PDA

View Full Version : Football vs "Football" with hands


Hazzle
21-06-2006, 04:26 PM
Football (the real type, where you use your feet) vs American "football" (because Americans like to catch FOOTballs with their hands). Discuss.

Jacoby
21-06-2006, 04:30 PM
I don't want to discuss this topic. It's been done about fourty times before.

Sundance
21-06-2006, 04:37 PM
I don't want to discuss this topic.

I don't mind discussing it, being something of a fan of American football myself.

Hazzle, I figure you'll be taking up the cons of American football so I'll hoist up a flag for the pros and establish my first line of defense:

1. "Americans catch FOOTballs with their hands" -- Not only do we have a sense of humor, but we think out of the box as well.

mehrdad368
21-06-2006, 05:11 PM
I prefer soccer than football.

Sundance
21-06-2006, 05:29 PM
You're going to get Hazzle's dander up, calling football "soccer".

Digital_Ice
21-06-2006, 07:08 PM
ah, quit ya bitching, who really wastes their time caring about this shit?...

...oh and btw.. they both suck. :p

Hazzle
21-06-2006, 09:33 PM
I don't want to discuss this topic. It's been done about fourty times before.

Heh. Yeah, I only started the thread because me and Brad were derailing the random pictures one. For the record let it be made known that I actually LOVE American Football. Just don't think it's a patch on the real thing.

1. "Americans catch FOOTballs with their hands" -- Not only do we have a sense of humor, but we think out of the box as well.

It's humoUr and if the irony was intentional I might actually respect it. But the fact that so few Americans bring that up as an argument is proof enough that it was an unintentional cock up. Thinking outside of the box, whilst a solid argument, would imply thought, which would be wrong. After all, what rational thought could possibly explain calling a game FOOTball in which kicking the ball, whilst part of the game, is considered an ugly tactic, heresy, an affront to the purity of the sport?

You're going to get Hazzle's dander up, calling football "soccer".

Exactly. I knew that the Iraq war was spreading American "culture" to the middle east but when the heretics start calling it "soccer" you have to worry.

ah, quit ya bitching, who really wastes their time caring about this shit?...

...oh and btw.. they both suck. :p

Brad. He seemed quite passionate about it we were derailing another thread, so stop YOUR bitching. Senior members should be setting an example and trying to keep threads on topic :p. For once I do it and I'm getting the piss taken out of me for it?! :D

Oh, and btw, you suck. Computer nerds who don't like sports are sad. And if you don't like either I worry as to what sort of gay "sports" you do like. I seriously hope you like cricket or we'll come to blows at the BBQ.

Digital_Ice
21-06-2006, 09:49 PM
hreh, cricket. yus. lol

Sundance
21-06-2006, 09:53 PM
It's humoUr and if the irony was intentional I might actually respect it.

Humor and irony were intentional. Maybe we still call it football because we carry the ball whilst "on foot".

. . . kicking the ball, whilst part of the game, is considered an ugly tactic, heresy, an affront to the purity of the sport

I don't know that field goal kicks or punts or kick-offs are exactly considered heresies. But maybe you were exaggerating.

And if you don't like either I worry as to what sort of gay "sports" you do like.

Figure skating?... (Then again, a few of those ladies look pretty sexy in their short skirts).

hasselbrad
21-06-2006, 09:56 PM
Keep dissing American football and I'll come to the BBQ just to use the both of yous as tackling dummies. :D
I think the thing about American football that throws most people off is the static nature of the game. Having individual plays, rather than a free-flowing homogay ballet :p causes some to lose interest.

So, Haz...do you really watch American football? NFL Europe...or do they televise NFL games over there?

Ranman
21-06-2006, 09:57 PM
Keep your faggy soccer, in the USA we play real sports
Footbal, baseball, hockey and Pro wreastling
Keep your faggy beer also, ours is better

Sundance
21-06-2006, 10:00 PM
a free-flowing homogay ballet . . .

I think you just coined a new catchy phrase for describing soccer --- I mean, futbol.

Keep your faggy beer also, ours is better.

I'll drink to that.

(but pro wrestling -- a "real sport"?)

Hazzle
21-06-2006, 10:03 PM
Humor and irony were intentional. Maybe we still call it football because we carry the ball whilst "on foot".

Heh. Well, whilst that's a sound argument, it's also a fallacy. You're the first American to use that argument so if it were REALLY the reason it was called football then more people would use it. It's also easily refuted, because in Basketball you dribble the ball whilst on foot, in baseball you strike the ball and run whilst on foot. By that token EVERY sport is "Football".

The true origins of American Football actually trace back to Rugby (unsurprisingly) and the reason why American Football is called American "Football" is because Rugby is actually "Rugby Football". However because the kicking aspect is less in Rugby than it is in proper football, the "football" was dropped to avoid confusion. The truth is American Football should be called American Football, not "Football", and real football should still retain its name, because the sport that American Football derived from took the same route.

If we're being technical Rugby Football IS a form of football as you can't throw the ball forwards, only kick it forwards, so kicking becomes a crucial part of the game, and a tactical element. In American football kicking mainly consists of penalties, conversions and punts, and you have specialist kickers. If American Football required more kicking it might have a better claim to the name.

Sundance
21-06-2006, 10:09 PM
. . . in Basketball you dribble the ball whilst on foot, in baseball you strike the ball and run whilst on foot. By that token EVERY sport is "Football".

I don't know about anyone else but I call basketball "dribbleball" and baseball "batball". I guess we could call the NFL the National Touchdown League but it just doesn't have the same ring.

In American football kicking mainly consists of penalties, conversions and punts, and you have specialist kickers.

Depending on what team you're on, you could actually spend a lot more time kicking than rushing or passing. And there's a lot of "great games" that came down to a field goal or the ability to pull off an on-side kick.

Hazzle
21-06-2006, 10:18 PM
Keep dissing American football and I'll come to the BBQ just to use the both of yous as tackling dummies. :D
I think the thing about American football that throws most people off is the static nature of the game. Having individual plays, rather than a free-flowing homogay ballet :p causes some to lose interest.

So, Haz...do you really watch American football? NFL Europe...or do they televise NFL games over there?

They televise NFL here. NFL Europe blows. I'm not dissing American Football, just disagree with the name, and disagree with the slagging off "soccer" gets from you cunts. It's a damn fine sport, and I don't think it has to be an "either or" decision when liking both Gridiron and Football. "Soccer" is not boring, it's just a lot more, as you point out, free-flowing, and that causes more improvisation, which by its nature will cause less goals. But scoring opportunities are APLENTY in football, the difference is every scoring opportunity doesn't automatically mean you score, it's just a "chance" to score.

What's the issue with the free-flowing nature of the game? The static nature of American Football tends to cause excitement levels to drop, unless the game is very tense and tightly contested. Free-flowing means end-to-end excitement. It's also not soft either, I've seen some very nasty leg breaks and one of my club's players broke his ankle in two places AND dislocated it from one tackle. It's quite simple really...pressure increases as surface area decreases. A man's bodyweight when his shoulder hits your ribs and spears you to the ground is less pressure on your bones than a man's body weight on a sliding tackle into your ankle.

Keep your faggy soccer, in the USA we play real sports
Footbal, baseball, hockey and Pro wreastling
Keep your faggy beer also, ours is better

Heh Pro-Wrestling. How is Baseball more manly than "soccer"? I've not seen anyone break their leg in two places playing Baseball. I'll grant you American "Football" is more physical but Baseball? Fuck off. Incidentally I'm a baseball fan. Only American sport than blows is Basketball as it's non-contact. You call "soccer" faggy when at least it's a contact sport and yet you have a sport, which according to Brad most of your best athletes play...where contact of any sort is not allowed? That's not faggy at all...

Keep your faggy beer also, ours is better

If by better you mean tastes like piss. American beer is like sex by a river; it's fucking close to water. Your local beers have half the proof of the imported versions, which is why you sell so many of them. I swear Sol, Stella and Guinness sell loads in the US because you guys KNOW our beer is better. So fuck off.

Depending on what team you're on, you could actually spend a lot more time kicking than rushing or passing. And there's a lot of "great games" that came down to a field goal or the ability to pull off an on-side kick.

I know. The Pats won two superbowls (that I watched anyway, I dunno if there were more) from field goals. And we CRITICISED for it. American Football purists say it's aaaaallllll about touchdowns.

You're right, it should be called the National Touchdown League.

hasselbrad
21-06-2006, 10:25 PM
You're right about the name football and the lineage through rugby, but as Americans, we always take something that's okay and make it much better. :p
As far as sports go, I happen to think that American football is the most team oriented. By this, I mean that American football requires each person on the field to do his job on every single play. If a running play is designed to go to the right, the receivers on the left side of the field must carry out their assignment as if the ball is coming to them. And, they must be willing to block downfield and occupy as many potential tacklers as possible. It's really hard for one person to tilt the field in American football the way they do in other sports.
Barry Sanders is a prime example. He might very well be the best running back ever, but he played for horrible teams. And, he lost more yardage than any other back in history while trying to make up for the lack of support. No ring. Teams were terrified of him, but if you could hem him up, you won.

I hate high scoring games. When I went to the University of Alabama, we won a National Championship with a defense that would make your ears bleed. We went 13-0 that season and won at least two games without scoring an offensive touchdown. Coach Paul Bryant always won with defense and a solid kicking game. Six National Championships in 25 years means he was doing something right. I love to watch a defense clamp down on an offense and drag it under. That is a thing of beauty that rivals that dude bouncing shots off the crossbar. :p

Sundance
21-06-2006, 10:28 PM
American Football purists say it's aaaaallllll about touchdowns.

It's because American Football purists long once more for the days of Joe Montana and the "immaculate reception."

You're right, it should be called the National Touchdown League.

That or you mentioned Gridiron. We could call it the National Gridiron League. But think of how much advertising, endorsements, jerseys, stadiums, logos, etc. would have to be altered for just one letter.

What you mentioned about American Football's roots being founded in rugby is absolutely true. Most of the alterations to how the game was played were made either because of fatalities on the field (Americans were crazy like that in the late 1800s) or bending of the rules by college coaches to outwit one another. I think it was during an Army-Notre Dame game that Knute Rockne or somebody introduced the forward pass -- because it was impossible to rush against Army's defense. Kicking became less and less a part of strategy... but the name tagged along.

Hazzle
21-06-2006, 10:32 PM
That is a thing of beauty that rivals that dude bouncing shots off the crossbar. :p

So you admit that that was a thing of beauty? :p

I'm with you on the tight defenses clamping down thing. Fucking LOVE it. And it is more team-orientated but I don't think "soccer" is any less team orientated. I mean you really should try and find a clip of the second Argentine goal against the Serbs...24 passes and pretty much every player on the team was involved in the move. That was a good team goal. And proof that "soccer" can be bloody entertaining. Seriously, find a video of that 6-0 game somewhere, it's well worth it. It's bad quality (because it's online) but try this (http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/video_and_audio/help_guide/4304501.stm).

I'm glad you brought up wide receivers and how they have to drag players away from the play. As someone who, I think you said, has watched a bit of "soccer" in his time, I'm sure you appreciate the amount of times in "soccer" that players make runs and movements, not to receive the ball but to clear space for someone else to run into and receive it? Or to have a clear sight of goal? I think those two plus cricket (especially Test) are the two most team-orientated sports. I like Baseball and Ice Hockey but I think they're more inidividually-focused games.

Heh Sundance. See, I do know my shit about gridiron!

Sundance
21-06-2006, 10:47 PM
I think it really comes down to "national pasttimes". Growing up in NorCal in the 80s, when the 49ers were collecting Superbowl rings - Joe Montana, Jerry Rice, Dwight Clark, and Ronnie Lott were household names. Had I grown up in Brazil or Britain or Spain, my tastes might have gone towards football or open-wheel racing or bullfighting.

Thinking of 80s football I remembered Bill Walsh and the fact he's credited (somewhat falsely) with developing the "West Coast offense" -- which does in fact concentrate on the "passing" game. So, for "West Coast offense" purists, it is all about the touchdowns -- but that's a semi-regional, not a nationwide strategy.

Swordsman
21-06-2006, 11:06 PM
Pro wreastling

Because all Americans are still in the 6th grade.

Sundance
21-06-2006, 11:09 PM
Pro wrestling

Because all Americans are still in the 6th grade.

I'm at a loss trying to find a coherent connection between these quotes.

Swordsman
21-06-2006, 11:17 PM
For serious? Only 6th graders like Pro Wresting.

Hazzle
21-06-2006, 11:22 PM
I think it really comes down to "national pasttimes".

Spot on. Just wish people would stop slagging off OUR national pastime :)

Fuck off Swords, I like Pro Wrestling.

Ranman
21-06-2006, 11:27 PM
For serious? Only 6th graders like Pro Wresting.

May the undertaker show up on your doorstep
and ravage you and your loved ones

Swordsman
21-06-2006, 11:33 PM
I'm... so surprised.

DanMan
22-06-2006, 12:50 AM
OK as an American I can agree that FOOTBALL may not have been the best name for our American sport. But hey, that doesnt make it any less fun to play GRRRRRAAAAAAAAH!

devine kk
22-06-2006, 07:17 AM
Dont get me wrong i enjoy watching American Football, baseball and basketball they are very exciting to watch. I am sory but a country that competes for the "World Series" in baseball but fails to invite any other countries in the world has a long way to go before they can comment on the "Worldwide" game known as FOOTBALL.

mehrdad368
22-06-2006, 07:36 AM
Soccer attraction.wrestling more.

Hazzle
22-06-2006, 08:11 AM
Dont get me wrong i enjoy watching American Football, baseball and basketball they are very exciting to watch. I am sory but a country that competes for the "World Series" in baseball but fails to invite any other countries in the world has a long way to go before they can comment on the "Worldwide" game known as FOOTBALL.

The World Series is a bad name for it. But to be fair, if it was between countries, it'd be no different to the MLB World Baseball Classic. And the US would get beaten by Mexico and Canada again. They can't have that!

Ranman
22-06-2006, 10:39 AM
We started it, were the best at it, it belongs to us.
It took the name world series long ago
when the rest of the world were still swinging in trees
What? were supose to change the name for a bunch of cretins?
( I still say soccer sucks)

Liam
22-06-2006, 11:31 AM
If the pansies played American Football without the 12 layers of kevlar armour on, I'd consider watching it. As it stands, professional rugby and AFL players make your footballers look like big girls blouses.

Hazzle
22-06-2006, 11:57 AM
We started it, were the best at it, it belongs to us.
It took the name world series long ago
when the rest of the world were still swinging in trees
What? were supose to change the name for a bunch of cretins?

Ironic punctuation error Ran. WERE the best at it. The fucking MEXICANS beat you at it. You crashed out in the first round when you had to go up against other countries. Most of the best baseball players in MLB aren't even American! You have to import talent.

The world was swinging in trees? Is this a reference to the fact we abolished slavery before you, and you still thought black people were monkeys for quite a while afterwards? That's so wrong Ran!

Cretins? No no, you CHOSE the name for a bunch of cretins. Any country with a president of the intellectual capacity of George W Bush shouldn't throw that particular stone around. We've NEVER had a Prime Minister that stupid, so shut your mouth, bitch-boy. You're a country of thugs, you beat us in a war because your population was greater and your approach to warfare was "throw bodies at it". This was your approach in both World Wars too, which is why everyone else wanted you around. Why should British soldiers die when the Americans are cretinous enough to throw their men right into the jaws of death FOR you?

It was brave, I'll grant you. But it was also highly cretinous. When the Americans learn to fight a war strategically, then come and tell me you're smarter than us. Brute strength is your forte and as Liam pointed out, even your most "brutal" sport involves wearing body armour. Bunch of pussies. Rugby shits on it. Cricket shits on baseball when it comes to manliness too. We catch 90 mph balls with our bare hands, you catch them in gloves the size of a plate.

devine kk
22-06-2006, 11:58 AM
If the pansies played American Football without the 12 layers of kevlar armour on, I'd consider watching it. As it stands, professional rugby and AFL players make your footballers look like big girls blouses.

Here, here. there is no need for all that protection, it is no more physically demanding than either code of rugby. Scrimmaging is the same as scrums in Rugby union (not so much in league) and take it from me (from personel experience) they are extremely physical. Playing hooker the only protection i wear is a pair of shin pads. As far as tackling goes they don't come any bigger than big forwards (martin Johnson, Lawrence Dallaglio) charging head on, again no padding. Softies.

The World Series is a bad name for it. But to be fair, if it was between countries, it'd be no different to the MLB World Baseball Classic. And the US would get beaten by Mexico and Canada again. They can't have that!

Ha ha, forgot to mention that LOL.

We started it, were the best at it, it belongs to us.
It took the name world series long ago
when the rest of the world were still swinging in trees
What? were supose to change the name for a bunch of cretins?
( I still say soccer sucks)

We started football, cricket and rugby but we learned to share. Wish we hadn't though, we would win the world cups everytime like the americans always win the world series.

I'll jump off the soap box for now.

Hazzle
22-06-2006, 12:11 PM
We started football, cricket and rugby but we learned to share. Wish we hadn't though, we would win the world cups everytime like the americans always win the world series.

Heh. We really should have. Especially as without us sharing our sports...America would be left with just Basketball. American football (Rugby), Baseball (Rounders and Cricket), and Ice Hockey (Hockey) all owe their origins to the Brits. We may not have invented Hockey but we introduced them to it :)

I love how America feels no shame in losing in a game they "don't care about".

Is it any surprise that the only team sport they play where they actually play other countries regularly and have a realistic chance of being whooped is the one they don't care about?

I suppose everytime we lose at a sport we should just stop caring about it like the Americans, and then start caring about Tiddlywinks instead...

Liam
22-06-2006, 12:13 PM
Here, here. there is no need for all that protection, it is no more physically demanding than either code of rugby. Scrimmaging is the same as scrums in Rugby union (not so much in league) and take it from me (from personel experience) they are extremely physical. Playing hooker the only protection i wear is a pair of shin pads. As far as tacking goes they don't come any bigger than big forwards charging head on, again no padding. Softies.

Heh yeah, I used to play at flanker in my first season, where I got truly hammered. Every game I would come off either limping, clutching a giant cork, or bleeding, but it was fun. I was switched to the wing for my second (and final) season. Still got hammered there, but was a lot more use. Did most of the penalty and conversion kicking as well, so no matter what I was always the high scorer :D

Dropped rugby to pick up playing cricket, but I am seriously thinking about jumping into AFL next season.

Ranman
22-06-2006, 12:16 PM
Just remember the two most important things in life
Alot of money and bigger dicks
Our guys have both :icon_lol:

devine kk
22-06-2006, 12:28 PM
Did most of the penalty and conversion kicking as well, so no matter what I was always the high scorer.

That's another thing, American Football kickers always take kicks from the middle of the pitch. Rugby kickers have to kick them from where the penalty was commited / try scored. Plus the kickers play the whole game not sit on the sidelines until they are needed. Softies.

We catch 90 mph balls with our bare hands, you catch them in gloves the size of a plate.

Nice one, softies.

Hazzle
22-06-2006, 12:33 PM
Just remember the two most important things in life
Alot of money and bigger dicks
Our guys have both :icon_lol:

If you say so. Their manliness is clearly shown by the way they approach their sports, so they MUST have big dicks. Catching a ball with a padded glove or playing "football" in body armour...so manly. :icon_err:.

There's a reason why most American men are circumcised and it's not for health reasons. Your penises are so tiny you need all the help you can get to make them LOOK bigger.

As for a lot of money...Michael Schumacher is the highest paid sportsman in the world and he takes part in a sport that again, Americans suck at. Such a shame...

hasselbrad
22-06-2006, 01:11 PM
Jesus titty-fucking Christ...the "body armor" is as much for delivering a blow as it is for protection. And, the American game is completely different due to its static nature and the forward pass. There are far more collisions at high rates of speed in the American game than in AFL or rugby. At no point does an AFL or rugby player stand in one place and look down the field while several 300 pound men try to knock him senseless. Nor, is there any point in your games where a player crosses the field to receive a pass while a 220 pound free safety waits to seperate him from his senses.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/6f/Cricket_wicket_keeper.jpg

Does everyone in England and its former colonies have such funny looking hands or is that chap wearing gloves. It's my understanding that the wicket keeper stands varying lengths behind the wickets, depending upon the type of bowler. In baseball, the catcher is just over ninety feet from the pitcher, whether he throws knuckleballs or 100 mph heat.

Basketball, even though I hate it, is every bit as physical as futbol.

devine kk
22-06-2006, 02:50 PM
There are far more collisions at high rates of speed in the American game than in AFL or rugby.

Bollocks, utter bollocks. There is one collision per play (except scrimmage - but thats just hand bags at dawn) of which there may be several players invloved, granted, then play stops for two mins while they think what to do next (thats why it takes over 3 hours to play 60 mins of play). In rugby there is collision after collision.

At no point does an AFL or rugby player stand in one place and look down the field while several 300 pound men try to knock him senseless. Nor, is there any point in your games where a player crosses the field to receive a pass while a 220 pound free safety waits to seperate him from his senses.

Not heard of the famous Gary Owen (up and under) where the poor old full back or winger stands waiting for the ball to decend whilst the opposition thunder towards him.


Does everyone in England and its former colonies have such funny looking hands or is that chap wearing gloves. It's my understanding that the wicket keeper stands varying lengths behind the wickets, depending upon the type of bowler. In baseball, the catcher is just over ninety feet from the pitcher, whether he throws knuckleballs or 100 mph heat.

Only the wicket keeper wears gloves, the rest of the fielding team don't, unlike baseball softies. The catcher in baseball is more or less guaranteed to receive the ball in his glove, the pitcher is bloody aiming for it. A wicket keeper is trying to catch a ball that could go anywhere and needs time to react therefore stands further back the quicker the ball. Plus if he stood up for fast bowls they would clear his head if they were pitched short.

hasselbrad
22-06-2006, 03:48 PM
Bollocks, utter bollocks. There is one collision per play (except scrimmage - but thats just hand bags at dawn) of which there may be several players invloved, granted, then play stops for two mins while they think what to do next (thats why it takes over 3 hours to play 60 mins of play). In rugby there is collision after collision.

Bollocks to you, sir. I can tell you from experience that those collisions at the line of scrimmage are quite a bit more than "handbags at dawn". The guy lined up across from you is aiming to put you flat on your back. Now, take a pulling guard around the opposite end of the line and you have, on average, a 320 pound man running a five second forty, trying to bury whatever is in his path, and you have quite a collision.

Not heard of the famous Gary Owen (up and under) where the poor old full back or winger stands waiting for the ball to decend whilst the opposition thunder towards him.

That's every punt and kick return, save for when the faggot calls for a fair catch, I'll give you that. Rugby flows from side to side to advance the ball because there is no forward pass. Trap blocking, pulling and crossing patterns create collisions away from the tackle that go unseen for the most part. The speed of the game and the size of the athletes playing it are a big difference as well.

Only the wicket keeper wears gloves, the rest of the fielding team don't, unlike baseball softies. The catcher in baseball is more or less guaranteed to receive the ball in his glove, the pitcher is bloody aiming for it. A wicket keeper is trying to catch a ball that could go anywhere and needs time to react therefore stands further back the quicker the ball. Plus if he stood up for fast bowls they would clear his head if they were pitched short.

Baseball gloves provide no padding or protection, it's just a way to snare the ball. The lack of contact in baseball is why they feel so compelled to fight at the drop of a hat.
It's all semantics though, because we all know hockey players are the toughest motherfuckers on the sports planet, save for boxers.

Hazzle
22-06-2006, 05:17 PM
Does everyone in England and its former colonies have such funny looking hands or is that chap wearing gloves. It's my understanding that the wicket keeper stands varying lengths behind the wickets, depending upon the type of bowler. In baseball, the catcher is just over ninety feet from the pitcher, whether he throws knuckleballs or 100 mph heat.

Basketball, even though I hate it, is every bit as physical as futbol.

Hah. Bullshit. The way you guys play football? Probably. The way we do? Fuck no. Did you not see the cut Brian McBride got for the US the other day? Wasn't pretty. Here's a picture:

http://eur.news1.yimg.com/eur.yimg.com/ng/sp/reuters/20060617/23/355091524.jpg

Show me a basketball player with the same sort of injury. Or shut the fuck up. Your point about cricket is a little smarter but the point about distance, whilst true, is misleading. The reason why a wicketkeeper stands further back is greater time to react because his main job is catching the ball as it edges off the bat. Since a catcher's job is to catch a ball that's pitched AT him (the pitcher's objective is to get the ball into his mitt and have it caught) it's better for him to stand closer. HE also wears a FUCKLOAD more armour. See:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7f/Baseball_catcher.jpg

So once again, you're very very wrong. I was actually refering to outfielders and if we count those:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/0e/Baseball_outfielder_2004.jpg

Whilst in cricket:

http://www.cricinfo.com/db/PICTURES/DB/012001/021781.jpg

Compare the number of broken bones in the hands of a baseball fielder and a cricket fielder in the same position. It's no contest. So bite me.

Hockey players are tough fuckers, if you mean that they're prone to a good fight. But again, look at the padding:

http://www.midwestskate.com/Hockey/images/Tour_Chest_Pad.jpg

So perhaps the idea that they're the toughest motherfuckers on the planet is a myth?

But you're right off course. "Soccer" is a game for pansies:

http://www.strangesports.com/images/content/112954.jpg

This one's a little less obvious but take a look at the left leg of the guy in red:

http://img55.exs.cx/img55/5369/cisse2.jpg

For a better view:

http://www.sportal.com.au/photos/news/058270news.jpg

See one in action:

Henrik Larsson leg break (http://www.goyk.com/video.asp?path=643)

Game set and match?

mehrdad368
22-06-2006, 05:51 PM
I never forget Jebreil Cisse leg that had broken in friendly match of FRANCE.

hasselbrad
22-06-2006, 05:52 PM
So perhaps the idea that they're the toughest motherfuckers on the planet is a myth?

Once again...Jesus titty fucking Christ...they are moving three times as fast as anyone else in sports when they collide and you are going to begrudge them a little padding? And, if they aren't colliding with each other or punching each other in the face, they are throwing their bodies in front of frozen pieces of rubber, sometimes travelling 120 mph.
When Chris Pronger was playing for the St. Louis Blues, he got hit in the chest with a puck so hard that his heart stopped for a moment and he had to be resuscitated. Technically speaking, he was dead.
He was on the ice two nights later. It gets no tougher than that.

http://www.nppa8.org/contests/stills/images/mar02_sports1.jpg

http://www.nppa8.org/contests/stills/images/mar02_sports2.jpg

:p

Oh, and if you want to see some leg breaks, go here. (http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://bostonbrat.net/content/media/media_joe.jpg&imgrefurl=http://bostonbrat.net/content/media/&h=100&w=75&sz=17&tbnid=ZhIoKLfGo9BZLM:&tbnh=77&tbnw=57&hl=en&start=1&prev=/images%3Fq%3Djoe%2Btheismann%2Bleg%2Bbreak%26svnum %3D10%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26safe%3Doff%26client%3Dfi refox-a%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-US:official_s%26sa%3DG)
...or here. (http://www.armchairgm.com/mwiki/index.php?title=To_the_World_Cup_Participants:_Goo d_Luck_and_Break_a_Leg%21)
(the little guy in red...#4...is Tyrone Prothro from Alabama. :( ...he was one of two broken legs for Alabama last year.)

Sundance
22-06-2006, 05:52 PM
Bruce Lee could've kicked all our arses -- and theirs. With a one-inch punch. Now that's game-set-match.


http://www.allbrucelee.com/poster/frontchest1.jpg

and Game-of-death.

hasselbrad
22-06-2006, 05:59 PM
And didn't Natalie Portman wear one of these (http://www.rugbygear.com/catalog_c19918.html) in Garden State? :p

Jacoby
22-06-2006, 06:31 PM
Hockey players are tough. More tough than any other sport, I say. Except maybe rugby, but even then I don't know.

It's common for a hockey player to break a bone in the first period and finish the fucking game. Guys break their wrists in the first few minutes and continue playing. Because they're tough. If Clint Eastwood played a sport, it would be hockey.

Sundance
22-06-2006, 06:50 PM
"Go ahead, punk... Try and take that puck away..."

Juliamariskamadadh
22-06-2006, 07:17 PM
Both Soccer and Football are my favorite sports, personally i prefer Soccer just because i prefer kickin' out my anger..Love watching the Super Bowl and jumping on guys backs..

runangl
22-06-2006, 08:57 PM
as my chemistry teacher once said:

"football (american) is the gayest sport for 5 reasons:

1. one guy leans over with a ball between his legs
2. another guy sticks his face in the first guy's ass
3. the guys run around hoping to get the ball after it is thrusted into the second guy's hands
4. once the ball is actually out in play the guys on the other team try to catch up to the guy with the ball and lay on top of him
5. at the end of the game the guys all go around slapping each others asses"

that said: i played american football in highschool. i also played actual football, and personally i love it way more than american football.

okay i'm done. :icon_roll

hasselbrad
22-06-2006, 09:03 PM
Something tells me your chemistry teacher got stuffed in more than one trash can by football players in high school. :p

Sundance
22-06-2006, 09:12 PM
Something tells me your chemistry teacher got stuffed in more than one trash can by football players in high school. :p

They probably balled him up, punted him toward the field goal posts, and left him dangling up there.

Hazzle
22-06-2006, 10:23 PM
Once again...Jesus titty fucking Christ...they are moving three times as fast as anyone else in sports when they collide and you are going to begrudge them a little padding? And, if they aren't colliding with each other or punching each other in the face, they are throwing their bodies in front of frozen pieces of rubber, sometimes travelling 120 mph.

WRONG. Three times faster than anyone else in sports? Tell Michael Schumacher that. 217 MPH down the pit straight at Monza. And whilst he wears a helmet (as a Hockey player does) his body is covered only in flame-retardant material that doesn't actually offer any padding.

When Chris Pronger was playing for the St. Louis Blues, he got hit in the chest with a puck so hard that his heart stopped for a moment and he had to be resuscitated. Technically speaking, he was dead.
He was on the ice two nights later. It gets no tougher than that.

Technically I didn't say Hockey players weren't tough. I generally think they ARE the toughest bastards in sports. However I've seen tougher than that. I've seen a pro-wrestler fall/dive/be thrown off a 15-20 foot cage, crash land in a table, and then climb back up said cage within minutes. Only to then be thrown THROUGH said cage. And then wrestle again the following night. Want the toughest sumbitch in sport? Mick Foley. It gets no tougher than that. And that's a "fake" sport :p

http://www.nppa8.org/contests/stills/images/mar02_sports1.jpg

Thanks for that. Two points to note though. Firstly she seems shocked by it, whereas Brian McBride not only shrugged it off but continued playing. Secondly women be vicious, show me a MAN with that sort of injury :p

http://www.nppa8.org/contests/stills/images/mar02_sports2.jpg

Is there meant to be blood there? I don't see it.

Oh, and if you want to see some leg breaks, go here. (http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://bostonbrat.net/content/media/media_joe.jpg&imgrefurl=http://bostonbrat.net/content/media/&h=100&w=75&sz=17&tbnid=ZhIoKLfGo9BZLM:&tbnh=77&tbnw=57&hl=en&start=1&prev=/images%3Fq%3Djoe%2Btheismann%2Bleg%2Bbreak%26svnum %3D10%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26safe%3Doff%26client%3Dfi refox-a%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-US:official_s%26sa%3DG)
...or here. (http://www.armchairgm.com/mwiki/index.php?title=To_the_World_Cup_Participants:_Goo d_Luck_and_Break_a_Leg%21)
(the little guy in red...#4...is Tyrone Prothro from Alabama. :( ...he was one of two broken legs for Alabama last year.)

Again, I didn't say American Football wasn't a tough sport. My POINT was that leg breaks are just as common an occurence in "soccer" as they are in American Football. Just because the American game is played at a much slower pace and generally lacks the physicality of the rest of the world, doesn't make the sport soft. Seriously, watch more European football. It's not soft at ALL. True, it's not a sport of brutality like American Football, it's a sport of finesse and skill. Hence why we call it the Beautiful Game.

So we still win :) Brad you should know me well enough by now to know I never lose an argument :p You've still yet to put a convincing argument to disprove the obvious proof that a) "soccer" requires a lot of skill and b) "soccer" isn't a non-physical, non-contact, "soft" sport. As usual Americans call it "homoerotic" and then when faced with the obvious proof of the physicality involved, instead of accepting their mistake, they just point out equally physical elements of their own sports. But the thing is, the barbarism of American Football doesn't make "soccer" less physical :D

Sundance
22-06-2006, 10:30 PM
Is there meant to be blood there? I don't see it.
The guy's about to get his beans kicked in.

Hazzle
22-06-2006, 10:34 PM
The guy's about to get his beans kicked in.

Ahh!

Well stuff like that happens a fair bit on football fields too :p. Seriously, stamps on the groin happen a lot, and a whole man's body weight on your balls with a studded boot can kill a man :p

I think the point I wished to make was proven. "Soccer" is not a soft sport. The leg breaks show that it's not. Especially the double-break in the first picture. That's right, DOUBLE break.

Cisse (the guy in the red) has broken his leg 3 times in the last two years. Given it takes about 6 months to recover, that's some record, and tells you a lot about the nature of "soccer". It's not a soft sport, it's just not a collision sport like American "Football". It's a contact sport, however, which Basketball is not. Most injuries in basketball are non-contact.

Sundance
22-06-2006, 10:35 PM
Cisse (the guy in the red) has broken his leg 3 times in the last two years. Given it takes about 6 months to recover, that's some record, and tells you a lot about the nature of "soccer".

Cisse's no sissy but he might be clutsy.

EDIT: Rhyme only works when it's mispronounced.

Hazzle
22-06-2006, 10:38 PM
Cisse's no sissy.

It's pronounced Cease-eh. He's French.

Swordsman
23-06-2006, 06:25 AM
I was just looking at posts and remembered that my town has money because of football. I tend to hate sports, except hockey, because i'm unathletic and don't give a dizzamn. My town has one of the oldest high school rivalries in the US and this year is the 100 anniversary and there's gonna be like 40,000 people in one shitty college stadium. So that's why American football is better, because it gives my town money.

Hazzle
23-06-2006, 01:51 PM
Can't believe you guys missed the best argument for American Football:

http://images.usatoday.com/money/gallery/lingerie-bowl/_fullrefs2.jpg

http://www.thesonsofscotland.co.uk/images/lingerie%20bowl/lingerie_bowl_referees.jpg

http://www.thesonsofscotland.co.uk/images/lingerie%20bowl/lampkin_sheds_blockers.jpg

http://www.thesonsofscotland.co.uk/images/lingerie%20bowl/fashion_show-6.jpg

More here (http://www.thesonsofscotland.co.uk/image%20pages/lingeriebowl.htm)

Then again, we do have this:

http://img78.imageshack.us/img78/1412/wm2006fotbollstjejer4ys8nn.jpg

http://msn.foxsports.com/id/5691914_7_1.jpg

http://msn.foxsports.com/id/5694942_7_1.jpg

http://msn.foxsports.com/id/5676186_7_4.jpg

More here (http://msn.foxsports.com/soccer/pgStory?contentId=5676192&pageNumber=1)

So as a tie-breaker I give you Keeley Hazell:

hasselbrad
23-06-2006, 01:59 PM
WRONG. Three times faster than anyone else in sports? Tell Michael Schumacher that. 217 MPH down the pit straight at Monza. And whilst he wears a helmet (as a Hockey player does) his body is covered only in flame-retardant material that doesn't actually offer any padding.
I was talking about stick and ball sports, monkey boy. :p
Let's save arguing about motorsports for another thread.

Technically I didn't say Hockey players weren't tough. I generally think they ARE the toughest bastards in sports. However I've seen tougher than that. I've seen a pro-wrestler fall/dive/be thrown off a 15-20 foot cage, crash land in a table, and then climb back up said cage within minutes. Only to then be thrown THROUGH said cage. And then wrestle again the following night. Want the toughest sumbitch in sport? Mick Foley. It gets no tougher than that. And that's a "fake" sport :p
Wrestling? I'll give you that they are good athletes (as many of them played college and/or pro American football) but that is choreographed.


Thanks for that. Two points to note though. Firstly she seems shocked by it, whereas Brian McBride not only shrugged it off but continued playing. Secondly women be vicious, show me a MAN with that sort of injury :p
Hey...McBride's tough...he's an A-MER-I-CAN. :p


Is there meant to be blood there? I don't see it.
Nope. Just an example of physical play. Don't get me wrong...I loathe basketball. I can tell you that I have never watched an entire NBA game in my life. However, I am very aware of the physicality of the sport. I had classes with guys off of Alabama's team when I was in school and the bruises and abrasions they sported gave me at least an appreciation for what they did.

Again, I didn't say American Football wasn't a tough sport. My POINT was that leg breaks are just as common an occurence in "soccer" as they are in American Football. Just because the American game is played at a much slower pace and generally lacks the physicality of the rest of the world, doesn't make the sport soft. Seriously, watch more European football. It's not soft at ALL. True, it's not a sport of brutality like American Football, it's a sport of finesse and skill. Hence why we call it the Beautiful Game.
American football is not played at a slower pace. You are confusing the static period between plays as some sort of rest and relaxation period. Trust me, it's not. Yeah, you catch your breath for a moment, but the reality is that you are so focused on what plays are being called, etc. that you often forget to take a deep breath. It's 25-40 seconds between plays depending on what level you are playing. I see plenty of soccer players standing or trotting when the ball is being passed back and forth on the other side of the field.
American football is not merely a sport of brutality. There's a lot of beauty in a perfectly thrown spiral, caught over the shoulder by a graceful reciever who has run a perfect post pattern. Likewise, there is beauty is a perfectly executed trap play. When you understand the complex patterns of each play, you can see that beauty more clearly.

So we still win :) Brad you should know me well enough by now to know I never lose an argument :p You've still yet to put a convincing argument to disprove the obvious proof that a) "soccer" requires a lot of skill and b) "soccer" isn't a non-physical, non-contact, "soft" sport. As usual Americans call it "homoerotic" and then when faced with the obvious proof of the physicality involved, instead of accepting their mistake, they just point out equally physical elements of their own sports. But the thing is, the barbarism of American Football doesn't make "soccer" less physical :D
Honestly, it's the theatrics that makes Americans take that view. I realize the Mexican leagues are a bad example, but I have watched (and yes, I'll watch Univision just to hear the announcers rattle off Spanish like a machine gun) guys get carried off the field on a stretcher, only to return at the next stoppage. I understand that this is more common in the Mexican leagues, but I have seen plenty of guys in your Premiership writhe around fishing for a penalty. That gets you two minutes in the sin bin in the NHL.
:p

Hazzle
23-06-2006, 02:23 PM
I was talking about stick and ball sports, monkey boy. :p
Let's save arguing about motorsports for another thread.

Hehe. I was right though. You said sports, you didn't specify which :p. Oh, and you still didn't point out the body armour Schumacher wears :D

Wrestling? I'll give you that they are good athletes (as many of them played college and/or pro American football) but that is choreographed.

Oh of course it is. Anyone who watches it knows that. But this "fake" thing that surrounds it is wrong. When they fall off a 15-20 foot cage, they fall off, and Mick Foley's injuries are not fake. He lost half of his ear when it got caught in one of the ropes and that's the least of his worries. I don't think there's a bone in his body he didn't break. You should read his autobiography, it's not only very well written (he's a bestselling author now) but it's fascinating and shows just how tough the cunts really are.

Hey...McBride's tough...he's an A-MER-I-CAN. :p

Oh I know. I was just showing you that footballer can be tough too.

American football is not played at a slower pace. You are confusing the static period between plays as some sort of rest and relaxation period.

You misunderstood me. I said the American game, meaning the American domestic "soccer" league :) I was pointing out that you can't base a criticism of European football on that.

American football is not merely a sport of brutality. There's a lot of beauty in a perfectly thrown spiral, caught over the shoulder by a graceful reciever who has run a perfect post pattern. Likewise, there is beauty is a perfectly executed trap play. When you understand the complex patterns of each play, you can see that beauty more clearly.

I didn't say otherwise. Simply pointed out that the English game is very much a finesse sport. The clue is in the name. "Soccer" is a contact sport, American Football is a COLLISION sport.

Honestly, it's the theatrics that makes Americans take that view. I realize the Mexican leagues are a bad example, but I have watched (and yes, I'll watch Univision just to hear the announcers rattle off Spanish like a machine gun) guys get carried off the field on a stretcher, only to return at the next stoppage. I understand that this is more common in the Mexican leagues, but I have seen plenty of guys in your Premiership writhe around fishing for a penalty. That gets you two minutes in the sin bin in the NHL.
:p

Oh I agree. The theatrics are a disgrace. But that's very much the influence of the European game on our domestic game. Whilst we've always had "diving" to win a penalty (c'mon, all professional sportsmen cheat. In American Football it's harder as almost anything is legal :p) the writhing around isn't typically English. However as I said, the crucial issue is the nature of the game, in American Football and Ice Hockey, virtually anything goes, the same isn't true in "soccer". But it's not a soft sport, I think I've proven that. You should play some with the guys I play with, and then limp around for a couple of weeks, then you'll see :p. And that's in a FRIENDLY kickabout.

Anyway, I think my pictures win :) Keeley'll take some beating...

hasselbrad
23-06-2006, 05:29 PM
You misunderstood me. I said the American game, meaning the American domestic "soccer" league I was pointing out that you can't base a criticism of European football on that.

The MLS is a sad fucking joke.

Hazzle
23-06-2006, 06:23 PM
The MLS is a sad fucking joke.

Agreed. Fucking awful. Seriously, if you ever take a trip over here, let me take you to a proper game. It's fucking awesome. I've never been to an American Football game IN America but the one I went to in London (was an exhibition game between the Eagles and Buffalo Bills when I was a kid at Wembley Stadium) the atmosphere blew. But that could be because the Eagles lost and I'd chosen to be an Eagles fan for the day. Although I've remained an Eagles fan since :p

hasselbrad
23-06-2006, 06:50 PM
Agreed. Fucking awful. Seriously, if you ever take a trip over here, let me take you to a proper game. It's fucking awesome. I've never been to an American Football game IN America but the one I went to in London (was an exhibition game between the Eagles and Buffalo Bills when I was a kid at Wembley Stadium) the atmosphere blew. But that could be because the Eagles lost and I'd chosen to be an Eagles fan for the day. Although I've remained an Eagles fan since :p

Deal.
And you come over here so's I can take you to a University of Alabama home game. The atmosphere at an Alabama game dwarfs anything found outside of an NFL stadium. Pretty much any SEC venue is like that.

Hazzle
23-06-2006, 11:38 PM
Deal.
And you come over here so's I can take you to a University of Alabama home game. The atmosphere at an Alabama game dwarfs anything found outside of an NFL stadium. Pretty much any SEC venue is like that.

Done. Now can we agree that Keeley Hazell is hot? And I think we can even agree on one thing about this World Cup. Don't you just wish you were this World Cup trophy replica? :

Renegade edit: Here lies a picture of a big breasted woman with the World Cup trophy between her knockers. Use your imagination.

ryan
24-06-2006, 12:52 AM
no
large breasts pale in comparison to smaller ones (B, maaaaybe small C).

Hazzle
24-06-2006, 01:03 AM
no
large breasts pale in comparison to smaller ones (B, maaaaybe small C).

Usually but this is an exceptional case. Her breasts are perfect. Also whilst Keeley IS an E, she's only a 32E. It works. I agree, normally small breasts are better, but Keeley's boobs are bloody perfect. They were made into a bronze bust for a reason :p

ryan
24-06-2006, 01:09 AM
Usually but this is an exceptional case. Her breasts are perfect. Also whilst Keeley IS an E, she's only a 32E. It works. I agree, normally small breasts are better, but Keeley's boobs are bloody perfect. They were made into a bronze bust for a reason :p

they'll be sagging on the floor in a few years
disgusting!

Hazzle
24-06-2006, 01:28 AM
they'll be sagging on the floor in a few years
disgusting!

Meh. I'm not so sure. They look pretty firm for a big girl. And who cares? Shag her now, have some fun, then be done with :p.

I agree, big breasts are actually a propensity to store fat in later life. So bang the big breasted ones now, then look for the little breasted ones to settle down with.

hasselbrad
26-06-2006, 12:46 PM
Wow. I managed to sit through that Portugal-Holland match, and I have to say, that made the Queer Eye for the Straight Guy bunch look like a biker gang.
That game is precisely why Americans don't enjoy soccer. I've seen better acting on a soap opera. I had to laugh when that guy went down holding his nose from that vicious...what do you call it when someone touches your face with their tricep? It wasn't an elbow. Christ-almighty, it wasn't even an unhinged forearm. Maybe the Dutch boy had really bad body-odor.
Congrats to the English, though. Bend it like Beckham, indeed.
You should have quite an advantage, seeing as half of Portugal got red cards in their sissy-boy-slapfest with Holland.

Hazzle
26-06-2006, 01:11 PM
The funny thing about that game Brad...is for all the soft pussy stuff like diving about like girls (which noone likes, not even fans of the game. Hell, ESPECIALLY not fans of it), there were some pretty meaty bits too. There was a headbutt, there were some scuffles, pushes and shoves, and I swore a fight would break out. Reminded me of the Turkey v Switzerland match where a fight DID break out after the game.

hasselbrad
26-06-2006, 04:16 PM
Something else that irks me is the going back over the center line. That makes for a lot of extra boredom. I like the fact that in basketball, you cannot cross back onto your side of the court once you have crossed midcourt. It sort of ups the ante and allows the defense to apply more pressure.
Given the amount of whistling I heard when the ball would cross midfield, only to be passed around until the keeper had it, I would think this sort of shit annoys Euro-fan as well.
Bring that up at the next meeting.

Hazzle
26-06-2006, 06:38 PM
Depends how that's done though Brad. Like Argentina crossed back into their own half in the 6-0 hammering they handed out but it was to build an attack through some excellent passing, rather than just passing back to the goalkeeper.

Backpassing is supposed to be discouraged by the fact the goalkeeper can't pick the ball up in that situation (which they could before) but attacking players don't close down as much in internationals as they do in club football.

Trust me, when you watch a club game, that sort of stuff happens a lot less. I would agree though, it's boring as fuck when it happens. High-tempo games are always the most entertaining.

International football is pretty much a joke. And I agree with your comment about basketball and physical contact when it comes to international football. There's more contact in basketball. But club football is a VERY different story.

Juliamariskamadadh
26-06-2006, 08:08 PM
-Put your hands on this

Sundance
26-06-2006, 08:14 PM
-Put your hands on this

Uh-uhh. How do I know you're sanitary?

Hazzle
26-06-2006, 08:27 PM
Uh-uhh. How do I know you're sanitary?

We sure as hell know she isn't. Or sane for that matter either.

Juliamariskamadadh
26-06-2006, 09:04 PM
I have gone totally nuts..i'm into the "Celts" now.

Sundance
26-06-2006, 09:08 PM
I have gone totally nuts..i'm into the "Celts" now.



I don't know. In your picture it looks to me like you're more into scratching your ass.