NationStates Jolt Archive

And by football I mean REAL football (what Americans call Soccer. Come on, in American football you hardly ever touch the ball with your feet so why call it football?). Why is it just not as popular in the US as the big three (Baseball, basketball and American Football)?

I personally find it boring. Sorry I guess it's just a cultural difference.

Why is it just not as popular in the US as the big three (Baseball, basketball and American Football)?
Cause Americans generally suck at it and never win any major competition.

Interesting fact about football, the only two continents ever to have a team win the World cup are Europe and South America. And another question (this thread is turning into a genral question Americans about their sports idea) Why do you have a baseball league called the world series if you are the only nation involved?

And by football I mean REAL football (what Americans call Soccer. Come on, in American football you hardly ever touch the ball with your feet so why call it football?). Why is it just not as popular in the US as the big three (Baseball, basketball and American Football)?

it's called football because the ball is a foot long, and the measurements are in yards. So it's still technically accurate. And it's not as popular because it's not as fast-paced, and there's not as much scoring.

Also, Soccer players are weenies.

Every country has there sport, Im just not thrilled with soccer, and yeah you might say "Well baseball is all standing around." How many times do you think Ive heard that, I dont care, I love baseball, its my favorite sport, I just dont like soccer, I tried to understand the groups of 20 year olds running around Rome screaming "GGGGGGGOOOOOOOOAAAAAAALLLLLLLLLL!!!" I just dont like the sport very much, or at all for that matter, its just too simple, kick a ball, kick it there kick it here, kick it to the center, kick it in the goal.

Cause Americans generally suck at it and never win any major competition.

Yeah, that's the reason. :rolleyes:

Cause Americans generally suck at it and never win any major competition.
We always used to get our asses handed to us in hockey before we beat the Soviets in the olympics, but we kept playing and watching the sport. Face it. It's not that we can't play your game, it's just that we're not interested.

Cause Americans generally suck at it and never win any major competition.

We wouldnt suck at it if we gave a damn.

Baseball is boring to me as well, but my friends who love baseball explained the attraction. It's a game of strategy. Like chess with athletic ability involved. Still not my cup of tea, but I understand the attraction. I still don't get why anyone watches soccer.

as popular because it's not as fast-paced, and there's not as much scoring.


You clearly have never watched a English Premier league football game, the pace is impressive. And if Americans are only entertained by high scoring sports what does that tell us about their psycie and national consciouness? (both badly spelt)

Strange then that football (soccer) is the most popular sport on the planet.

Strange then that football (soccer) is the most popular sport on the planet.

Who gives a shit, oh lets bow down Von Witzleben if its the most popular sport in the world lets follow it!

Onw of my favorite shirts; "You laugh at me because Im different, I laugh at you because you're all the same."

Strange then that football (soccer) is the most popular sport on the planet.
Only because it's too warm for hockey, folks!

You clearly have never watched a English Premier league football game, the pace is impressive. And if Americans are only entertained by high scoring sports what does that tell us about their psycie and national consciouness? (both badly spelt)

Thats not what were interested in, yes I have watched English soccer, after five minutes I was bored to tears than flipped to the Eagles Packers game, and put on a minor league baseball game on PIP mode because normal baseball season was out, than flipped to the Baseball game during the Football commercials.

I have a friend from Spain, he goes there every summer, his favorite sport, soccer, his least favorite sport, English soccer.

Who gives a shit, oh lets bow down Von Witzleben if its the most popular sport in the world lets follow it!
Blahblahblah....

Onw of my favorite shirts; "You laugh at me because Im different, I laugh at you because you're all the same."
I never said it was my sport. I prefer k-1 or boxing. I only watch football if my national teams play.

I love soccer and try to watch it on FOX sports net (the only channel that carries UK soccer). I'm not a huge fan of gridiron though.

Baseball is boring to me as well, but my friends who love baseball explained the attraction. It's a game of strategy. Like chess with athletic ability involved. Still not my cup of tea, but I understand the attraction. I still don't get why anyone watches soccer.

I think we have all learned a little something from Drunk Commies today.

I personally don't care about soccer and it's not because Americia isn't good at it or that I'm into high octane sporting events it's just something that doesn't spark a big interest in the general public outside of youth soccer leagues.

I have a friend from Spain, he goes there every summer, his favorite sport, soccer, his least favorite sport, English soccer.
I didn't know that soccer is a different sport then English soccer. :rolleyes:

Would someone please explain why they like European football? I just don't get it. No offense intended, I just don't understand the attraction.

Hey, do you english folk have Soccer Moms, too? I'd call them Football Moms, but that's entirely different terminology here.

american is dumb ur all covered up. aussie football no protection=mans game. as for soccer being 4 weenies i no some1 who tore 90% of the ligements in there right leg playing it. (actualli he wasnt wearing shin pads but neva mind)

Would someone please explain why they like European football? I just don't get it. No offense intended, I just don't understand the attraction.
As a European I can honestly say I have no idea to the why.

Boxing! Blah!

american is dumb ur all covered up. aussie football no protection=mans game. as for soccer being 4 weenies i no some1 who tore 90% of the ligements in there right leg playing it. (actualli he wasnt wearing shin pads but neva mind)
Tell it to Joe Theisman.

american is dumb ur all covered up. aussie football no protection=mans game. as for soccer being 4 weenies i no some1 who tore 90% of the ligements in there right leg playing it. (actualli he wasnt wearing shin pads but neva mind)

And I know a guy who lost his nose in a hockey game. And he still plays.

Boxing! Blah!
Boxing kicks ass! Literally. I used to love to box

Interesting fact about football, the only two continents ever to have a team win the World cup are Europe and South America. And another question (this thread is turning into a genral question Americans about their sports idea) Why do you have a baseball league called the world series if you are the only nation involved?

we aren't. Toronto Blue Jays. I don't follow baseball all too much, really, but I would guess it is called the "World Series" because there is no rule stating another country can't join the league.

*shrug

Kids in America are crazy about soccer. There are kidsoccer leagues like crazy. I guess it's just people here in America don't want to watch it. I don't know what it is, but I hate it too.

I find that it's frustrating. I watch it, and I'm like, "Why don't you just clobber him!?" It's our aggressive nature, maybe. The fact that no one gets clobbered like in other court/field type sports like football and hockey. Even basketball has the occasional clobbering. Maybe that's why people go nuts at soccer games in Europe. It's all this teasing and violence foreplay type stuff, and the testosterone level just goes off the charts because it's there's no violence outlet, and people just start hitting each other in a massive orgy of violence.

Did that make sense?

we aren't. Toronto Blue Jays. I don't follow baseball all too much, really, but I would guess it is called the "World Series" because there is no rule stating another country can't join the league.

*shrug
Plus there are a bunch of players from Central America and the Carribian and Japan.

Boxing kicks ass! Literally.
Nonono..no kicking allowed in boxing. :p

we aren't. Toronto Blue Jays. I don't follow baseball all too much, really, but I would guess it is called the "World Series" because there is no rule stating another country can't join the league.

*shrug

I wouldn't doubt that Japanese teams might try to join in the near future.

Nonono..no kicking allowed in boxing. :p
Depends on what kind of boxing. I did both, but sucked at kickboxing.

We always used to get our asses handed to us in hockey before we beat the Soviets in the olympics, but we kept playing and watching the sport.
News flash: the Canadians beat the Soviets first, in 1976 (Henderson). Your so-called "Miracle" was nothing but following up a previous victory by your neighbours to the north. And you still get your asses handed to you in hockey - witness the beautiful trumping we witnessed at Salt Lake City in 2002 - beaten from the gold medal in both women's and men's hockey by Canada, on your home turf.

Soviet dominance of sport collapsed once the Canadians beat them, not the Americans. Get yo' facts straight.

Anyway, soccer sucks. So does football, and baseball.

I personally don't care about soccer and it's not because Americia isn't good at it or that I'm into high octane sporting events it's just something that doesn't spark a big interest in the general public outside of youth soccer leagues.

Actually, the USA is good at soccer, arent they ranked in the top ten teams in the world ahead of england. LOL what a stupid thread LOL

My favorite sports in order are: (to watch anyways...)

hockey, even though its probably the most shity to watch in its history, no body in the world can run as fast as I, ME YES ME can skate, I can skate faster than track stars. You can skate 30 miles a hour...

NFL , how anybody can say soccer has a faster pace than the NFL is beyond me...

CFL american style football with 3 downs, 50 times faster pace than soccer, lol.

Baseball, good for beer drinking, very slow pace, but probably the best game in the world for moments of drama....

Lacrosse, actually pretty fun to watch, lots of hitting, probably the toughest sport in the world, ahead of even rugby + aussie rules football lol

Boxing, needs a turnaround, still some good fights though.

Arena football, fast pace

Professional card playing,

Soccer, watched the World cup + Euro cup, fun to play but very boring to watch.

BAsketball, jsut getting really lame

Rugby, how can people watch it? Fun to play but soooo fucking boring

Curling, this sport should outlawed

Car racing


Soccer is just pretty boring, I mean even Euro championships + world cup were jsut meh...

Depends on what kind of boxing. I did both, but sucked at kickboxing.
I was pretty good at both. And Muy Thay. But I was to lazy for the ridget training needed for a fight. But I was always the sparring partner for the guys and galls that did go for it.

Actually, the USA is good at soccer, arent they ranked in the top ten teams in the world ahead of england.
No.

Interesting fact about football, the only two continents ever to have a team win the World cup are Europe and South America. And another question (this thread is turning into a genral question Americans about their sports idea) Why do you have a baseball league called the world series if you are the only nation involved?

There are teams located in Canada now. And talks about a few teams starting up in Europe. Although the price for those players to be transported across the ocean for games would be colossal.

But i have no clue why the MLB Orriginally called it the "World Series". You would have to go back in time and ask the founders of the MLB to figure out the answer to that.

I wouldn't doubt that Japanese teams might try to join in the near future.
It'd be good for the sport. But tricky cause it is called America's favourite passtime. (I'm american, don't mind the u in fav...)

I think it would be good for the sport, though, to add an international league. Same for (American) football. U.S. football v. European.

And, for you Aussies. Yes, Australian "football" (Euro. Rugby) IS the man's game. Except I know girls who play.

And, (I know, i haven't stopped yet) if you are wondering why American football involves padding and such, its because our President some time ago (can't remember which one! ^^) threatened to ban the sport because too many players were dying in the game. It used to be like rugby, only fights and pile ups caused the kids playing (i say kids because it started out as a college sport) to suffer life-threatening injuries. That is why it is all panzy like with padding and scrimmage lines.

NFL , how anybody can say soccer has a faster pace than the NFL is beyond me...


Dude. Seriously. I like (American) football too, but I'm sorry, "soccer" is a much faster paced game. Try this: they don't stop the clock after every first down, and there isn't a 30-second clock between each play. Watch soccer, a WHOLE game. Sure there aren't any (major) tackles, but it is a lot faster than the NFL.

News flash: the Canadians beat the Soviets first, in 1976 (Henderson). Your so-called "Miracle" was nothing but following up a previous victory by your neighbours to the north. And you still get your asses handed to you in hockey - witness the beautiful trumping we witnessed at Salt Lake City in 2002 - beaten from the gold medal in both women's and men's hockey by Canada, on your home turf.

Soviet dominance of sport collapsed once the Canadians beat them, not the Americans. Get yo' facts straight.

Anyway, soccer sucks. So does football, and baseball.
I was just replying to the guy who posted that we hate soccer because we don't win. We didn't win at hockey, but we liked the game. Relax dude.

I was just replying to the guy who posted that we hate soccer because we don't win. We didn't win at hockey, but we liked the game. Relax dude.
Hmm..but it didn't realy took off till you beat the evil commies did it?

Dude. Seriously. I like (American) football too, but I'm sorry, "soccer" is a much faster paced game. Try this: they don't stop the clock after every first down, and there isn't a 30-second clock between each play. Watch soccer, a WHOLE game. Sure there aren't any (major) tackles, but it is a lot faster than the NFL.

I disagree, I have watched many soccer games, you get moments of movement but mostly it just passing and trying to gain the ball...

Hmm..but it didn't realy took off till you beat the evil commies did it?
Actually it's always had some popularity. Depends on which region of the country you are from. In the midwest and northeast it's always been popular.

I was just replying to the guy who posted that we hate soccer because we don't win. We didn't win at hockey, but we liked the game. Relax dude.

Don't forget. It was called a Miracle because, oh, I don't know. We Could Never Win! Geeze, I agree man, he needs to take a breath or two before posting. The fact that America won was the miracle, not the fact that the Russians lost.

Why do germans like wheat beer? Why do central americans eat tortillas? Why do jewish poeple wear yamikas? It's all culture and upbringing. here in the states football is the #1 highschool sport. Although, soccer is becoming very popular. When i was in school all the skinny kids played soccer or ran track and all the gorrilla jocks played football. That is changing b/c soccer is becoming more popular. anyway, it's all about regional upbringing and cultural differences, nothing more.

No.


Whoops the USA is ranked #11 and england #7 my mistake, the USA sure seems crappy at soccer though lol....


By the way when was the last time England won the world cup?

Whoops the USA is ranked #11 and england #7 my mistake, the USA sure seems crappy at soccer though lol....


By the way when was the last time England won the world cup?
1966. 4:2 against Germany.

Soccer is an ok sport to play when you're young, because noone cares if you don't know the rules or not. Somewhere between 7 and 14 most American kids drop out of it for varying reasons (can't understand the rules, injury, etc.) and never come back. Granted, those who enjoy the sport (I mean REALLY enjoy the sport) in America won't let something like having their leg amputated stop them from playing, but most of the people I know just don't like it. In soccer, it always seems that injuries aren't as frequent as on the lacross field. I am, of course, wrong as someone will probably point out. Still, the drama Americans enjoy seems to be found in other sports; while soccer players may be knocked out by only a few collisions (due to the lack of overall padding), we enjoy watching our atheletes slowly, painfully, but in a determined way, rise up from sheer physical pain that would have knocked anyone else out, kind of like watching Achilles rise from a hail of spears that missed his heel by only a few millimeters. It shows the human spirit in its full glory. Simply the fascination you have with your sport shown with ours.

Dude. Seriously. I like (American) football too, but I'm sorry, "soccer" is a much faster paced game. Try this: they don't stop the clock after every first down, and there isn't a 30-second clock between each play. Watch soccer, a WHOLE game. Sure there aren't any (major) tackles, but it is a lot faster than the NFL.

I play football(American) myself. Try this: You are on the line of scrimmage, offensive side. You look to your left, you see your left tackle, you look to your right, you see your center. The count is on one. Down... Set... HIKE! -and just like that you have a lineman coming from each side, trying to bust through the line to get a sack on their record. When a lineman is 2, sometimes 3 times bigger than you, you know how tough you have to play. It's all technique<sp?>. We just got done with our season, 8-0. Soccer isn't as exciting, I'm sorry.

Soccer is an ok sport to play when you're young, because noone cares if you don't know the rules or not. Somewhere between 7 and 14 most American kids drop out of it for varying reasons (can't understand the rules, injury, etc.) and never come back. Granted, those who enjoy the sport (I mean REALLY enjoy the sport) in America won't let something like having their leg amputated stop them from playing, but most of the people I know just don't like it. In soccer, it always seems that injuries aren't as frequent as on the lacross field. I am, of course, wrong as someone will probably point out. Still, the drama Americans enjoy seems to be found in other sports; while soccer players may be knocked out by only a few collisions (due to the lack of overall padding), we enjoy watching our atheletes slowly, painfully, but in a determined way, rise up from sheer physical pain that would have knocked anyone else out, kind of like watching Achilles rise from a hail of spears that missed his heel by only a few millimeters. It shows the human spirit in its full glory. Simply the fascination you have with your sport shown with ours.

If that's the case, bring on the Aussies! We can take them!

Maybe we don't like the arrogance of a bunch of Europeans telling us our sport isn't a real sport, and that we are stupid for not liking soccer?

*snip*
In other words Americans love violence.

In other words Americans love violence.
Well, Yeah. Haven't you been paying attention?

Well, Yeah. Haven't you been paying attention?
Oh yes. I've been paying attention.

I play football(American) myself. Try this: You are on the line of scrimmage, offensive side. You look to your left, you see your left tackle, you look to your right, you see your center. The count is on one. Down... Set... HIKE! -and just like that you have a lineman coming from each side, trying to bust through the line to get a sack on their record. When a lineman is 2, sometimes 3 times bigger than you, you know how tough you have to play. It's all technique<sp?>. We just got done with our season, 8-0. Soccer isn't as exciting, I'm sorry.

Sure linemen have fun. Ironic you didn't chose the QB to focus on, or the C, or the WRs. Soccer doesn't have this fear of being fallen upon by a 300+ lb. Gorilla, but YOU try mustering the courage to run the full length of the field after just getting there because the goalie kicked the ball back to mid-field. I can't stand soccer, personally, but I think that we need to drop the pads in football. THEN it will be a true test of strength.

Oh yes. I've been paying attention.

Yes. We get it. You hate all us Americans and everything we do. Get the fuck over it already.

I'm an American, I love soccer and watch out, in a decade or so we'll be right up there with the world soccer super powers.

Why do you have a baseball league called the world series if you are the only nation involved?

I'm pretty sure the Red Sox could take any team from any other league around the world.

In other words Americans love violence.

YA GODDAMN RIGHT WE DO!!!



Then again, if violence isn't that common in your society you either can't appreciate it or want more of it. For you, it's the former. For us, it's the latter.

Soccer doesn't appeal to our short attention span. If you look at the two that are most applicable, basketball and hockey, the field/court/rink is much smaller and allows for a much more up and down noticeable action.

As for football, it can be devastatingly slow as a whole, but the thing about it is, the plays last a whole of 3-10 seconds, there is a lot of excitement during it, then you can stop paying attention. But for those who try to get more out of sports, there is near infinite amounts of strategy involved, as well.

Whoever told that guy that baseball is a game that demands strategy is just plain wrong. A couple of years ago, I saw an article in a Sports Illustrated comparing the managers with the best records to the number of coaching moves they made (substitutions, intentional walks, etc.). It was a completely inverse relationship, where the coaches with the most wins did the very least. I hate baseball, now. It is so simple and BORING.

Bring back Ozzie, Tony Gwynn, Wade Boggs, Cal Ripken. They actually played instead of simply swinging.

Yes. We get it. You hate all us Americans and everything we do.
No need to try and read between the lines in this thread to get it. I frequently state that in the ones about politics and global affairs.

Well, I'm Canadian, and Our Football/Soccer team . . . . Sucks . . . badly.

Besides, Hockey's Much more exciting! :D

*Shakes Fist at the NHLPA*

YA GODDAMN RIGHT WE DO!!!



Then again, if violence isn't that common in your society you either can't appreciate it or want more of it. For you, it's the former. For us, it's the latter.
:D The former? I'm a k-1 lover.

Football can have the same problem. Running a 50 yard touchdown and then getting it called back. It's not uncommon either. Anyways, with QBs, they have to memorize countless plays, keep an eye on the line and where they might throw and wether they are going to have to run it or not.

No need to try and read between the lines in this thread to get it. I frequently state that in the ones about politics and global affairs.

So are you looking for some kind of acceptance then?

FIFA World Soccer Rankings#
(as of November 10, 2004)
----------------------------


Rank Team Points Rank: Sep 2004
---- ----- ------ --------------
1 Brazil 847 1
2 France 802 2
3 Argentina 784 3
4 Spain 775 4
5 Czech Republic 768 6
6 Netherlands 758 5
7 England 752 7
8 Mexico 743 10
8 Portugal 743 8
10 Italy 736 8
11 United States 728 11

Soccer is not as big in America because it has lacked a strong national league and the big television coverage/contracts. Someone/owners with deep pockets is needed to take the losses until viewership & advertising grows enough to make it profitable. That will not happen till there is major teams in most metro areas. It's all business, thats it. I like soccer but give me amer. football, basketball and hockey first. Baseball is good to listen to or watch on tv as background noise but forget going to a game that requires alot of beer to make it fun. ;)

Nuff said

I'm going to start a new thread for the "violence" theme. Let's leave this one to sports.

So are you looking for some kind of acceptance then?
:confused: Acceptance? From Americans? No. What makes you think that?

I know, Witzleben. It's just that understood generalizations save time. I just have to hope they don't offend anyone.

(Dammit, I need to type faster!)

Soccer will never break into mainstream north american sports untill they clean up the pussies who play soccer.

How can you go for a sport where at the slightest bump, bruise etc etc the player goes down in agony?

if players do that in the NFL or in hockey they are prompty booed and pelted with beer...

:confused: Acceptance? From Americans? No. What makes you think that?

So then you're just a giant ass? The thread is obviously titled "What do Americans think of football?" You're not an American. Why post? You have nothing constructive to add to the conversation, as you can't possibly have a valid opinion on what Americans think of football. All you have to offer is your wildly skewed view on what we might think, a view that is tainted by your obvious dislike for everything American. So why do you post? All you bring to the table is flame and flamebait because of your hatred of us. Why don't you just let us discuss things civily without bringing such drivel as "Cause Americans generally suck at it and never win any major competition"? That's not the case, and even if it were, what position are you to make that sort of judgement? You obviously know nothing of merit about America.

So then you're just a giant ass? The thread is obviously titled "What do Americans think of football?" You're not an American. Why post? You have nothing constructive to add to the conversation, as you can't possibly have a valid opinion on what Americans think of football. All you have to offer is your wildly skewed view on what we might think, a view that is tainted by your obvious dislike for everything American. So why do you post? All you bring to the table is flame and flamebait because of your hatred of us. Why don't you just let us discuss things civily without bringing such drivel as "Cause Americans generally suck at it and never win any major competition"? That's not the case, and even if it were, what position are you to make that sort of judgement? You obviously know nothing of merit about America.
I neither flamed nor baited. The original poster asked why but didn't ask anyone of a specific nationality to answer it. And hence I can give my opinion. Wether it's to your liking or not.

How can you go for a sport where at the slightest bump, bruise etc etc the player goes down in agony?

The players who fall are faking around 90% of the time, trying to draw a foul and a possible card for the other player.

The players who fall are faking around 90% of the time, trying to draw a foul and a possible card for the other player.


This makes you a pussy and a poor sport. A very good reason to dislike PRO soccer. Again, do that playing hockey + football and your in trouble, most likely you will be injured by pissed off players for real....

And by football I mean REAL football (what Americans call Soccer.
Personally, I love it!

okay to me soccer sucks i wouldnt watch a game if were payed, but american football? that is sweet nothing compares, ockeys good, baseball sucks and basketballs mediocre in entertanement value

oh, but better a soccer game then golf or something

Well I'm from England and personally find most football games boring :\. But that's just because I'm not really into any team or anything I guess... Rugby can be fun though...more fun to play than to watch!

crap!

This makes you a pussy and a poor sport. A very good reason to dislike PRO soccer. Again, do that playing hockey + football and your in trouble, most likely you will be injured by pissed off players for real....

Football players fake. Recievers always want pass interference. Basketball is notorious for that "Oh, I got hit, please let me go to the line?" thing going on. Come on now, its a part of ANY Pro sport. Hockey doesn't do it because they figure the players will fight it out, and who ever wins goes to the box, and the other one cowers in shame. Its part of ANY professional sport. You're being paid to win, not to be honest.

Football players fake. Recievers always want pass interference. Basketball is notorious for that "Oh, I got hit, please let me go to the line?" thing going on. Come on now, its a part of ANY Pro sport. Hockey doesn't do it because they figure the players will fight it out, and who ever wins goes to the box, and the other one cowers in shame. Its part of ANY professional sport. You're being paid to win, not to be honest.


Actually, in Hocky, if 2 players fight, they both go to the box.

Think football isn't exciting, and that the players are pussies? Whatch an Old Firm match (Celtic vs Rangers) and you'll see that football can be both violent and extreamly exciting.
The fact the football isn't as high scorring as American Football is not a flaw in the game; low scoring games mean that any lead is fragile and that the losing side can always stage a come back, this means that a side can never let it's gaurd down. There is nothing more compelling than watching your side desparately try to keep a one goal advantage against an attacking opposition.
Tatics. Football is definately a tactical game - to say otherwise is plain wrong. Good tactics can break any team, there is loads going on tatically in most games (with the exception of any Dundee United game). Also remember that one of the most popular sports sims in Europe is a game called 'Championship Manager' where you assume the role of the manager and decide on your team's tatics.
When I have watched any American Football I have found it to be dull and overly drawn out (granted this was watching the Scottish Claymores, so this could just be their style - bunch of NFL rejects :) ). There doesn't, to me, seem to be any continuity or flow to the game, as whenever anything happens - or nearly happens - both sides stop and have a tatical huddel.

This is just my take on it, there is much to reccomend in Football, but there are plenty of dull,abismal matches too. Equally I'm sure there are good American Football matches, but we only seem to see the turkeys.

I'm not an American, but...

Hockey > Football > Basketball > Rugby > American football > Baseball. :cool:

Personally, I think that soccer sucks.

Although from having attended both professional hockey and soccer games on more than one occasion, I'd have to say that it doesn't suck as much as hockey does.

Who would have thought I'd see more fights between players at a soccer game than I would at a hockey game?

But overall, I can't understand that point the soccer. I've tried, I've given it more than it's fair share of chances. I'd say that it's the culture, but I come from one of the big soccer cities of the northeast and I still grew up loathing it.

Honestly, anymore, the only sport that I still love is baseball. Football is parody. Basketball is individualism. And well, that's about it. Everything else is just a jumbled version of the next. Some are played with balls. Some are played on clay courts. Some on gym room floors. But they all more or less are the same.

Football players fake. Recievers always want pass interference. Basketball is notorious for that "Oh, I got hit, please let me go to the line?" thing going on. Come on now, its a part of ANY Pro sport. Hockey doesn't do it because they figure the players will fight it out, and who ever wins goes to the box, and the other one cowers in shame. Its part of ANY professional sport. You're being paid to win, not to be honest.


Ummm, ok, Football players fake? When? A RB may argue about a call but thry dont go down like they are shot as in soccer, your a moron...

Have you ever watched a hockey game? ITs not EA sports NHL 2004 hockey game you knucklehead! Both players get a 5 minute major and go to the box, the loser doesnt cower. Are you on crack?? A good example of a hockey player faking is when a Canadiens player "faked" a injury in last years playoffs to get a call against the other team. He got up and was soundly booed. When this guy got back to montreal, his own stadium HE WAS BOOED BY HIS OWN FANS. You just dont do that shit in hockey.

Soccer players do it on a regular case. At every foul, you see some little skinny dork writhing on the ground in pain. If you did that in hockey or football,,,,,, yikes good luck!

Think football isn't exciting, and that the players are pussies? Whatch an Old Firm match (Celtic vs Rangers) and you'll see that football can be both violent and extreamly exciting.
The fact the football isn't as high scorring as American Football is not a flaw in the game; low scoring games mean that any lead is fragile and that the losing side can always stage a come back, this means that a side can never let it's gaurd down. There is nothing more compelling than watching your side desparately try to keep a one goal advantage against an attacking opposition.
Tatics. Football is definately a tactical game - to say otherwise is plain wrong. Good tactics can break any team, there is loads going on tatically in most games (with the exception of any Dundee United game). Also remember that one of the most popular sports sims in Europe is a game called 'Championship Manager' where you assume the role of the manager and decide on your team's tatics.
When I have watched any American Football I have found it to be dull and overly drawn out (granted this was watching the Scottish Claymores, so this could just be their style - bunch of NFL rejects :) ). There doesn't, to me, seem to be any continuity or flow to the game, as whenever anything happens - or nearly happens - both sides stop and have a tatical huddel.

This is just my take on it, there is much to reccomend in Football, but there are plenty of dull,abismal matches too. Equally I'm sure there are good American Football matches, but we only seem to see the turkeys.


Its good to point out that those guys that are playing in Europe are bums. They could not make the NFL, arena football or the CFL, that league would be like division 4 soccer...

So it would tend to be a crappy product.

Soccer players are pussies. When a guy like me 6 feet 200 pounds would be a dominant phyical presence on the soccer field whereas in hockey i am MUCH smaller than average + in football I am probably going to die on the field, you can see how people doent respect soccer players.

That being said you have to be in great shape to be soccer, just not very strong or tough...

As a Forest season ticket holder, I can understand how some people find football boring, (Watching a match in Gillingham when it's tipping it down as a example) but when you get a good match then it's really exciting, especcially if soethings at stake/

Well it seems most people think football (soccer) is boring...

Personally I LOVE it. It's my favorite sport... WAY ahead of basketball, football, baseball, hockey, whatever else you can name.

I play soccer and I'm a soccer referee :)

I guess it isn't as fast paced as like ice-hockey or basketball, but why does a sport have to be fast paced to be good?

Well it seems most people think football (soccer) is boring...

Personally I LOVE it. It's my favorite sport... WAY ahead of basketball, football, baseball, hockey, whatever else you can name.

I play soccer and I'm a soccer referee :)

I guess it isn't as fast paced as like ice-hockey or basketball, but why does a sport have to be fast paced to be good?


Soccer is fun to play, I too play in the summer but it is SO boring to watch..

Actually, the USA is good at soccer, arent they ranked in the top ten teams in the world ahead of england. LOL what a stupid thread LOL


Dont know where you get your info but that is definitely not true. Top teams in the world aprox at the moment (based on World Cup 2002 and Euro 2004)

Brazil
Greece
Portragal
Senegal
South Korea
France
Turkey
Spain
Germany
Chezc Republic

USA is getting better but they are not nearly as good in terms of their record as any of the nations here.

FIFA World Soccer Rankings#
(as of November 10, 2004)
----------------------------


Rank Team Points Rank: Sep 2004
---- ----- ------ --------------
1 Brazil 847 1
2 France 802 2
3 Argentina 784 3
4 Spain 775 4
5 Czech Republic 768 6
6 Netherlands 758 5
7 England 752 7
8 Mexico 743 10
8 Portugal 743 8
10 Italy 736 8
11 United States 728 11

Soccer is not as big in America because it has lacked a strong national league and the big television coverage/contracts. Someone/owners with deep pockets is needed to take the losses until viewership & advertising grows enough to make it profitable. That will not happen till there is major teams in most metro areas. It's all business, thats it. I like soccer but give me amer. football, basketball and hockey first. Baseball is good to listen to or watch on tv as background noise but forget going to a game that requires alot of beer to make it fun. ;)

Nuff said

The above poster is a DUM ASS

Soccer is pretty popular with the under 14 crowd. But eventually they realize that running around non-stop is stupid.

I like to watch my girlfriend play though...

I personally don't mind it. Hell, I used to play it when I was lil and I'd consider playing it again out of fun as well as to get back into shape.

To why it's not as large, or really have much of a stance at all in the American public/interest from what i've seen, I trully don't know. I know I personally would rather watch it then basketball or baseball (The second which in my opinion seems rather boring. Hit a ball and run...hit and run. Just seems..repetetive and...yub, boring as stated). I do though have an idea why American Football is up over it over here in the states though. Or atleast a theory. It being the American interest with violence and growing interest in instant gratification. Those two combined...yub. And I could go more into detail but I crave lunch.

Well, according to some people on this forum, Americans don't think. :rolleyes:

Instant gratification in the way of some people enjoying things that you have little time to wait for. Each play taking less than half a minute typically.

Violence, though apparent in other games, is key to this game. Key in the sense that when the center hands off the ball to the quarterback, the line is instantly engaged with the opposing team. Key also in that, other than a touchdown or missing a catch, is the way a play is stopped...a quick hit knocking the man to the ground.

Though looking up over this, the points difference could be something else that has an effect somehow. Larger numbers in both the sense of the scorring and the end of game. 'Course a problem with that is baseball, which at times has rather low scores.

The thoughts/ideas/theories/etc are a little flawed but...yub. They're mine.

---
And My Gun, who was that last comment to, out of curiosity?

Instant gratification in the way of some people enjoying things that you have little time to wait for. Each play taking less than half a minute typically.

Violence, though apparent in other games, is key to this game. Key in the sense that when the center hands off the ball to the quarterback, the line is instantly engaged with the opposing team. Key also in that, other than a touchdown or missing a catch, is the way a play is stopped...a quick hit knocking the man to the ground.

Though looking up over this, the points difference could be something else that has an effect somehow. Larger numbers in both the sense of the scorring and the end of game. 'Course a problem with that is baseball, which at times has rather low scores.

The thoughts/ideas/theories/etc are a little flawed but...yub. They're mine.

---
And My Gun, who was that last comment to, out of curiosity?

No one in particular.

And by football I mean REAL football (what Americans call Soccer. Come on, in American football you hardly ever touch the ball with your feet so why call it football?). Why is it just not as popular in the US as the big three (Baseball, basketball and American Football)?

Because in my personal opinion watching soccer is worse than watching paint dry.

Another thing thats annoying about soccer is why the fuck do you whistle when someone does something that annoys you?

They do that in mexico as well. They even greet each other by whistleing, fucking stupid...

If the reason that Football is not so popular in the US is that it is not fast paced enough or that its not vilont enough, then what does that tell you about the American popular cultures mind?

If American's are so dumb, what relevance to any of you does it make how we feel about sports?
I enjoy soccer. I played for 9 years. I watched the World Cup devoutly (not just the US, I set the VCR to record all 3 matches on tv every morning) and cheer for my hometown pro-club (Kansas City Wizards) loudly.

...and this goes on and on and on and on and on...

Let's face it. I don't know if it is in each country's culture, way of life, philosophy, god-knows-what, but sports bashing is a thing that never ends...

Even though I love football (soccer) and play it as a hobby almost daily, I've compromised with the idea that there will always be people who think that running around in a green field kicking a ball is stupid. Right the same way I think that throwing around an olive-shaped ball while wearing tight pants is...odd at least :P

People should just let everyone have fun with whatever the hell they like and stop critisizing sports...

...but this post will probably just unify everyone against me, bah :P

If the reason that Football is not so popular in the US is that it is not fast paced enough or that its not vilont enough, then what does that tell you about the American popular cultures mind?


IF Europeans are not into the NFL or hockey and are into a sport that embraces cheating (faking injury) lack of strength and speed, then what does that tell you about Europe's pop culture?

IF Europeans are not into the NFL or hockey and are into a sport that embraces cheating (faking injury) lack of strength and speed, then what does that tell you about Europe's pop culture?

1) I can tell you now, everyone in Europe who watches football detests divers
2) Exactly how does football require a lack of speed or strength?

1) I can tell you now, everyone in Europe who watches football detests divers
2) Exactly how does football require a lack of speed or strength?


Do you think ANY soccer players could outrun a decent runningback or receiver in the NFL?
Do you think ANY soccer player could take a hit or receive one from a NFL player or hockey player?

As I stated before as someone who 6 feet 200 pounds when playing soccer I AM the big guy whereas in hockey I am small and in the NFL Id better be a really really fast DB...

Do you think ANY soccer players could outrun a decent runningback or receiver in the NFL?
Do you think ANY soccer player could take a hit or receive one from a NFL player or hockey player?

As I stated before as someone who 6 feet 200 pounds when playing soccer I AM the big guy whereas in hockey I am small and in the NFL Id better be a really really fast DB...

Oh rearly intellgent, the "Whos bigger" game. Yes I do as a matter of fact think that football players could out/equal the speed of an NFL/hocky player. And since football is suposed to be a non contact sport, then nautraly we wouldnt expect a "hit" from anyone. To those who say non contact sports are for the week, I say that actually it denotes a great deal of restraint and maturity.

Oh rearly intellgent, the "Whos bigger" game. Yes I do as a matter of fact think that football players could out/equal the speed of an NFL/hocky player. And since football is suposed to be a non contact sport, then nautraly we wouldnt expect a "hit" from anyone. To those who say non contact sports are for the week, I say that actually it denotes a great deal of restraint and maturity.

Your getting owned here. You stated that soccer take strength and speed but now you seem to be backing away from that.

Taking a hit = strength.

The fastest man in the world cannot = the speed of a average hockey player, they skate at 30 miles a hour. :rolleyes:

Soccer players do have endurance, I will give em that. You have to be in really good shape to play soccer, but having the same speed as the NFL + hockey? those sports are about sprinting...

The average NHL hockey player is 6 2, 225 pounds, what do you think would happen to a 6 feet 160 pound soccer player against a hockey player? lol

Why do you have a baseball league called the world series if you are the only nation involved?

The name World's Series has nothing to do with geography. The name is The World's Series actually. It goes way back when, if I'm correct, there were no playoffs as we know them today. There was only a series at the end of the season between the best team of each league (National and American). The World was in fact the name of a newspaper (or some important publication at that time). I cannot recall correctly how it was involved in the The World's Series, possibly as the sponsor of it, but anyways the series was given the name of that newspaper. The Series of The World -> The World's Series.

Couple of thoughts:

First off the comment that said, "I guess it isn't as fast paced as like ice-hockey or basketball, but why does a sport have to be fast paced to be good?"

To me, hockey is about as fast-paced as a group hug at an old folk's home. My thoughts of a typical (meaning the twenty or so AHL/NHL games that I have attended in my life--all on free tickets): Face off. Clear puck into board. Group hug against boards while four guys poke at puck. Puck is cleared into corner. Group hug while six guys poke at puck. Puck is cleared to other end. Goalie squeezes his over-padded ass out of net, chucks puck on down to defenseman who in turn flicks it to center who then attempts to pass it to winger, but winger mishandles it and group hug ensues again in corner.

Now take that and multiple it by three periods. To me, it's like watching four hours of left turns in Nascar only in hockey you'll occasionally see a cool mullet here and there.

As for soccer. I don't consider myself just another dumb American, but to me it really is just a bunch of great conditioned people kicking running after a ball. In many ways I see it like hockey. And I suppose that is why the majority of Americans don't care about either one of them, and never will. NHL hockey games get outdrawn in television ratings by women's golf. I can only imagine how low the soccer ratings are.

But I will say that the one redeeming quality about soccer, one that will actually make me watch it when I come across it on television. There aren't any commercials. Now THAT is cool.

The name World's Series has nothing to do with geography. The name is The World's Series actually. It goes way back when, if I'm correct, there were no playoffs as we know them today. There was only a series at the end of the season between the best team of each league (National and American). The World was in fact the name of a newspaper (or some important publication at that time). I cannot recall correctly how it was involved in the The World's Series, possibly as the sponsor of it, but anyways the series was given the name of that newspaper. The Series of The World -> The World's Series.

A+

"The World Series" is just a way of showing how Americans feel about ourselves. It doesn't MLB doesn't span across the globe. How does that song go, "We are the world," I think that's why we call it that. ;)

"The World Series" is just a way of showing how Americans feel about ourselves. It doesn't MLB doesn't span across the globe. How does that song go, "We are the world," I think that's why we call it that. ;)

No, Besser is correct. It was named after a publication that sponsored the first game between the American League champion and the National League champion.

"The World Series" is just a way of showing how Americans feel about ourselves. It doesn't MLB doesn't span across the globe. How does that song go, "We are the world," I think that's why we call it that. ;)

Did you just read the above post about the 'World' periodical being the original sponsor. It is just a mininterpreted tradition.

Taking a hit = strength.


Not true, to take a punch well you need a practial basic knowedge of physics and biology, reflexes and endurence.


The fastest man in the world cannot = the speed of a average hockey player, they skate at 30 miles a hour. :rolleyes:


Oprative word "Skate". They only skate that fast because of lack of friction.


Soccer players do have endurance, I will give em that. You have to be in really good shape to play soccer, but having the same speed as the NFL + hockey? those sports are about sprinting...


Focus the endurence into a sprint and you may have something.


The average NHL hockey player is 6 2, 225 pounds, what do you think would happen to a 6 feet 160 pound soccer player against a hockey player? lol

Since Football is a non-contact sport, the footballer would win as he has more experiance. The hockey player would get a red card for an extremely hevey handed tackle.

Christ, I was kidding.

I've played baseball my entire life. I know baseball in and out. I know why it is called the World Series.

Couple of thoughts:

First off the comment that said, "I guess it isn't as fast paced as like ice-hockey or basketball, but why does a sport have to be fast paced to be good?"

To me, hockey is about as fast-paced as a group hug at an old folk's home. My thoughts of a typical (meaning the twenty or so AHL/NHL games that I have attended in my life--all on free tickets): Face off. Clear puck into board. Group hug against boards while four guys poke at puck. Puck is cleared into corner. Group hug while six guys poke at puck. Puck is cleared to other end. Goalie squeezes his over-padded ass out of net, chucks puck on down to defenseman who in turn flicks it to center who then attempts to pass it to winger, but winger mishandles it and group hug ensues again in corner.

Now take that and multiple it by three periods. To me, it's like watching four hours of left turns in Nascar only in hockey you'll occasionally see a cool mullet here and there.

As for soccer. I don't consider myself just another dumb American, but to me it really is just a bunch of great conditioned people kicking running after a ball. In many ways I see it like hockey. And I suppose that is why the majority of Americans don't care about either one of them, and never will. NHL hockey games get outdrawn in television ratings by women's golf. I can only imagine how low the soccer ratings are.

But I will say that the one redeeming quality about soccer, one that will actually make me watch it when I come across it on television. There aren't any commercials. Now THAT is cool.


Nice stick to basketball then man. Hockey is definately the slowest paced I have ever seen it. However, i would take it over soccer anytime...

Did you just read the above post about the 'World' periodical being the original sponsor. It is just a mininterpreted tradition.

Would someone mind re-naming it then to "The world's montly series" or something to clear things up. I assume that said newspaper no longer exists. We change our sports championships names if the sponser changes "Barclycard premiership/Carling Premiership"

But on that point, the best shirt that I have ever seen was in Yankee Stadium where there was a picture of Yankee Stadium and underneath the picture it said, "They called it the World Series, but it's usually played here."

Would someone mind re-naming it then to "The world's montly series" or something to clear things up.

No, we're not going to change 100+ years of tradition to make you less confused.

edit: Tell you what. You get the rest of the world to call football "soccer" so we don't confuse it with our football, and we'll rename the World Series so you don't get confused.

Not true, to take a punch well you need a practial basic knowedge of physics and biology, reflexes and endurence.



Oprative word "Skate". They only skate that fast because of lack of friction.



Focus the endurence into a sprint and you may have something.



Since Football is a non-contact sport, the footballer would win as he has more experiance. The hockey player would get a red card for an extremely hevey handed tackle.


:p Your on crack why would a hockey player play soccer his skates would rust on the pitch.

A soccer player on a hockey rink would get shoved, fall down grabbing his leg, start crying and then when the hockey player wasnt looking kick him in the groin and then start grabbing his foot in pain....

No, we're not going to change 100+ years of tradition to make you less confused.

Read my edit. Said newspaper is gone now yes? We change our titles to fit the current sponsor. Its only fair you do the same. Even calling a paper "The world" is pretty arogent.

Basketball nowadays is a mess. If the game is fast paced it's only because someone misques on a dunk and nobody gets back on defense. If the game is too slow it's because nobody can shoot a jumpshot and long rebounds turn into set up plays where everyone is trying to set themselves in a position to get the ball, instead of setting themselves in a position where their teammate can score.

Overall though, it's boring.

:p Your on crack why would a hockey player play soccer his skates would rust on the pitch.

A soccer player on a hockey rink would get shoved, fall down grabbing his leg, start crying and then when the hockey player wasnt looking kick him in the groin and then start grabbing his foot in pain....

Football is a non contact sport, thus requiring restraint. If you want to compare a British sport to NFL/Hocky, then compare Rugby. We dont wear pads.

Read my edit. Said newspaper is gone now yes? We change our titles to fit the current sponsor. Its only fair you do the same. Even calling a paper "The world" is pretty arogent.

Read my edit.

Football is a non contact sport, thus requiring restraint. If you want to compare a British sport to NFL/Hocky, then compare Rugby. We dont wear pads.

You also don't get hit nearly as hard in rugby as you do in American football. Rugby is a sport of endurance like soccer, not a sport of speed.

Football is a non contact sport, thus requiring restraint. If you want to compare a British sport to NFL/Hocky, then compare Rugby. We dont wear pads.


Wasnt this thread about "football"

Rugby is a contact sport but again im going to have to go for hockey + the NFL over rugby, unless of course canadiens are playing rugby then the hits are a little more entertaining.

Yup we might get beat 80 to 8 but will break some legs...

This thing, about soccer players being pussies, or not as physical as hockey players, or football players, or whatever. Soccer players are one of the most in shape athletes in the world. And even though I despise the "sport" I guaruntee any one of those soccer players could run circles around a defensive tackle to the point where the fatty collapses. And also, with hockey players, they change shifts every couple of minutes so they get that breather. If I'm correct, you don't really have that many substitutions in a soccer game. And seeing that all they do is kick around the ball, and not really score, that leads to a whole lot of running.

But every sport is full of great athletes. To say one group is pussy and the other is superior I think is wrong. But if you were to go that route, than I think that almost all athletes would pale in comparision to the condition of a rugby player. Now those are some bad ass, take no shiot athletes.

Tell you what. You get the rest of the world to call football "soccer" so we don't confuse it with our football, and we'll rename the World Series so you don't get confused.

Since football was called football in the UK way before American football was invented I'd say we have dibs on that, if anything American football should be renamed Ameriball or something to dispell the myth that you use your feet. Also you have the small problem of said newspaper no longer existing. What reason is there to continue to call it "World Series" other than to perpetuate the idea that Americans beleive the world is America. Call it "The world's series" or something to indicate ownership of something but your not doing any favours to your international perception by having a tornement where only American teams play called "The World Series"

You also don't get hit nearly as hard in rugby as you do in American football. Rugby is a sport of endurance like soccer, not a sport of speed.


The lack of pads do make a large diference and you do get "hit" more often than playing american football or even hockey. But the hits are MUCH more hard than in rugby...

I'm an American and I love football (soccer)! I've lived here my whole life so I'm not sure how I got into it in the first place, but I really like it. I just got done watching Chelsea vs. Newcasltle and now I have Roma vs. Madrid on (I know they're both old games, I taped them and just got arount to watching them).

Football my not be much of a spectator sport here, but it has more registered youth players than any other sport in the US. Average attendances at MLS matches in 2003 were higher than those of the NBA and NHL, so the sport is growing. There will also be two expansion teams next year, and for further proof that the sport is growing, just look at American exports Tim Howard, DaMarcus Beasley, Landon Donovan, Brad Friedel, Taylor Twellman, Jonathon Spector, and Clint Mathis, to name a few.

Yes, as someone said earlier it is because we suck at it.

It might also have something to do with wanting to be "unique" with our own sports...Sports that the creators hoped would be popular world-wide. But no, they're just too boring.

Basketball being the least boring of the three.

Just guessing by the way, I have no knowledge of the history of sports...

I personally like real football. My mother is Argentine and my father English. That might have something to do with it. Never really got into the American sports.

And if someone hasn't already answered the "world series" thing, it's probably because Americans like to say they're the best in the world, while not having to actually compete with anyone else.

What? So I'm a little un-patriotic. Go stars and stripes or whatever. There. Satisfied?

We still call it The World Series for the same reason Europeans still called soccer, football. Tradition. Baseball is all about tradition, as I suppose soccer is too.

American football, after all, hasn't been "that" popular for "that" long. It was still only thirty or so years ago when the Championship game got interuppted for a showing of Heidi on national television.

This thing, about soccer players being pussies, or not as physical as hockey players, or football players, or whatever. Soccer players are one of the most in shape athletes in the world. And even though I despise the "sport" I guaruntee any one of those soccer players could run circles around a defensive tackle to the point where the fatty collapses. And also, with hockey players, they change shifts every couple of minutes so they get that breather. If I'm correct, you don't really have that many substitutions in a soccer game. And seeing that all they do is kick around the ball, and not really score, that leads to a whole lot of running.

But every sport is full of great athletes. To say one group is pussy and the other is superior I think is wrong. But if you were to go that route, than I think that almost all athletes would pale in comparision to the condition of a rugby player. Now those are some bad ass, take no shiot athletes.


One thing to remember are NHL playoffs, go untill you win. You dont see that in other sports. Hockey playters are like really fast linebackers IMO fast and tough and in great shape...

Last time I checked, there weren't any NHL playoffs.

I'm an American and I love football (soccer)! I've lived here my whole life so I'm not sure how I got into it in the first place, but I really like it. I just got done watching Chelsea vs. Newcasltle and now I have Roma vs. Madrid on (I know they're both old games, I taped them and just got arount to watching them).

Football my not be much of a spectator sport here, but it has more registered youth players than any other sport in the US. Average attendances at MLS matches in 2003 were higher than those of the NBA and NHL, so the sport is growing. There will also be two expansion teams next year, and for further proof that the sport is growing, just look at American exports Tim Howard, DaMarcus Beasley, Landon Donovan, Brad Friedel, Taylor Twellman, Jonathon Spector, and Clint Mathis, to name a few.


Ahh dont they play in NFL stadiums? Would that equal higher per game attendence?

Over a year attendence? GIMMIE A BREAK! I see those MLS games and half the stadium is empty....

Since football was called football in the UK way before American football was invented I'd say we have dibs on that, if anything American football should be renamed Ameriball or something to dispell the myth that you use your feet. Also you have the small problem of said newspaper no longer existing. What reason is there to continue to call it "World Series" other than to perpetuate the idea that Americans beleive the world is America. Call it "The world's series" or something to indicate ownership of something but your not doing any favours to your international perception by having a tornement where only American teams play called "The World Series"

Deal with it. Life's not fair, and those are my terms.

Last time I checked, there weren't any NHL playoffs.


What are you a idoit? Are you talking about hte strike? Im talking about a normal year.. :rolleyes:

We still call it The World Series for the same reason Europeans still called soccer, football. Tradition. Baseball is all about tradition, as I suppose soccer is too.


Football is called football for the obvious reason that you are using your feet for the most part. The World newspaper no longer exists, so it should be renamed whoever the current sponser is like in the English Premier league.

The lack of pads do make a large diference and you do get "hit" more often than playing american football or even hockey. But the hits are MUCH more hard than in rugby...

I know, I played football in high school and I play rugby for the club team at my university now. Neither sport is tougher than the other.

Deal with it. Life's not fair, and those are my terms.

Your quite right, Americans are logicaly minded reasonable people.

Interesting fact about football, the only two continents ever to have a team win the World cup are Europe and South America. And another question (this thread is turning into a genral question Americans about their sports idea) Why do you have a baseball league called the world series if you are the only nation involved?
Ah, but you are wrong! Canada is involved and many of the players are from other countries.

Football is called football for the obvious reason that you are using your feet for the most part. The World newspaper no longer exists, so it should be renamed whoever the current sponser is like in the English Premier league.

There is no current sponsor. It's called the World Series, and I suggest you get over it already. Major League Baseball is not going to change their billon dollar industry because you've got your panties in a bunch over the name of the championship series.

Your quite right, Americans are logicaly minded reasonable people.

Ooh, generalizations and sarcasm in the same post! Amazing work!

What someone said, "Football my not be much of a spectator sport here, but it has more registered youth players than any other sport in the US. Average attendances at MLS matches in 2003 were higher than those of the NBA and NHL, so the sport is growing. There will also be two expansion teams next year, and for further proof that the sport is growing, just look at American exports Tim Howard, DaMarcus Beasley, Landon Donovan, Brad Friedel, Taylor Twellman, Jonathon Spector, and Clint Mathis, to name a few."

You can automatically discount the attendance figures against the NHL because this lockout has proven that Americans don't care about hockey. And the few places that still are semi-passionate about hockey, well their baseball teams have given them enough reason to forget about what they are missing...or really not...in hockey.

As for soccer growing here. If soccer is growing so much, how come all of those exports were exported? In what other sport do the top guys (and I take your word that these are elite players because I have never heard of any of them) leave the country they are from? Overall, soccer will never, ever grow in popularity here. True, the youth registration is high, but look at those numbers when kids get to be teenagers. They drop dramatically. Why? Because once the kids reach the age where they want to set themselves up in a position where they can maybe make a living off the sport, there isn't a viable market anywhere in the US. That, and I hate to say it, but chics don't really dig a soccer player in the US. Not like they would a football player.

Interesting fact about football, the only two continents ever to have a team win the World cup are Europe and South America. And another question (this thread is turning into a genral question Americans about their sports idea) Why do you have a baseball league called the world series if you are the only nation involved?

Because we were once the only nation that played pro baseball, abd even after others started we were still unquestionably the best, and the team that won was the best in the world. Not neccasarilly so anymore but i guess no one has thought to change it.

American's like football (American style that is) because it mirrors who we are: fast moving bull headed well padded and mean.

We don't like soccor (your football) because it's viewed as soft and squishy.


:sniper:

Every country has there sport, Im just not thrilled with soccer, and yeah you might say "Well baseball is all standing around." How many times do you think Ive heard that, I dont care, I love baseball, its my favorite sport, I just dont like soccer, I tried to understand the groups of 20 year olds running around Rome screaming "GGGGGGGOOOOOOOOAAAAAAALLLLLLLLLL!!!" I just dont like the sport very much, or at all for that matter, its just too simple, kick a ball, kick it there kick it here, kick it to the center, kick it in the goal.
And Baseballs not? You swing a stick at a rock and run in circles.

Just for the record, the US doesn't suck at football. While we are not as good as some European and South American powerhouses, we are currently 11th out of 205 in FIFA rankings, and reached an all-time high of 7 in July, which had us ahead of England, Italy, Mexico, Turkey, Portugal, Argentina, Ireland, Germany and Greece. Our current ranking still has us ahead of Turkey, Ireland, Germany, and Greece, which are all formidable national teams.

"Because we were once the only nation that played pro baseball, abd even after others started we were still unquestionably the best, and the team that won was the best in the world. Not neccasarilly so anymore but i guess no one has thought to change it."

Dude, even though I love baseball, I hate to inform you that we didn't even qualify for the Olympics in baseball.

Ah, but you are wrong! Canada is involved and many of the players are from other countries.

This just shows how stupid some Americans can be. WORLD CUP! Not WORLD SERIES. The world Cup is the largest sporting competition of any kind and guess what IT IS FOOTBALL

"Just for the record, the US doesn't suck at football. While we are not as good as some European and South American powerhouses, we are currently 11th out of 205 in FIFA rankings, and reached an all-time high of 7 in July, which had us ahead of England, Italy, Mexico, Turkey, Portugal, Argentina, Ireland, Germany and Greece. Our current ranking still has us ahead of Turkey, Ireland, Germany, and Greece, which are all formidable national teams."

The only reason why I could see why this could be is that we have some of the best colleges in the world, and we have such a diverse population that we end up getting more skilled players to come over here.

So it's still technically accurate. And it's not as popular because it's not as fast-paced, and there's not as much scoring.


Why are baseball and golf so popular then. (I'm an American, but i just don't get it)

This just shows how stupid some Americans can be. WORLD CUP! Not WORLD SERIES. The world Cup is the largest sporting competition of any kind and guess what IT IS FOOTBALL

He was talking about the World Series, ass. You brought it up in your post.

Why do you have a baseball league called the world series if you are the only nation involved?

Because we were once the only nation that played pro baseball, abd even after others started we were still unquestionably the best, and the team that won was the best in the world. Not neccasarilly so anymore but i guess no one has thought to change it.

WORLD CUP NOT WORLD SERIES. This is exactly the problem I am pointing out. The world cup is the largest sporting tournement of any kind in the world and it is football. The world series is your misnamed baseball tournement which is dominated by Americans.

The World Cup? Largest sporting event? Never heard of it.

Back to that NHL playoff thing, and how they play until there is a winner. How is that different than soccer? Isn't there a shoot out to determine the winner in both games?

But remembering why neither hockey nor soccer can ever be truly popular in the US, they can easily, and quite likely, end in ties. How can you go sixty to ninety minutes a night and not have a winner? That just doesn't make any sense. It's like when baseball went soccer/hockey and ended the All Star game in a tie. What in the blue hell were they thinking?

"Because we were once the only nation that played pro baseball, abd even after others started we were still unquestionably the best, and the team that won was the best in the world. Not neccasarilly so anymore but i guess no one has thought to change it."

Dude, even though I love baseball, I hate to inform you that we didn't even qualify for the Olympics in baseball.

Like I said, that it's not neccasarily true anymore.

I realize the contradiction in my post, but my point was that in regular seasons games, which ultimetely take up year, upon endless year, in soccer and hockey there are ties.

In playoffs, of course you can't have ties. In any sport.

The only reason why I could see why this could be is that we have some of the best colleges in the world, and we have such a diverse population that we end up getting more skilled players to come over here.

We're still a formidable power and its not like our national team is packed with foreigners we've recruited. All of our players were born in the USA or have at least lived a majority of their lives here.

I still believe that the US, (with regret I have to include the roided out dickheads), if you are to take our professional MLB players, we are the best in the world when it comes to baseball. However, if you break our players into the countries that they come from, the Dominicans would kick our asses.

The World Cup? Largest sporting event? Never heard of it.


American ignorence. The largest sporting event in the world. Every nation with a national football team goes in for the qualification, then there are seveal groups of four nations each, and the top two get qualified on the basis of win = 3pts for winner draw = 1 pt for both teams and loss = 0 pts for loser. Then its a knock out contest.

I still believe that the US, (with regret I have to include the roided out dickheads), if you are to take our professional MLB players, we are the best in the world when it comes to baseball. However, if you break our players into the countries that they come from, the Dominicans would kick our asses.

I believe they played a tournament like that last summer. The USA came in 4th or 5th, if I recall, and the championship game was between the Dominican Republic and Puerto Rico.

"American ignorence. The largest sporting event in the world. Every nation with a national football team goes in for the qualification, then there are seveal groups of four nations each, and the top two get qualified on the basis of win = 3pts for winner draw = 1 pt for both teams and loss = 0 pts for loser. Then its a knock out contest."

My point exactly. Why in the blue hell do you need a point system for sports? Winner. Loser. Draw? Are we playing Texas Hold 'Em?

And the last time I checked, the largest sporting event in the world was The Super Bowl. Check the worldwide television ratings.

That tournament wasn't a true professional tournament. There were some professional players on the teams, but if they were professional, they were from the lower ranks of the minor leagues or college players.

But I still think, if you were to take the elite players from each country, that small island of the Dominican would give the Americans all they can handle.

And the last time I checked, the largest sporting event in the world was The Super Bowl. Check the worldwide television ratings.

American ignorence 2
The superbowl is the most televised sports event. The world cup involves the largest number of represented peoples and the largest number of diffrent teams. A sporting event is not "big" depending on how many people watch it.

American ignorence 2
The superbowl is the most televised sports event. The world cup involves the largest number of represented peoples and the largest number of diffrent teams. A sporting event is not "big" depending on how many people watch it.

So it's big based on the amount of people participating?

What if the precious World Cup was represented by a 100 plus countries, but no one was in the stands to watch it? Would that still apply to, "A sporting event is not "big" depending on how many people watch it."

Or is that the same type deal as a kid standing in his backyard, big ole red whiffle ball bat in his hand, bottom of the ninth, with two on and two out, and he hits the game winning homerun? Is that as big as the Super Bowl? Or the World Cup?

Since it's not measured in the amount of viewers, it's still big. But just how big?

Sorry, but getting an American to think something of the World Cup is like getting an American to care about winning the Stanley Cup. Did we win that last year? Oh yeah, who cares.

And personally, I think that the number of people watching a particular event does determine how big it is. After all, success in sports is measured in dollars, and I am pretty sure no one is paying $4 million for a thirty second spot at the World Cup.

Is it even televised?

What if the precious World Cup was represented by a 100 plus countries, but no one was in the stands to watch it? Would that still apply to, "A sporting event is not "big" depending on how many people watch it."

Or is that the same type deal as a kid standing in his backyard, big ole red whiffle ball bat in his hand, bottom of the ninth, with two on and two out, and he hits the game winning homerun? Is that as big as the Super Bowl? Or the World Cup?

Since it's not measured in the amount of viewers, it's still big. But just how big?

Sorry, but getting an American to think something of the World Cup is like getting an American to care about winning the Stanley Cup. Did we win that last year? Oh yeah, who cares.

And personally, I think that the number of people watching a particular event does determine how big it is. After all, success in sports is measured in dollars, and I am pretty sure no one is paying $4 million for a thirty second spot at the World Cup.

Is it even televised?
I balive it was televised to every country in the world and most games had around a 1 million viewing rating. Almost all the games had full stadiums, In fact they all had full stadiums, around 10 million people watched the England vs Argentinia game.

So yes it is big. Even devision 4 games (ie League 2) get a avrage cround of 3 or 4 thousand, and thats oround the 80th best teams in the country, Forest have a avrage attendences of 26,000, and Man Utd have a avrage attendence of around 60,000.

So yes it is big.

Is it even televised?

Yes it is. Estimated 2 billion people watched the World Cup Finals. The number one most people watching was from China. About few hundred million chinese watched it.

Soccer IS the worlds sport.

Yes it is. Estimated 2 billion people watched the World Cup Finals. The number one most people watching was from China. About few hundred million chinese watched it.

Soccer IS the worlds sport.
Amen.

"Yes it is. Estimated 2 billion people watched the World Cup Finals. The number one most people watching was from China. About few hundred million chinese watched it."

Man, that doesn't count. That's only a slight sliver of their population.

For the most part though, I am only breaking balls.

It the rest of the world loves soccer, so be it. I never will understand the passion behind it, but being a die-hard baseball fan, I can understand how other cultures hate that too.

And I know it's televised.

But last time I knew, it ran overnight because of the time differences. And if you put the World Cup games against Jerry Springer reruns, or infomercials from Girls Gone Wild, for most Americans (and I'm not even saying this is right) they'd rather watch free smut.

Well, I don't play. But, its VERY popular where I'm from. I prefer to watch the overly-padded ice version-- HOCKEY!

Just as I can never understand the attraction of Baseball, at least we understand each other.

I balive it was televised to every country in the world and most games had around a 1 million viewing rating. Almost all the games had full stadiums, In fact they all had full stadiums, around 10 million people watched the England vs Argentinia game.

So yes it is big. Even devision 4 games (ie League 2) get a avrage cround of 3 or 4 thousand, and thats oround the 80th best teams in the country, Forest have a avrage attendences of 26,000, and Man Utd have a avrage attendence of around 60,000.

So yes it is big.


Good grief, about 60,000 people went and saw the last grey cup at the stadium and no one outside of canada would have watched it and they got 5 million people to watch the game...

"Good grief, about 60,000 people went and saw the last grey cup at the stadium and no one outside of canada would have watched it and they got 5 million people to watch the game..."

Now I'm being serious with this one. What the hell is the grey cup? Is that the trophy for soccer, or that Canadian Football League?

Thats not what were interested in, yes I have watched English soccer, after five minutes I was bored to tears than flipped to the Eagles Packers game...

Please never speak of that game again (Eagles/Packers). It was a shame to modern sports, worldwide. I would have watched anything (Cricket even) other then that. I wanted to cry.

P.S. I'm from Green Bay. It sucked big.

How the Packers fair in that one? ;)

Oh yeah, and soccer (football, whatever) would be cool if I could still play it, but I blew up my knee a few years back (hyper-extended and dislocated it at the same time) Watching it isn't that exciting, unless you're pissed up and looking for a fight.

Good grief, about 60,000 people went and saw the last grey cup at the stadium and no one outside of canada would have watched it and they got 5 million people to watch the game...
No they go to most Man Utd matchs, as they try to win the Premier league? And most people in England wacthed the game.

Sorry folks...There is only one sport worth watching and that's ice hockey...

As far as soccer, it was a new phenomenon when I was a wee one in the mid 70's...It's very popular with younger kids now

As an american i've wondered why Soccer isn't football and why the World Series is only the US, But was kind of apethetic about it anyway

Getting back to a point made a while back to when someone raised the point how registration for youth soccer was up with Americans.

A big reason for that is that soccer is more or less a sport that everyone can play at that age. If you have two legs and can run, then you can play soccer. Baseball, that isn't so easy. You have to be able to hit a baseball. That's not something that everyone can do. Kids don't have attention spans anymore, and a lot of them don't want to work at learning how to hit a baseball.

And with the "rah, rah, rah" obsession that parents have today, nobody wants to admit that their kid sucks at what they are playing. In baseball, the nine best players play and that is it. In soccer, (at least in youth levels) it's easy to fit in a kid who doesn't neccesarily have talent.

But like I said before, take those youth registration numbers and look at them when they get to be teenage levels. They drop off dramatically.

America's weird that way, like the fact the whole uses the metric system but us

How the Packers fair in that one? ;)

Well let's see, Brett Favre didn't throw a single touchdown, ending his record at (I'm pretty sure) 36 games scoring a touchdown. Philly got 4 TD's in the second quarter, opposed to the Packers 3 points which they only got in the last 5 seconds. 2 turnovers, a total of 249 yards, like 12 penalties (although if you ask me the refs did a TERRIBLE job, not that it mattered), and basically Terrell Owens made us look like a joke. Oh yeah and Favre's QB rating was like a 13.

If that game was in GB (where it's about 27 degrees right now) it would have gone a lot differently. Well maybe not but at least I could have been throwing stuff at T.O. from the stands. I hate that guy.

I don't care about soccer, but I'm a girl and not very good at sports. I can play American football and baseball all right, but not very good. So I don't care for sports much.

How can you hate T.O.? That guy is great.

He talks smack, and then he backs it up. Nothing wrong with that.

And I don't think GB would have faired much better at home that game. They got wiped pure and simple.

How can you hate T.O.? That guy is great.

He talks smack, and then he backs it up. Nothing wrong with that.

And I don't think GB would have faired much better at home that game. They got wiped pure and simple.
Sound like cloughy, thats another reason to love footy, all the great caracters.

"Sound like cloughy, thats another reason to love footy, all the great caracters."

What in the blue hell did that mean?

I hate these threads. "My favorite sport is better than your favorite sport because of such and such!"

Do you really know why soccer is the most popular major sport in the world? It's because it's the cheapest to play. Two nets and a ball is all that's needed to play it. Many poorer countries have people in villages that play it. (American) football requires lots of padding which can get very expensive when just fielding a 20 member team. Playing without it leads to injury very quickly. Because of the ability for just about everyone to play soccer it makes the sport more popular. More people can play and so more people get interested in it. It doesn't make the sport any better (I played it as a kid as well, it wasn't all that great to me).

Also, (A) football is more of a violent chess match. EVERY single play has one coach calling a play to beat the other coach's play. There's a LOT of strategy involved, especially when you have to take into account each player's athletic abilities. Plus, most of the players in soccer are not anywhere near the ball at most points in the game. Half of them are standing around for awhile at a time. (A) football has EVERYONE involved for almost the entire play!

As for the 2 billion people who watched the World Cup finals...I call bullshit. That'd be almost a third of the world's population! Probably barely a third even HAVE televisions!! If you meant 2 million I should let you know that the Super Bowl (american football's final game) draws probably close to 50 million viewers or more!

And by football I mean REAL football (what Americans call Soccer. Come on, in American football you hardly ever touch the ball with your feet so why call it football?). Why is it just not as popular in the US as the big three (Baseball, basketball and American Football)?

People keep saying it's very popular with the under 14 crowd, but nobody has yet pointed out that Soccer is actually the #1 most popular youth sport in the United States today, with more active league players than either Baseball or Football. Nobody here has yet hit on what I think is the reason that soccers popularity drops off among teenagers and adults...it's too random.

With American football the teams have plays...plans of action that are carried out on the football field and have to be countered by the opponent. It's a metaphor for warfare (no, I'm not kidding). The two teams meet on a field of combat, and the victory is claimed by the team that can draft the superior battle plan and carry it out.

With American Baseball, you have a different dynamic...the display of extreme physical prowess and skill. The whole game basically boils down to one man attempting to impart as much force as possible into a randomly spinning ball flying at him between 75-100MPH, while also controlling both its direction and angle of climb. It takes an incredible amount of skill to actually become good at baseball, and Americans appreciate that.

American Basketball is rapidly degenerating into a joke. I quit following it many years ago, as did most of my friends, and everything I hear says that NBA viewership has been declining for more than a decade. People just don't have time to watch a bunch of overpaid, inner-city primadonnas get in fistfights, cuss out fans, and act like a bunch of OG's while refusing to play on a medical because they bruised their tushies in a game. I'll be suprised in BBall is even in the top 5 twenty years from now.

And then there's soccer. Soccer is simply random, and it requires no acquired special skill. There are no real battleplans, very little demonstration of physical prowess, and the only difference between amateur and pro soccer is the speed the ball moves. There's no drama, no hero, no hard physical confrontation to complete the play. It's just a bunch of people running around, hoping the ball comes their way so they can kick it towards the goal. Soccer in many ways is a game of chance more than a game of skill, and Americans simply don't like that in their professional sports.

Interesting fact about football, the only two continents ever to have a team win the World cup are Europe and South America. And another question (this thread is turning into a genral question Americans about their sports idea) Why do you have a baseball league called the world series if you are the only nation involved?

Canada is also involved with Toronto Bluejays and the formerly Montreal Expos but ya its pretty stupid. They should incoporate the Japanese baseball teams then "The World Series" would have more legitimacy.

"Sound like cloughy, thats another reason to love footy, all the great caracters."

What in the blue hell did that mean?
Brian Clough, the greatest (And most controversial) football manager of all time. There are some great caracters like him


http://www.brianclough.com/

I have no doubt that the World Cup final drew more viewers than that.

How can you hate T.O.? That guy is great.

He talks smack, and then he backs it up. Nothing wrong with that.

And I don't think GB would have faired much better at home that game. They got wiped pure and simple.

Yeah, gotta agree with you here. Yes, I'm an Eagles fan but that's not the reason why. Sports NEEDS players like him. It brings some more drama to the game. He makes it more fun and gets the fans involved on a higher level than most other players do. Besides that, he's got a clean record. No drugs, weapons charges, etc... that seems to plague other players. I wish more players acted like him! It's all about having fun (the money is just a bonus) and he and McNabb accel at this part!

I wuldn't say soccars random, the skill of curving the ball, the perfect tackle ect are all very hard things to master.

And on the Viewing figures front, so far i have found that 15 million people tuned in for Englands freindly against germany, in 2002.

Pudding Pies-

You said the key thing about T.O. He is clean. Aside from his antics on the football field, or the occasional "you are gay" blast to former quarterbacks, he leaves the drama on the field. And he plays with his heart on his sleeve.

WORLD CUP NOT WORLD SERIES. This is exactly the problem I am pointing out. The world cup is the largest sporting tournement of any kind in the world and it is football. The world series is your misnamed baseball tournement which is dominated by Americans.

The Toronto Blue Jays won the World Series in 1992 and 1993. They are the only baseball team other than the Yankees to get back to back World Series. Shows how stupid people from your country are. Toronto just for your own personal education is not located in the United States and never has been. Then again I won't insult the intelligence of your country. You obviously can not reflect an entire country. If I were to blanket an entire country with predjudice and ignorance like you I would be just as bigoted.
Heres a thought though genius... if the US is so stupid? How is it we have 242 Nobel Prizes? Thats three times as many as the next country... Germany.

Oh and Canada has the most home runs in a single game. This was set in 1987 when they hit ten home runs in a single game.

Okay, viewing figures for the fifa world cup, from FIFA themselves:

Television coverage at the 2002 FIFA World Cup Korea/Japan™ reached 213 countries, virtually every country in the world, with over 41,100 hours of dedicated programming. This represents a 38% increase in coverage over the 1998 event and set a new record for a single sporting event. Contrary to some expectations, live audiences were not affected by the time zone differences for viewers in Europe and Central and South America. In fact, the cumulative live audience showed an overall increase on the 1998 figures.

Although the overall global audience was down on France 98, this decline was entirely due to the introduction of audited audience measurement in China for the first time, which allows for more accurate reporting. The 1998 Chinese figure was substantially overweighted - as were the Chinese viewing figures for the two previous FIFA World Cups - because they were based on Shanghai City ratings, which were then multiplied nationally to give an estimated audience for the entire country.

FIFA has taken the lead in deciding that a more accurate solution needed to be introduced and that this was the right time to do it. As part of this drive towards a more rigorous approach, the viewing figures for 2002 included more audited viewing data than for any previous FIFA World Cup™.

The cumulative audience over the 25 match days of the 2002 event reached a total of 28.8 billion viewers. The corresponding audience for France 98, with unaudited viewing figures for China, reported 33.4 billion. However, if China was excluded from the statistics for both events, the totals show an increase of 431.7 million viewers (+ 2%) for the 2002 FIFA World Cup™.

These impressive figures make the 2002 FIFA World Cup Korea/Japan™ the most extensively covered and viewed event in television history. Despite the time difference between Asia and the major football continents of Europe and South America, record audiences and market shares were reached in many countries.
The 20 most viewed matches of the tournament achieved an impressive average market share of 84.8%. The largest market share, 94.2%, was reached during Brazilian broadcaster TV Globo's coverage of the England v. Brazil quarter-final (46 million viewers and a 30.2% rating). This is an impressive audience for a broadcast that took place at 3.30 am local time.

Viewers the world over demonstrated their willingness to trade sleep for soccer and change their viewing habits and daily routine in order to watch the FIFA World Cup™. In terms of viewer hours, calculated as the total number of hours watched by all viewers, this year's tournament set a new record for a sports event of 49.2 billion worldwide.

Thanks to advances in research methods, it was possible to assess for the first time the viewing figures for out-of-home viewers. This new intelligence is important, given that football viewers' watching habits are changing profoundly. The 2002 FIFA World Cup™ saw exceptionally high levels of out-of-home viewing in public places, such as pubs and bars, and in the workplace. This added 2.5 billion to viewing worldwide. Some public viewing - most strikingly in Korea - ran into millions for single matches.

Out-of-home viewing contributed to the 2002 FIFA World Cup™ Final being the most viewed match in FIFA World Cup™ history, with 1.1 billion individuals watching this game.

Summary of key results The most viewed event in the world

Television coverage in 213 countries and over 41,100 hours of programming - a 38% increase over 1998.

A cumulative in-home audience of 28.8 billion viewers.

Live audiences were not affected by the time zone differences for viewers in Europe and Central and South America.

Proper, audited research for China introduced for the first time, which accounted for a 14% reduction in the global audience total when compared to 1998. Taking China out of the equation, the global figure is actually up 2%.

Excitement, variety, choice
Viewing patterns have changed. First proper assessment of out-of-home viewing - a key factor in understanding today's audiences - has added 2.5 billion to the total.

Big-screen viewing became a major feature - for example, an incredible 4.2 million Koreans took to the streets to watch their national team's victory over Italy.

Futuristic options were on trial, with 16 x 5 wide screen viewing and delivery to mobile phones.

Many audience records were broken
The novel experience of staging a FIFA World Cup™ in Asia provoked an extraordinary response from television viewers.

The host continent accounted for 40% of the total audience.

In spite of non-prime time viewing hours in Europe, North and South America, many national audience records were broken. Live audiences held up, accounting for 77% of the cumulative FIFA World Cup™audience and an average of 314.1 million viewers per match.

Including the out-of-home viewing figures, live audiences accounted for 87% of the total viewing - an average of 352.6 million per match.

Record breaking audience shares
There were many record-breaking audience shares, in some cases more than 80% or 90% of all active viewers at a particular time were tuned to the FIFA World Cup™ transmission. The 20 most viewed matches achieved an incredible average market share of 84.8%.

The largest market share of 94.2% was reached during TV Globo's coverage of the England v. Brazil quarter-final - 46 million viewers and a 30.2% rating. Germany v. Brazil, broadcast in Brazil at 8:00am local time, received the highest overall audience. The match attracted over 52.3 million viewers - an individuals rating of 35.8%.

The rating in Germany for the same match was even higher, with coverage by national broadcaster ZDF achieving a rating of 37.8%. This was the highest audience recorded in Germany for the tournament and amounted to over 26.5 million viewers, representing an astonishing market share for ZDF of 88.2%!

However, the Final achieved its highest national audience in Japan! A massive 54.1 million viewers watched the match on national channel NHK, representing an all individuals rating of 44.5% and a market share of 76.6%. This compares to a Japanese audience of only 4.5 million for the 1998 FIFA World Cup™ Final when France emerged as Champions against Brazil.

More women watched the event
Soccer has long been seen as the perfect vehicle for sponsors to deliver messages to the dream male demographic, but statistics for the 2002 FIFA World Cup™ indicate that women's interest in the tournament is growing rapidly. For example in Japan, the audience split for the whole of the tournament was virtually even, at 51% men, 49% women. The FIFA World Cup™ attracts audiences outside the typically male-dominated arena of sports broadcasting.

In Korea too, there was strong evidence of appeal to both sexes. Korea's decisive group match against Portugal, for example, broadcast by MBC, realised a total audience of just over 3.8 million - comprising 1.9 million women compared to 1.5 million men. The male rating was 16.4%, the female 21%.

More audited data than ever before
This report includes more audited viewing data than any previous FIFA World Cup™. In particular, information sourced in sub-Saharan Africa and fully audited measurement in China. This market contributed 41% (1994) and 33% (1998) to previous audience totals. For 2002, it contributed just 20% of the cumulative total.

Excluding China, the total global audience has increased by 431 million viewers over France 98.

From FIFA

OH, and I'm Aust.

American ignorence. The largest sporting event in the world. Every nation with a national football team goes in for the qualification, then there are seveal groups of four nations each, and the top two get qualified on the basis of win = 3pts for winner draw = 1 pt for both teams and loss = 0 pts for loser. Then its a knock out contest.

How about being ignorant about spelling ignorance? Why don't you learn something other than blind hatred? How many Americans do you know? I don't make misguided attacks against the collective intelligence of your country. Don't make them against mine.

Elveshia

It's been said here that soccer is the #1 youth sport. And you do make the valid point of cost efficiency. However, as cheap as it is to play (backyard wise), the tournament cost is insane. I've worked at a college the last four years where every summer soccer teams come from all over the northeast US for tournaments that go all summer long. Not to completely generalize things here, but soccer, at least tournament soccer, seems to me to be a predominantly white middle to upper class activity. I suppose in that regard it's a lot like tennis.

Basketball, well the costs of playing that (backyard wise) are about the same as soccer. All you need is a ball and some sneakers. Now I think society, as you have argued by your not liking basketball anymore, predominantly thinks of basketball now as a inner-city sport. Well as much as that may seem true with some of the poster boys of the NBA (bad marketing is the sole reason for that), I'd go as far as to say that basketball is just as popular among youths, if not more so than soccer, but not as well "studied." I mean, how many summer basketball leagues are there across the US? How many basketball tournaments are there out there? Not too many. But millions upon millions of young people in the inner city and the suburbs are playing basketball.

Football, you hit that right on. It's expensive. And you have to be willing to chance getting hurt to play that. And even if the kid is, you have to sell it to the parents.

Baseball. That too can be expensive. And it's not so easy to just run across a baseball field in the middle of nowhere, if you know what I mean? And I'd argue that baseball more than any other "American" sport takes the most skill, and practice, and determination to be good. Like I said before, not everyone can hit a fastball. Even less people can hit a curveball. And even less than that can hit a slider.

But for what someone said, about soccer not requiring skill, I think that is wrong. Like hockey is a game more or less of stragedy and endurance. It's like chess on grass I suppose. But to say that it takes no skill, I think that is wrong.

Capitallo-

You said:

"They are the only baseball team other than the Yankees to get back to back World Series. Shows how stupid people from your country are. Toronto just for your own personal education is not located in the United States and never has been. Then again I won't insult the intelligence of your country. You obviously can not reflect an entire country. If I were to blanket an entire country with predjudice and ignorance like you I would be just as bigoted."

Dude, you just showed your own ignorance there. Lots of other teams have won back to back World Series titles. The A's did it in the 70's. The Reds. The Dodgers.

Before you speak for all of us, and make all of us look bad, look at the stats first.

And then there's soccer. Soccer is simply random, and it requires no acquired special skill. There are no real battleplans, very little demonstration of physical prowess, and the only difference between amateur and pro soccer is the speed the ball moves. There's no drama, no hero, no hard physical confrontation to complete the play. It's just a bunch of people running around, hoping the ball comes their way so they can kick it towards the goal. Soccer in many ways is a game of chance more than a game of skill, and Americans simply don't like that in their professional sports.

What do you mean? I agree that football may be boring at times but it's far from random. It's curious that your opinion is exactly that of people who have only watched a couple of games of American football or hockey and don't know what the heck is going on.

Football has strategy. Do you keep your men close to the midfield, protect your goal or attack the other goal? Do you move the ball by the sides or the centre? How good is the other team's defense? Can you try an individual play or should you try to make their defense come forward and close with a centre pass close to the net?

It has heros. The dribbler who can get the ball past the defense, the defender who can take the ball from even the meanest looking forward, the captain that puts together brilliant passing plays, and the goalie, of course.

And it has shows of physical prowess. The goalie stopping a ball coming at him from 15 metres away at better than 80 km/h, fighting for the ball in the midfield, trying to get a header after a corner kick.

And it's also a metaphore for war. In fact, football started by being played between villages to solve disputes instead of engagin in fights and other violence.

My point is, they're all very good games in themselves, you just have to give them a try. It's obvious Americans prefer home-grown games (although basketball is Canadian) but for most it's just a matter of getting to know the game.

What do you mean? I agree that football may be boring at times but it's far from random. It's curious that your opinion is exactly that of people who have only watched a couple of games of American football or hockey and don't know what the heck is going on.

Football has strategy. Do you keep your men close to the midfield, protect your goal or attack the other goal? Do you move the ball by the sides or the centre? How good is the other team's defense? Can you try an individual play or should you try to make their defense come forward and close with a centre pass close to the net?

It has heros. The dribbler who can get the ball past the defense, the defender who can take the ball from even the meanest looking forward, the captain that puts together brilliant passing plays, and the goalie, of course.

And it has shows of physical prowess. The goalie stopping a ball coming at him from 15 metres away at better than 80 km/h, fighting for the ball in the midfield, trying to get a header after a corner kick.

And it's also a metaphore for war. In fact, football started by being played between villages to solve disputes instead of engagin in fights and other violence.

My point is, they're all very good games in themselves, you just have to give them a try. It's obvious Americans prefer home-grown games (although basketball is Canadian) but for most it's just a matter of getting to know the game.
Agreed