NationStates Jolt Archive

Which type of football do you prefer?

There's only one kind of football.

In my mind there is only one form of Football and thats good old fashiound British Football!
RULE BRITANIA!

*joins thread before it develops into a flame war between Brits and Americans*

Football.

*leaves thread*

Both, but American Football should not be called football guys. How about calling it American Scrimmage or something more appropriate to the nature of the game.

In my mind there is only one form of Football and thats good old fashiound British Football!
RULE BRITANIA!

:cool: that was perfected and expanded by the South Americans and Europeans :D

Both, but American Football should not be called football guys. How about calling it American Scrimmage or something more appropriate to the nature of the game.

Well then you should call Euro Footy something like kickball, or "run-around-in-pansy-shorts-never-scoring-boring-the-crap-out-of-everyone-ball."

We've had this discussion before. Americans do not care if you think the name is inappropriate. We call it football, thus to us, it is football. To us, names don't mean shit, they just are what the are. (watch Pulp Fiction) Frankly, we don't know why you like soccer at all. I agree that American Football has too many damn commercials. But it is a sport designed to be watched on TV, or to be watched while you are consuming vast quantities of beer. I don't want to miss anything, so I go pee, or get another beer during a break. You go on and on about "nonstop action", but NOTHING HAPPENS. (covered in a Simpsons episode) 90 minutes of passing does not constitute a sport- it is a method for mothers to tire out their children on weekends so they do not drive them crazy.

Could we stop the Americans calling their sport football on the grounds that a ball is a spherical object?

Could we stop the Americans calling their sport football on the grounds that a ball is a spherical object?

Maybe US rugby would be better...actually why is'nt Rugby being discussed, i thought it was the ancestor the games we call Football and American Football? and to be honest who cares about US football???it will never be a global game a bit like the US will never be globally appreciated.

Nah, rugby was derived from football:
Short history of rugby:
During a football match at Rugby, sometime in the nineteenth century, William Webb Ellis picked up the ball and ran with it, throwing it into the goal. Rugby was thus invented, and is crap. (I kid).

Interesting piece of untrue trivia: The name for a try in rugby is taken from the following exchange between Webb Ellis and the referee after Webb Ellis had 'scored':
W-E "Is that a goal, ref?"
Ref "No, but it's a good try."

Nah, rugby was derived from football:
Short history of rugby:
During a football match at Rugby, sometime in the nineteenth century, William Webb Ellis picked up the ball and ran with it, throwing it into the goal. Rugby was thus invented, and is crap. (I kid).

Interesting piece of untrue trivia: The name for a try in rugby is taken from the following exchange between Webb Ellis and the referee after Webb Ellis had 'scored':
W-E "Is that a goal, ref?"
Ref "No, but it's a good try."

ah i see, god NS is cool i learn something new all the time ;)

You might as well have just made the poll:

Are you from:

a) USA

b) Rest of the world

hehe

I like both sports.

I like World football for its elegance, strategy, and worldwide ubiquity.

I like US football because of the raw power, army-like tactics, and idiomatically US appeal.

EDIT: I like the World Cup AND the Super Bowl. I like UEFA, and English League football as well as NCAA Division I US football.

I think that nobody makes their case well when they put down the other sport. This issue is a matter of personal preference as well as what you may or may not have been accustomed to watching.

Can we get over this now (he asked, knowing full well that "we" can't)?

I prefer playing American Football than European Football. It has nothing to do with nationality, seeing how I'm Italian, but I just prefer the game.

Well then you should call Euro Footy something like kickball, or "run-around-in-pansy-shorts-never-scoring-boring-the-crap-out-of-everyone-ball."

We've had this discussion before. Americans do not care if you think the name is inappropriate. We call it football, thus to us, it is football. To us, names don't mean shit, they just are what the are. (watch Pulp Fiction) Frankly, we don't know why you like soccer at all. I agree that American Football has too many damn commercials. But it is a sport designed to be watched on TV, or to be watched while you are consuming vast quantities of beer. I don't want to miss anything, so I go pee, or get another beer during a break. You go on and on about "nonstop action", but NOTHING HAPPENS. (covered in a Simpsons episode) 90 minutes of passing does not constitute a sport- it is a method for mothers to tire out their children on weekends so they do not drive them crazy.

Snooker is a sport, as is darts, and golf and none of them are particularly interesting in terms of what happens. Now fine, soccer can take ages to get a goal, but who cares? High scoring games may well be interesting, but seeing individual flair and fabulous-ness (a la Ronaldinho) is rather cool.

You're also one to talk about boring, American Football games can go on for 3 hours, with thousands of stoppages. Fine, the game is agressive and some players can have moments of inspiration throughout a match, and I enjoy watching the actual game, but 3 hours? What happens in a low scoring game? Is that not boring?

Had soccer not been invented, there wouldn't actually BE American Football. Or rugby for that matter...

only America would hold a world series and forget to invite anyone else :p

oh and my list goes: Rugby > football > American football

mostly because American football is just rugby with protective gear and warm weather you may call the players sportsmen but I call them chicken *does chicken dance*

only American would hold a world series and forget to invite anyone else :p

oh and my list goes: Rugby > football > American football

mostly because American football is just rugby with protective gear and warm weather you may call the players sportsmen but I call them chicken *does chicken dance*

Hey your right, US footy is rugby with padding!

Snooker is a sport, as is darts, and golf and none of them are particularly interesting in terms of what happens. Now fine, soccer can take ages to get a goal, but who cares? High scoring games may well be interesting, but seeing individual flair and fabulous-ness (a la Ronaldinho) is rather cool.
:confused: What? I take it you don't watch snooker or golf then? When watching golf tournaments, out in the rain for hours on end, I find that it can just take one superb shot by one player to make the whole day worthwhile. As for snooker, I take it you've never seen Ronnie O'Sullivan's 147 in 1997? Although I prefer watching a good safety match in snooker.

Yeah, darts can be a bit crap.

Hey your right, US footy is rugby with padding!

I don't quite no the rules of rugby in terms of tackling, but in AF, you can tackle high or low, as hard as you like :mp5:

:confused: What? I take it you don't watch snooker or golf then? When watching golf tournaments, out in the rain for hours on end, I find that it can just take one superb shot by one player to make the whole day worthwhile. As for snooker, I take it you've never seen Ronnie O'Sullivan's 147 in 1997? Although I prefer watching a good safety match in snooker.

Yeah, darts can be a bit crap.

I actually quite like them all :p except golf really... and I did watch Nigel Bond make a fabulous shot which could've won the match yesternight against Stephen Hendry at 9-9 in a best of 19 frame match on the black with a 7 point difference :| he potted the white :D

Anyhoo, I was using that as an example of what you mostly see in those sports. Passing happens a lot in football, and throwing darts is a rather boring thing, as is hitting a ball into another ball and hitting a ball in a field. On their own, they're boring, but can be quite interesting in terms of competition.

I talk too much :s

Snooker is a sport, as is darts, and golf and none of them are particularly interesting in terms of what happens. Now fine, soccer can take ages to get a goal, but who cares? High scoring games may well be interesting, but seeing individual flair and fabulous-ness (a la Ronaldinho) is rather cool.

Darts, etc are not spectator sports though. And who cares? Americans care, obviously, because for the most part we find your obsession with soccer to be a bit...puzzling. It's like hockey without the sticks, fights, and ice. At least the Canadians managed to find a way to make soccer a bit more interesting.

You're also one to talk about boring, American Football games can go on for 3 hours, with thousands of stoppages. Fine, the game is agressive and some players can have moments of inspiration throughout a match, and I enjoy watching the actual game, but 3 hours? What happens in a low scoring game? Is that not boring?

What, three hours is too long for you? I thought you were the ones saying we have short attention spans. And there are NOT thousands of playing stoppages. Not even hundreds. Low scoring games tend to be defensive battles, with a lot of hitting (300 pound guys smacking into each other at full speed, not 150 pound guys slide "tackling"). But yeah, I have seen a game or two that dragged. For instance, the 1998 6-3 game between Jacksonville and Baltimore. But the average score of an NFL game is about 20-17.

I don't quite no the rules of rugby in terms of tackling, but in AF, you can tackle high or low, as hard as you like :mp5:

Not true. You can not legally tackle low on a player that is already being tackled high, unlike in rugby.

However, I played both sports and the similarity is in the goal posts and that is it. I prefer rugby as it demands more all around talent (any player can end up playing any part during the game) but AF is fun to play as well, if completely different.

Darts, etc are not spectator sports though. And who cares? Americans care, obviously, because for the most part we find your obsession with soccer to be a bit...puzzling. It's like hockey without the sticks, fights, and ice. At least the Canadians managed to find a way to make soccer a bit more interesting.



What, three hours is too long for you? I thought you were the ones saying we have short attention spans. And there are NOT thousands of playing stoppages. Not even hundreds. Low scoring games tend to be defensive battles, with a lot of hitting (300 pound guys smacking into each other at full speed, not 150 pound guys slide "tackling"). But yeah, I have seen a game or two that dragged. For instance, the 1998 6-3 game between Jacksonville and Baltimore. But the average score of an NFL game is about 20-17.

The referees tend to be a bit poor in AF as well. For example, the Superbowl earlier this year. I had been interested in AF for maybe 3 months by that point and even I knew that some of the calls were a bit like the referee had just been taken a backhander... and you obviously haven't seen much in the way of derbies (rivalry matches) in soccer. Hibs and Hearts in Scotland for example. violent and fun :D and there was also a match in Argentina that has 7 players sent off, a rather large fight and 8 goals. Uruguay also has some incredibly violent fans, as does Poland. And England of course... always England.

and you obviously haven't seen much in the way of derbies (rivalry matches) in soccer. Hibs and Hearts in Scotland for example. violent and fun :D and there was also a match in Argentina that has 7 players sent off, a rather large fight and 8 goals. Uruguay also has some incredibly violent fans, as does Poland. And England of course... always England.

Derbies are brilliant, i live for derbies but being a QPR fan the last derby i saw was us against shitty brentford last season, nothing like playing our real rivals Chelscum and Foolham....

The thing is, for all the action in American sports, they're just so boring because can't bring myself to care when someone scores because it happens all the time. Whereas I can go crazy over a soccer goal.

The coverage of the premiership stateside stopped me from going insane.

Hey your right, US footy is rugby with padding!

Well, to tell the truth, our version of football requires all of the protection you see on the players.

Back in the 1920's, our players only had marginal leather padding (shoulders, hips, head). This was a very bad thing, because many people were being killed in-game from body tackles. President Roosevelt almost banned the game, so they had to introduce more protection and more tackling rules.

If you watch a game of American football, even today, you'll see just why the players need so much protection. A 6'4", 240-pound linebacker who can run faster than many Rugby players almost a foot shorter than him can cause serious pain.

I like both sports, but American football is something I grew up with, and I find it more interesting due to the field strategy involved. I'm also partial to the passing aspect.

Nah, rugby was derived from football:
Short history of rugby:
During a football match at Rugby, sometime in the nineteenth century, William Webb Ellis picked up the ball and ran with it, throwing it into the goal. Rugby was thus invented, and is crap. (I kid).
Yeah, that story's not true :p

Yeah, that story's not true :p
Meh.
^^ It's an argument winner :p

Stopper at least...


Well, whaddya know? I just had a look at wiki...

only America would hold a world series and forget to invite anyone else :p

oh and my list goes: Rugby > football > American football

mostly because American football is just rugby with protective gear and warm weather you may call the players sportsmen but I call them chicken *does chicken dance*
"Warm weather"? Green Bay? New England? Chicago? New York? Pittsburgh? Cleveland? Denver? All of these cities have open-air stadiums and the US National Football League plays in fall and early winter, with playoff games happening in January in heavy snow, wind and/or rain in places like those mentioned above. So you can take your "chicken dance" and blow it out your fruity backside. Brit football doesn't happen in winter, does it?

Brit football doesn't happen in winter, does it?
I may have missed the sarcasm, but yes it does. Indeed, the Boxing Day and New Year's Day fixtures are a traditional part of the festive period.

Derbies are brilliant, i live for derbies but being a QPR fan the last derby i saw was us against shitty brentford last season, nothing like playing our real rivals Chelscum and Foolham....


Wow... thats odd.... how local to QPR are you?

I'm a yeading fan.... and yes, it was only after they got to newcastle in the FA cup

I love american football, soccer is ok, and ive never seen rugby. but besides the point, y cant they just be called the same thing and get on with our lives? i mean americans call europe football soccer, and europeans call football american football. who cares what came first
First posted by I V Stalin
Could we stop the Americans calling their sport football on the grounds that a ball is a spherical object? Dictionary term for a ball:A spherical or pointed projectile used in various athletic activities and games.

Dictionary term for a ball:A spherical or pointed projectile used in various athletic activities and games.
Didn't used to be thus. It was only changed to that after the rise of rugby and American football. So the American's use of the word foot'ball' to describe their game was erroneous when it was first used.

Wow... thats odd.... how local to QPR are you?

I'm a yeading fan.... and yes, it was only after they got to newcastle in the FA cup

Born and raised in Shepards Bush, but presently living in Willesden, both of which are tradionally QPR territory but in this modern day game of big money most kids run around in Chelscum tops.

COME ON YOU R'SSSSSSSSSSSS

Has anybody here heard the new england song? It is a HUGH disapointment!
In my opinion we should remake '3 Lions'

Has anybody here heard the new england song? It is a HUGH disapointment!
In my opinion we should remake '3 Lions'
No, but I could've told you it's crap anyway. It's by Embrace, for fuck's sake.

No, but I could've told you it's crap anyway. It's by Embrace, for fuck's sake.

Other people who listened to it on the radio listed it as Crap, Rubbish, waste of life listening to ect. :D

I prefer (european) football, but I find american football to be mildly interesting. I watched the Superbowl, and I found the first 30 mins or so to be interesting, but then I fell asleep. Playing, european is much more fun I think. My overall favourite sport to watch though is hockey (and this is in no way due to our recent success in international competitions *whistles*)

Why do you even call it English football, if your national team can't beat anyone anymore? Portugal beat you several times in the past few years. (and that Beckam penalty on Euro2004 was really sweet), and FIFA has proved that football actually was invented in China.

Portugal rules

Why do you even call it English football, if your national team can't beat anyone anymore? Portugal beat you several times in the past few years. (and that Beckam penalty on Euro2004 was really sweet), and FIFA has proved that football actually was invented in China.

Portugal rules
Well, Portugal beat us once in the last few years. At Euro 2000. So...six years ago. At Euro 2004, it went to penalties, which means we were drawing after 90 and 120 minutes...so it was a draw, not a defeat. And then Portugal lost to Greece...

Yep.
Last year portugal won against Brazil, eliminated Spain, England, Holland, Russia in the euro04, then we lost to greece (we just can't win against them, it's mad) and shortly after the euro cup we won 8-0 to Russia.
That one game you're talking about was memorable, losing 2-0 we won 3-2 with 2 great goals from João Pinto and a spectacular angle goal from Figo.
But still, England isn't as strong as it was in the past.
Or am I wrong? I don't wanna be taxative, is just my opinion, my point was that if England isn't the strongest team and it has been proven that it wasn't them who invented football, why do the british still flatter themselves cause of the invention of football.
Plz prove me wrong :P

Yep.
Last year portugal won against Brazil, eliminated Spain, England, Holland, Russia in the euro04, then we lost to greece (we just can't win against them, it's mad) and shortly after the euro cup we won 8-0 to Russia.
That one game you're talking about was memorable, losing 2-0 we won 3-2 with 2 great goals from João Pinto and a spectacular angle goal from Figo.
But still, England isn't as strong as it was in the past.
Or am I wrong? I don't wanna be taxative, is just my opinion, my point was that if England isn't the strongest team and it has been proven that it wasn't them who invented football, why do the british still flatter themselves cause of the invention of football.
Plz prove me wrong :P
I'd say we're better now than at any time since 1990. We've got a decent keeper, very good defence (so long as Ashley Cole is available), very good midfield, and a world class strike-force. Plus they work together as a team well.

Aussie Rules Footy. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_rules_football)

A much better game than Rugby, Soccer and American Football.

Gaelic football.
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaelic_football)

Now that's a real mans game.

I prefer (european) football, but I find american football to be mildly interesting. I watched the Superbowl, and I found the first 30 mins or so to be interesting, but then I fell asleep. Playing, european is much more fun I think. My overall favourite sport to watch though is hockey (and this is in no way due to our recent success in international competitions *whistles*)

I fall asleep watching soccer. American football is at least unpredictable, you never know what the offense is going to do. Different play each time.