American Football vs Real Football [Archive] - Eyes on Final Fantasy Forums

tomamar04

01-29-2005, 08:40 PM

I've watched American football, and I found it incredibly boring.

And Del Murder, if you came to England and watched a good quality side, you'd see that the types of players vary dramatically, we've got hardmen who aren't afraid to knock you off the ball, tacticians who can vary the pace of play and have the sporting brain of a genius, explosing attackers who can strike the ball with almighty power, dainty forwards with bucket loads of pace, leaders who can command a game, goalkeepers with amazing agility.

The whole of Europe, South America, Africa and Asia can't be wrong, Football (soocer) is the worlds number 1 sport...and for a good reason!

RSL

01-29-2005, 09:12 PM

Del Murder summed it up nicely. American football is indeed the best sport in the world and I look forward to each season.

I respect and admire soccer players, but I just can't get into watching it.

eestlinc

01-29-2005, 09:34 PM

baseball.

Yamaneko

01-29-2005, 09:38 PM

Football is my favorite sport. There's too many breaks in American Football. Football has 45 minutes of non-stop action. I can't wait until the '06 World Cup!

tomamar04

01-29-2005, 09:41 PM

Fact: The Football (soccer) World Cup is the most watched single sport event in the world.

Fact: Football (soccer) is the most popular sport in most European, South American, Asian and Afrian countries.

Fact: Football (soccer) is the most played team sport in the world.

Fact: The 2002 World Cup final was watched by over 1 billion people world-wide, the biggest ever worldwide audience for a sporting event.

Fact: Football (soccer) is a fast paced, exciting game.

Fact: Football (soccer) has international teams, something American football doesn't have. You'll never experience the glory and the patriotism when you beat another country in a world-wide event.

I could go on forever...

The Captain

01-29-2005, 10:03 PM

Part of this argument could be fueled by the fact that American Football has not caught on in Europe and Soccer has not quite caught on Stateside either. If both sports were played equally all over the world, then it would probably be easier to judge one against the other.

Take care all.

Del Murder

01-29-2005, 10:07 PM

I don't think you will get any arguments, tomarmar, that soccer is not the most popular sport in the world. It just doesn't have the things I like to see. I don't care that much about the rest of the world to get too excited over international sports, but when the Raiders play the Chargers....watch out! International rivlaries in Europe are replaced by regional rivalries here.

I really enjoyed your reply to my post, even though I didn't understand most of it. :)

What I meant by different types of athletes was that only in the NFL will you see a 6'0" 300 pound physical lineman, a 5'10" 200 pound agile running back, and a 6'4" 180 pound speedy wide reciever all invloved in the same play. Perhaps soccer has those, I admit that I have not seen many professional soccer matches.

fire_of_avalon

01-29-2005, 10:13 PM

I enjoy American football better. But I like them both.

However, eestlinc knows the score. Baseball am win.

gokufusionss1

01-29-2005, 10:13 PM

you of course have physical differences 6ft 3 centre backs. Pacy wingers, strong front men. But you dont' have any Rhino sized men because they'd be too slow and not agile enough for the game. American football iritates me in that every move is "in the playbook" they'res no room for individual creativity and the kind of showmanship you get from players like Ronaldinhio and jay jay ocacha. you also get several forms of play in football in different areas of the pitch not just the same thing moved up 10 yards. Must say i do like the cheerleaders though.

dufflebag

01-29-2005, 10:32 PM

i'm american and i like soccer better than football.

Psychotic

01-29-2005, 10:37 PM

International rivlaries in Europe are replaced by regional rivalries here.That's probably where Football wins out over American Football: Not only are there regional sides (I'm not an expert in the NFL or anything, but from what I've seen only major cities have sides - in football, every single town has a side or maybe several, but I suppose in a country as large as the US that isn't really possible) but there are also international sides. It's fun to have rivalries against such people as Czanthor over here, say (Because Liverpool >>>>>>>>> Arsenal :p) but then both me and Czan will unite behind the England team and the glory of Shaun Wright-Phillips. It's great.

Oh, and rivalries aren't limited to just Europe. If you knew of England and Argentina...hoo boy.

01-29-2005, 10:45 PM

Someone tell me how you can call it American Football? The ball spends 90% of the time in someone's hands! :D

Joking aside, my main problem with American Football is that stopping and starting every 2 second's just breaks up the game making it dull to watch. I can't watch NFL game's i've tried but I just get bored and change channel. And vise versa i'm sure for people who arn't used to Football/Soccer.

As for there being more tactics in American Football that's just rubbish imo. There are alot of tactics to Football. For a start you've got different formation's 442, 451, 433, 532, I could go on but won't. You have team's playing counter attacking football when playing away from home. Teams going all out attack, manager's are shiffting players about mid game to increase width or conjest the midfield, I really could go on, but too anyone who dosn't follow Football it's not going to make a blind bit of sense.

The problem with Ameican Sports (All of them not just American Football.) for me is there's no promotion or relegation from league's. Your team does crap, ah well, better luck next season. In Football if you team's bottom of the pile come the end of the season. Your going down a division. This add's alot of passion for supporter's as no one want's to see there team relagated and add's meaning to every single game a team has when there at the wrong end of the table same for a team fighting at the top of the table. In English football there's 4 professional divisions, That means alot of up's and down's come the end of the season and alot of joy and heartbreak as well.

I could keep going but everyone's probley stopped reading by now, so ill just shut up. :p

Strider

01-29-2005, 11:31 PM

Hell, hockey is way more exciting than soccer. At least you can deck someone in hockey.

You all know my answer.

Raistlin

01-30-2005, 12:02 AM

I cannot watch a full game of soccer. Don't get me wrong, I love playing it, and did so all throughout high school. But watching it is so bloody dreadful.

American football is the best sport in the world to watch.

JunotDe

01-30-2005, 12:45 AM

Hell, hockey is way more exciting than soccer. At least you can deck someone in hockey.

You all know my answer.

Nobody cares we're not talking about Hockey but all aside I love hockey too and I very much miss the NHL and playing street hockey on hot summer days. All this argument is is being based on peoples personal feeling and opinions about other sports there will NEVER be an answer on to which is better just wether you like it more or not. I get REALLY pumped up for Both Soccer and NFL games especially when my favourites the broncos play I usually dont watch other teams but for soccer i'll watch any team even english(gross) just cause its such a beautiful sport

I suck at spelling, grammer and knowing intelligent words

( in other stupid news My soccer team lost today:( )

Kirobaito

01-30-2005, 01:09 AM

As for there being more tactics in American Football that's just rubbish imo. There are alot of tactics to Football. For a start you've got different formation's 442, 451, 433, 532, I could go on but won't. You have team's playing counter attacking football when playing away from home. Teams going all out attack, manager's are shiffting players about mid game to increase width or conjest the midfield, I really could go on, but too anyone who dosn't follow Football it's not going to make a blind bit of sense.
I can and will double that bit of "tactics."

Here is the average defense:

-------SS-------------FS----------
CB------------------------------CB
---ROLB--------MLB---------LOLB--
-----DE-----DT-----DT-----DE-----

Defenses can run a 4-3-4 defense, with 4 down lineman, 3 linebackers, and 4 defensive backs, as most teams do. However, about 7 or 8 teams run a 3-4-4 most of the time, with only 3 lineman and 4 linebackers, and for the most part that works out better for teams that can run it, because the offensive lineman don't know where the 4th rusher is coming from. When offenses play 3 wide receivers, teams switch to the nickel - 4 lineman, 2 linebackers, and 5 defensive backs (3 cornerbacks and 2 safeties). Some teams, however, run a 4-2-5, which is different from the nickel. In this formation, instead of 3 CBs and 2 Ss, you have 2 CBs and 3 safeties (Strong, Weak, Free). You can also find dime defenses (4-1-6), and Quarter/Prevent (3-1-7). These are often used at the end of games, where the opposing team's quarterback is going to throw the ball up in the air hoping for miracle. You'll also find goalline defenses (6-3-2), designed to stop plays at the line of scrimmage, and 5-2-4 defenses, used in running situations.

On defense, there are about a billion different play options. The average defense is called Cover 2, where the cornerbacks cover the wide receivers, the linebackers cover the backs/tight ends, and the two safeties play zone 10+ yards from the line of scrimmage. Some teams will play zone defense straight across, in which players are assigned areas on the field instead of men to cover. This defenses can be manipulated by a blitz by one of the linebackers, safeties, or cornerbacks. A blitz is where the player runs into the offensive backfield to sack the quarterback and disrupt a play.

You can also find what's called "Zone Blitz." That is where the defensive ends (look on the diagram above) drop back into coverage where the LOLB and ROLB are, and the LOLB and ROLB blitz in their place. This is used with young quarterbacks who don't know how to handle it (like Brady Smith, a DE, intercepting Eli Manning this past season).

On goalline situations, the 3 linebackers have to play the "gaps' (A gap, B gap, C gap) to prevent running backs from scoring touchdowns. This is all done on the spot.

That's just the defense. :)

Del Murder

01-30-2005, 02:07 AM

Yeah, what KB said. There is no doubt that soccer has its share of tactics.

Soccer, hockey, and basketball all have the same basic premise. Get the ball/puck from one side of the field to the other and into some net. In soccer you can't use your hands. In hockey you have to use a stick, you play it on ice, and the net is smaller. In basketball you have to dribble the ball, you play it on a court, and the net is elevated. They are just variations of the same principle. The reason I like basketball and not the other two is that the elevated net allows for less defense and therefore more scoring. A good defensive play is nice, but I can't take a game that goes 1-1 into the last period. To me that's boring cause it means not much is happening. Without scoring the plays lose their meaning and purpose.

Football shares the same 'get it to the other side' premise, but instead of continuous back and forth action, which I think gets repetitve, there are set plays and limits to how you can get down there. Field position is only important in football. Stopping every two minutes would get boring, yes, but it is more like every 30 seconds, and each stop allows the coaches to try to come up with something to outsmart each other. I love the 'let's try this, ok, now let's try this, ok now let's try this' aspect of the game. Running a play takes some of the decision making out of the player's hands, but not much. Quarterbakcs and running backs still have to make quick decisions, and the defense still has to read what the other team is trying to do. I'd say they are equal in that respect.

Baseball is great because it is nothing like the others. There's nothing like it, really. Maybe cricket is like it, I don't know the rules, but as far as exposure in this country there is no game remotley similar. That is why it is awesome, even though sometimes gets a little slow for my tastes. Plus there are too many games in the season. The NFL is great because every game means something.

TasteyPies

01-30-2005, 03:05 AM

Tennis sucks

tomamar04

01-30-2005, 07:25 AM

I'm not sure of many of the rules of American football, but last week when my Dad and me watched NFL highlights while flicking through sports channels, we laughed when we saw how bloody repetitive it got.

And even though I'm sure rivalries do exist in American football, in football (soccer) when England play in a competition the whole country supports England, even those who hate football, and the buzz I got when Lampard scored the equaliser against Portugal in the dying minutes of extra time in Euro 2004, or when Owen scored against Brazil in 2002, and when Owen ran round the Argentian defence and buried the ball in the back of the net.

Club football is just as great, picture this;

Only a minute left of normal time; Bayern Munich 1-0 Manchester United. Beckham steps up to take a corner in front of 100,000 fans in the Nou Camp Stadium, Barcelona and a world-wide audience of millions. He swings in a high flying corner, falls eventually to Ryan Giggs, who launches it at goal, seeing the shot going wide, vetran striker Teddy Sheringham directs the ball into the net; Bayern Munich 1-1 Manchester United.

In a desperate attempt to get a late winner, both teams push forward, Bayern Munich have a half-chance, before the Man United defence clears, after some attacking pressure from United, they win a corner. Beckham swings in the what must be the last attacking ball of the game, after a flick on, Ole Gunner Solksjaer scores for Manchester United; Bayern Munich 1-2 Manchester United, and with doing that Manchester United becoame the first, and only team to win the Premiership, The FA Cup and the Champions League. The three most prized possesions any club could have.

Del Murder

01-30-2005, 08:37 AM

I agree that that would be pretty exciting, but the whole rest of the 1-0 game would be pretty boring unless you were really into the sport. The sports I like have constant scoring, making the whole game as exciting as the last few plays you described.

I guess the repetitveness would exist in both if you weren't a follower of the games.

Dingo Jellybean

01-30-2005, 09:30 AM

This question is pretty useless because we're all going to be biased. Unless one of us has never watched a game of either football and all of the sudden watches both sports to get an opinion of it, the answers will always be US for the NFL fans and Soccer for the Soccer fans.

However, after watching a lot of Rugby matches(like, 20...which is a lot for an American), there isn't nearly as much strategy as their is in the NFL. Soccer doesn't even have many plays, like basketball. The number of plays used in one NFL game is probably equal to the number of plays in a whole soccer season.

However, Chess matches doesn't neccessarily make things good. I like basketball most because of it's fast paced, high-flying, acrobatic, jaw-dropping moves that you can only see in a basketball court. Anyone can deck opponents, how many people can do a 360-Windmill while launching 10 feet away and 50"(127cm) into the air? Not many people. Michael Vick is as close to the NFL being "NBA" like as it is with his high flying play-making.

The NFL gets boring at times though, I use to think I could watch any game...but all I care about are the teams I like(Redskins, Ravens) and the teams I hate(Green Bay, Dallas, Pittsburgh).

Resha

01-30-2005, 11:37 AM

Football football....(soccer). I think American football is violent and suspiciously rugby-like, but feel free to correct me as I've never watched it. :love:

Arsenal. :love: Die, Chelsea, die. :rolleyes2

01-30-2005, 11:59 AM

As good as many of your points are, this argument really can't go anywhere simply because of the limited exposure Soccer gets in the US, and American Football gets in the UK.

American Football is clearly a very tactical game, but that's not to say Soccer isn't. The tactics may not be as immediately obvious as they are Stateside, where each play is clearly defined, but they have just as drastic an effect.

Taking an example from my own side, Arsenal. If you compare our match against Everton at the start of the season to our game against Bolton two weeks ago, you'll see a startling difference. We swarmed all over Everton because they were poorly organised, but got nowhere against Bolton because their defence was so well-planned. I won't go in to the details, since every player on the pitch had a well-defined role in the Bolton side. Nonetheless, it was their superb strategy, without a doubt, that won them the game.

Another common misconception might be American Football's stop-start nature. However, Soccer is interrupted nearly as often by niggling fouls, offside calls, or throw-ins. Plus, even with the repeated breaks, American Football still exhibits moments of speed and skill, where a chain of passes set off a free-flowing movement that gets the pulse racing.

The fact is, it's all a matter of perspective. To your average Brit, American Football might simply be Rugby with pads, when in reality it's far more tactical than our game could ever be. Likewise, an American might think Soccer's lack of scoring is dull, when in actual fact it is the low ratio of opportunities to goals that makes the sport so thrilling for many of us.

I prefer Soccer because I've grown up with it, not because it's a better game. I've followed Arsenal since the age of five, and been kicking a ball against a chalk-marked wall since even earlier than that. It's no surprise, then, that it's my favourite game in the world. Therefore, it also doesn't surprise me to think that a small boy growing up watching NFL on the TV might become an American Football fan. Once again, it's all about persepctive.

P.S. Shut up, Psy. :p

Skogs

01-30-2005, 02:31 PM

At a first glance, American football is closer to rugby league than rugby union, as play stops/pauses after each tackle and there is a limited number of tackles/downs allowed before a turnover is enforced (although in American football, the count resets if the attacking team advances over ten yards).

However, American football is similar to rugby union in that different positions require different kinds of athletes (big fatties at hooker/prop, speedsters at wing, quicking-thinking agile guy at scrum half etc.).

But then American football is closer to cricket when it comes to tactics and the amount of time required between plays.

In the end, though, I find Australian football the best game to watch. It's flowing, the players are incredible athletes and it's pretty high scoring. Also, because of the draft and salary cap, you don't get the Manchester Uniteds, Arsenals and Liverpools who almost always finish near the top of the table. Every team has its day.

tomamar04

01-30-2005, 03:34 PM

This is another reason I love football, there's no other sport like it.
American Football, Australian Football, Rugby League and Rugby Union are all too similar, and Baseball, Cricket and Rounders are all too similar.

And that brings me too Basketball, it's the only Americanised team sport I have any time for, I don't know any of the players or anything, but watching Basketball at the Olympics was great (But football is still a million times better :p ).

Rusty

01-30-2005, 03:54 PM

RSL

01-30-2005, 04:19 PM

"American football sucks for Reason A, but I admit I've never watched it."

Nice basis for an argument there. This is another case of everyone having their own personal tastes and no one being the "right" answer. If you love football, great! If you love soccer, terrific! It's not like the two are really competing against each other, so why does there need to be an argument?

Appless

01-30-2005, 04:31 PM

I really can't stand American football. To me it's a bit dull in a way. Not very exciting. Because I watch so much AFL and Rugby Union, I'm more used to the rough stuff of those games, I find them more exciting, fast paced and more fun to watch. Where as in American Football they have all this padding on. Compared to AFL and Rugby Union it's a bit timid.

Soccer is more fun to play than it is to sit and watch a game. I think it's because of the low scoring in Soccer. I could sit and watch a whole game with only one goal kicked. That to me is a bit boring. But like I said, when you play it, it's much more fun and exciting.

Thats just my opinion :)

I agree with everything you said especially the bit about NFL being more timid compared to AFL and Rugby Union. I find it ridiculous that they wear all this padding and helmets while AFL players get smashed around even more and they don't wear anything like that. AFL's just better in general because of how fast paced and exciting it is. :)

I'm not a fan of NFL at all so I'll got with soccer because it's fun to play even though it's boring to watch most of it.

Del Murder

01-30-2005, 04:47 PM

Heh, yeah we should really let human beings go out there and murder each other. The types of players who make the hits are probably the best combination of speed and strength in the world, and so pads are necessary to sustain the longevity of those we like to watch playing.

Appless

01-30-2005, 05:00 PM

I'm sure our guys can hit just as hard as your guys. And our guys that get hit get up and keep playing and have long careers. Unless they were badly injured of course. But then most of the time they recover fully except in the extreme cases where even padding would probably not do much to stop the injury. Did that make sense?

eestlinc

01-30-2005, 05:14 PM

Trust me, if Ray Lewis clobbered you without any pads on, you would not be getting up and playing that moment, and you would not have a long career in the sport. US Football players destroy their bodies for our entertainment, which is one reason I don't like the sport as much as I would otherwise. There's a reason so many running backs retire early: all those years and games of constant hits and abuse takes a toll. Many try to retire while they can still walk and form sentences.

RSL

01-30-2005, 07:03 PM

I don't buy that at all. Why would a sport be more entertaining if the players weren't protecting themselves somewhat? If other rough, physical sports chose not to use pads and helmets, then I see them as ridiculous, not the other way around.

Doc Sark

01-30-2005, 10:21 PM

I prefer soccer to American Football. I like the NFL highlights show, because it lasts an hour and I get to see the best bits of the matches. I can't see myself sitting through 3-4 hours of a game with the constant advertising. There was a European league for American Football in the early nineties which was popular for a short time until its fad status expired. Anyone remember the London Monarchs? It's like that in England, you get washed up or retired NFL, NHL, NBA players to come and coach/play in the English teams. It is (or used to be) at least similar in MLS. A lot of European players going to MLS to play out their careers. Steve Nicol anyone? Anyway my point is, how is America as a nation going to truly appreciate the joy of soccer as Europeans do and vica versa with American Football in Europe, if we aren't seeing the very best that sport has to offer and we have to settle for players of a lesser or dwindling quality? Note there are exceptions...Freddie Adu, but seriously how long will he stay in MLS?

People have been talking about plays and tactics in both sports and I would like to reiterate something Czech Republic said. It is very difficult to compare the two sports in that respect. My understanding of American football is that you have to score a touchdown or a field goal using a number of pre-defined plays. That's fine. You can't compare the two sports in that respect because Soccer (and I'm only calling it soccer to avoid confusion, its football where I come from) doesn't use a "play" system. You don't make plays in soccer, with the exception of set pieces, the match is one continuous "play" where, as Czech Republic rightly says, strategies are constantly being planned before a game and altered or overhauled during.

Anyone that said this was a fruitless discussion with no right or wrong answer is spot on. Still it's nice to point out the finer points of the game of soccer and in return listen to the opinions of American Football fans and why they love the game.

GhandiOwnsYou

02-07-2005, 02:53 AM

See, I love American Football. It's not my favorite sport by a long shot though. My deal is, i like sports that reward the ability to get hammered eight hundred times by men three times your size and keep on truckin. Football does that. In soccers, you screw up, someone kicks you in the shins and steals the ball, or knocks you down. In football, you get four motorized refridgerators that flatten you to the ground and attempt to make your head pop like an over ripe cantaloupe. THAT, is incentive my friend.

Now, on to my favorites? Rugby, Lacrosse, Hockey. Pure unadulterated mayhem and violence. particularly rugby, because i'll turn on a rugby match and see guys in their 40's beating the CRAP out of each other. that's hardcore, when your balding dad is kicking ass. Sports reward three things. Intelligence, Grace/talent/proficiency, and brute strength. long live brute strength! it's just more fun to watch...

bigbri2k5

02-07-2005, 02:48 PM

I really like football and have supported Man Utd all my lif e but recently i started watching American Football. Its not as good but its still a good sport.

PS. Try sending a mercenary after me and i'll kill them and come after you.

Raistlin

02-07-2005, 02:59 PM

edczxcvbnm

02-07-2005, 02:59 PM

American Football by far. Soccer is just so damn boring...not the most boring(baseball) but pretty damn close. I don't like the way American Football is run though. They need to have to stop tweaking the rules every damn year...okay. Maybe they don't tweak the rules but the refs always call specific things a lot more to protect something.

I think the worse call in Football is holding. If it is against the defense then its 5 yards AND a first down. If it is against the offense then it is 5 yards and repeat the down. Thats bull<img src=http://forums.eyesonff.com/images/smilies/rpg_009.gif><img src=http://forums.eyesonff.com/images/smilies/rpg_009.gif><img src=http://forums.eyesonff.com/images/smilies/rpg_009.gif><img src=http://forums.eyesonff.com/images/smilies/rpg_009.gif>. It should be 5 yards and 4th down. If you get such great rewards one way it should be just as devasting the other way.

Basketball is my favorite sport though. Worst refering over all but in the end it really doesn't make that big of a difference.

Doc Sark

02-07-2005, 03:14 PM

Some of you soccer fans mentioned the fact that rugby players do not have pads. Rugby also does not have 350 lb linemen and 300 lb linebackers who could bench-press you with their little finger. One of those guys hits you without pads on...well, let's just say you'll be taking a nap.

I think any soccer fans saying that are missing the point, as are the American Football fans replying to them. Two very different games rugby and American Football, different types of players, but trust me, there are guys in rugby who you would not want to take a hit from either. It would be impossible for your average rugby player to carry 350lbs in weight because of the amount of constant running involved in the game, he just wouldn't last the 80 minutes.

Shoden

02-07-2005, 04:00 PM

footy definatly if you watch real sports like this you dont see people beating the hell outta each other just to get an oval shaped ball with football the only gear you wear are shorts socks football shoes a vest and shirt depending on who you play for or support optionals include gloves and shinpads. if you know your stuff football managers make a hell of alot more money than any rugby manager could in 3 years.

Doc Sark

02-07-2005, 04:02 PM

Shin pads are mandatory, not optional.

Raistlin

02-07-2005, 04:09 PM

I think the worse call in Football is holding. If it is against the defense then its 5 yards AND a first down. If it is against the offense then it is 5 yards and repeat the down. Thats bull. It should be 5 yards and 4th down. If you get such great rewards one way it should be just as devasting the other way.
10 yards, repeat down for holding on the offense.

Two very different games rugby and American Football, different types of players, but trust me, there are guys in rugby who you would not want to take a hit from either. It would be impossible for your average rugby player to carry 350lbs in weight because of the amount of constant running involved in the game, he just wouldn't last the 80 minutes.
Exactly. Two very different sports with different requirements.

Basketball is my favorite sport though. Worst refering over all but in the end it really doesn't make that big of a difference.
Actually, NBA refs are monitored <i>very</i> carefully and are the best basketball refs in the world...it's pretty much about as good as it's going to get. I mean, watch and NBA game as compared to the games they played at the Olympics. No comparison as to which refs are better.

Shoden

02-07-2005, 04:19 PM

i never use shinpads as they make my legs itch but when i play i usually defend but sometimes i go upfront but not usually. i see no pro footballers wear shinpads or is it the fact that them massive soks cover them up

Doc Sark

02-07-2005, 04:25 PM

It is part of the rules and regulations of F.A governed football. You must wear shin pads. Every pro wears shin pads, you are not allowed on the pitch without them.

Shoden

02-07-2005, 04:31 PM

meh maybe thats what the socks are for o cover them up so ya dont look like a pillock.

lordblazer

02-07-2005, 04:32 PM

Hold on the title is really <img src=http://forums.eyesonff.com/images/smilies/rpg_009.gif><img src=http://forums.eyesonff.com/images/smilies/rpg_009.gif><img src=http://forums.eyesonff.com/images/smilies/rpg_009.gif><img src=http://forums.eyesonff.com/images/smilies/rpg_009.gif>ing i mean the F word all over offensive!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.I'm assuming your claling real football soccer and oyur being stuck up about it because your english.WTF?Can we all just get along.American football is football so is soccer both have the different ways you play it.Boht have valid definitions.I mean come on you can not vs. two completely different sports.

Doc Sark

02-07-2005, 04:35 PM

Yeah read the whole thread. We pretty much covered all that.

Shoden

02-07-2005, 04:38 PM

ok Football came along a bit before Rugby and were british invented sports Football came first so its right to call it real football and you play using your FOOT/Feet. thats all im saying before an agruement starts

gokufusionss1

02-07-2005, 05:02 PM

rugby and football spawned from the same game in fact rugbys full title is "rugby football".

Anyway i was watching the supernbowl last night maybe it was the lack of sleep or the paul mccartney effect but i enjoyed it. Still not a good as game as Football or Rugby but better than bowls. Also the cheerleaders were a welcome bonus.

Shoden

02-07-2005, 05:23 PM

Football was the predecessor but i dont understand rugby much

edczxcvbnm

02-07-2005, 05:48 PM

Actually, NBA refs are monitored <i>very</i> carefully and are the best basketball refs in the world...it's pretty much about as good as it's going to get. I mean, watch and NBA game as compared to the games they played at the Olympics. No comparison as to which refs are better.

I was talking in general. Compared to other sports the refs are the worse. Not other basketball leagues. Its a very tough game to call no doubt but they still make too many bad calls. With football they implemented reviews to cut down on that. The other sports are pretty cut and dry when it comes to the calls and there isn't a lot of interperation.

That is what I meant.

Doc Sark

02-07-2005, 05:54 PM

Football definitely isn't "cut and dry" when it comes to refereeing decisions. I can't think of the last time a ref had a mistake free game. But personally I think that adds to the enjoyment of the game and gives fans something else to talk about.

MoonsEcho

02-07-2005, 05:57 PM

I like American football better, even though it would make more sense for soccer to be called football. Soccer just bores the mess out of me to watch, and I hate playing it too. I'm not a huge fan of pro football; I actually like college ball better, but it definitely is leaps and bounds more entertaining than soccer.

Of course, baseball pwns all sports, so nyah.

Raistlin

02-07-2005, 07:49 PM

I was talking in general. Compared to other sports the refs are the worse. Not other basketball leagues. Its a very tough game to call no doubt but they still make too many bad calls. With football they implemented reviews to cut down on that. The other sports are pretty cut and dry when it comes to the calls and there isn't a lot of interperation.

That is what I meant.
Yeah, and you're right, but basketball is probably the toughest sport to ref. It's extremely fast-paced in a very very tight court. With soccer, it's much more spread out and penalties are more or less exclusively on the ball. In football, you have about 3457495874 refs keeping an eye all over the bloody place. In baskteball, you have three refs that have to keep an eye on about a million or so different things. Very tough, no doubt.

Doc Sark

02-07-2005, 08:24 PM

There's four refs in football. Just becuase most fouls occur on the ball that's not to say there isn't a hundred other things to watch out for. Offside for example. Probably the hardest rule to referee in any sport, anywhere, especially since FIFA's new ruling, which confuses it even more.

Football is not an easy game to officiate. Controversial maybe, but I actually believe that Basketball and Football have a lot in common. Certainly more in common than Football and American Football.

edczxcvbnm

02-07-2005, 08:39 PM

Yeah, and you're right, but basketball is probably the toughest sport to ref. It's extremely fast-paced in a very very tight court. With soccer, it's much more spread out and penalties are more or less exclusively on the ball. In football, you have about 3457495874 refs keeping an eye all over the bloody place. In baskteball, you have three refs that have to keep an eye on about a million or so different things. Very tough, no doubt.

No doubt its the toughest sport to call. How many other sports do you have to decide if the player is faking to draw the foul? Sure in other sports it happens but in basketball it constantly happens. Due to the pace of the game they can't really review plays because then it slows the game down. They do the best job they possibly can but there isn't going to be perfect refing in that sport until robots take over.

Shoden

02-07-2005, 08:44 PM

Basketball is too easy and simple. with Football theres many rules and hard techniques eg hammer kick. the strangest rule in the whole of football is you get fouled for taking off your shirt after scoring and over celebrating

Kirobaito

02-07-2005, 09:55 PM

To say that Basketball is easy is ridiculous. Let's see you throw a basketball from 23 feet and make it in the net with a hand in your face. Anybody can kick a ball, albeit some better than others. Shooting a basketball is much more difficult than kicking a soccerball. Not to mention there's much more 1-on-1 defense, an entirely different skill.

Shoden

02-07-2005, 10:01 PM

is it wesh look ive done a 26 yard shot in the net with ease (im double jointed in my hands so it got more power and speed) im small compared to the others they're all about 5'9-6'4 im only 5'6-5'8 in height. footballs harder as you need to get passed the strikers and defenders then quickly make a perfect shot before you get tackled or fouled.

Kirobaito

02-07-2005, 10:06 PM

OK. You still said basketball is easy, which it is not by any stretch of the imagination.

Shoden

02-07-2005, 10:10 PM

i find it easy same with alot of ppl i know all you need is good throw and speed and thats it while in football there's kicking heading deflecting saving corner taking throw in taking & tackling.

Kirobaito

02-07-2005, 10:59 PM

If you really want to get that specific, here are the following skills in basketball:

Shooting (Jumpshots)
Layups
Dunks
Free-throw shooting
Defending
DRIBBLING
Running
In-bounds passes
Passing as a whole
The alleyoop pass
Blocking
Stealing
Rebounding
Jumping

Trust me. Real basketball requires a lot more than "good throw and speed."

Shoden

02-07-2005, 11:07 PM

most of them are just for showing off, seriously ive scored points in a b ball game about a hell of alot more times than football which i hardly ever score at. but i have scored 2 Hatricks before in the last month plus i can do spinba;lls on anyball when im goal at football or shotting in basketball since i practiced cricket and done spinballs when i was bored so i do it in these games. Basketball isnt as violent it s a cleaner sport but it can be very boring at times but with football when you see the skills of someone going through the midfielders and defence and doing a beautiful shot to the back of the net. they're both great sports and both own Rugby but on Tv Football is better

Kirobaito

02-07-2005, 11:18 PM

most of them are just for showing off
xDDDDDDD

I don't know why I'm continue to post about B-Ball, since it's off-topic, but no. Just no. Dunking and alleyoop passes are for showing off.

Dribbling, shooting, defending, jumping, blocking, stealing...all of those are parts of the game.

And basketball is one of the most exciting sports in the world, with the proper teams.

Doc Sark

02-07-2005, 11:30 PM

Again, different skills required in each different sport. I can understand your frustration Kirobaito. I would be more than sceptical if someone told me they could shoot a basket from 26 yards....

Shoden, you're giving soccer fans a bad name and making us look ignorant about American sports. Basketball is a hell of a hard game to play and you need a lot more than speed and accuracy. The standard of Basketball in British schools hell in the pro British league is so far from the NBA it's not even funny. I take it back to my earlier point about the British not being privy to the best American sports have to offer and vica-versa so its now wonder the opinions vary so widely from country to country.

Del Murder

02-08-2005, 02:16 AM

I was talking in general. Compared to other sports the refs are the worse. Not other basketball leagues. Its a very tough game to call no doubt but they still make too many bad calls. With football they implemented reviews to cut down on that. The other sports are pretty cut and dry when it comes to the calls and there isn't a lot of interperation.

That is what I meant.
The baseball strike zone is the most inconsistently and difficultly called point in sports in my opinion.

Of course you are going to score more in basketball than in soccer. The playing field is much smaller and the net is elevated so that you cannot directly defend it. A soccer game goes 5-4 while a basketball game goes 95-94. I don't think you can compare the two. Both take a hell of a lot of aerobic endurance, though, possibly more than the other top sports.

edczxcvbnm

02-08-2005, 02:39 AM

I think the strike zone, while hard to call, is called correctly most of the time. The Umpire is usually very good at making the call and all those instant replays prove it to me. While it is very hard it is still more cut and dry than B-Ball. How many times have people been called for a clean block because they pushed the shooter down with the ball. Perfectly legal but it happens all the time. How about charging or defensive fouls. There are so many they let go by as well as so many that don't deserve to be called. Its a game where you don't want to slow down the game by over burdening it with ticky-tack fouls but you also don't want to let people get away with stuff. That is highly interppertatable(is this a word?). That is why I think basketball is the hardest sport to call over all. There are parts of other sports that are hard to call but almost all of basketball is hard to call.

Del Murder

02-08-2005, 02:52 AM

You're probably right. I just wanted to get baseball mentioned since it hadn't been for about a page or two.

Doomgaze

02-08-2005, 07:38 AM

The baseball strike zone is the most inconsistently and difficultly called point in sports in my opinion.

Of course you are going to score more in basketball than in soccer. The playing field is much smaller and the net is elevated so that you cannot directly defend it. A soccer game goes 5-4 while a basketball game goes 95-94. I don't think you can compare the two. Both take a hell of a lot of aerobic endurance, though, possibly more than the other top sports.

That's a rather high score for a soccer game, isn't it?

Raistlin

02-08-2005, 11:03 AM

Yeah, it is. But he got the point across.

Resha

02-08-2005, 04:21 PM

Basketball? *Looks at thread title* Ok. I think basketball is nicer to actually play, but that footy (soccer) is nicer to watch. I can't watch basketball because it's too fast-paced, and too repetitive after a while.

tomamar04

02-08-2005, 08:23 PM

5-4 certainly is a high score. Only once this season has a game had 9 goals in it. If a game has more than 4 goals it's seen as high scoring, but that's part of the beauty of football, when you do finally get a goal, it's so rewarding...and you run around the house screaming in celebration...

Kirobaito

02-08-2005, 10:35 PM

That's one of the reasons I can't watch soccer - you just NEVER have scoring, and the time in between scoring is about as repetitive as life gets. You kick the ball down to one end, at some point a defender gets in the way, and kicks it to the other end. At least, in hockey, guys get hit all the time. :)

Del Murder

02-09-2005, 01:20 AM

Yeah, that's my main beef with it too. Unless you have a keen understanding for the game it is hard for a fringe fan or the low attention span of today's youth to get into it.

Doc Sark

02-09-2005, 02:31 AM

On the flip side you could say the same about practically any sport. In most sports there is one goal that it's participants attempt to achieve over and over again so there is bound to repetetiveness. I don't find a bunch of guys running up and down a court doing nothing BUT scoring very stimulating.

Horses for courses.

lordblazer

02-09-2005, 02:39 AM

Doc Sark

02-09-2005, 02:48 AM

Why is that significant? It's a crap league and no-one watches it. It was popular for about 1 season and then it got boring and no-one paid attention to it anymore. It's just washed up American Footballers ending their careers playing with second rate European players. It's about as popular in Europe as Hitler (slight exaggeration).

I don't even know if the London Monarchs still exist..!!!

lordblazer

02-09-2005, 03:04 AM

Kirobaito

02-09-2005, 04:41 AM

JunotDe

02-09-2005, 06:24 AM

i find it easy same with alot of ppl i know all you need is good throw and speed and thats it while in football there's kicking heading deflecting saving corner taking throw in taking & tackling.

Sweet, Yer an idiot!

Every sport is hard Dont try to compare between others

JunotDe

02-09-2005, 06:25 AM

lordblazer

02-09-2005, 06:30 AM

The Germans have an infatuation with NFL Europe. They're the only country that has managed to like it. It's no coincidence that they've been long thought of to be the smartest country in Europe. :)

I turned the TV onto Fox Sports World today, and there was a soccer game on. One of the most boring things ever. WHY do they just randomly kick the ball out of bounds FOR NO REASON? The players just do random things, like kicking it directly at an opposing player. It's just a horrible sport. ;_;
it wasn't broing last year when Mexico owned USA Man team.But the USA's female soccer team is pretty impressive.But yeah I like footbll better because of the tatics.TRust me I bet none of yall couldn't doo what a quarterback has to do.He has to remember every single play then once he actually has standing and isn't a rookie at what he does.He must start making some plays himself.Also you have to add int he facotor of 300+ muslce bound men.The pads are just there to keep those players alive trust me it hurts so bad that you don't want to get up the first time your tackled.also respect each others opinion socer and football ar eboth excelent sports.HEre in american its Soccer vs. Football vs. BAseball vs. Basketball vs. Hockey and golf adn teenis left the war a long time ago lol.

escobert

02-09-2005, 06:31 AM

yeah and I get sickl of seeeing them lay on the ground for 3 hours when they get puched over. In American football most of the time the players breakbones or are seriously hurt when they lay on the ground. Most get up and you don't hear about them being hurt until efter the game. I've played both soccer and football. I love football and only played soccer becasue my mom said I was too small and would be killed :p. I played soccer form pre-school until 4th grade then in 5th grade I started playing football until I was done with school. I almost played in college but was too assed to. IMO American football > all other sports but that;s me :p

lordblazer

02-09-2005, 06:33 AM

The only reason I played soccer was because a lot of my friends who are hispanic.Showed me some tricks and I wanted to learn how to do them.So I joined the schols indoor soccer team.they kick hard and the players ltierally try to kick each other like idiots.But its fun and tiring.Never play indoor soccer.Aytleast in american football it teaches you to get tough the world isn' gonna slow down for you.
IMO Jim Thorpe still remains the best athelete to have ever lived.

escobert

02-09-2005, 06:46 AM

.Aytleast in american football it teaches you to get tough the world isn' gonna slow down for you.
In my 4 years of high school football I think I learned more of being a man and a true gentalmen then anything. Yes we learned how to catch, tackle, carry a ball and all that good stuff but, we also learned about family and how you always have someone there for you. We learned about pride, and about sportsmanship. If you say that theres more emotion in soccor then in football then you've never played American football. I've seen some of the stongest toughest guy cry after we lost a big game to a rival town. I mean we put everythin into it and to have it all taken away with 1 game.

In highschool football atleast up here in the NE we only play 9 regular season games then playoffs. SO really if you loose 3 games you may not make it the playoffs and will be dropped down to a lower division.

I've had so many friggin concussion that if I get one more I won;t be able to anything that could even remotly hurt my head(excluding drivin a car ect.) and everyone of those cuncussions was form football. Yeah we wear pads but we still get beat to hell every game.

Doc Sark

02-09-2005, 12:41 PM

If you say that theres more emotion in soccor then in football then you've never played American football.

This is the most circular debate ever.

Obviously to you theres going to be more emotion in American Football but to Europeans and South Americans there is far far more emotion in playing football. If you go to Brazil, its part of their national culture, they live and breathe football, its intertwined with their history and the progress of their national team hinges the mood of the entire nation. There isn't a single other sport in the world that has that effect on an entire country like soccer does on Brazil. If you don't believe me then ask a Brazillian what the greatest disaster in their history is and see what they say.

The Germans have an infatuation with NFL Europe. They're the only country that has managed to like it. It's no coincidence that they've been long thought of to be the smartest country in Europe.

I turned the TV onto Fox Sports World today, and there was a soccer game on. One of the most boring things ever. WHY do they just randomly kick the ball out of bounds FOR NO REASON? The players just do random things, like kicking it directly at an opposing player. It's just a horrible sport. ;_;

Well you don't understand football. I rarely see the ball kicked out of play for no reason, there is always a reason. To clear the lines, to allow treatment for injured player, to give the defence a breather etc, they don't just go "oooh I fancy giving the other team a throw-in." I rarely see the ball kicked at an opposing player unless out of frustration, that is called a foul, every sport has them, some are tactical fouls, some are petulant, silly fouls that wind a player up in trouble. And don't even try and tell me that NFL Europe is more popular in Germany than Football is, becuase you would be very very wrong.

yeah and I get sickl of seeeing them lay on the ground for 3 hours when they get puched over. In American football most of the time the players breakbones or are seriously hurt when they lay on the ground. Most get up and you don't hear about them being hurt until efter the game.

Although this is clearly an exaggeration, I can see your point. A lot of players in football play act to try and make the referee penalise the opposition. Diving and gamesmanship are plague on the International game and need to be stamped out. However, in general footballers are not all wooses who lie down every time they take a knock. I watched Terry Butcher play the entire 90 minutes with a head wound that caused him to lose over a pint of blood, I watched Paul Ince captain England into the 1998 world cup with a broken ankle, there was the famous case of the welsh goalkeeper in the 1950 World Cup who played with a broken spine and many other examples of injuries being overcome in the face of adversity. Football is a wonderful game, at the end of the day, if it wasn't, it wouldn't be the worlds most popular sport.

Polaris

02-09-2005, 01:19 PM

VIVA PORTUGAL!

Apoiado!

Soccer... who-oh I'm not gonna die...

tomamar04

02-09-2005, 02:55 PM

Yup, Doc Sark pretty much summed it all up. In Germany, there are probably 10,000 football fans for every American football fan, and when England march in to Villa Park tonight, to face Holland, I know that when the anthems start playing, I'll feel a sense of pride.

I think the best example of how passionate some fans can get is the 1994 world cup, some Colombians shot one of their players who scored an own goal.

edczxcvbnm

02-09-2005, 03:21 PM

I don't find a bunch of guys running up and down a court doing nothing BUT scoring very stimulating.

You say that about basketball but I say this about soccer.

I don't find a bunch of guys running up and down a field doing nothing very stimulating.

Doc Sark

02-09-2005, 04:01 PM

Oh for goodness sake....

You say that about basketball but I say this about soccer.

I don't find a bunch of guys running up and down a field doing nothing very stimulating.

I know this, I accept this, but some people aren't getting past this. i was using that statement to illustrate my point about all sport being repetetive to some degree, not to disrespect basketball which I acknowledge as a sport that involves a high degree of skill and athleticism.

And they're not doing nothing. You just don't understand football. Each player has his own role...my god its the same in practically every team sport.

I think the best example of how passionate some fans can get is the 1994 world cup, some Colombians shot one of their players who scored an own goal.

I don't think that Drug Lords shooting Escobar because they lost a significant amount of money when he scored an own goal against the USA to put Colombia out amounts to passion as musch as it amounts to greed and illustrates how dangerous a country Colombia is. I'm sure you can think of better examples of passion regarding football tomamar, like the sound of the Japanese fans every time Japan got out of their own half in the 2002 World Cup.

Shoden

02-09-2005, 04:39 PM

well i find it easy that doesnt mean its easy at all ive never been brilliant at b ball or football but i still try but im a lot better at b ball but its a boring sport compared to football which im usually hoyed in defence or goal when im capable of scoring. which is rare but when i do i usually score more than 1.
all sports have differences and similiarities and difficulty levels that differ for each person i find b ball easy but it doesnt mean im going to be in the NBA does it. im out of football for a wholw fortnight after the injuries in my left foot and right leg.

tomamar04

02-10-2005, 07:47 AM

Oh sorry, I didn't realise that it was Colombian drug lords who had a bet, I must be misinformed :confused: .

02-10-2005, 11:43 AM

Seen as some people don't seem to get the point i'm going add to what Doc said.

All sports are repetative. They all invole doing the samething over and over again in order to achive something.

Football, NFL, Basketball, Hockey, Golf, Tennis, Rugby, Cricket, any other sport or activity you can think of. They all invole people doing the same thing over and over again.

Some of you complain about the lack of scoring in football make's it boring. On the other hand scoring in Basketball happens every few second's. Which to someone else is boring/repetative.

To give another example. I like Baseball, but I know it's repetative. Some game's have hardly any scoring some have a lot. On the other hand I can't stand Cricket, it has more scoring that Baseball, but it dosn't make it more fun to watch. It's not about the score it's about the game. The up's and down's you go through whilst watching or playing.

Sport isn't about how often a point/goal is scored it's about the passion, excitment and tension depending on the situation.