When Soccer meets American Football.

[Frozzy]

And Handmelon

[yavoon]

they need to score more goals in soccer or america will just watch the worldcup every 4 years=[. we have basketball and football both are superior spectator sports so the best soccer can do is catch up to hockey. which also is more exciting to watch.

if u like soccer u'll like watching soccer. like golf/sailing/motorcycle racing/etc... but basketball and football are real spectator sports

[FredLC]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui WOW... better than the 70 team?! That must have been a sight to see then .

Well, History is cruel to those who loose, and they lost that crucial semi-final to Italy.

A honest victory for the Azurra, if you ask me. All the goals they made were legit; and if in fact there was a penalty kick for Brazil that was ignored (the italian guy actually thorn Zico's shirt, and the referee acted as if he had faked it ), there was also a legal goal for Italy that the referee didn't validate.

However, it was honest but not fair. I've seen that game many times (all sport channels use to replay old WC games here in Brazil when the next WC is near), and I can honestly say, Brazil kicked ass. It played much better than Italy, and the lost was a fatality of destiny. I use to joke with friends that if that Brazil and that Italy had played 40 times in a row, Brazil would have won 39 times and had lost only that game.

Anyway, it's all in the past, so let's focus on what that team could do. All players - no exception - were masters at dribble. If defenders had to face them one on one, they were in real trouble, because those frontman would win an unbelievable percentage of the disputes.

Also, very rarely a player would touch the ball twice. They would do mostly one-touch passes, keep the ball running one side to the other, and the adversaries running after it like crazy, untill they were too tired to even walk. An everlasting "Olé", as we like to put it.

Even the first line of defenders - and let alone the offensive mid-field -were great at passing, even long aereal passes. So, the foes never knew if we were to strike with a series of short passes or a surprise ball sent in the back of the defender for a sudden attack.

Last but not least, there were at least four players who were masters with free kicks. Zico, specially, was extraordinary. People say that he used to place a shirt in the top corner of the goal to use as target when he was training, and sometimes he, shooting from twice the distance of the goal area, have managed to hit it up to 10 times in a row.

Really, it was an honest defeat, but an highly unfair one. If we had one generation that really deserved being world champions, it was that one. Those guys really kicked ass.

Regards .

[FredLC]

Originally posted by yavoon
they need to score more goals in soccer or america will just watch the worldcup every 4 years=[. we have basketball and football both are superior spectator sports so the best soccer can do is catch up to hockey. which also is more exciting to watch.

if u like soccer u'll like watching soccer. like golf/sailing/motorcycle racing/etc... but basketball and football are real spectator sports

Of course it's a matter of taste, but the point is that the fun of the sport is not only in scoring. It's also in a great dribble and in an outstanding pass. When you see someone use the back of his foot to make the ball goes below the adversarie's legs, and runs away as he looses balance and falls, that's a lot of fun.

Also, I like that there aren't that many goals. It makes each goal a special moment, something to wait for and remember, true highlights in the game.

Regards .

[Drogue]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

Look at Rugby and Rugby League. No pads and these guys don't stop for "rests".

Yeah, but they also don't have 350 pound guys that can run faster than you or I can .

Have you never heard of Jonah Lomu? He's about 20-22 stone (280-308 pounds) and he runs a hundred in under 11 seconds. Or Jason Robinson who is a lot smaller (still built like a brick outhouse though) and runs a hundred in 10.6 This without pads, without breaks, and without being able to pass forward, meaning you can't just sneak up to the touchdown area and catch the ball.

Why some people seem to place these two sports in competition with one another, and argue about which is better, is beyond me.

True, they are both good. American Football is watched by millions in the US, Soccer by millions outside the US. I'd love to play American Football, but we don't have any teams around here

[Az]

Both sports are great, both are fun to watch, and both demand lots of athletic capability.

The name "Football" should really belong to European football. I don't mind "Soccer", but it feels weird, and I have no idea what it means.

[yavoon]

Originally posted by FredLC


Of course it's a matter of taste, but the point is that the fun of the sport is not only in scoring. It's also in a great dribble and in an outstanding pass. When you see someone use the back of his foot to make the ball goes below the adversarie's legs, and runs away as he looses balance and falls, that's a lot of fun.

Also, I like that there aren't that many goals. It makes each goal a special moment, something to wait for and remember, true highlights in the game.

Regards .

my pt is the casual fan will enjoy football/basketball the most. both have the most amts of "highlights." both are fast moving. u can go an entire game in soccer w/ only 3-4 important(to a novice) things happening. and thats just not enuff.

[Drogue]

Well it is better for many. Basketball is just people dribbling up and scoring, and then dribbling back and scoring. Its too many, there is nothing special in it, except the *very* few times that someone scores from behind halfway, for example. Each goal in football is an event, and millions all around the world love it. I think the casual fan will think that American Football is all stop and start, almost like a more exiting version of cricket, and basketball is just going up and down and scoring, with a miss being an event that could decide a match, not a piece of brilliant skill. But this is all speculation. Millions watch each. Basketball mostly confined to the US, football mostly to everywhere but the US.

[lightblue]

To be honest I have to say that even as a basketball (or former now, rowing takes too much time) player myself, basketball is not the greatest spectator sport. Yes there's some spectacular actions (2-3 a game), but a lot of it ( about 3 quarters worth) is just fairly dull and meaningless.

As for American Football, it'd be better in my opinion if the breaks between plays wasn't that long. That and cut the commercial breaks, and just lengthen the break between halves to accomodate the commercials.

Soccer is more fun to watch (depending on the teams) as because of the low scoring the game is always on knife edge. One mistake, or one moment of brilliance, can cost you the game. That and it is a better drinking game in the pub.

[reds4ever]

Originally posted by FredLC


Of course it's a matter of taste, but the point is that the fun of the sport is not only in scoring. It's also in a great dribble and in an outstanding pass. When you see someone use the back of his foot to make the ball goes below the adversarie's legs, and runs away as he looses balance and falls, that's a lot of fun.

Also, I like that there aren't that many goals. It makes each goal a special moment, something to wait for and remember, true highlights in the game.

Regards .

If thats the sort of opinion that FOOTBALL is up against in America it may as well either give up or make the goals bigger and turn the halves into quaters.

American Football isn't a bad game I watch the NFL quite a lot, but as for basketball (or mens netball as it's known in the UK) I refuse to take any sport seriously where a team can win a game 134-135 simply by scoring last!

[yavoon]

Originally posted by Drogue
Well it is better for many. Basketball is just people dribbling up and scoring, and then dribbling back and scoring. Its too many, there is nothing special in it, except the *very* few times that someone scores from behind halfway, for example. Each goal in football is an event, and millions all around the world love it. I think the casual fan will think that American Football is all stop and start, almost like a more exiting version of cricket, and basketball is just going up and down and scoring, with a miss being an event that could decide a match, not a piece of brilliant skill. But this is all speculation. Millions watch each. Basketball mostly confined to the US, football mostly to everywhere but the US.

u can disagree w/ me, but no need to be so defensive. basketball actually can be picked up very quickly from a spectator's viewpoint cuz momentum is instantly translated into the score. 7-2 runs, 19-0 runs, 10 pts down, 2 pts up. all easy for a novice to interpret and get into throughout the game.

lots of ppl watch soccer and will continue to, but america is the most diverse sports culture and the concept of what casual spectators watch is a big deal here(money wise). lots of our sports have changed to be more casual spectator friendly. baseball lowered its mound, football tightened up calls on defense, etc. and now hockey is under a similar pressure.

in europe sports seem to be more sacred and changing them constitutes some sort of rewriting of the bible. so obviously u r not use to the competition

[FredLC]

Originally posted by yavoon
in europe sports seem to be more sacred and changing them constitutes some sort of rewriting of the bible. so obviously u r not use to the competition

I can agree with this. There are some changes I'd like to see being done in soccer, at least for attempting.

1 - Like, limit the number of individual fouls - if a player makes five, he's out of the match, and have to be replaced.

2 - Cut that silly limitation for substitutions - let the coach manage the team freely, it will make the game far more strategical, as the coachs will be able to set teams to respond for specific in-game situations.

3 - Finally, diminish the halfs to 35 minutes and introduce a clock that stops when there is a foul or the ball goes out.

FIFA, however, is unwilling to experiment even things far less invasive than those...

[yavoon]

Originally posted by FredLC


I can agree with this. There are some changes I'd like to see being done in soccer, at least for attempting.

1 - Like, limit the number of individual fouls - if a player makes five, he's out of the match, and have to be replaced.

2 - Cut that silly limitation for substitutions - let the coach manage the team freely, it will make the game far more strategical, as the coachs will be able to set teams to respond for specific in-game situations.

3 - Finally, diminish the halfs to 35 minutes and introduce a clock that stops when there is a foul or the ball goes out.

FIFA, however, is unwilling to experiment even things far less invasive than those...

offsides kills so many goals in soccer its ridiculous. so much excitement is raped by the offsides penalty. I don't know enough about soccer to suggest how to change it. but its pretty easy to see that its a huge culprit.

and yah free substitutions! GOGO

[Drogue]

yavoon: I was not trying to be defensive, merely putting the other view accross. I am sorry if it caused offence, it was not intended to. I just found it a bit weird that someone was saying what would appeal more to the spectator. IIRC more watch Soccer, since it is watched in many countries.

It is interesting that people from the US seem to think that they're games are better, like your arguing with the competition thing. Yes there is big money if sport in the US, and it is the most diverse single nation in tersm of sport. But the US compared to the rest of the world together, the rest of the world has more in all but advertising and commercialism. I like Basketball, but find it a bit tedios watching a whole game, and am not fond of the idea of having a series of 7 games between two teams to decide the winner. Just my opinions though.

[reds4ever]

FIFA have been bending over backwards to relax the offside rule the last 5 or so years, short of scrapping it theres not a lot else the can do.
IMHO more subs = less skill, the game will be played faster because players know they can go off for a rest after running around like headless chickens for 10 minutes