Soccer really sucks, doesn't it?

[Al B. Sure!]

Sports Science compared the force generated by rugby and football players:



Rugby: 1596lbs of force
Football: 4807lbs of force

Now, before you say the rugby guys were amateurs, the football representative, Quentin Jammer is a little guy by football standards at 6' 204lbs. He's a cornerback, the smallest guys on the field. I suspect that rugby tackler weighs quite a bit more.

(I also don't know why the tested them differently but I don't imagine it had any bearing on the amount of force projected)

Nevertheless, as they note, while individual football hits are far harder than in rugby, rugby involves more full hitting than football. Also, the pads reduce the risk of injury by spreading the force through the body.

[Drake Tungsten]

Jammer played for Texas, so he certainly isn't the toughest football player they could've found.

[Al B. Sure!]

Yeah I don't even get the logic in picking a cornerback to begin with, let alone Quentin Jammer who I've never thought of as being particularly hard-hitting.

Now, a Ray Lewis or a Rodney Harrison... that would've been something.

[Drake Tungsten]

Like Ray Lewis versus some rugby player is a fair comparison. They aren't even the same species.

[Al B. Sure!]

exactly.

[Asher]

FACT: BASKETBALL IOS THE WORST AMERICAN SPORT

You are misinformed, my transvestite Argintinian friend

[C0ckney]

nah basketball is the best of a bad bunch, it's fast paced and actually quite entertaining to watch. ice hockey isn't terrible either, but it's too niche. baseball is ****, it's just rounders (a game played by schoolgirls in england) but slower and less fun. american football is the worst of all, a bunch of fat knobheads in body armour (body armour, for f*ck's sake), all running into each other for no apparent reason. stop. start. stop. start. stop. commercial break. f*ck off. what a steaming pile of turd.

tuber, there have been a few experiments over the years to play football without the offside rule, but they all end in farce with players just hanging around the goal. the offside rule is easy to explain, but if you don't understand why it's there, then all i can suggest is that you watch more football and think about it a little.

ask yourselves this, why do you think football is the most popular game on the planet, and american sports are popular in err...america. there's a reason for it.

[Elok]

No, there's no "reason" for it--it's simply a cultural variation, like using bidets vs. toilet paper. Its greater spread is, in all likelihood, an historical accident. I haven't read up on it, but I'm going to guess 19th-century colonialism played a major role.

[Tuberski]

I understand why it is there, that is why I said like hockey. Can't go past the top of the penalty box until the ball does. Which is the same thing they do now WRT the defenders.

As far as American football, I suggest you just don't understand the game. I suggest you watch it more to figure out why they are "running into each other for no apparent reason."

Think of soccer as an RTS game. Think of American football as a TBS game.

For the record, I like watching the World Cup, but the MLS here seems to be lacking something, maybe vuvuzelas.

ACK!

[Barnabas]

FACT: BASKETBALL IOS THE WORST AMERICAN SPORT

You are misinformed, my transvestite Argintinian friend

How could baseball be better than basketball?

Basketball is the only american sport liked outside the USA

[Tuberski]

Baseball is played all over Central and South America as well as Japan. 27.7% of MLB players were born outside of the USA.

ACK!

[a.kitman]

iam shocked that there are americans that doesnt get football. shocked!!

albert the reason football players cant be as strong as your american version is they need alot more stamina.
if you have never seen a match live you might not understand just how much movement there is going on all the time.

i will however agree that the diving is getting out of hand. thats what we get for putting a wannabe french ****** incharge whit a french ******.

[C0ckney]

No, there's no "reason" for it--it's simply a cultural variation, like using bidets vs. toilet paper. Its greater spread is, in all likelihood, an historical accident. I haven't read up on it, but I'm going to guess 19th-century colonialism played a major role.

the spread of football certainly had something to do with colonialism, but not as much as you might think. it's got more to with the movement of people generally. for example in south america, it was brought here by british railway workers, sailors and traders. many clubs in south america have retained the english names given to them by their founders.

i'm afraid i don't buy into the rest of your argument. football appeals to people across the world, from an extremely diverse range of cultures. it has an instant appeal, people everywhere saw the game, liked it and started playing it. in many places it's a national obsession. there's a reason for that, and there's a reason why no other sport has replaced it.

[Cort Haus]

I do wonder why we bother re-hashing the same arguments in the same trash-talking troll-thread every four years.

Presumably it's the same reason we re-hash the same arguments in the same trash-talking troll-threads about everything else.

[C0ckney]

tuber, that's the problem, american football is a strategy game, and as a result it's dull to watch. would you want to watch someone else play civ? while of course there are tactics in football (and they are important), there's also a lot of flair and skill and moments of individual brilliance. put the two together and it's compelling viewing.

also, i don't know about the rest of south america, but i've not heard anything about baseball in brasil. no one i've met has mentioned it, no posters or billboards, nothing in the newspapers, or on the TV. i've heard more about rugby, which i didn't even know they played here!