Soccer really sucks, doesn't it?

[Ming]

Most average viewers knew where to find it.

Wrong. The average viewer knows the Olympics are on NBC, and that's about it.

No... only the morons thought it was only on NBC.

But again, you are just trying to make crap up to support your moronic views.
First, the MSNBC HD channel had been rolled out prior to the olymics. If you had digital cable or satalite HD, you got the game in HD. However, you probably watched the game on the non HD channel because you are an idiot.

Second, NBC had excellent reasons for not showing the game on the flagship channel. The olympics is one of only three sporting events where woman views out number men. They were playing to their audience and sponsors. They easily won the nightly ratings with ice dancing, and still provided live coverage of the hockey game, which also did well on MSNBC. They would have lost the majority of the woman's viewers by not broadcasting the ice dancing.

Plus, unlike the medal rounds where very little action was occuring opposite of them, the early rounds of the hockey had many other events running opposite of them, many for medals. Can you just imagine how viewers would have reacted if they had left the game to show other action occuring at the event.
They could do so with the ice dancing, and provide coverage of all the other events during prime time.
Committing a solid three hour block to Hockey was NOT the smart move on NBC's part.

There was more live hockey shown this year than past years thanks to the multiple outlets. Hockey fans got more live action than ever before... and any of them that were not idiots, knew where to find it.

We all know that you have a hard time with real facts and the reality of life, so thanks again for proving just how stupid you are with every post.

[Drake Tungsten]

You must be really good at your job with the penetrating insight you seem to have into the behavior of the average American TV viewer.

If you had digital cable or satalite HD, you got the game in HD.

This is clearly wrong, btw. Also, "satellite".

[Al B. Sure!]

I've noticed Ming can't stop concluding his reasonable arguments with ad hominem insults. I've seen him do it to Lancer, to Ben, and now to Drake.

[Drake Tungsten]

He also whines incessantly about how mean and insult-laden my posts are, even though I'm extremely tame compared to him.

[Ming]

He also whines incessantly about how mean and insult-laden my posts are, even though I'm extremely tame compared to him.

Coming from an insult asshat like you, that's funny.
Your first reaction to somebody that disagrees with you is to insult them... but then you act like a baby when you get insulted back. Deal with it! Be a MAN!

As far as HD...

Let's also not forget that the game wasn't available in HD in much of the country due to NBC's moronic decision to show it on MSNBC.

It was... yes some cable companies didn't provide it, but it was available to much of the country, so again, you are wrong as usual.

[Drake Tungsten]

It was... yes some cable companies didn't provide it

DirecTV also didn't show it in HD, so your claim was clearly wrong.

[Ming]

The game was broadcast in HD. If the providers didn't show it, it was their problem. NBC and MSNBC's numbers showed it was indeed broadcast to "much" of the country. So your claim that it wasn't is clearly wrong. I watched it in HD, but then again, maybe next time, you should try to find the HD channel instead of spending all your time scrolling through 300 + channels to find it being broadcast in non HD.

[Cort Haus]

No thoughts on the sprinter/marathon runner comparison and how it relates to the different athletic capabilities of American football and soccer players or has this thread turned into a hockey sucks thread?

Mobius covered it off earlier - as a (rare) British person who has played American Football.

As I said, pure athleticism - as in jumping higher (Basketball, High Jump) or charging like a rhino into another player (American Football) is all very well in the context of disciplines designed to reward such capacities, but Football is not like that. There is a physical element, but it is not intended to be about pure athleticism, fine an objective as that is.

Football requires stamina (10k+ of running), less strength than many sports, than but is also about skill, technique, control, touch, timing, awareness, reactions, rhythm, fluidity, anticipation, spontaneity, creativity - many of which are attributes shared with other sports from tennis to cricket to hockey and even to an extent motor racing.

Football is sometimes known as 'the beautiful game'. It isn't always beautiful, and we also have a phrase 'winning ugly'. Without getting too bogged down in detail there are two broad approaches to football - 'passing and movement' , where the aim is simply to find some space, receive the ball, identify a team-mate who has also found some space and pass it to him. Repeat. Another is to defend in depth (with lots of players) and 'hoof it up to the big lad up front' while clattering opponents and hoping you don't get sent off for foul play.

Which of these strategies to adopt depends on the ability of the team - and the ugly one is the easier if you have more strength than skill. The beautiful one is the hardest, but teams that can do it (my club team is almost religiously devoted to it - see the clips above) produce the most entertaining football for the spectators. Whether it gets you trophies is another matter, and this is a cause for considerable debate amongst fans, but for many of us, it is a part of what makes our sport so fascinating.

As, I think, Asher alluded to earlier, cultural heritage plays a huge part, and the social/cultural role of football is massive in Britain. Its tradition of being a working-class sport is generally a matter of pride rather than shame, with its basic equipment of a ball plus jumpers-for-goalposts making it accessible for all. Our ancestors were shooting at the goal while yours were still shooting Indians.

[Drake Tungsten]

you should try to find the HD channel

There was no HD channel on DirecTV, despite your claims that "satalite" customers could watch the game in HD. Comcast customers in your own city also weren't able to watch the game in HD.

[Cort Haus]

To be fair, some of our ancestors were shooting Indians too, but different Indians.

[Asher]

[Drake Tungsten]

Our ancestors were shooting at the goal while yours were still shooting Indians.

The FA first met in 1863. The first college "football" game in America (Rutgers vs. Princeton) was in 1869. Big difference.

[Asher]

Our ancestors were shooting at the goal while yours were still shooting Indians.

The FA first met in 1863. The first college "football" game in America (Rutgers vs. Princeton) was in 1869. Big difference.

Ice hockey pre-dates both?

Dates back to at least 1810 in a quasi-modern form (Scottish shinty + field hockey, on ice). Was formerly referred to as hockey in documents dating back to 1825.

First organized INDOOR game was 1875 though.

[Drake Tungsten]

Ice hockey pre-dates both?

Don't know. "Football" in some form was played long before the 1860s in both England and America; I chose 1863 and 1869 as quasi-official dates where the sport in each country moved from a highly variable sport played with different rules from place to place to a more regulated endeavor. I don't know enough about the history of ice hockey to know when that change happened for that sport, but it could very well be before the same happened in football.

[Al B. Sure!]

Cort Haus:

Is 'passing and movement' in soccer different from passing in basketball?