wyly Posted June 20, 2010 Report Posted June 20, 2010 I don't think the popularity of something says anything about the sophistication required to enjoy it. I used to play soccer, so I understand it. I played soccer better than I ever did hockey. Nonetheless, I still prefer hockey as a sport. just my experience precious few canadians understand football even though they claim to have played it....I played hockey as well I don't claim I to know it as well as think you know football... Quote “Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives.”- John Stuart Mill
SF/PF Posted June 21, 2010 Report Posted June 21, 2010 (edited) No, seriously. What's this about red and yellow flags? WTF? What kind of sport depends on referee flags - rather than basic competition? And what kind of sport allows players to feint injury? I think the yellow and red cards are one of the best ways to control the flow and discipline in a sport. Referees have the option of calling for a simple free kick for minor infractions that have a small effect on the game, yellow cards for infractions that are more serious, and red cards for particularly egregious offences. Relatively minor offences typically have little impact on the outcome, and particularly bad offences really punish the perpetrator's team. On allowing players to feign injury... I can't think of a sport that doesn't permit players to get away with that. Perhaps you've noticed the growing trend in Hockey where players throw themselves to the ice and frantically clutch at their face anytime an opponents stick comes within 2 feets of their heads? Often times the stick doesn't even hit them, yet they claw at their face trying to draw that extra 2 minute penalty.. Or the long time trend in cfl/nfl of taking a knee and faking an injury to give your team more time to set up for the next play. Its a problem in all sports. The solution is to start issuing penalties/cards/whatever for unsporstmanlike conduct. And, for a spectator, when someone tries to score a goal, it's exciting. Well, in European football, how many shots on goal are there? And in hockey, how many? I've long suspected that many sports fans don't especially like the sport, so much as they like the goals. The trap that several NHL teams played for a few years was one of the best examples of tactical play and discipline in the sport of hockey.. and it was almost universally hated because it reduced the number of goals. Edited June 21, 2010 by SF/PF Quote Your political compass Economic Left/Right: -4.88 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -6.15
SF/PF Posted June 21, 2010 Report Posted June 21, 2010 they're not really...the big teams are dominating their games but coming up against stifling defending, teams that refuse to do anything but defend and are playing for a 0-0 scoreline...the only big country playing like crap is France but then they've reached the end of an era and have to rebuild...England is strong but getting frustrated and not handling it well...score lines don't reflect the difference in quality between the top ten and all the rest... The key to beating those stifling defenses that stack the box with defenders is to return to meat and potatos football: crosses into the centre and long pitches into the box. The giants of the sport seem determined to strive for pretty goals, and its killing them. Quote Your political compass Economic Left/Right: -4.88 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -6.15
wyly Posted June 21, 2010 Report Posted June 21, 2010 The key to beating those stifling defenses that stack the box with defenders is to return to meat and potatos football: crosses into the centre and long pitches into the box. that's part of the problem defending has evolved to the point where those long balls are becoming rare,...watch the better defending sides they'll take away the passing/crossing option with two men squeezing the man on the ball, the option rarely exists...that plus loading the box with tall aggressive defenders to clear any balls that do get through...The giants of the sport seem determined to strive for pretty goals, and its killing them.really when was the last time a side other than one of the giants won the world cup?...Uraguay and Hungary are the only two and even they were giants back then... Quote “Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives.”- John Stuart Mill
wyly Posted June 21, 2010 Report Posted June 21, 2010 Or the long time trend in cfl/nfl of taking a knee and faking an injury to give your team more time to set up for the next play. Its a problem in all sports. The solution is to start issuing penalties/cards/whatever for unsporstmanlike conduct. the problem is determining if a injury is real or not, sometimes seemingly little contact does result is severe injury...a finger in the eye will stop you dead in you tracks...I was at a national championship where a ref carded a player for faking injury, the player was subbed off the medical people pulled down his sock to found two holes punched right through his shin guard from the opponents cleats, he had a fractured leg...I've long suspected that many sports fans don't especially like the sport, so much as they like the goals. The trap that several NHL teams played for a few years was one of the best examples of tactical play and discipline in the sport of hockey.. and it was almost universally hated because it reduced the number of goals.I agree these people don't really understand the sport they only think they do...if goals where the all important thing Basketball or cricket would be the only sports watched...then the same types will rave about a no hitter in baseball....it's how the game is played that matters, the creativity, the technical skills, the tactical scheming, the goal is just the climax, you can have all that without a goal being scored...the fair weather sports fans just don't get that part because they don't know sports as well as they think they do... Quote “Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives.”- John Stuart Mill
SF/PF Posted June 21, 2010 Report Posted June 21, 2010 that's part of the problem defending has evolved to the point where those long balls are becoming rare,...watch the better defending sides they'll take away the passing/crossing option with two men squeezing the man on the ball, the option rarely exists...that plus loading the box with tall aggressive defenders to clear any balls that do get through... Fast crosses and switches can be used to relieve pressure on the ball carrier and open up the field a bit. Also, some of the teams are simply using the wrong configuration when trying to crack the defence of their opponents. For example, Italy chose to attack New Zealand's 3-4-3 with only 2 strikers, when its pretty widely known that a 3 defender system is susceptible to being spread by 3 attackers. really when was the last time a side other than one of the giants won the world cup?...Uraguay and Hungary are the only two and even they were giants back then... I don't expect the underdogs to have much success beyond the round robin. The high skill sides that can adapt to a stifling defence will make short work of the underdogs in the round of 16 and beyond. The giants that can't adapt will be going home. Quote Your political compass Economic Left/Right: -4.88 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -6.15
wyly Posted June 21, 2010 Report Posted June 21, 2010 Fast crosses and switches can be used to relieve pressure on the ball carrier and open up the field a bit. Also, some of the teams are simply using the wrong configuration when trying to crack the defence of their opponents. For example, Italy chose to attack New Zealand's 3-4-3 with only 2 strikers, when its pretty widely known that a 3 defender system is susceptible to being spread by 3 attackers. it's not a static system...netherlands on paper lines up as a one striker system but that's not how it works out on the field, there two attacking half's that overlap on the wings, so there are three attackers when in possession of the ball...against Japan it R vd Vaart and Kuyt were the wing/halves and V Persie as the lone striker, even so with three actual attackers getting a ball crossed in against the Japanese was extremely difficult the defenders shut down the crossing option...and when it was crossed in more often than not it Tulio cleared it out...Netherlands finally beat the defenders playing the ball on the ground through the middle... I don't expect the underdogs to have much success beyond the round robin. The high skill sides that can adapt to a stifling defence will make short work of the underdogs in the round of 16 and beyond. The giants that can't adapt will be going home.the group stages allow the little teams to play their defensive games looking for the single point, the knockout stages eliminate any that get through to that stage.. Quote “Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives.”- John Stuart Mill
August1991 Posted June 21, 2010 Report Posted June 21, 2010 (edited) On allowing players to feign injury... I can't think of a sport that doesn't permit players to get away with that.SF/PF, thanks for that correction. As soon as I typed it, I suspected that "feint" was not a verb.I wonder how often football dweebs go into hockey threads and make stupid comments about there being too many shots on goal or too many fights or other such nonsense?Football dweeb? I'm a sports dweeb. Nevertheless, I can wade in. IMHO, a good sports match is based on good drama: conflict and an unknown outcome. Nothing provides excitement like a good scoring chance missed.As I watched a few World Cup football/soccer matches, this was obvious to me - yet the scoring chances were so few. In comparison, there are so many more in (ice) hockey. (And compared to basketball, hockey is so much faster. There's more conflict.) I'm sorry but to my uninformed eye, soccer/football is almost as boring as golf or bowling (watching paint dry is admittedly more boring). Call it the "world game" if you want but to me, the only reason soccer/football is popular around the world is because most (poor) people in the world don't have access to large sheets of ice. If many people in the world don't have access to a sit-down flush water toilet in private, is that reason for me to change my habits? This is the World Cup where each team is representing their country and each team is made up of people from their country (although some strange rules and strange things happen based on this father and that mother).And I suspect that those rules will become more arcane in the future.But msj, you missed my point. I prefer a society where millions of people named Tremblay cheer on someone named Halak. I prefer a city (Montreal) where car windows have flags from many different countries as opposed to a city (Frankfurt) where the car windows only have one flag. Most of all, I prefer a city where the flags are for a sports team - not a country. And where the sports team has players from all over the world, from many different countries. Edited June 21, 2010 by August1991 Quote
msj Posted June 21, 2010 Report Posted June 21, 2010 Football dweeb? I'm a sports dweeb. Nevertheless, I can wade in. IMHO, a good sports match is based on good drama: conflict and an unknown outcome. Nothing provides excitement like a good scoring chance missed. Sure, I guess... but that's the point - the game is different and you don't like it. Others do like it. BFD. Don't watch it if you don't like it. As I watched a few World Cup football/soccer matches, this was obvious to me - yet the scoring chances were so few. In comparison, there are so many more in (ice) hockey. (And compared to basketball, hockey is so much faster. There's more conflict.) I'm sorry but to my uninformed eye, soccer/football is almost as boring as golf or bowling (watching paint dry is admittedly more boring). Call it the "world game" if you want but to me, the only reason soccer/football is popular around the world is because most (poor) people in the world don't have access to large sheets of ice. Honestly, you think that your opinion is so important that you have to share it with the rest of us about why football sux? If you don't like it then don't watch it. You don't see me coming on here presenting all my (subjective and stupid/silly) reasons why I don't like hockey, do you? No, of course not. Mom taught me a few lessons and I'm too grown up for that thing. But nooooo, you gotta come to a forum and put forth why football sux because you're, well, such an important person with such an important opinion, I guess. But msj, you missed my point. I prefer a society where millions of people named Tremblay cheer on someone named Halak. I prefer a city (Montreal) where car windows have flags from many different countries as opposed to a city (Frankfurt) where the car windows only have one flag. Most of all, I prefer a city where the flags are for a sports team - not a country. And where the sports team has players from all over the world, from many different countries. I think you have missed the point of why it's called the World Cup. You know, it's kinda like the Olympics where people from their own countries compete for their countries. I know, I know, there isn't a scoring opportunity in the skeleton, or snowboarding, or running 100m in less than 10 seconds, or a marathon in 2 hours, so such games don't excite you. As a runner I won't waste your time on why the track events excite me because, well, really, who gives a fig? As for flying flags - I don't know. Never have been to Europe during the Champions Cup - maybe that's more comparable to whatever strange fan dream you prefer to dream about when it comes to Stanley Cup playoffs. I imagine that many Argentinians support Barcelona if only because of Messi - I know I do and I'm not even Argentinian. Does any of this count for points in your fan dream? A Canadian supports a Spanish team because an Argentinian plays on that team. That's heavy, dude! In all, I suppose that many fans support various teams based on various factors. Once again, BFD. --------------------------------------- Wyly and SF/PF have put forth some very good posts about football and I don't want you guys to think they aren't appreciated. They certainly are. It's just too bad that we gotta deal with trolls from time to time. Oh, I know, don't feed the trolls..... Quote If a believer demands that I, as a non-believer, observe his taboos in the public domain, he is not asking for my respect but for my submission. And that is incompatible with a secular democracy. Flemming Rose (Dutch journalist) My biggest takeaway from economics is that the past wasn't as good as you remember, the present isn't as bad as you think, and the future will be better than you anticipate. Morgan Housel http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2016/01/14/things-im-pretty-sure-about.aspx
wyly Posted June 21, 2010 Report Posted June 21, 2010 You know, it's kinda like the Olympics where people from their own countries compete for their countries. football is limited to under 23's...the World Cup is a bigger event than the Olympics and qualification/playoff process for it takes two years so FIFA wasn't about send it's best to the Olympics...As for flying flags - I don't know. club teams have their flags as well...Never have been to Europe during the Champions Cup - maybe that's more comparable to whatever strange fan dream you prefer to dream about when it comes to Stanley Cup playoffs. Football's equivalent to the Stanley Cup is the Champions league, qualification for it is done on the previous years placing unlike the Stanley Cup only the top teams from each league are invited to compete, the elimination begins in the beginning of each new season and runs to the very end of the season. I imagine that many Argentinians support Barcelona if only because of Messi - I know I do and I'm not even Argentinian. pick a favourite because you live there(or did), their style of play, a favourite player whatever...Does any of this count for points in your fan dream? A Canadian supports a Spanish team because an Argentinian plays on that team. That's heavy, dude!I do the same...Oh, I know, don't feed the trolls.....the ignore feature works fine for me Quote “Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives.”- John Stuart Mill
kimmy Posted June 22, 2010 Report Posted June 22, 2010 August contrasts Montreal hockey fans-- where Montrealers unite to cheer on a team of Anglos and Russians and Slovaks and Americans-- to the World Cup, where the English cheer on the English and Spaniards cheer on Spaniards and Italians cheer on Italians. August forgets that during the Olympics, Canadian hockey fans were cheering on Canadians. August forgets that when the World Cup is over, the English and Spaniards and Italians will go back home and cheer for their favorite teams which will, like the Montreal Canadians, have players from all over the globe. Club teams-- whether in soccer or hockey-- demonstrate merit hiring in action. If you're running an NHL franchise, your livelihood depends on winning. And when winning is what matters, it really doesn't matter if your goalie is French Canadian or Slovakian... it matters that he can win games. Soccer? Don't care to watch it. Just a personal preference. It's no doubt annoying to hear your favorite sport dissed by people who don't appreciate the finer points. However, it's also somewhat annoying to hear this idea that often circulates at World Cup time: that since the rest of the world loves soccer, Canadians must be somehow culturally deficient to not appreciate it. -k Quote (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ Friendly forum facilitator! ┬──┬◡ﾉ(° -°ﾉ)
SF/PF Posted June 22, 2010 Report Posted June 22, 2010 I'm sorry but to my uninformed eye, soccer/football is almost as boring as golf or bowling (watching paint dry is admittedly more boring). Call it the "world game" if you want but to me, the only reason soccer/football is popular around the world is because most (poor) people in the world don't have access to large sheets of ice. Except that even in countries with easy access to large sheets of ice, including some hockey powerhouses, soccer/football is just simply more popular. Look, its ok to not like soccer/football. But just say "I don't like soccer/football." instead of casting aspersions on the game. Quote Your political compass Economic Left/Right: -4.88 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -6.15
jefferiah Posted June 22, 2010 Report Posted June 22, 2010 Honestly, you think that your opinion is so important that you have to share it with the rest of us about why football sux? If you don't like it then don't watch it. This topic is in the more chit-chatty section of the board so I think you are all taking August too seriously. He does not seem to be pissed off, he is just making comments about the World Cup which is the topic here. It's hard to find a thread on this board where everyone agrees on everything. What do you expect? This is what forums are for, sharing your opinions on topics. If you don't like it...... Quote "Governing a great nation is like cooking a small fish - too much handling will spoil it." Lao Tzu
wyly Posted June 22, 2010 Report Posted June 22, 2010 Except that even in countries with easy access to large sheets of ice, including some hockey powerhouses, soccer/football is just simply more popular. Look, its ok to not like soccer/football. But just say "I don't like soccer/football." instead of casting aspersions on the game. total number of registered hockey players in the USA 2009,466,000...total number of registered football(soccer) players USA 18,000,000registered ice hockey players in Canada 500,000....number of registered Football players Canada over 800,000hockey isn't even the most popular sport in our country and we have no shortage of ice... it is the most popular game in the world, Cricket 2nd, basketball comes in 3rd... Quote “Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives.”- John Stuart Mill
msj Posted June 22, 2010 Report Posted June 22, 2010 If you don't like it...... ...then put the troll on ignore. Quote If a believer demands that I, as a non-believer, observe his taboos in the public domain, he is not asking for my respect but for my submission. And that is incompatible with a secular democracy. Flemming Rose (Dutch journalist) My biggest takeaway from economics is that the past wasn't as good as you remember, the present isn't as bad as you think, and the future will be better than you anticipate. Morgan Housel http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2016/01/14/things-im-pretty-sure-about.aspx
jefferiah Posted June 22, 2010 Report Posted June 22, 2010 (edited) registered ice hockey players in Canada 500,000....number of registered Football players Canada over 800,000hockey isn't even the most popular sport in our country and we have no shortage of ice... I was a soccer player. Does not mean the sport was more popular with me. It's cheap. 50 percent of Canadians identify themselves as hockey fans. Edited June 22, 2010 by jefferiah Quote "Governing a great nation is like cooking a small fish - too much handling will spoil it." Lao Tzu
jefferiah Posted June 22, 2010 Report Posted June 22, 2010 I'm sorry but to my uninformed eye, soccer/football is almost as boring as golf or bowling (watching paint dry is admittedly more boring). No vuvuzela's though. Nah I watch the world cup a bit. I really don't think it's that boring, I just enjoy hockey more. Quote "Governing a great nation is like cooking a small fish - too much handling will spoil it." Lao Tzu
wyly Posted June 22, 2010 Report Posted June 22, 2010 I was a soccer player. Does not mean the sport was more popular with me. It's cheap. 50 percent of Canadians identify themselves as hockey fans. I was a hockey player and that does not mean the sport was not more popular with me. I identify myself as a hockey fan too but that doesn't mean I prefer it over football... Quote “Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives.”- John Stuart Mill
jefferiah Posted June 22, 2010 Report Posted June 22, 2010 (edited) I was a hockey player and that does not mean the sport was not more popular with me. I identify myself as a hockey fan too but that doesn't mean I prefer it over football... No, but I think we both know which sport is more popular to Canadians. Not that popularity matters, Canadian or worldwide. August and I are simply smarter and better looking than everyone else and have much better tastes as well. Edited June 22, 2010 by jefferiah Quote "Governing a great nation is like cooking a small fish - too much handling will spoil it." Lao Tzu
wyly Posted June 22, 2010 Report Posted June 22, 2010 No, but I think we both know which sport is more popular to Canadians. Not that popularity matters, Canadian or worldwide. August and I are simply smarter and better looking than everyone else and have much better tastes as well. do we?...the Stanley cup final drew a TV audience of 4 million, one of the preliminary group matches of the WC drew an audience of 2.25 million and there was not a single Canadian involved in the match, Canada isn't even in the tournament, how many of those so called hockey mad canadians would watch a hockey game with no canadians involved or without a canadian team included in the tournament, I'd guess very few, most are fair weather fans who like my wife tune into the event rather than the game...hockey fans are living in a delusionary world, not that hockey isn't popular but theu're in denial on just how popular Football is in Canada... Quote “Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives.”- John Stuart Mill
Jack Weber Posted June 22, 2010 Report Posted June 22, 2010 do we?...the Stanley cup final drew a TV audience of 4 million, one of the preliminary group matches of the WC drew an audience of 2.25 million and there was not a single Canadian involved in the match, Canada isn't even in the tournament, how many of those so called hockey mad canadians would watch a hockey game with no canadians involved or without a canadian team included in the tournament, I'd guess very few, most are fair weather fans who like my wife tune into the event rather than the game...hockey fans are living in a delusionary world, not that hockey isn't popular but theu're in denial on just how popular Football is in Canada... Real football or "kickee ball"? Quote The beatings will continue until morale improves!!!
wyly Posted June 22, 2010 Report Posted June 22, 2010 Real football or "kickee ball"? ya real football with real athletes not the N american version with obese padded gorillas that suck on oxygen after every 2 second play ... Quote “Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives.”- John Stuart Mill
Jack Weber Posted June 22, 2010 Report Posted June 22, 2010 ya real football with real athletes not the N american version with obese padded gorillas that suck on oxygen after every 2 second play ... Love the Eurocentric arrrogance... Quote The beatings will continue until morale improves!!!
kimmy Posted June 22, 2010 Report Posted June 22, 2010 do we?...the Stanley cup final drew a TV audience of 4 million, one of the preliminary group matches of the WC drew an audience of 2.25 million and there was not a single Canadian involved in the match, Canada isn't even in the tournament, how many of those so called hockey mad canadians would watch a hockey game with no canadians involved or without a canadian team included in the tournament, I'd guess very few, most are fair weather fans who like my wife tune into the event rather than the game...hockey fans are living in a delusionary world, not that hockey isn't popular but theu're in denial on just how popular Football is in Canada... The Stanley Cup finals *averaged* over 4 million viewers, while the 2.275 million viewers for the England-USA World Cup game is the *highest ever* viewership for a preliminary round game. The other games have gathered 1.6m, 1.3m, 900k... How many Canadians watched the Olympic gold medal hockey game? 22 million... If you think soccer is anywhere close to hockey in Canada, you're the one living in a delusional world. -k Quote (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ Friendly forum facilitator! ┬──┬◡ﾉ(° -°ﾉ)
M.Dancer Posted June 23, 2010 Report Posted June 23, 2010 The Stanley Cup finals *averaged* over 4 million viewers, while the 2.275 million viewers for the England-USA World Cup game is the *highest ever* viewership for a preliminary round game. The other games have gathered 1.6m, 1.3m, 900k... How many Canadians watched the Olympic gold medal hockey game? 22 million... If you think soccer is anywhere close to hockey in Canada, you're the one living in a delusional world. -k You are right but let me add an omportant caveat....these are the preliminaries...audience numbers will climb much much higher as we move forward. The other thing is...the time of day the games air...not everyone has the option to start work at 7 so they can be infront of the TV at 2:00ish... Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.