The World Cup starts in 5 days...

[Fabienne]

Originally Posted by montecristo#4

No, Europeans say we are arrogant, unsophisticated, and militaristic.

Yeah, those too. Thanks for completing the set.

 

[Chicago]

1 day. 23 hours. 50 minutes.

 

[LA Guy]

It is the high speed collisions where the tackler is protected by armor that makes American football more damgerous than rugby. Hell, I'll take some minor lacerations over a brain hemorrage any day. Geez, did no one read my post

 

[tiger02]

FN was denied rights to carry the World Cup games. I don't even like soccer and I'm pissed off.

Oh, and where's waldo? He's pretty cool

 

[imageWIS]

Originally Posted by Fabienne

Yeah, those too. Thanks for completing the set.

Indeed. Also both France and the US say that they are better countires than each other...

Jon.

 

[tiger02]

Originally Posted by imageWIS

Indeed. Also both France and the US say that they are better countires than each other...

Jon.
They are.

 

[imageWIS]

Originally Posted by tiger02

They are.

LOL.

Jon.

 

[waldo pepper]

Originally Posted by lawyerdad

Um, no. When you start trying to cherry-pick facts about a subject you know nothing about, you know you should give up the argument. American football players don't wear "sneakers". When playing on grass, they wear cleats ("studs"). When playing on artificial turf they wear special athletic shoes with a sole specially designed for that surface. Also, picking the lightest and heaviest players from a football roster tells you nothing useful in this context. Most likely, the 178 pound player was a kicker or punter, a specialized player who for all intents and purposes does not participate in the "normal" part of the game.

It tells you everything useful when the original point was that they need helmets,padding etc...because the big guys are hitting the little guys.If the little guys don't even get on the field then that argument is non existent.
As I said I know very little about it apart from outside of the USA nobody could give a toss about it.Whereas outside of the USA,football is a phenomenom,with billions upon billions of fans.
One final point when I have watched US football the players do about 5 minutes and get dragged off blowing out of their arses but the rugby lads do the full 80 minutes.

 

[LA Guy]

Originally Posted by waldo pepper

It tells you everything useful when the original point was that they need helmets,padding etc...because the big guys are hitting the little guys.If the little guys don't even get on the field then that argument is non existent.
As I said I know very little about it apart from outside of the USA nobody could give a toss about it.Whereas outside of the USA,football is a phenomenom,with billions upon billions of fans.
One final point when I have watched US football the players do about 5 minutes and get dragged off blowing out of their arses but the rugby lads do the full 80 minutes.

I like both rugby and American football. They are both tough, physical games. In rugby, endurance is more of a factor. American football, however, is more dangerous.

 

[waldo pepper]

Originally Posted by romafan

Serie B if they're lucky!

Yes, Italy has a big problem w/ the ultras/tifosi.

Di Canio is an animal and self-admitted fascist, and an asshole to boot. All intra-city derbys are tense affairs, to the point of creating an almost incendiary atmosphere. Add to that the fact that Roman fans historically divided along political and class lines (Lazio supported by wealthier, 'right wing', suburban-dwellers vs. Roma's working-class, 'left wing', inhabitants of the city center) and you've got a real potboiler. This distinction has blurred in recent years, and the Roma curva has (sadly) seen the entrance of a right wing element.


"I would add that I recently went to a baseball game in DC with my Italian friend. As we walked up to our seats, he noted that the atmosphere was so much different than at the San Siro. "There is much less tension," he said, noting that American baseball fans treated the game like a picnic or a festival."

I would imagine he did not necessarily mean this was a good thing - "tension" or "atmoshpere" is what makes games so exciting.....

I don't expect you to like DiCanio with you being a Roma fan but when the guy played in England he was a breath of fresh air.
He was responsible for one of the greatest acts of sportsmanship I have seen,when a cross came in and he had an opportunity to score in an empty net but caught the ball because the keeper was down injured.
As for being a fascist,its not great but at least he admits it instead of hiding.

 

[montecristo#4]

Originally Posted by waldo pepper

It tells you everything useful when the original point was that they need helmets,padding etc...because the big guys are hitting the little guys.If the little guys don't even get on the field then that argument is non existent.
As I said I know very little about it apart from outside of the USA nobody could give a toss about it.Whereas outside of the USA,football is a phenomenom,with billions upon billions of fans.
One final point when I have watched US football the players do about 5 minutes and get dragged off blowing out of their arses but the rugby lads do the full 80 minutes.

Rugby is a waste of time "tweener" sport between the man's game (football) and the beautiful game (football).

 

[waldo pepper]

Originally Posted by LA Guy

I like both rugby and American football. They are both tough, physical games. In rugby, endurance is more of a factor. American football, however, is more dangerous.

Ok..I put up a good fight but I will stand corrected,you obvoiusly know your stuff.

1 day 21 hours 52 minutes

 

[waldo pepper]

Originally Posted by montecristo#4

Rugby is a waste of time "tweener" sport between the man's game (football) and the beautiful game (football).
Do you mean US football or football?

 

[tommib]

I'm English and I hate the weeks when everyone goes football mental.

Imagine having to see cars with the England flag driving around everywhere and yobs shouting and chanting in the street. Where I live football hooligans are a real nuisance, they're intimidating as well.

To the person who said England have got a good track record, think again. They should all be sent to some kind of makeshift alcatraz. Maybe build a giant wall around wolverhampton or something and put them all in there. Then we could get some peace and quiet.

And if England go out in an early round, I'm going to be scared to leave my house. Oh yeah and watch Football Factory, not Green Street, its rubbish!

T

 

[waldo pepper]

Originally Posted by lawyerdad

Well, fine. It wasn't my intention to debate which sport is "better" or even "more manly", both of which seem pretty pointless. Just to point out that you were seizing on "fact" that weren't particularly accurate (understandable in discussing a game you don't follow and don't give a "toss" about)

Well fascism isnt great is it?

The original point was that US F is tougher than rugby because big guys hit little guys,by looking on the roster it PROVED that the difference between the biggest and smallest was not much different to rugby therefore disproving the theory.

I don't even particularly like rugby I just get tired of Americans getting on their high horses about sports that nobody outside the US plays.