Jump to content
[[Template core/front/custom/_customHeader is throwing an error. This theme may be out of date. Run the support tool in the AdminCP to restore the default theme.]]

Why is the World Cup bigger than any American sporting event?


kryptonite
 Share

Recommended Posts

How many of you are watching soccer right now?

 

 

Given my connections to the country that borders us to the south, I will be getting up early to watch the Mexico-Iran match. Looking forward to it actually. I also follow the Mexican pro leagues. My favorite team is Necaxa (mis Rayos Rojos - red lightning. I think the logo being similar to my Bolts is what drew me to that team). It also helps that I am fluent in Spanish and can understand more than GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAL!

 

I am not a big baseball fan and look forward to the Yearly international soccar tournies, especially the World Cup every four!

 

There is no comparison for me, I love our football, second fav game is LaCross. But soccar is easy to understand and I like it!

 

:D

Edited by McBoog
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 58
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Good stuff in this thread. I don't think it really matters a hoot about the relative popularities of the two sports - I love them both. It's not true that the rest of the world "laughs at our NFL" or whatever was said earlier. In my experience there are two reactions to the NFL - admiration at the way the league is run with it's salary cap and it's parity and the other is wonder at why all the equipment is necessary, given that rugby players don't use any. If you ask any non-American abroad who the current SB (or World Series) champs are, no-one will have a clue.

 

One thing worth mentioning is that the South Americans, Africans and the Europeans would hate timeouts with a passion - no game of any popularity in the rest of the world has timeouts. Here, TV pretty much mandates timeouts - over and above the regular ones, we've all seen the ridiculous NBA "time out on the floor" when the ref gets the signal from TV to call an uncharged time out. To me, time outs are an unfortunate but necessary evil.

Edited by Ursa Majoris
Link to comment
Share on other sites

... given that rugby players don't use any. If you ask any non-American abroad who the current SB (or World Series) champs are, no-one will have a clue.

 

I have played Ruggar. It is a rough sport and a lot of fun! It truley gets down to the "little boy" nature of men, lotsof rolling in the dirt! :D

 

What was interesting to me though, is that without all the protective gear, the players back off, I think instictually, and the collisions/impacts are not nearly as intense as those of my football days.

 

The same holds true of Australian Rules Football... unless you are playing with Aussies. Those f'n whackos :D will put the hurt on you BIB TIME (you will need a bib so you don't drool on your shirt after your brain gets rattled).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe I'm incorrect here, but isn't rugby played with tackling only below the waist. That may explain the lack for need of padding, as compared to the NFL where you have guys like Donovan Darius aiming to make you concussed with a helmet to helmet shot...?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe I'm incorrect here, but isn't rugby played with tackling only below the waist. That may explain the lack for need of padding, as compared to the NFL where you have guys like Donovan Darius aiming to make you concussed with a helmet to helmet shot...?

 

There's no doubt the hitting in football is more intense, especially the blindside hitting, hence the protective gear. I was merely pointing out the non-American impression - most of them have never watched a game. Having said that, I wonder how intense the hitting would be if the hitter didn't have the protective gear themselves....? :D

 

As for rugby, there are limits to the tackling as you say, but it's certainly not a game for wusses and as McBoog points out above, Aussie Rules football is played only by certifiable lunatics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

what I'm wondering is why was ESPn giving this and the horse race more coverage than the Hopkins/Tarver fight...

 

usually you see the speech following the fight and etc...

 

but all you saw was a couple clips and then Hopkins holding the belt....then they changed the subject....I figured this would be bigger news than the horse race and soccer.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

what I'm wondering is why was ESPn giving this and the horse race more coverage than the Hopkins/Tarver fight...

 

usually you see the speech following the fight and etc...

 

but all you saw was a couple clips and then Hopkins holding the belt....then they changed the subject....I figured this would be bigger news than the horse race and soccer.....

 

 

Because half of Mecixo is here now and they need to appeal to their audience!?!? :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

what I'm wondering is why was ESPn giving this and the horse race more coverage than the Hopkins/Tarver fight...

 

usually you see the speech following the fight and etc...

 

but all you saw was a couple clips and then Hopkins holding the belt....then they changed the subject....I figured this would be bigger news than the horse race and soccer.....

 

Y'all are kidding of course..... :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information