Soccer, What's the Point?

Off Topic
61


Just as a defense to why football players wear so many pads. If this guy hit YOU and you weren’t wearing pads, you would break something 100% of the time, he would probably kill you half the time if he tried to.

He breaks guys bones even though they wear pads, so before you start inferring that NFL players are pussies because they wear pads, go ask this guy to takle you as hard as he can without any protection.

After you get out of the hospital, you can come back here and tell us the importance of players wearing pads.

V

62

[quote]pushharder wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
bushidobadboy wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
American football is much harder hitting and more physically aggressive than rugby.

Sure, but since they are padded up, does it count?

BBB

The pads are more like weapons. Football hits are much harder and more frequent. It is a brutal game.

Those that haven’t played it really have no clue.

The force, i.e., mass x acceleration, generated is exceeded by no other sport on earth and that includes rugby. It’s basic physics, folks. The pads worn don’t protect as much as they enable.[/quote]

The linebackers in American football may be bigger, but try getting tackled without a helmet or shoulder pads on and then tell me how you feel.

i remember playing in highschool at the age of 15, and my mate who was 230lbs at 6’2" broke a players neck, luckily he got airlifted to hospital.

Also in American football its encouraged to tackle more for the sake of tackling, whilst Rugby requires more strategy. Its more evolved as a game.

Rugby is a more popular sport worlwide too. So fuck the haters :stuck_out_tongue:

I do like ice hockey a lot too, but i don’t understand the trend over the last few years. Some players seem to be hired regardless if their psychotic(remember that guy who tried to severe an opponents Achilles tendon with his skating blade!).

63

[quote]malonetd wrote:
DoubleDuce wrote:
josh86 wrote:
malonetd wrote:
josh86 wrote:
Football and Hockey > *

What? Hockey is just soccer on ice. It’s basically the same game.

No fucking way, in hockey there is hard board checking and fist fights break out all the time.

I can see the argument that indoor soccer and hockey are similar, but really they are nothing alike.

The basics of the game are the same. Scoring scheme and concepts are the same – non-stop offensive movement to bring the ball/puck into the opposing goal.

Yes, there are different skill sets, different strategies, and different number of players, but the base concept is still the same.

It’s like comparing American Football and 7-on7 touch. Many differences, but it’s still the same root game.[/quote]

you can’t compare hockey to soccer based on the fact that “they move towards an opponents goal and try to score”…thats the same as almost every god damn sport. Hockey takes a lot more skill/strength than soccer imo.

64

[quote]Rico Suave wrote:
Hockey takes a lot more skill/strength than soccer imo.
[/quote]

It’s less of a workout though since teh soccer guys have to run while the hockey guys just float along the ice like little angels.

I love ice skating.

65

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
pushharder wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
bushidobadboy wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
American football is much harder hitting and more physically aggressive than rugby.

Sure, but since they are padded up, does it count?

BBB

The pads are more like weapons. Football hits are much harder and more frequent. It is a brutal game.

Those that haven’t played it really have no clue.

The force, i.e., mass x acceleration, generated is exceeded by no other sport on earth and that includes rugby. It’s basic physics, folks. The pads worn don’t protect as much as they enable.

They actually did this on sports science. They determined it more likely to break bones in a rugby hit than an American football one.

However, oddly enough soccer still has a higher injury rate than american football too.

I find that people that talk bad about soccer have never played it either.[/quote]

The football tackle exerted almost 3x the force of the Rugby tackle, which is what he pointed out. The test was also done without premier players(the rugby dudes were from some LA club, and Jammer is hardly one of the NFL’s premier hitters).

I don’t think anyone is arguing that rugby hits aren’t hard, just that to brush off football hits as being soft because you wear pads is ridiculous, if you actually play you know this.

66

[quote]Rico Suave wrote:
malonetd wrote:
DoubleDuce wrote:
josh86 wrote:
malonetd wrote:
josh86 wrote:
Football and Hockey > *

What? Hockey is just soccer on ice. It’s basically the same game.

No fucking way, in hockey there is hard board checking and fist fights break out all the time.

I can see the argument that indoor soccer and hockey are similar, but really they are nothing alike.

The basics of the game are the same. Scoring scheme and concepts are the same – non-stop offensive movement to bring the ball/puck into the opposing goal.

Yes, there are different skill sets, different strategies, and different number of players, but the base concept is still the same.

It’s like comparing American Football and 7-on7 touch. Many differences, but it’s still the same root game.

you can’t compare hockey to soccer based on the fact that “they move towards an opponents goal and try to score”…thats the same as almost every god damn sport. Hockey takes a lot more skill/strength than soccer imo.
[/quote]

Its like saying if there were a sport that was exactly like american football, but it was on ice, and they used a puck, and had to move it with sticks, and weren’t allowed to hit, and the field was only 25 yards instead of 100, and there were walls that were inbounds, it would be just like american football.

67

[quote]red04 wrote:
DoubleDuce wrote:
pushharder wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
bushidobadboy wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
American football is much harder hitting and more physically aggressive than rugby.

Sure, but since they are padded up, does it count?

BBB

The pads are more like weapons. Football hits are much harder and more frequent. It is a brutal game.

Those that haven’t played it really have no clue.

The force, i.e., mass x acceleration, generated is exceeded by no other sport on earth and that includes rugby. It’s basic physics, folks. The pads worn don’t protect as much as they enable.

They actually did this on sports science. They determined it more likely to break bones in a rugby hit than an American football one.

However, oddly enough soccer still has a higher injury rate than american football too.

I find that people that talk bad about soccer have never played it either.

The football tackle exerted almost 3x the force of the Rugby tackle, which is what he pointed out. The test was also done without premier players(the rugby dudes were from some LA club, and Jammer is hardly one of the NFL’s premier hitters).

I don’t think anyone is arguing that rugby hits aren’t hard, just that to brush off football hits as being soft because you wear pads is ridiculous, if you actually play you know this.[/quote]

The forces recorded on the rugby hit were higher because they were more concentrated. I haven’t yet said football is a wimpy sport in any way.

But I think saying that football is more brutal than a game like soccer is like saying the 100 meter hurdles is more grueling than a marathon because falling is more likely with the hurdles.

68

badminton anyone?

69

What’s the point of any sport? Seriously. In the end somebody devised a game and some other people decided they liked it enough to get REALLY good at it and yet some other people decided they liked watching those people for some meaningless reasons of idle entertainment.

That doesn’t make sports good or bad it just makes them all the same as far as the weightiness of their existence.

It’s personal taste. This question is like asking “sauerkraut, what’s the point”?

I love hockey and am bored stiff by soccer. That means absolutely nothing beyond my being entertained by hockey and not by soccer.

70

[quote]Rico Suave wrote:
malonetd wrote:
DoubleDuce wrote:
josh86 wrote:
malonetd wrote:
josh86 wrote:
Football and Hockey > *

What? Hockey is just soccer on ice. It’s basically the same game.

No fucking way, in hockey there is hard board checking and fist fights break out all the time.

I can see the argument that indoor soccer and hockey are similar, but really they are nothing alike.

The basics of the game are the same. Scoring scheme and concepts are the same – non-stop offensive movement to bring the ball/puck into the opposing goal.

Yes, there are different skill sets, different strategies, and different number of players, but the base concept is still the same.

It’s like comparing American Football and 7-on7 touch. Many differences, but it’s still the same root game.

you can’t compare hockey to soccer based on the fact that “they move towards an opponents goal and try to score”…thats the same as almost every god damn sport. Hockey takes a lot more skill/strength than soccer imo.
[/quote]

Don’t use quotes when it’s not what I said. If you can’t see how similar these sports are, then you’re not even trying.

71

[quote]Vegita wrote:
Just as a defense to why football players wear so many pads. If this guy hit YOU and you weren’t wearing pads, you would break something 100% of the time, he would probably kill you half the time if he tried to.

He breaks guys bones even though they wear pads, so before you start inferring that NFL players are pussies because they wear pads, go ask this guy to takle you as hard as he can without any protection.

After you get out of the hospital, you can come back here and tell us the importance of players wearing pads.

V[/quote]

Rugby players are just as big. But there are no head-high tackles allowed. This is to avoid players breaking each other’s necks. Certain types of tackles are illegal because all the players are wearing is a mouthguard, and all they’ve got to protect themselves is their musculature and strength.

They’re probably allowed to hit harder in American football due to the pads and helmet.

72

too bad hockey tops them all…

73

Living in a country where soccer is THE national sport, even I agree it sucks ass. Zero action for 90 minutes, and if no one scored, another 2 minutes of boring-ass running.

To make things worse, it’s the ONLY sport to ever be broadcasted on any channel around here. I have to pay ridiculous amounts of money to be able to watch a good Football game or a boxing/mma match.

74

[quote]malonetd wrote:
Rico Suave wrote:
malonetd wrote:
DoubleDuce wrote:
josh86 wrote:
malonetd wrote:
josh86 wrote:
Football and Hockey > *

What? Hockey is just soccer on ice. It’s basically the same game.

No fucking way, in hockey there is hard board checking and fist fights break out all the time.

I can see the argument that indoor soccer and hockey are similar, but really they are nothing alike.

The basics of the game are the same. Scoring scheme and concepts are the same – non-stop offensive movement to bring the ball/puck into the opposing goal.

Yes, there are different skill sets, different strategies, and different number of players, but the base concept is still the same.

It’s like comparing American Football and 7-on7 touch. Many differences, but it’s still the same root game.

you can’t compare hockey to soccer based on the fact that “they move towards an opponents goal and try to score”…thats the same as almost every god damn sport. Hockey takes a lot more skill/strength than soccer imo.

Don’t use quotes when it’s not what I said. If you can’t see how similar these sports are, then you’re not even trying.[/quote]

Im not quoting you. I was using it as a basis of what you said. You are comparing the goals of the games. They both score on a net. so you are saying its the same as water polo. I highly doubt that.

75

[quote]sen say wrote:
Rico Suave wrote:
Hockey takes a lot more skill/strength than soccer imo.

It’s less of a workout though since teh soccer guys have to run while the hockey guys just float along the ice like little angels.

I love ice skating.[/quote]

I can take it that you’ve never played a comepitive game of hockey before. I’ve played both Jr. A hockey and U18 OYSL soccer. I’m a lot more exhausted after hockey than soccer. Maybe thats just me though.

76

Ping pong is the toughest sport ever!

77

Damn you JB with your hot avatar and your knowledge of manly sports.

78

[quote]Rico Suave wrote:
malonetd wrote:
Rico Suave wrote:
malonetd wrote:
DoubleDuce wrote:
josh86 wrote:
malonetd wrote:
josh86 wrote:
Football and Hockey > *

What? Hockey is just soccer on ice. It’s basically the same game.

No fucking way, in hockey there is hard board checking and fist fights break out all the time.

I can see the argument that indoor soccer and hockey are similar, but really they are nothing alike.

The basics of the game are the same. Scoring scheme and concepts are the same – non-stop offensive movement to bring the ball/puck into the opposing goal.

Yes, there are different skill sets, different strategies, and different number of players, but the base concept is still the same.

It’s like comparing American Football and 7-on7 touch. Many differences, but it’s still the same root game.

you can’t compare hockey to soccer based on the fact that “they move towards an opponents goal and try to score”…thats the same as almost every god damn sport. Hockey takes a lot more skill/strength than soccer imo.

Don’t use quotes when it’s not what I said. If you can’t see how similar these sports are, then you’re not even trying.

Im not quoting you. I was using it as a basis of what you said. You are comparing the goals of the games. They both score on a net. so you are saying its the same as water polo. I highly doubt that. [/quote]

Apparently you’re lost. I didn’t say anything about water polo.

79

yeah i think people forget that most football players, the ones who hit you, are hovering in the 230-260 range. i dont think you guys know how to make em that big in rugby countries.

lol@hockey being soccer on ice. except for the fact that if you get in a fist fight no one is going to break it up. im sure most people playing have broken noses and missing teeth cause its a girly sport.

80

[quote]malonetd wrote:
Rico Suave wrote:
malonetd wrote:
Rico Suave wrote:
malonetd wrote:
DoubleDuce wrote:
josh86 wrote:
malonetd wrote:
josh86 wrote:
Football and Hockey > *

What? Hockey is just soccer on ice. It’s basically the same game.

No fucking way, in hockey there is hard board checking and fist fights break out all the time.

I can see the argument that indoor soccer and hockey are similar, but really they are nothing alike.

The basics of the game are the same. Scoring scheme and concepts are the same – non-stop offensive movement to bring the ball/puck into the opposing goal.

Yes, there are different skill sets, different strategies, and different number of players, but the base concept is still the same.

It’s like comparing American Football and 7-on7 touch. Many differences, but it’s still the same root game.

you can’t compare hockey to soccer based on the fact that “they move towards an opponents goal and try to score”…thats the same as almost every god damn sport. Hockey takes a lot more skill/strength than soccer imo.

Don’t use quotes when it’s not what I said. If you can’t see how similar these sports are, then you’re not even trying.

Im not quoting you. I was using it as a basis of what you said. You are comparing the goals of the games. They both score on a net. so you are saying its the same as water polo. I highly doubt that.

Apparently you’re lost. I didn’t say anything about water polo.[/quote]

Yeah…and Grizzly Adams had a beard.