The World Cup is the metric system in short pants.
Printable View
The World Cup is the metric system in short pants.
I don't think shorts would make a good measurement system.
Yes, well, there is that.Quote:
Originally Posted by DorisInsinuate
I thought they used imperial measurements in soccer.
I thought the same, but then just figured I must have missed j2's point.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cheese
After seeing the officiating in the WC, I am SingTFU about the officiating in the NFL and NBA.Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
I saw how Wayne Rooney got bumped out of game because of Ronaldo's clearly fake whining. (hats off to England for no doiving and whining)
I saw how France beat Portugal as a result of a call which resulted in a penalty kick which was the only fucking score in the game. The one score, not the call, is why we aren't enamored. :pinch:
As I said before, the highlights for a soccer game are summed up in short time by the menial scores and numerous penalties. Sports like basketball and football usually have to have a person weeding out certain highlights to fit time constraints.
Yeah, it'd be same if they did highlights of soccer games in the local park.Quote:
Originally Posted by Busyman™
From Reuters
:dry:Quote:
On the pitch, there were too few goals, too few great matches, too few great players, too few upsets and too little goalmouth action.
There were too many fouls and too much blatant cheating by players -- in particular diving and feigning injury to earn unfair free kicks and penalties, all unchecked and sometimes even encouraged by coaches.
There was actually a fair number of goals scored and some fairly good matches. Holland and Portugal were the main divers and fakers most of the rest had their occasional Prima Donna moments but nothing serious. The Italy US game was largely down to a bad ref.
On the whole it was an enjoyable footie fest.
I think though that there has been far more coverage of the event in the US this time - must be all those Mexicans :whistling
Ok i will try to explain this very simply.Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
Machismo comes from within, that is why Italy won.
It's not about ego.
Get it?
No it was becasue of ESPN. It was tried on network TV (ABC I think) and was a huge flop.Quote:
Originally Posted by Biggles
US television is great at hyping up anything and ESPN talked up the WC immensely. I don't know how successful it was though. I'm sure the US matches and the final drew the biggest ratings. One factor is that the matches came on over here at fucked up hours.
On the whole, for me, I saw what I needed to see in the quick highlights on ESPN.
GOAL, GOAL, RED CARD, RED CARD or more like
GOAL, RED CARD, RED CARD, YELLOW CARD, RED CARD, YELLOW CARD
Watching a piece of a match there just isn't anything else interesting. I did find the saves by Italy quite good though.:happy:
When i watch Basketball highlights it's all;
TEAM 1 SCORES, TEAM 2 SCORES, TEAM 1 SCORES, TEAM 2 SCORES.......
When people score in football it's a big event it means something, you go out onto the pitch knowing 2 or 3 goals will make you a national hero. Basketball you have to score 30-40 baskets just to be in with a chance of winning. So when someone scores it's just like "meh who cares only 39 more to go guys".
After a promising start, the World Cup was a bit of a poor one I thought.
No real great teams showed themselves, and there wasn't even any great games.
I also heard on the radio today that it was the second lowest scoring World Cup ever.
What exactly is a "menial score"? :huh:Quote:
Originally Posted by Busyman™
HUH? :huh:Quote:
Originally Posted by 100%
Apparently, you don't get it.
I will try to explain this very simply.
Insert this short phrase in front of my post:
"To sportsfans in the USA,"
Get it?
In basketball every steal, blocked shot, missed pass, etc can (and usually does lead to a score) lead to a score.Quote:
Originally Posted by Peerzy
In basketball every score still means something 'cause you can still get beat with a second left.
In basketball it is entertaining throughout as you can see a fella break someone's ankles then pass for an alley-oop dunk. It's fucking sweet. It's graceful. It's full of finesse without the anarchy.
Admittedly, and I've said this before, when a soccer goal is scored it's like the fucking 4th of July since it's so unlikely. However, the game otherwise is severely boring to watch while basketball is an overload of great play throughout.
:snooty:
Btw, in basketball there's is no "39 more to go". You score as much as you can....like in soccer *coughcough*.
low scoresQuote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
Must be a new definition of the word, then, because it doesn't mean "low", it means "lowly".Quote:
Originally Posted by Busyman™
That's different. ;)
I enjoyed most games I saw , the penalty kicks were the most exciting part of some games . Sadly what a cheap way to win tho .
Oh gawd. Maybe you should rethink wanting to be a mod but try being a spelling/grammar/thesaurus/dictionary checker.Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
It also means dull and boring like the above quote.
The penalty kicks and shoot-outs are kinda cool.:happy:Quote:
Originally Posted by peat moss
Quote:
Originally Posted by Busyman™
Well you would think that bud , seeing as Basketball games are decided in the last minute . :lol:
:lol: :lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by peat moss
Shoot-outs are better than free throws.
Fact.
...but not better than buzzer beaters. :snooty: