I agree

Around the world soccer junkies enjoy more than the Champions League, the expectation and the thrill every 4 years, with the World Cup, Soccer in the Olympics Game, the Euro Cup, the Copa America. Every 2 years the African Cup of Nations and the Asian Cup. Then you have the qualifiers to those tournaments where passion is also in such a high level. There are games that sucks everywhere, but in those that in which every play of a game matters the excitement has no end. Then I would place the Champions League, very tactical master piece of a game, PRO's at every level, the achievers, but it is also canned. One error and they can lose big time. The real game of inspiration, selflessness, love for the jersey is in Copa Libertadores (FOX first half of the year)and Copa Sudamericana (second half of the year), where a 17 years old playing among veterans can make the difference of gold and the opportunity of a life time. Then there are national leagues once you understand soccer, not only the game, but the symbols of the history behind, in an endless competition year around, with one competition getting better than the other, and with MLS rising to be at the par of those, probably it will easier to understand the way of this beautiful world, every teams' dream, every countries' dream just one more goal than the opponent. So enjoy Champions League game, but for the game it does get better than that.

sorry, you're going to need more (and better!) reasons than this.

One counter-reason might be simply that Americans don't have room in their sports cycle to follow another sport. February is normally the "lull" month between the Super Bowl and NCAA's Selection Sunday.

Americans tend to prefer boring sports like football and baseball, so I don't hold out my hope for them to enjoy something that's actually stimulating.

They're boring to you because you don't watch them. That's not the attitude to take.

i know that the same level of nuance in american football (where each play can be liked to a chess match) can be found in the strategy and execution of soccer...it's just that i didn't grow up with it, and it's not a part of the culture.

so what you see as an exciting game...i see as a bunch of guys running around and passing the ball back and forth. occasionally, there will be a scoring attempt. in other words, it feels to me like almost nothing is happening.

until the game is actually a part of the culture as it is in the rest of the world (and i doubt that will happen), that perception will not change.

Mark, you're a luvverly fella but comparing American Football to Chess is about the dumbest thing I've heard this year! Bloke tries to throw a ball to another bloke while a bunch of other blokes try to stop him?

I've no idea if Football will ever take a place amongst the leading sports in the USA but if you genuinely can't see any more to it than you write above, you'd better stick to those obscure Jazz sounds you love so much! :-p

Matthew (#6),

So something can only be boring to me if I subject myself to it? I can only find football boring if I actually watch it? That doesn't make much sense.

Of course it's the right attitude to take. It's my opinion and it's "right" for me to think that those sports are boring, just as it's "right" for me to enjoy hockey and soccer.

To be fair, Mark isn't the first person to have likened American Football to a chess match.

Like gridiron and most other team sports, chess is after all a surrogate for war.

Bloke tries to throw a ball to another bloke while a bunch of other blokes try to stop him?

that's about the most reductive description i've ever encountered. it's also dead wrong.

and i did not say that there was nothing going in in a soccer game...just that i don't perceive it because it's not what i grew up with.

I think the culture is starting to change as regards soccer. We've had a viable men's professional soccer league for 10 years, and in another year or two a women's league will be starting. The fact that European soccer is being broadcast on a major cable network suggests that there are people who want to watch the games. At the same time, soccer is never going to grow (nor will each of us as individuals, come to that) if we don't take a chance on something unfamiliar.

Exactly how is that an inaccurate description, Mark?

every play, on both offense and defense, has an incredibly complex series of schemes behind it.

your statement is just plain inaccurate.

"Bloke tries to throw a ball to another bloke while a bunch of other blokes try to stop him?"

That could be said for just about every sport in the book.

By the way, I'm glad we're having this "which sport is better" discussion again. There was so much unresolved the last time, hopefully we can fill in the gaps on this take.

i would like to point out that i am not involved in the "which sport is better" discussion because i don't think one sport is better than the other.

or something like that.

Mark, it still comes down to my description. I think you're trying to make a simple game sound more complex than it is.

It consists of a team having four attempts to make 10 yards or more, by throwing the ball forward to be caught and then repeating the process if successful, until they score or are required to hand the ball over to the other team.

It is a very static game that lacks the free form poetry (for you, read Jazz) and passion of football!

It is also the antithesis of competitive sport as there is nothing at stake for the losers, as there is no relegation in the game. It is sterile to all but the partisan fans. Crikey, I'd rather watch Rugby League, which is really saying something!

I did enjoy the Super Bowl match though, as a once in a year event, especially as I was supporting the winning team - on the basis that I've been to New York.

Matt, we aren't having that discussion, we're discussing Mark's claim that American Football is like Chess versus Football is uneventful.

I think you've actually topped him with your assertion

"Bloke tries to throw a ball to another bloke while a bunch of other blokes try to stop him?"

That could be said for just about every sport in the book.

Mark, it still comes down to my description. I think you're trying to make a simple game sound more complex than it is.

ok, we're done here.

it's not an assertion, it's a fact.

Because you say so? R-i-i-ght! What a bossy boots you are sometimes. There may be lots of "subtle" strategies behind a play, but it still comes down to the essence as I described it.

I fail to comprehend why you can neither stand up for the game or why you're getting so surly about it. Confident, are we? I know, why don't you get your ball and take it home! lol

By the way, most games are pretty simple: Golf, Pool and Cricket = hitting a ball with a stick; Curling = sliding a stone; Australian Rules = a drunken riot!

sussman was right, this is a total waste of time.

and right, football boils down to a bunch of guys kicking the ball around with the hope that some day, the ball may end up in that frame thing with the strings hanging from it.

whatever.

It's only a waste of time because you've gone all sulky and humourless instead of your usual silky articulacy...

There is no "which sport is better" discussion.

It has been scientifically proven that darts is superior to any other sport ever invented.

Silly question.

;-)

"Mark, it still comes down to my description. I think you're trying to make a simple game sound more complex than it is."

mhmm. that's why quarterbacks have to learn 300-page playbooks. (and that's just for offense.) and that's why teams dress 46 players even though only 11 are on the field at any given time. hrm... maybe there's some strategy?

"It consists of a team having four attempts to make 10 yards or more, by throwing the ball forward to be caught and then repeating the process if successful, until they score or are required to hand the ball over to the other team."

-did you know they can run the ball as well?
-and what's your description of good third-down strategy? when, and why, is it a good idea to go for it on fourth down?
-tell me your thoughts on the ever-increasing prevalence of play action.
-i think it's a good idea (within limits) to run on first down. even if you don't agree, i'm sure you could give me a few reasons as to why i might say such a thing.

"It is a very static game that lacks the free form poetry (for you, read Jazz) and passion of football!"

even on the most limited of offensive plays devised by offensive coordinators, there are at least 4-5 options of where/with whom the ball can end up, decided on what happens within the first second or two after the snap. the more complex plays offer somewhere around 7 or 8 different scenarios that are constantly dwindling or growing, depending on luck, confusion or someone gaining or losing an edge on the opposition. add to that the defensive manuevers, and the differences between what is planned and what actually occurs grows exponentially.

"It is also the antithesis of competitive sport as there is nothing at stake for the losers, as there is no relegation in the game."

that's one thing i like about soccer vs. football. but, football just works it out a different way. the worst team in the league gets the first pick in the draft. therefore, they have a better chance of being better the following year. parity, my friend, is a wonderful thing. keeps you guessing, meaning the nfl doesn't have an equivalent of the man u-liverpool-arsenal clusterfuck... at least not for too long.

on the other hand, if you play on a losing team, chances are you'll get your ass fired to make way for "rebuilding," as they call it. so you don't want to be on a losing team for too long if you value things like job security and money.

"I think you've actually topped him with your assertion

"Bloke tries to throw a ball to another bloke while a bunch of other blokes try to stop him?"

That could be said for just about every sport in the book.

Er, Curling? Tennis, Swimming, Badminton?"

Yep, that objective pretty much covers most of those, with a little tweaking:

Curling -- some guys try to score while other guys try to make sure they don't score

Tennis -- some guy tries to score while the other guy tries to score (same goes with badminton)

Swimming -- this is a race, not a sport

Of course, all of these descriptions are painfully simplistic and carelessly remove the nuances of all the competition.

American football has a hell of a lot of strategy. Obviously those who do not normally follow the sport wouldn't know that, which is pretty much the case for any sport. Case in point: Curling is full of strategy, but the übercasual fan just sees guys with brooms playing large-scale shuffleboard.

So I see no point in responding to an American football fan's explanation of the game's strategy by saying "no, I was right initially by saying it's not a strategic game." Jesus Christ, you're the comments editor. You're better than that.

My Primer on Men's Sports for Americans

Basketball --- A bunch of tall guys bounce an orange ball and try to throw it through an elevated hoop. Usually, some of the guys try to prevent this but sometimes everyone stands around while one of the guys stands behind a line and tries to throw the ball through the hoop. Some common terms: dribble, key, foul, dunk.

Swimming --- Seeing how fast people can swim.

Car Racing --- Not a sport.

Gymnastics --- Spinning around on bars and doing somersaults.

Skiing --- A guy attaches two long pieces of wood/fiberglass to his boots and slides down a snow-covered hill, either trying to go really fast, or go fast while maneuvering between poles or spinning around in the air before landing or falling.

Track --- Seeing how fast people can run.

Baseball --- A guy throws a little white ball and another guy tries to whack it with a piece of wood. Some other guys stand around and try to catch the ball if the guy manages to hit it towards them. After awhile, the teams switch roles. Points are scored by stepping on a pentagonal object buried in the dirt. Some common terms: steal, walk, relief, bunt, slide, strike.

Football --- A bunch of big guys line up facing each other on a grassy field. A slightly smaller guy reaches under another big guy and takes an odd-shaped ball, which he either hands to a fast guy or throws to an even faster guy. Some of the other guys try to prevent the guy with the ball from crossing a line at one end of the grass area. This is accomplished by colliding with the guy who has the ball and making him fall down. A guy in a striped shirt blows a whistle and the guys break into two groups. Each group has a brief meeting, making sure no one is hurt, then try again. Sometimes, they kick the ball, hence the name. Some common terms: first down, punt, clip, interference, audible, half-time, special teams.

Tennis --- Two guys whack a ball back and forth over a net, using sticks with netting, trying to keep from hitting the ball outside a rectangular area. Some common terms: love, deuce, clay, ace.

Soccer --- A bunch of guys run up and down a big grass field kicking a ball and sometimes bouncing it off their head. The idea is to kick the ball into a net, which sometimes happens, but not often, as it appears that some of the guys try to prevent this.

Diving --- Jumping into a swimming pool, trying not to make a big splash.

Hockey --- A bunch of guys skate on ice and try to knock a circular disk into a net with a big stick. Sometimes, the players bump into each other and then they use the sticks to hit each other.

Boxing --- Two guys wearing short pants, trapped in a roped off, elevated square floor, try to hit each other in the head with oversized mittens. Another guy in the ring, who doesn't fight, makes sure the two guys don't cheat --- no weapons allowed! The game is over when one of the guys falls down and can't get up, or whenever a predetermined number of 3-minute intervals has transpired, and some other guys add up points based on how many times each guy got smacked upside the head.

After all of this I still have no desire to watch soccer nor do I feel I should be. Go figure.

I think this stopped being about soccer a loooong time ago. Which is too bad, since there was a fairly good game on during most of these comments.

I actually watched that game down in the hotel bar since, well, I'm in NI, and that's pretty much all there is to do here.

That's gotta be tough for a team to focus on three different seasons.

zing, just because some bloke wrote a book about it doesn't mean it's a great game, and if you watched it with a less subjective eye, maybe you'd see how limited it really is. Perhaps that's why on a global scale it's not a significant sport?

Fuck knows why they need 46 people for such a game, the other similar sports from the best format of them all, Rugby Union, through the Aussie Rules anarchy to the more stilted League all manage to make do with one team doing both offence and defence.

I thought the reason they didn't have relegation was because it is more of a business than a sport?

suss, you're sure doing a great job of championing US sports by taking half of what I wrote and ignoring the rest and then just making stuff up. I said it was a simple game, not that there was no strategy behind it. You're doing a great job of disproving the "dumb, arrogant Yanks theory". Jesus Christ, you're the Sports Editor. You're better than that.

That's all right Josh, I have no desire to listen to Bruce Springsteen. Go figure.

Thanks for all the thoughtful insight and comments, my colonial cousins, it's been fascinating to see.

Obviously those who do not normally follow the sport wouldn't know that, which is pretty much the case for any sport.

thanks suss, that was exactly my point.

you can keep saying it's a simple sport and it will never be true.

that aside, please describe to me what is going on it a football match that i don't see. i take it there must be a whole host of away-from-the-ball strategy/moves that i don't know about (this must be stuff that doesn't translate to television...because you can't see it)

Mark, stop being such a plonker. It is a simple game and denying it until the end of time won't ever change that. I didn't ever say simple games were bad, indeed overly complex games are boring. The weakness of American Football is the bitty nature of the game, which lacks any fluidity or continuity of play, unlike Rugby Union.

As a music fan, I thought you would have got that. Just imagine a band that started a piece and then took a break before starting it over. Where's the continuity, the flow, the passion?

You're the one that made the original remark that started this fascinating exchange when you compared Gridiron to Chess, which is either pompous or laughable, possibly both. Either way, all you've done is confirm the impression many Europeans have about American insecurity about their culture, sporting or artistic, which they over-compensate for by the kind of attitudes shown here. It could have been funny but it has only been tragic.

if you would take that chip off of your shoulder, you would see that i was actually asking you a question. i guess you're not interested in enlightening me.

and earlier, i clearly stated that i did not grow up with the sport and therefore remain ignorant of the nuances that make it interesting to the rest of the world.

as for american football, it's fairly obvious you don't know what you're talking about. i admitted as much, why can't you?

Rosey: "Australian Rules = a drunken riot."

No need to get drunk to have a riot playing Australian Football (all the rioting's on the field BTW).

Aussie Rules is a misnomer. There are no rules.

It's two teams of 18 very big buggers running around a giant oval-shaped field smashing each other with fists, elbows, and knees and using each other's kidneys as step ladders to take a high ball.

That's why I don't like it. It appears to have no structure (the opposite of American football). It's just a giant free for all.

On topic, with four codes of football in Australia (Rugby Union, Rugby League, soccer and Australian football), just like in the US, the round-ball game is struggling for support at corporate level, although it's improved.

The telling factor is that soccer in Australia is now a summer sport, played mainly at night, because it can't compete with the three oval-ball contact codes.

I would suggest soccer in America faces a similar uphill battle.

My view: played at the very top level (and that's not the US or Australia) it's a good game. Played anywhere below that, it's a snore-a-thon.

And I say, just because you Poms, Euros and South Americans grow up playing the game and think it's wonderful doesn't make it so.

In many cases, I suspect one-eyed aficionados of soccer don't know much about the oval-ball codes and theor fanatical support of soccer is therefore simply the result of them not knowing any better.

I can tell you this ... I'd rather watch a sweeping, running backline movement in a rugby match where the ball passes at speed through 10 sets of hands than 22 over-paid bogans with earrings booting a bag of wind backwards and forwards in the near-forlorn hope that someone might at some stage put it in the net.

As entertainment, soccer just doesn't cut it in my book.

"zing, just because some bloke wrote a book about it doesn't mean it's a great game, and if you watched it with a less subjective eye, maybe you'd see how limited it really is."

but that's not what's being argued here, is it, mr. rose. you said it was a simplistic little game, which it is not. it is a game with lots of strategy. and no, some bloke did not write a book... each team comes up with their own playbooks, which are constantly changing year-to-year, and often game-to-game, depending on the competition.

maybe if you looked at it with a more objective eye, you'd see what a complex sport it really is. how could it not be strategy-based? every 5-10 seconds, they stop playing and think about what they are going to do next. you think they pay 6-10 coaches to sit there and tell players to play harder? no, those are the guys thinking about what each individual player should be doing on each individual play.

it's not like your football, where the coaches job is to basically announce a starting line-up and a formation, then sit back and strategically substitute three times, with a little yelling and making faces at players and refs... nfl coaches do this EVERY FEW SECONDS.

people often have trouble with the "offsides" call in soccer. try it in football, where there are 5 or 6 "offsides"-type rules, all with different names, some of which i don't understand.

this is a predominantly american website, chris. your hatred of this game is probably something half of us (the female half) would agree with. but unless you want to say that "my football is better than your football," you're better off not exposing your total ignorance of the game.

(i.e.--call it a simple game. it's obvious from that point that you don't know shit about it. my point? when it comes to american football, you are an i-d-i-o-t.)

"Perhaps that's why on a global scale it's not a significant sport?"

true. but your little wembly stadium in londontown sold out real fast for a game. plus, when's the last time you british people enjoyed anything you didn't create? if clotted cream is so good, why isn't it everywhere in the world? eh? eh? shut yr gob. and if gobs are so great, why... whatever.

you know i love soccer. probably more than football. greatest sport in the world, i say. but football does have one advantage--it comes across great on t.v.. it's a true spectator sport for the t.v. age, with bathroom and commercial breaks built right in. only thing that comes close is ncaa march madness.

Yeah Rosey, American Football could hardly be described as a simplistic game - especially when compared to soccer, which is basically a bag of wind being booted up and down a field.

AF is more about strategy than tactics. Which is why I find it a tad boring. That and the endless stoppages and the use of two separate teams, one for defence and the other for attack when I'm used to watching Rugby League, which has endlessly more big hits of the same oomph-power but is a hundred times faster and has about a 10th of the stoppages.

I put American football higher though in the entertainment stakes than both soccer and that disgraceful abomination, Australian Football, played by the heathens of the southern and western states.

a. why isn't clotted cream more popular? it's quite good!

b. curling might beat out march madness if they'd go back to wearing top hats

c. i don't know much about australian football...but that finger-pointing thing that the weird officials do is surreal!

i have a hankering for some clotted cream right now. and i still drink my tea the english way, although my sugar intake is far less than it used to be. as a result, so's my waist!

on the other hand, if dentistry is such a significant breakthru, why hasn't it made it over to england yet? harharhrahar.

Saleski: "i don't know much about australian football...but that finger-pointing thing that the weird officials do is surreal!"

You're not missing much.

I think those officials are carpark attendants who've somehow found their way into the ground.

"How long's yours again?"

"This long." (*holds two fingers nine inches apart, the bloody liar).

Only philistines from the heathen-populated southern and western states play Australian football.

"[ESPN is] not about to waste time and money on a crap sport."

Are you kidding? I have seen them show Strongman competitions, professional dominoes, and aerobics.

"It has been scientifically proven that darts is superior to any other sport ever invented."

If you can drink beer and get better at it, technically it's not a sport.

"Jesus Christ, you're the comments editor. You're better than that."

Suss, I am guessing you haven't seen how often he and Ruvy dance around discussing the existence of God. One of them is about to break any day now. I can just feel it.

Mark, I don't have a chip on my shoulder, but you do seem to be sporting an entire bag of French Fries. It's not a look I expect to catch on...

I ignored your question because, as I'm sure you know full well, you don't really seem to want an answer. You're just carrying on a big strop because someone dared to make the obvious and true statement that gridiron is a simple game. Ever since you've just been clucking like an outraged rooster. You're over-reacting like a moody teenager.

Football isn't a complicated game either and it doesn't take very long to get a good understanding of it. You clearly just don't want to, presumably because you just don't like having your comfy old world view adjusted?

zing, you're just waffling. Draughts is a simple game too. Just cos there is a lot of strategy doesn't mean it isn't a simple game. They are not mutually exclusive terms.

Furthermore, I don't hate American Football, and I'll thank you not to attribute statements to me that I haven't made, which is a pretty common habit of quite a few of you sensitive Yankees. Touchy much? I rather think so! Try paying attention rather than making stuff up, it makes you look uncharacteristically dumb.

And if the best justification of the game is that it looks good on TV, well that's pretty tragic too. I don't actually agree with that opinion, as most of the off ball movement takes place off screen while the camera focuses on the quarterback, then cuts to the intended receiver, just as in Football the camera focuses on the player with the ball and not the other players.

In fact, you could argue that as good football is a passing game played on the ground rather than the aerial long ball, it is more suited to TV than your game. The argument that gridiron fits in nicely with ad breaks is just sad really. And if you need to go to the bathroom THAT often, you need medical help! In the end, it just comes down to that old cliché of different strokes for different folks.

STM, your prejudice in favour of the oval ball over the round ball is well known and noted. Personally, I like both.

El Bicho, thanks for popping by with one of your characteristic comedy routines, it's as much appreciated as it is hilarious. I reckon the AF fans have as intimate a relationship with reality as our pet mystic does. And just as much charm, grace and respect for other views too...

whatever you'd like...enjoy the void.

goodbye.

Thanks for the dialogue, Mark, it's been, well, disappointingly juvenile really. Enjoy your sulky walk home though. Laters.

Having watched the ball go back and forth here, I'll say this much. Football seems like a bunch of dumb jocks in heavy pads trying to score ten yards (or more) by advancing a pigskin. For the most part, that is what it looks like to me. If I didn't understand that there are complicated strategies involved in attempting to accomplish this, I'd forget the game altogether.

I mean, really - why should I give a rip about 300 pound jocks running around in pads and tights? Nevertheless, football is like chess - a simple game - and like chess, it requires complicated strategies to accomplish its simple goals.

I say this as a chess player, not a football fan.

ON THE OTHER HAND, there is a certain joy in soccer that does not even exist in football. First of all, it is a hell of a lot easier to play. All you need is a good pair of shoes, some decent shorts, and sun shining down on a pitch.

If you can run, kick, and head a ball, you've got it made. So the poetry in movement is much easier to enjoy, because you too can be such a poet. What is frustrating for Americans about soccer is the low scoring - what is frustrating about football is the fixed positioning, the stops and starts, the time seemingly wasted while a bunch of jocks in pads and tights stand still. Someone used to the poetry of movement will be bored by the fixed positioning in football.

Now, living here, I can shut off the hype about kadur-regel found in the local sports pages, and just concentrate on the poetry in movement created by the sportscasters as I listen to the soccer games on Sunday night, riding hone from J-lem police patrol.

Saleski and zing-zing are right. Soccer is just not in American culture. Baseball and football are.

But on the other hand, in this little country, baseball and football will always just be imports for the Americans and wannabe Americans to enjoy.

Living here means breaking out a bag of sunflower seeds, opening up a bottle of Tapuzina and screaming yesh!! when Beitar Yerushalayim actually does score....

They do - once in a while.

Rosey, I like the top flight european games ... EPL, Serie A, etc.

But the rest of it, I hate to say it, is a snore-a-thon.

The other factor is this: Any top sporting competition that decides its champions on penalty shootout is flawed, badly ... and too often soccer championships even at the highest level are decided by penalty shootout.

That's not entertainment Rosey.

"Just cos there is a lot of strategy doesn't mean it isn't a simple game. They are not mutually exclusive terms."

waffling? yeah. meet its definition.

"Furthermore, I don't hate American Football, and I'll thank you not to attribute statements to me that I haven't made, which is a pretty common habit of quite a few of you sensitive Yankees."

shut up! i'm gonna cry... ok, i didn't. anyway, "hatred" was a strong word, i'll admit it. but you certainly have enough of a problem with the game to go off on it for no particular reason...

"And if the best justification of the game is that it looks good on TV, well that's pretty tragic too."

now, you know i didn't say that. so stop that, you angry american. i said that being a great tv game is "one advantage" that football holds over soccer, which often doesn't quite translate.

"I don't actually agree with that opinion, as most of the off ball movement takes place off screen while the camera focuses on the quarterback, then cuts to the intended receiver..."

proving, once again, that you haven't watched much football... about half the plays are running plays, and about half the passes are for short yardage. long passes only happen about a 1/4 of the time, and usually, the camera will try to follow the ball, as the camera crew usually doesn't quite know where it's going to end up...

"The argument that gridiron fits in nicely with ad breaks is just sad really. And if you need to go to the bathroom THAT often, you need medical help! In the end, it just comes down to that old cliché of different strokes for different folks."

ok... i got a couple of problems with this. #1, are you going to say that you have never ever missed a goal because you were on the pisser? ha! i call you liar if you want to claim such a thing. you know how beer and sports go together. one tends to pee a lot during a 3-hour game.

and #2, is it a medical issue or is it "different strokes?" can't be both.

there is a certain joy in soccer that does not even exist in football. First of all, it is a hell of a lot easier to play. All you need is a good pair of shoes, some decent shorts, and sun shining down on a pitch.

Actually, you don't even need that. It's the simplest game in the world to play because there's no special equipment necessary. People in Africa and on the beaches of Brazil play barefoot. Kids in Britain use piles of jackets for goalposts, or a goal drawn on the wall with chalk.

When I was a boy, my brother and I converted the backyard into a stadium - much to our father's chagrin. Two lime trees were the goal at one end (there was even the chain-link fence which separated our property from the railroad to serve as a net!), and either a pair of bamboo stakes or our imagination made do at the other.

You don't actually even need a soccer ball. A tennis ball will do or, if push comes to shove, anything that can be kicked. I've played with a crushed coke can many times... although I don't recommend heading one of those bad boys!

Stan, the demand for a result can be as strong from the fans as it is from clubs or administrators.

If people have travelled to the finals of an event such as the FA Cup or World Cup and the match is tied even after extra time, the players will need time to recover. Many players are running as much as 15 km or more (10 miles for the non metric) in 90 minutes and can loses several kilos in weight.

It is sadly just not fair to fans who have possibly saved up for a year or more to attend such an event to have a replay, just as it may not be possible to use the venue again or to fit an extra game into club schedules.

The penalty shootout is the best answer people have been able to come up with. I was set against it myself for a while but, having now experienced a few, they do have a certain dramatic intensity of their own. In other words, they can be bloody exciting.

zing, I'm disappointed you can't see my point but I think you kind of don't want to. I don't have a "problem" with the game at all, I just find it a bit dull, rather like rugby league. You may like the stop/start kind of play interesting but I get bored at the constant interruptions. Great sport is like great music, dancing or sex, it should be a continuously flowing series of moves that build to a crescendo, not some weird variation of coitus interruptus.

I still can't concede your point about it being a great TV game either, for the reasons I wrote above. I will admit that I love that camera system that can track over the whole pitch though, that's one trick that would be a great addition to many sports, including football.

No, at 45 minutes each half, I'm going to watch all of any game that I really care about, although I did once miss a classic Eric Cantona goal for Manchester United when I went to the bogs to skin up!

1. Lowering the heart rate reduces the effects of stress. Boredom lowers the heart rate.

2. A sport in which almost no one uses their hands makes Irish step-dancing seem not so foolish

3. Sorry, I can't think of a third reason to watch soccer.

"Great sport is like great music, dancing or sex, it should be a continuously flowing series of moves that build to a crescendo, not some weird variation of coitus interruptus."

ahem. you've never heard of the minutemen, the vogue or changing position?

and for your tv point, well, see, you have missed a goal because of a bathroom break, even if it was for drugs instead of bladder issues. (and "skin up" is a pretty nasty term, i say, especially when you are doing so in the "bog.")

Trust you to bring up the exceptions to the rule, zingy, whilst ignoring the irresistible and elegant beauty of my point! The goal I missed was at a live match, not on TV, still narked i missed it though.

ok--so your music and dance theories were right. but sex? so you just pound away at the missus until orgasm is achieved, children are born and the years just melt away into death?

no, no.

but yeah, ok.

but you seem to be missing something here as well. i appreciate american football. i also appreciate soccer. that leaves me one up on you! (and i also like [college] basketball, [pro] baseball, [women's] tennis, [pro] hockey...)

maybe you have some all-sport consuming passion for soccer, but it ain't the only thing going on in the world (of sports). maybe it simplifies your life. i ain't judging. soccer's a good choice. i like it. it's fun.

A sport in which almost no one uses their hands makes Irish step-dancing seem not so foolish

A sport in which no-one uses their hands... You mean, like track?

Yep, that Jeremy Warriner. What a pussy.

Skin up = construct marijuana cigarette.

Cantona = big-nosed French Judas bastard...

A bitter Leeds fan. Still. Always actually, go figure!

Come on, Colin, he did help you win the league. Your grapes can't be that sour.

Leeds wouldn't have won it again with or without him. The writing (in the form of Manchester United's formidable bank balance) was already on the wall, and I think Monsieur Dropkick knew that.

Oh but they can be Doc! Oh but they can...

He played his part, but he arrived fairly late in the title-winning season, in fact, he fair flitted through Leeds, sadly. It's an extraordinary story (apply the salt of hearsay) but I believe Sir Alex, or one of his Satan-badged minnions rang up to enquire about a different player and we said, "Why not have Eric instead?"... Madness!

Your lot better start winning soon though Doc: Derby are down, Fulham probably too (sad that, I like Fulham, nicest ground I've been to) but it's all a bit tight after that and you keep getting thwacked!

Well, it doesn't help that since Kev arrived we've had to play the combined might of the Roman Legions in quick succession, so things aren't quite as dire as they seem (although we certainly shouldn't have lost 5-1 at home, even to the Eleven Footballers of the Apocalypse).

We just need to win one to get some confidence up. We've got Blackburn at home next week, and they're beatable, so I have hopes.

One of the things I love about the end of summer/heading into autumn in Australia.

The soccer, basketball and cricket seasons are over, and the proper football season (you know, those games where people use their hands AND try to break their opponents in half), is about to begin.

Southern hemisphere international Super 14 Rugby is already underway and going gangbusters leading into the 3rd round (all four Aussie teams doing nicely early), and the National Rugby League starts in a few weeks.

Can't wait for that ... a bit of good old-fashioned biffo on TV!

The only blot on the landscape is that abomination, Australian Football, or Aussie Rules (no fu..ing rules!), which will begin in a few weeks and will at least I suppose keep all the deluded heathens in the southern and western states (are they really part of this continent??) quiet for the next six months.

Switching the topic brutally from club to country, there was something on the BBC website earlier about whether there should be a play-off game between the Six Nations and Tri-Nations champions.

Seems to me that if it ever actually happens, there'd be no need for a World Cup.

And then maybe the winners of that game could go and get their arses kicked by the Argentinians.

Argentina should be admitted to SANZAR, the southern hemisphere governing body.

Finishing third in the world cup makes that imperative IMO.

I love the style they play too. Their set piece stuff is mechanical, especially the scrums where they have been schooled in the bajada technique, which - loosely - involves reversing their foot placement so as to concentrate all the force of the scrum through the hooker, who you'd hope would have thick neck.

What it does do is splinter an opposition scrum. Argentia win plenty of scrum penalties from this, especially on the wheel.

They also quite often will push the best packs off the ball at the opposition put-in.

Combined with that, their backs (most of whom play in France, and which is probably one of the reasons why it would be diffucilt for them to join the Tri-Nations), have inherited the gallic flair and unpredictability of French backs, who are dangerous every time (the bastards!!) they get their hands on the pill.

They have certainly come of age as a rugby-playing nation, and deserve to be rewarded.

Interestingly, the Seppos played OK too in the last world cup ... thank God they don't know much about the nuances of the game, or play it at a high level in the US, or they'd grow into a world rugby power.