soccer or football

What sport is better?

  • Total voters
    58
Nicolasd said:
Doesn't Brazil and Italy play matches where they don't score at all? You don't see that in many other sports. The results in soccer do have a large random element.
Click to expand...

Lol, there's always the chance of a 0-0 but that scoreline is far more likely with teams that play long ball tactics. Brazil are probably the highest scoring team in the world and they always keep the ball on the ground and use lots of close control and passing, I can't think of a single successful long-ball team in the history of football.

As for random element? I can't see how it's more likely to be random than any other sport. Only 7 countries have every won the World Cup since 1930 despite hundreds entering, half of all of these trophies are shared between 2 teams.
I'm gonna take a punt here and guess there's no other sport in world where 2 teams have dominated in such brutal fashion
 
CCR said:
Long ball teams like Norway? They never even come close to winning anything
Click to expand...

Exactly. We did always beat the hell out of Brazil though. For some weird reason, even when Brazil was like the world champions, we beat them. Must have been something about the Norwegian teams style they diden't handle very well. We have actually never lost to Brazil..

And before you try: That does not indicate that soccer is a game of chanse, the Norwegian style/tactic was simply something Brazil couldn't handle. Doesn't mean Brazil had worse tactics than Norway, all tactics and styles have their weaknesses, the Norwegian style is/was simply the Brazil styles weakness..
 
Karky said:
Exactly. We did always beat the hell out of Brazil though. For some weird reason, even when Brazil was like the world champions, we beat them. Must have been something about the Norwegian teams style they diden't handle very well. We have actually never lost to Brazil..

And before you try: That does not indicate that soccer is a game of chanse, the Norwegian style/tactic was simply something Brazil couldn't handle. Doesn't mean Brazil had worse tactics than Norway, all tactics and styles have their weaknesses, the Norwegian style is/was simply the Brazil styles weakness..
Click to expand...

Perhaps Brazil wasn't fielding their best team in this particular match. International friendlies don't mean much in football, sorry...soccer. Even in major tournaments such as the copa america (wich norway isn't a part of) or the world cup, top teams like Brazil can afford to field a "B" team in the latter matches of group stages because in most cases, are guaranteed to qualify already, so they can take a loss. Not to rain on your parade or anything. I will give you though that Norway does have at least one quality player in John Arne Riise
 
I think it all comes down to your childhood, I love watching baseball and US football but I'll never be fanatical about it like I am with soccer because soccer is in my blood. I live and breath it and my life would feel empty without it. I could only ever be an armchair fan of US football because it's not in my breeding

I know that sounds weird to non-fanatical fans and it drives my other half crazy but it's been bred into me like a religion. Because of that devotion I'll never be able to think of any other sport in the same light
 
Streamline said:
Perhaps Brazil wasn't fielding their best team in this particular match. International friendlies don't mean much in football, sorry...soccer. Even in major tournaments such as the copa america (wich norway isn't a part of) or the world cup, top teams like Brazil can afford to field a "B" team in the latter matches of group stages because in most cases, are guaranteed to qualify already, so they can take a loss. Not to rain on your parade or anything. I will give you though that Norway does have at least one quality player in John Arne Riise
Click to expand...

No offence Streamline, but you have no idea what you are talking about.. You just assume Norway and Brazil have just had friendly matches, that's far from true. We have had friendly matches too, where we diden't play with our top team either. But we have played against Brazil in "real" matches too.
I admitt we haven't played eacother on that many occations but I believe even the Brazil team admitted that Norway just hit their weak spot. However, I'm afraid if Norway were to play Brazil now, Norway would loose, because Norway might have been sucky before, but they are just reaching new heights every year.

And Norway had more good players before. Tore Andre flo, Ole Gunnar Solskjær (who just retired from ManU) John Carew (still playing, he can be good sometimes)
I don't really like Riise all that much. But then again, I hate soccer.. :p
 
Last edited:
I think Solskjær, just for his abilities to analyze the game and come inn 10 min before it's over and score. Works every time :D And I haven't seen Riise much, but I believe you guys if you say he's good.
 
Karky said:
No offence Streamline, but you have no idea what you are talking about.. You just assume Norway and Brazil have just had friendly matches, that's far from true. We have had friendly matches too, where we diden't play with our top team either. But we have played against Brazil in "real" matches too.
I admitt we haven't played eacother on that many occations but I believe even the Brazil team admitted that Norway just hit their weak spot. However, I'm afraid if Norway were to play Brazil now, Norway would loose, because Norway might have been sucky before, but they are just reaching new heights every year.

And Norway had more good players before. Tore Andre flo, Ole Gunnar Solskjær (who just retired from ManU) John Carew (still playing, he can be good sometimes)
I don't really like Riise all that much. But then again, I hate soccer.. :p
Click to expand...

Are you kidding me? I know exactly what i'm talking about...The only thing i assumed is that Brazil didn't field their best team. Define a "real" match...like i said, the majority of soccer internationals are friendly matches and fairly meaningless...But hey, if Norway beat the best Brazil team than more power to them

Really, Ole Gunnar Solskjaer just retired and use to play for Man U...Really?...Thanks for tellin me that coz i had no idea...I'm gonna take a leaf from you and point out the obvioius but that previous sentence was sarcasm. Carew sucks, i think Gamst Pederson would play a more important role than he does for his country. Riise is deffinately the best player you have though
 
Karky said:
I think Solskjær, just for his abilities to analyze the game and come inn 10 min before it's over and score. Works every time :D And I haven't seen Riise much, but I believe you guys if you say he's good.
Click to expand...
He'd better be good when you look at his pay slip, lol, this is genuine btw, it's made the news over here as Liverpool and Riise want to know how this got leaked

JAR.jpg
 

Attachments

  • JAR.jpg
    JAR.jpg
    23.7 KB · Views: 231
Last edited:
Sandy Eggo said:
I voted Football. Soccer is my least favorite sport to play. I'd rather learn how to play Curling... ;)
Click to expand...

I've gone curling as a fun activity with a hockey team. We got yelled at for throwing the stones around. Our taskmaster lady curling expert was not amused and explained that apparently "that is not done in curling." Ha!

When yet another pass hits me in my skates, and I'm trying to kick the puck up to my stick without losing speed, I curse the fact that most North Americans lack soccer skills and training (outside of 6 year olds in the suburbs).

I can watch pretty much any competitive sport: basketball, baseball, hockey, football, tennis, soccer, rugby, cycling, Aussie rules football, and so on. My preferences are merely a matter of how action packed things are, how much I can get into understanding the strategy, and, of course, my cultural background.

I am someone who ALWAYS has a game on in the background while I'm working, cooking, hanging out, etc. But you know what? While watching high level athletes perform is a joy, I can't think of ANY sport that I'd rather watch than getting to PLAY something on my own.

I prefer watching football to soccer (culture, of course), but I'd rather PLAY soccer than watch football. Then again, I'd rather PLAY football than soccer. Good thing I'm not a kicker!
 
CCR said:
He'd better be good when you look at his pay slip, lol, this is genuine btw, it's made the news over here as Liverpool and Riise want to know how this got leaked

JAR.jpg
Click to expand...

I believe that John Terry is on a 180, 000 Euro/week contract. That's just his weekly guarantee, notwithstanding clean sheet bonuses, appearance bonuses or whatever else is in there. If you think this is rediculous, Chelsea is also paying Shevchenko 130, 000 Euro/week. Of course, this contract was offered to him when he was good!
 
Lol, yeah, Riise is far from being the highest paid but it just seems different when you see the figures written down in front of your eyes, it brings home the reality of what these guys make. When you say 'X' earns £100k a week it's just a figure but when you see all the 000's written down on a payslip it looks more insane
 
It is insane and a testament to how popular football is and the amount of money generated can allow the big clubs to give out rediculous salaries. What on earth do you do with all that money?
 
Football is the greatest soport in the world. just hiiting people and the heart that goes in to the game. there is no better feeling in the world that winning a conference championship even in high school. Football is a sport of few chances because you only get at most eight years high school and college. the chances of going to the NFL are very slim. you guys should try it. A once in a lifetime sport
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top