||[Mar. 12th, 2009|11:03 am]
Listen in, listen Ian!
dubdobdee posted this article which is a fairly standard American getting all defensive about "soccer" type article (although a particularly mental example of the type).|
Not that I care what Americans think about football, or indeed what anyone thinks. Any fule kno that football was actually loads better before everyone, particularly gurls, started pretending to like it. No, my main problem with the article is the use of the phrase "The linear, two-dimensional action of soccer". Something can't be linear and two dimensional, as a line has only one dimension. Perhaps he meant to say "The planar, two-dimensional action of soccer", who knows? Certainly not him, because I'm as near to certain as I can be that if this were pointed out to him, he'd just say something like "Hell, I'm just trying to form a coherent argument to persuade others that my beliefs are correct. Who cares what scientific terms I misuse?" And I'm moaning about it here because frankly, it's too minor to bother Ben Goldacre with.
Oh, that sentence in full by the way: "The linear, two-dimensional action of soccer is like the rocking of a boat but without any storm and while the boat has not even left the dock." Yes.
also clearly football is three dimensional, especially in league two, hoof it up to the big lad!!!
Quite. Moreso, clearly, than American football where scoring is achieved by crossing the line at any height, whereas height is crucial to scoring in football. Silly, two-dimensional Americans!
...and their linear thinking ;)
That sentence makes my head hurt.
I don't get why people fuss about soccer/football over here. It's essentially the same as American football/hockey/lacrosse/basketball/rugby/etc...two goals of some sort, one on either end of a field, one ball, and one team tries to make the goal while the other team tries to stop them. What's wrong with that?
You aren't allowed to use your hands. Which is communist, and ungodly apparently.
Ah, perhaps that explains the Holy Goalkeepers
All those games are cousins to each other, hands or no hands. Baseball, now, that's a seriously messed-up game. Run around in circles for hours on end...best take a book to the ballpark, because you're not getting out of there any time soon.
Sporting should be about breaking kids down before you start building them up
Is this guy my old P.E. teacher?
also anyone who shivered through 90 minutes of playing left back whilst it hailed/sleeted/just generally precipitated on you and you maybe got two touches of the ball in that 90 minutes wouldn't say anything about not being broken down, but then we played on adult-sized pitches from the age of 10 because we are british and abhor skill in our footballers...
What a twat.
I love this: Do kids ever say, “Trick or Treat, smell my hands”? no, BECAUSE THAT DOESN'T RHYME. Duh.
No, it's because everyone wants to smell a stranger's hands. It's just coincidence that it doesn't rhyme.
Well, that guy's obviously an idiot, so expecting him to understand basic geometry is asking too much. ;) I hope very much that the article isn't meant to be taken seriously, because it's really just too absurd while also having a disturbing sexist aftertaste. Why isn't this douchebag raging against tee-ball, which really is a bullshit "every kid is a winner" game. I mean, the ball is RIGHT there on a tee in front of you... all you have to do is hit it. Soccer requires skill and athletic ability, for fuck's sake. An article about how soccer moms are ruining America, I could get behind.
Personally, I think anyone from a culture that doesn't stop to wonder why the sport they call "football" barely involves foot-on-ball contact needs to think longer and harder before they offer a word of criticism against soccer.