GameBanshee Forums

You could say the same about any sport. Why are sports like baseball and american football so big in North America when the majority of the rest of the world probably doesn't even know the rules for them? Football is so popular because it is a game that has spread through so many countries and that anyone can play to some degree. The World Cup and other competitions highlight the social aspect of the game. Yes there are riots etc., but the majority of the fans respect the fans of different nationalities and the World cup brings that out. No other sport seems to get different nationalities drinking and laughing together - for example, last Thursday the England and German fans (who have always been huge rivals) were watching the matches together on the huge screen in the centre of a German city.

With regards to the colours of their tops, its more than that. It comes down to supporting your country. In club football, it is no different to supporting a particular ice hockey team for example, but with International football, you are supporting your country.

Lestat wrote:And what post did earn that cranky, slightly elitist comment? Sorry, but football watching is, at least in my country, a preeminant pubsport, with all the silliness involved.

And I thought right from the start that this was a rather light hearted thread, or am I completely mistaken?

If we have one thread for discussion of the football World Cup, I'd much prefer to discuss football in this thread and not let it deteriorate to a general spam thread like 90% of all other SYM-threads. There are pub threads for general spam, general wittiness and general social chitchat.

My comments was aimed at the above posts that were off topic, simply because I wished to stop more off topic spam. In particular, my comment was aimed at Jon Irenicus comment that "Why do europeans get all crazy when soccer season comes around? I have never understood this. The whole other half of the world gets crazy. Is it because you guys can't kill each other in combat anymore so a ball in the net is the next best thing or what". I did not take this comment as a joke, but as a post questioning "why are you discussing what you are discussing in this thread". Now, I think it's pretty unconstructive and non-contributing to any topic to just post a "why do you discuss this topic, I don't find it interesting"-statement.

However, in the light of JonIrenicus last post it seems that maybe I misunderstood him and he is actually seriously interested in why people are so interested in football. This I will try to reply to in a post to JI later.

That being said, I do not believe England will get past Portugal that easily, in view of their performance against Ecuador.

Oh, I don't think it will be easy at all for the English. But I sure think that a Portugal without two important players and 5 yellows will certainly be a lot easier than a well-playing Holland would have been.

@Sytze: I don't think the ref is the only one to blame for the farcial game. Considering the new rules, he didn't hand out many cards at all that were not according to the rule book. More than the ref, I think the players in both teams were to blame.

Well JI's comment was still on topic, so hardly spam. And some merry banter should be allowed, as I said, this is for me more like watching football in a pub. If I want serious sportsjournalism, SYM is not where I'm going.

And as far as England goes, Beckham was the best man on the field in the last match, 'nuff said.

[QUOTE=JonIrenicus]This is exactly why I asked that question. People go crazy about a sport and I asked why. So why? Maybe you could answer me.
<snip>
People have riots and kill each other about this sport. Why? You are rooting for a color jeresy and nothing more (unless you know someone personally). Seriously why does a large portion of the world care so much about this game?[/QUOTE]

I am sorry if I misunderstood you and thought you did not mean this as a serious question although you did. I will do my best to try to explain why I think football is so important to many people. There are several reasons.

1. Same as any sports, baseball, American football etc are popular in your country, football is popular in almost all countries worldwide. Football, like all other sports, provides entertainment, excitement and the opportunity to watch people perform something to the level of perfection. Your personal taste and your geographical and/or cultural loyalty determines how you select players, teams, coaches, playing styles that you like and enjoy to watch and care for. For instance, I love to watch Brazil play football, not because I have any special connection to Brazil but because to me, it's like watching a piece of classical dancing by Petipa or listening to a concerto by Rachmaninov - it's one of these few moments of perfection in a world full of human imperction.

2. The riots and killing associated with football has a background that is far more than a colour of the jersey. In Italy as well as in Spain, the various football teams are connected to political factions and areas that have been in conflict with each other historically. Fascism, extreme leftists, pro- and con Franco, separatists, etc...it's connected to the political history of the region and the country. In some countries, like France, England and Brazil, there is a connection to social class and the struggle of poor people. Consider a world player like Samuel Eto'o, who is sadly not in the World Cup because Cameroon failed to qualify. Eto'o is a more important person to most West African people than their own leaders. Eto'o, who in case you don't know who he is, is a symbol to people, a symbol that African people can be successful, that an African guy from the poorest of circumstances can do be somebody, do something to turn his fate around, also in the rich world. It is more than just playing a sport, it is a glimpse of hope for people who live in misery and poverty.

3. Football is a very simple sports. It has an old history, and football-like games have been played all over the world for thousands of years. It requires no equipment, no special climate or geograpical prerequisites and the rules are simple so you don't need an education to understand the game - that's why it is so popular globally. Even poor people and poor countries can succeed in football. Consider for instance that the famous Brazilian team who won the World Cup in 1958. The health control before the tournament start revealed that most of the players were malnutritioned, many had various parasites and worms and they had so bad dental health so the dentist had to pull out 32 teeth before the tournament started. One of the major stars in the squad is said to have scored 38 out of 123 on an IQ-test - a result that would not allow him to work as a bus driver. Still, they outperformed the other teams by a mile.
The simplicity of football is the key to its' global success. Like music or art, sports can also be an international language, so to speak. I can't tell you how many times I've walked into small coffee shops in places where people have never seen a European woman before, and even though everybody eye me with suspicion at first, immediate contact is established as soon as I start asking questions about the football game everybody is watching at the semi-broken TV in the corner. And even if you can't talk to people due to lack of any common language, you can always play football with them (Yes I've tried this at all continents)

So do you think this explanation made it any more clear to you why people care about football?

Lestat wrote:Well JI's comment was still on topic, so hardly spam. And some merry banter should be allowed, as I said, this is for me more like watching football in a pub. If I want serious sportsjournalism, SYM is not where I'm going.

I have already stated that I obviously misunderstood the nature of JonIrenicus comment, but no, I don't think "why are you discussing topic A, topic A is not interesting, nobody I know cares about topic A" is not on-topic in my opinion unless it is a serious question. Let's pretend you and I are discussing the political problems of Sub-Saharan Africa. Somebody posts: "Hey, why are you concerned about Africa, nobody cares about Africa anyway, nobody I know care about Africa". That is not a question. It's a statement that it is negative to discuss Africa. This is how I interpreted JI:s first two posts, and seeing Fiona continued the off-topic posts by making a non-football related joke about JI:s location, I wanted to stop the thread from deteriorating into the usual SYM-spam which, as I said above, I think we have plenty of other threads for. I have not stated I wish serious football journalism, that's an overinterpretation from your side. I do want football discussion in a football thread, just as a want political discussion in a political thread. I am just fed up that a majority of discussion threads here at SYM are clogged up by internal jokes and one-line posts like "Yeah me too" or "Hehehehe that's funny". I am simply asking can we please talk about football here and not people's locations and not why it is silly to talk about football because people in the US don't talk about football.

And as far as England goes, Beckham was the best man on the field in the last match, 'nuff said.

I think Beckham has played well generally, so far. British media critisise him a lot a usual, I can't see how this man can do anything to make the media in the UK like him. Gerrard and Lampard were not close their best in the last game and neither was Terry. Rooney looked good in my opinion, I believe he is getting back to shape.

A funny thing is that pre-tournament, more Swedes were cheering for Sven-Goran Eriksson, ie England, than for the Swedish team Now when Sweden is out, most people cheer for England, followed by Brazil and Argentina.

[QUOTE=C Elegans]I did not take this comment as a joke, but as a post questioning "why are you discussing what you are discussing in this thread". Now, I think it's pretty unconstructive and non-contributing to any topic to just post a "why do you discuss this topic, I don't find it interesting"-statement.[/QUOTE]

This is why I don't assume. I wish others would do the same. Believe me, if I wanted to offend I would have made it very clear but that is not my intentions. Sure I made a little jab at soccer but it was in good fun.

I know why people watch sports. I watch american football time to time. But I don't get angry when my team loses. That happens. But soccer on the other hand, people go nuts if their team loses. I mean I know there is the few hardcores out there of any sport but it's like whole country is crazy about it. I live in the states so I really don't know why. It is just a game like any other yet people idolize the sport and put it higher then all other games(not everyone mind you but a lot of people), which irritates me. I mean this is a game where the refs can get paid off just to give favour to a team (oh it does happen). That is pretty hardcore by itself. Even the olympics doesn't compare to the crazyness of soccer. When a team loses in the olympics people really don't seem to care. "yay we win" "aww we lose." Not that seriousness soccer has.

JonIrenicus]I know why people watch sports. I watch american football time to time. [/quote] Ok wrote:But I don't get angry when my team loses. That happens. But soccer on the other hand, people go nuts if their team loses.
<snip>
It is just a game like any other yet people idolize the sport and put it higher then all other games(not everyone mind you but a lot of people), which irritates me.

Football is the worlds most globally widespread sports. That is a fact. I don't know if that is the reason why some people put it higher than other games, or if it is something else. It is certainly the reason why it's my personal favorite sport.

I don't get angry if my team loose, and I don't view it as the end of the world as I know some people do. However, as I tried to explain in the long post above, for many people it's not just a question of their team loosing, it may be a matter of ties to social groups or political factions. A famous Swedish author has written a very good short-story about Greece loosing to Sweden in the European Championships. This author was born in Greece and came to Sweden as an immigrant. For him and his Greek-Swedish friends, when they watched Greece playing Sweden, it was far more than a football game, it was the hope of getting acceptance in Swedish society, it was a feeling of taking revenge at all the discrimination they have experienced as immigrants, all the failed job interviews, all the suspicious looks, all the people who changed seats in the metro, all the shouting of invectives on the street... I think it is in this perspective you have to view football. It's a lot more than a game to a lot of people, especially to people in a not so privilegded life situation.

Well to talk about the reaction to losing, lately, in an effort to inspire Australia, we've been hearing about the Guus factor. That is, Guus Hiddink, our coach, and how Italy is afraid. From 2002, he coached South Korea to beat Italy, and now he's back to do it again.

But apparently Italy's loss to a nation such as South Korea really demoralised them, reduced the turnout at Italian club games and lost a lot of face to the public. We're hoping the fear will remain as Guus comes back for seconds.

@ CE: well, I didn't see any degeneration of discussion, just a little off-tangent comment, so I found your comment to be a bit like a tackle that hit the man and not the ball.

And sorry but the comparison Africa // Football is a bit disingeneous: after all football is a game. A lot that is happening in Africa is not. Sorry but the importance of the problems of Africa are a fair bit more important than a game, however popular. And I'm happy that the majority of voters in Liberia thought so too.

Whatever football is, lets not take it too serious please, and certainly not on a level as the problems facing the African continent.

@Lestat: so do you give me a yellow or a red?

[QUOTE=Lestat]And sorry but the comparison Africa // Football is a bit disingeneous: after all football is a game. A lot that is happening in Africa is not. Sorry but the importance of the problems of Africa are a fair bit more important than a game, however popular. And I'm happy that the majority of voters in Liberia thought so too.

Whatever football is, lets not take it too serious please, and certainly not on a level as the problems facing the African continent.[/QUOTE]

Lestat, I really hope you are not suggesting that I am comparing football to the problems of the African continent. I was merely taking a serious topic as an example to illustrate the concept I dislike, ie simply posting that you personally think a subject is not interesting and nothing more. I took a serious topic as example to make the principle more obvious, but the type of behaviour I was trying to illustrate is the same, ie a post made not to discuss but only to point out that the topic is not interesting to the person who has written the post.
I could illustrate the same with a trivial example: let's presume you and I are discussing what books we like. The somebody posts "why do you talk about books, reading is so boring, nobody in my towns read any books". Again, I don't view this as on-topic or in any way contributing to the thread, unless the question is seriously meant and the poster seriously wants an answer.

Now it turned out that JI was interested in the topic (ie football) which I did not at all get the impression he was from the first two posts. If it was not for JI:s third post, I would still take the Is it because you guys can't kill each other in combat anymore so a ball in the net is the next best thing or what and No one in my city doesn't even care comments as meaning exactly that, and not meaning JI was interested in discussing football, or why football is popular in the rest of the world. I personally don't find it obvious from the first two posts, and my statement was in response to those posts.

However, let's not linger to that since it was obviously a misunderstanding. Let me just conclude this discussion with stating that personally, I am really fed up with spam and internal jokes, and I'd be posting far more at SYM if there was a better separation between discussion topics (any topic, serious or not) and general spam.

[quote="dj_venom]
But apparently Italy's loss to a nation such as South Korea really demoralised them"]

As far as I understand, the Italians were extremly unhappy with their result at the last WC, and they blamed all of it on bad referreeing. They also had a bad European's in 2004 (they went out already at the group stage) so I am sure they are highly motivated to perform well this time. According to an Italian colleague of mine, many Italians feel they want to show the world that Italy is about football and playing football well, not about these disgracing match-fixing scandals.

[QUOTE=C Elegans]@Lestat: so do you give me a yellow or a red? [/QUOTE]
If it's Poll, it won't matter, you'll get to stay on either way.

[QUOTE=C Elegans]As far as I understand, the Italians were extremly unhappy with their result at the last WC, and they blamed all of it on bad referreeing. They also had a bad European's in 2004 (they went out already at the group stage) so I am sure they are highly motivated to perform well this time. According to an Italian colleague of mine, many Italians feel they want to show the world that Italy is about football and playing football well, not about these disgracing match-fixing scandals.[/QUOTE]

Well they can be motivated all they want, Australia is determined. From what Guus has said, the plan is to ensure that we don't conceed and early goal, like we did against Croatia and Japan, as they are good at defending a lead. We're aiming for a tie after extra time, since we are confident about penalty shootouts.

[QUOTE=C Elegans]So do you think this explanation made it any more clear to you why people care about football?[/QUOTE]

Much more clear. Since I am from the states, I have limited knowledge of other countries. Like I know soccer is a pretty fun sport to play but what I didn't know was why it is so widespread. Sure I could assume and pretend but I rather get that information from someone who is there or at least get their viewpoints.

Oh and I played soccer from second grade to fifth grade (which is a long, long time ago). I quit soon as my parents gave me the option to. My body is just not made to play that kind of sport nearly everyday. It was more of a social thing, getting to know the kids I went to school with better and all.

[QUOTE=JonIrenicus]<snip>
I know why people watch sports. I watch american football time to time. But I don't get angry when my team loses. That happens. But soccer on the other hand, people go nuts if their team loses. I mean I know there is the few hardcores out there of any sport but it's like whole country is crazy about it. I live in the states so I really don't know why. It is just a game like any other yet people idolize the sport and put it higher then all other games(not everyone mind you but a lot of people), which irritates me. I mean this is a game where the refs can get paid off just to give favour to a team (oh it does happen). That is pretty hardcore by itself. Even the olympics doesn't compare to the crazyness of soccer. When a team loses in the olympics people really don't seem to care. "yay we win" "aww we lose." Not that seriousness soccer has.[/QUOTE]

Mearly because you don't get angry when "your" team looses, doesnt' mean the countless of other fans of "your" team in the type of sport you follow doesn't get angry that they loose. Americans popular culture worships sportstars and sports as well.

Riots originating from sports is also an issue in the USA, so that neither is specific to football.
The fact that bad seeds exists amongst football fans is no more the sports fault as it is when the sports fault when somebody cause a riot when some random icehockey team wins in the US.
The fact that some bad seeds amongst the sport bribe a referee is no more the sports fault as when people dope themselves for the olympics. Besides, it is easy to bribe referees for most any sport.

Your questions are much more general then simply "why soccer". You might as well ask "why people".
It is just that you don't understand football as many outsider the US fail to understand the fasination with Super Bowl or the Stanly Cup, or why baseball gets called the World Series.

[QUOTE=C Elegans]@Sytze: I don't think the ref is the only one to blame for the farcial game. Considering the new rules, he didn't hand out many cards at all that were not according to the rule book. More than the ref, I think the players in both teams were to blame.[/QUOTE]
Obviously. However, the referee let it go totally out of control by showing his favourite colours. It all started with that Heitinga. After Portugal stopped the game due to various injuries and he had to pass it back, etiquette and all, he actually kept it to himself. Ridiculous. Deco’s foul was, in my opinion, quite justified and I believe I would’ve done the same thing if I were in his situation. What Deco did wasn’t sportive, but Heitnga clearly showed no respect, maturity or wisdom whatsoever. It wasn’t sportive either. From then on, everything started going downwards, with the players getting caught up in the mood and atmosphere. I believe we really could’ve used Seedorf: He’s level-headed, has plenty of experience, and is capable of keeping his calm throughout the game, unlike several other players. A shame vBasten considered him uncontrollable.



[QUOTE=dj_venom]But apparently Italy's loss to a nation such as South Korea really demoralised them, reduced the turnout at Italian club games and lost a lot of face to the public. We're hoping the fear will remain as Guus comes back for seconds. [/QUOTE]
Don’t get too exited. If I know the Italian team well enough, and I think I’ll do, they will beat Australia. Australia’s strength is, more than anything else, their physique. Unfortunately for them, Italy has that area covered quite well, too. And then, on top of that, Italy has more experience and technique. Overall, they are better. Then again, they were also better against Korea (on paper), but we all know how that turned out. Regardless, though, I think they learned a lot since then and won’t be making the same mistakes. Italy is more calculated nowadays. The only thing I find unfortunate about current Italy, is that Nesta is injured. What a loss and what a shame. One of my favourite players.

Regarding the ref in the Holland-Portugal match, I do not think he is much to blame. It was a horrendous show by the players of both teams and totally unworthy of the sport.
The ref didn't start all to well in my view, because I felt he interfererd to much in the game by calling fouls when the game might as well have flowed, however, I think most of the cards he delt was actually quite allright, although I'd say the yellow card to the dutch player stamping down on Ronaldo should indeed have been a direct red.
However hte way the players started going at it in the second half - shamefull for that level of football.

Also - shame shame shame on Holland for the very unsportsmanlike conduct of keeping the ball after Portugal gave it up when a player as down needing attention. Shame indeed, it is an unwritten rule that you give the ball back to the team that gives it up when something like that happens. Although I had my hopes for Holland that incident alone makes me satisfied they didn't advance.

It was a shamefull match for football, but in the end - I think the most deserving team won.

[quote="Sytze]<snip>
Don’t get too exited. If I know the Italian team well enough"]

I don't know. Australia plays untraditionally and with a morale which I find very interesting.
It was very clear with the croatia match that the aussies just kept attacking with multiple players constantly, and I think if they keep that up, they can surely stress out Italys defense.
It will open the aussies up for counter attacks et al as well though, but I do think the game is more open then the bookies do. I do think Italy will pull it off in the end, but I find the match interesting.

[QUOTE=Xandax]I do think Italy will pull it off in the end, but I find the match interesting.[/QUOTE]

In the end, indeed. Poor Australia, what a cruel fate. How is the discussion going in other countries? Swedish commentators and journalists all agree that was not a penalty.

On a Belgian site it was called "awarded lightly" (licht toegekend), meaning there might have been something, but not something for which you'd normally award a penalty kick.

[QUOTE=Xandax]

Also - shame shame shame on Holland for the very unsportsmanlike conduct of keeping the ball after Portugal gave it up when a player as down needing attention. Shame indeed, it is an unwritten rule that you give the ball back to the team that gives it up when something like that happens. Although I had my hopes for Holland that incident alone makes me satisfied they didn't advance.

It was a shamefull match for football, but in the end - I think the most deserving team won.

[/QUOTE]

Yes, I agre that they havent deserved going ahead and that the referee was kinda blind. Anyway, I dont think it was a shamefull match for football just because it was the match of the world cup. A game fought (even though a bit violent) every minute in. And the football shown there wasnt as bad as it could be (Italy played very worst).

@CE: we're guessing how much have they paid for the referee right now. That was a damn ugly thing, with no time for the aussies to even try to score afterwards. Coward move, bad move, referee. Yes, bad move.

I hope FIFA will pay more attention to the referees for the next wave of matches (specially semifinals and finals, because if that happens in a final, damn, we'll be cursing FIFA for the next four years).

[QUOTE=C Elegans]In the end, indeed. Poor Australia, what a cruel fate. How is the discussion going in other countries? Swedish commentators and journalists all agree that was not a penalty.[/QUOTE]
Speechless. At least, that's what my opinion was when it happened. It's such a shame, I know that a lot of the time people blame the ref, perhaps unfairly, but it truly seems as though our campaign has been plagued by poor reffing, and now other cases too. It's really a pathetic way to lose the game, when in my opinion we were dominating the whole time.

[QUOTE=Xandax]I don't know. Australia plays untraditionally and with a morale which I find very interesting.
It was very clear with the croatia match that the aussies just kept attacking with multiple players constantly, and I think if they keep that up, they can surely stress out Italys defense. [/QUOTE]
Not to sound arrogant or biased, but it's the Aussie fighting spirit, something we have in all things we do. We had it in the Croatia match, we also had it in the Japan match.

[QUOTE=C Elegans]In the end, indeed. Poor Australia, what a cruel fate. How is the discussion going in other countries? Swedish commentators and journalists all agree that was not a penalty.[/QUOTE]

It was a harsh penalty, but I think it was a foul so if he gave it he had to give the penalty. However, at that point in the game and the fact that it was a pretty tame foul I think he could have used his better judgement and just let it go as it didn't deserve a penalty that would knock them out of the cup. The commentators here are blaming the defender rather than the ref though (at least thats the impression I got from them) and saying that, although it was a very harsh penalty, the defender should not have gone to the ground in the penalty box at that stage of the game as the refs are blowing the whistle for everything in this tournament.