American Football

[Coito ergo sum]

An awful lot of rules just for a game. And all these plays and tactics they have, do they have practical use or do they go out the window once the ball is thrown.

Considerable practical use. Football is a game of strategy and tactics. On any given play, each player has a job or task, or a "route" to run. Often, if one player doesn't do that job, the whole play will fail.

[Animavore]

An awful lot of rules just for a game. And all these plays and tactics they have, do they have practical use or do they go out the window once the ball is thrown.

Considerable practical use. Football is a game of strategy and tactics. On any given play, each player has a job or task, or a "route" to run. Often, if one player doesn't do that job, the whole play will fail.

But surely once the ball is put into play the other team can easily move totally against expectation meaning your play is ruined and players are left having to improvise their play almost every time. I find it hard to see how those plays could ever be otherwise except in the odd circumstance.

[Coito ergo sum]

I know how it evolved (and using that logic, people are fish) but since the ball is mostly carried by hand I can't bring myself to call it football.

You're confusing "definition" with "etymology."

And rugby football also involves mostly carrying the "hand egg" by hand. Same with Gaellc football. What do you bring yourself to call Gaelic football. Or, Australian rules football? They also "mostly" carry the ball by hand.

In Gaelic football the ball cannot simply be carried like the other two, it must be bounced after every three paces. Also in Gaelic football you can simply kick the ball around like in football pure and even score awesome goals. And no one calls 'rugby' 'rugby football'.

It still "mostly" entails the hands.

Rugby IS rugby football, however. That's how the name came about. Like soccer. Soccer football. Short version of Association Football - i.e. asSOCiation football. Or "soccer," or originally "socker." Rugby -- also called "rugger." Rugger football. Soccer football.

I've heard a lot of Brits scorn the use of the word "soccer," which now is also used in Canada and Australia, too, and not just in the US. But, soccer is originally a British English word, invented in Oxford and other universities as a reference to that kind of football to distinguish it from rugby. You want to play football? Rugger football? No, soccer football.

1889, socca, later socker (1891), soccer (1895), originally university slang (with jocular formation -er (3)), from a shortened form of Assoc., abbreviation of association in Football Association (as opposed to Rugby football); cf. rugger, but they hardly could have taken the first three letters of Assoc.

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?all ... hmode=none

1864, after Rugby, public school where the game was played, from city of Rugby in Warwickshire, central England. The place name is Rocheberie (1086) "fortified place of a man called *Hroca;" with second element from O.E. burh (dat. byrig), replaced by 13c. with O.N. -by "village" due to the infl. of Dan. settlers. Otherwise it might be *Rockbury today. First element perhaps rather O.E. hroc "rook." Rugby Union formed 1871. Slang rugger for "rugby player" is from 1893.

See - rugby was originally just "football." But, to distinguish the kind of football it was, it was named after the school at which it was played. When soccer, Association Football, started being called "football" and predominated, rugby football evolved into just rugby.

By that point in time, however, the United States had significantly separated from the UK, and was evolving on its own. So, rugby football was imported to the US, and over time the rules changed. The first NCAA college football game in the US was in something like 1885, and the teams were Rutgers v. Princeton. The game back then was much more like rugby, with no forward passing. Over time, the game evolved, and one of the biggest thing that changed it was the forward pass.

[Coito ergo sum]

An awful lot of rules just for a game. And all these plays and tactics they have, do they have practical use or do they go out the window once the ball is thrown.

Considerable practical use. Football is a game of strategy and tactics. On any given play, each player has a job or task, or a "route" to run. Often, if one player doesn't do that job, the whole play will fail.

But surely once the ball is put into play the other team can easily move totally against expectation meaning your play is ruined and players are left having to improvise their play almost every time. I find it hard to see how those plays could ever be otherwise except in the odd circumstance.

Well, there are, of course, broken plays and improvisation involved. However, it is certainly not "almost every time." Uncertainty is part of the game, but routes, timing and the like are vital. Plays are practiced to such a degree that some of them involve a Quarterback throwing to a "spot" on the field as opposed to a player. The offensive line is supposed to "open up a hole" and the running back is supposed be ready at the right time to run through it. Etc.

[Animavore]

It still "mostly" entails the hands.

No. It uses both in equal amounts. Players may carry the ball because it's convenient to do so but there is absolutely no rule to stop you using feet as you see fit. You can play it like it is soccer if the fancy takes you but it's harder to keep the ball when the opposition can simply shoulder you off.

[Coito ergo sum]

It still "mostly" entails the hands.

No. It uses both in equal amounts. Players may carry the ball because it's convenient to do so but there is absolutely no rule to stop you using feet as you see fit. You can play it like it is soccer if the fancy takes you but it's harder to keep the ball when the opposition can simply shoulder you off.

Just because you "may" doesn't make it "equal." It's not equal. I've seen it.

But, so what, anyway? In basketball, the ball is mostly not in the basket. Hockey doesn't involve anything called a "hock." Curling doesn't involve curling anything. Golf should be called "stick ball." Baseball has most of the players not on bases, and should be called bat-ball. Cricket has no crickets in it.

For some reason, "football" has to involve always having the ball and the foot involved? Or, what? It's not "o.k." to use the word?

Weird.

I think a better argument can be made that the Brits ought to use the word the Brits invented - soccer - for the game. Why did the Brits invent the word if they weren't going to use it, and if they were then going to complain about other countries using the word?

[Animavore]

It still "mostly" entails the hands.

No. It uses both in equal amounts. Players may carry the ball because it's convenient to do so but there is absolutely no rule to stop you using feet as you see fit. You can play it like it is soccer if the fancy takes you but it's harder to keep the ball when the opposition can simply shoulder you off.

Just because you "may" doesn't make it "equal." It's not equal. I've seen it.

But, so what, anyway? In basketball, the ball is mostly not in the basket. Hockey doesn't involve anything called a "hock." Curling doesn't involve curling anything. Golf should be called "stick ball." Baseball has most of the players not on bases, and should be called bat-ball. Cricket has no crickets in it.

For some reason, "football" has to involve always having the ball and the foot involved? Or, what? It's not "o.k." to use the word?

Weird.

I think a better argument can be made that the Brits ought to use the word the Brits invented - soccer - for the game. Why did the Brits invent the word if they weren't going to use it, and if they were then going to complain about other countries using the word?

I'm not arguing against the use of 'football' in American football

[Coito ergo sum]

Well, it's a very common argument.

Rugby? They don't even use rugs. They should call it handby.

[redunderthebed]

Rugby: Rugby (or rugger) football. Rugby is a kind of football.

American football evolved from rugby aaaand apart from aussie rules and gaelic football all can trace their lineage to soccer/football.

Aussie rules evolved from early forms of rugby and gaelic football and a indigenous game called marngrook.

Have you actually watched aussie rules CES?

Yes. My favorite team as a kid were the Collingswood Magpies. They and Carlton were always on one of the ESPN channels we had way back when.

I loved it. I don't see it around much anymore. But, it's fun to watch.

*Collingwood the team everyone loves to hate in Australia Then again your a conservative so your judgement is questionable from the get go. Interesting carlton and maggots are two of the biggest teams in the league so that doesn't surprise me although now its called the AFL (australian football league) because they introduced teams from other states (and they needed the money).

If ya interested http://www.afana.com/drupal5/ - this has all the info to watch it i know because that is what my sperm donor uses to get times when games are on. Doesn't start until end of march next year.

[redunderthebed]

Next year next year.

Only thing to say now is GO THE COWBOYS!

[Ian]

Next year next year.

Only thing to say now is GO THE COWBOYS!

GO GIANTS!!!

[Coito ergo sum]

It still "mostly" entails the hands.

No. It uses both in equal amounts. Players may carry the ball because it's convenient to do so but there is absolutely no rule to stop you using feet as you see fit. You can play it like it is soccer if the fancy takes you but it's harder to keep the ball when the opposition can simply shoulder you off.

Your confusing "can" with "do." Of course they can, but they don't play it like soccer equal amounts of the time. I've watched the game. It's mostly hands....running, lateraling the ball, tackling, scrumming, all involve hands on the ball, and represents much more than 50% of the game.

But, whatever --- I'm sure, yes, the European "hand egg" game is far superior to the American variety, or the Canadian variety, as with all things.

[Coito ergo sum]

Rugby: Rugby (or rugger) football. Rugby is a kind of football.

American football evolved from rugby aaaand apart from aussie rules and gaelic football all can trace their lineage to soccer/football.

Aussie rules evolved from early forms of rugby and gaelic football and a indigenous game called marngrook.

Have you actually watched aussie rules CES?

Yes. My favorite team as a kid were the Collingswood Magpies. They and Carlton were always on one of the ESPN channels we had way back when.

I loved it. I don't see it around much anymore. But, it's fun to watch.

*Collingwood the team everyone loves to hate in Australia Then again your a conservative so your judgement is questionable from the get go.

Fuck off. I'm not now and never have been a "conservative." It pisses me off when people accuse me of that. Generally, it's folks who couldn't tell a liberal view from a conservative one if they were told.

But, in any case, I was a fan of Collingswood basically because they were one of the teams I watched the first couple times I watched Australian rules football. I had no idea what Collingswood was like, or even where in Australia it was located, or even whether it was a good or bad team.

Interesting carlton and maggots are two of the biggest teams in the league so that doesn't surprise me although now its called the AFL (australian football league) because they introduced teams from other states (and they needed the money).

That may explain why those teams showed up on American cable television more than other teams.

Most Americans haven't even heard of Australian rules football, and if you did a survey on the street, I bet half of those questioned would think Australian football was a soccer.

If ya interested http://www.afana.com/drupal5/ - this has all the info to watch it i know because that is what my sperm donor uses to get times when games are on. Doesn't start until end of march next year.

Thanks.

[Coito ergo sum]

Next year next year.

Only thing to say now is GO THE COWBOYS!

Jets miss the playoffs, again.

Giants notch another division title and another playoff appearance. And, they have home field advantage for their game against Atlanta, if my calculations are correct.

Ah, yes. It's nice to have a team to root for in January.

[Animavore]

Was watching some game in the pub the other day. Quite entertaining. Couldn't tell you who were playing or anything