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 wrote: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.
American Football
-
- Posts: 32040
- Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm
- Contact:
Re: American Football
Re: American Football
Coito ergo sum wrote: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 wrote: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.
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.
Libertarianism: The belief that out of all the terrible things governments can do, helping people is the absolute worst.
-
- Posts: 32040
- Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm
- Contact:
Re: American Football
It still "mostly" entails the hands.Animavore wrote: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'.Coito ergo sum wrote:You're confusing "definition" with "etymology."Strontium Dog wrote: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.
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.
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.
http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?all ... hmode=none1889, 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.
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.
-
- Posts: 32040
- Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm
- Contact:
Re: American Football
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 wrote:Coito ergo sum wrote: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 wrote: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.
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.
Re: American Football
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 wrote:It still "mostly" entails the hands.
Libertarianism: The belief that out of all the terrible things governments can do, helping people is the absolute worst.
-
- Posts: 32040
- Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm
- Contact:
Re: American Football
Just because you "may" doesn't make it "equal." It's not equal. I've seen it.Animavore wrote: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 wrote:It still "mostly" entails the hands.
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?
Re: American Football
I'm not arguing against the use of 'football' in American footballCoito ergo sum wrote:Just because you "may" doesn't make it "equal." It's not equal. I've seen it.Animavore wrote: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 wrote:It still "mostly" entails the hands.
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?

Libertarianism: The belief that out of all the terrible things governments can do, helping people is the absolute worst.
-
- Posts: 32040
- Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm
- Contact:
Re: American Football
Well, it's a very common argument.
Rugby? They don't even use rugs. They should call it handby.
Rugby? They don't even use rugs. They should call it handby.
- redunderthebed
- Commie Bastard
- Posts: 6556
- Joined: Mon Mar 09, 2009 2:13 pm
- About me: "Life should NOT be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, chocolate and wine in each hand, body thoroughly used up, totally worn out and screaming "WOO HOO what a ride!"
- Location: Port Lincoln Australia
- Contact:
Re: American Football
*Collingwood the team everyone loves to hate in AustraliaCoito ergo sum wrote: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.redunderthebed wrote:American football evolved from rugby aaaand apart from aussie rules and gaelic football all can trace their lineage to soccer/football.Coito ergo sum wrote:
Rugby: Rugby (or rugger) football. Rugby is a kind of 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?
I loved it. I don't see it around much anymore. But, it's fun to watch.


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.
The Pope was today knocked down at the start of Christmas mass by a woman who hopped over the barriers. The woman was said to be, "Mentally unstable."Trolldor wrote:Ahh cardinal Pell. He's like a monkey after a lobotomy and three lines of cocaine.
Which is probably why she went unnoticed among a crowd of Christians.
Cormac wrote: One thing of which I am certain. The world is a better place with you in it. Stick around please. The universe will eventually get around to offing all of us. No need to help it in its efforts...
- redunderthebed
- Commie Bastard
- Posts: 6556
- Joined: Mon Mar 09, 2009 2:13 pm
- About me: "Life should NOT be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, chocolate and wine in each hand, body thoroughly used up, totally worn out and screaming "WOO HOO what a ride!"
- Location: Port Lincoln Australia
- Contact:
Re: American Football
Next year next year.
Only thing to say now is GO THE COWBOYS!


Only thing to say now is GO THE COWBOYS!


The Pope was today knocked down at the start of Christmas mass by a woman who hopped over the barriers. The woman was said to be, "Mentally unstable."Trolldor wrote:Ahh cardinal Pell. He's like a monkey after a lobotomy and three lines of cocaine.
Which is probably why she went unnoticed among a crowd of Christians.
Cormac wrote: One thing of which I am certain. The world is a better place with you in it. Stick around please. The universe will eventually get around to offing all of us. No need to help it in its efforts...
Re: American Football
redunderthebed wrote:Next year next year.![]()
Only thing to say now is GO THE COWBOYS!![]()


GO GIANTS!!!
-
- Posts: 32040
- Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm
- Contact:
Re: American Football
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.Animavore wrote: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 wrote:It still "mostly" entails the hands.
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.
-
- Posts: 32040
- Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm
- Contact:
Re: American Football
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.redunderthebed wrote:*Collingwood the team everyone loves to hate in AustraliaCoito ergo sum wrote: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.redunderthebed wrote:American football evolved from rugby aaaand apart from aussie rules and gaelic football all can trace their lineage to soccer/football.Coito ergo sum wrote:
Rugby: Rugby (or rugger) football. Rugby is a kind of 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?
I loved it. I don't see it around much anymore. But, it's fun to watch.Then again your a conservative so your judgement is questionable from the get go.
![]()
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.
That may explain why those teams showed up on American cable television more than other teams.redunderthebed wrote:
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).
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.
Thanks.redunderthebed wrote:
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.
-
- Posts: 32040
- Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm
- Contact:
Re: American Football
Jets miss the playoffs, again.redunderthebed wrote:Next year next year.![]()
Only thing to say now is GO THE COWBOYS!![]()
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.
Re: American Football
Was watching some game in the pub the other day. Quite entertaining. Couldn't tell you who were playing or anything 

Libertarianism: The belief that out of all the terrible things governments can do, helping people is the absolute worst.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests