It's time to quit calling it soccer

D

Dave

Guest


Agree? I know, we'd lose the term "soccer mom" but anyone that still says that needs to have it taken away, anyway. Think of the kids; US kids as part of a worldwide community of football no longer segregated, sent to the back of the bus. Come on. It's football. Let's call it that.
 

CrystalGeezer

My secret's my enzyme.
I think we call it that because soccer sounds like something in French. Sugar, but something else, it;s like a word that describes longing or something, I can't remember. :confused::crazy::D;):rolleyes::squiffy::straightface:
 

Theo

Active Member
America ain't the only country that calls it soccer, and soccer ain't a word that comes from America. It comes from England, and is part of the history of the sport. And, in fact, it's called soccer in the very country hosting this year's World Cup.

Dave's threads are as silly as ever. Perhaps he should stick to trolling other people's threads with pics of unicorns. If he were so interested in the history of, and a respect for, the game, and that game's relation to the worldwide community, he wouldn't be so completely ignorant about why some places call it soccer.
 
Last edited:

Theo

Active Member
It's 0-0 right now. I'm not sure who I want to win. Theo van Gogh would probably want me to pull for the Netherlands, but I've been to Spain and liked the place, plus Spain made me happy by beating Germany. Plus, this article kinda convinced me: Orange Devolution - Why all soccer fans should root for Holland to lose to Spain. So, go Spain! But it looks like they're being outplayed so far.....

Asking Americans to call soccer "football", and American football something else, is another example of the arrogance and cultural imperialism of the English. And to think they try and tell Americans where we can shove our hamburgers!
 
Last edited:

Theo

Active Member
Let's call it football! :thumb:
Only the most submissive Euro-worshippers of America (particularly the so-called "progressives") feel that way. They also hope Barack Obama successfully transforms America into just another stupid country. :crazy:

Whatever. I'm going to post SteeleWorldWide's latest Malt Liquor Video.

[youtube]<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/lEN-JeAoPco&amp;hl=en_US&amp;fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/lEN-JeAoPco&amp;hl=en_US&amp;fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>[/youtube]


Drink Malt Liquor! Get Money!
 
T

therightone

Guest
Where did "soccer" come from?

It's not an Americanism:

"Soccer" is not some Yankee neologism but a word of impeccably British origin. It owes its coinage to a domestic rival, rugby, whose proponents were fighting a losing battle over the football brand around the time that we were preoccupied with a more sanguinary civil war. Rugby's nickname was (and is) rugger, and its players are called ruggers-a bit of upper-class twittery, as in "champers," for champagne, or "preggers," for enceinte. "Soccer" is rugger's equivalent in Oxbridge-speak. The "soc" part is short for "assoc," which is short for "association," as in "association football," the rules of which were codified in 1863 by the all-powerful Football Association, or FA-the FA being to the U.K. what the NFL, the NBA, and MLB are to the U.S.

...or so I read...
 
D

DAVIE

Guest
Football does sound better though...coz you use a foot to kick the ball! Whilst in American football, they don't always kick the ball...Probably used the word soccer so it doesn't get confused!
 

bucks boy

Member
we used to have star soccer on atv midlands and then it went to central.it had hugh johns on it every week with a midland game derby,villa,forest..etc and then other games from the old itv network. gary newbon was the show host,it had the best intro music for a football program ever.who can forget hugh johns with his gravely voice from smoking to many fags.with his classic quotes like, one nothing and how about that.for that reason i think we should let people call it soccer.
 

Theo

Active Member
Football does sound better though...coz you use a foot to kick the ball! Whilst in American football, they don't always kick the ball...Probably used the word soccer so it doesn't get confused!
Yeah, but I read something about this on the internet in the last 24 hours, from sources that could be suspect. So I'm here to educate people about things I just learned myself. Apparently the foot in football was cuz they played these commoners' games (rugby, soccer) on foot as opposed to rich folk games that were played on horses. And, apparently, the dominant sport in each country that fell under this general category of "football" became the sport that that country referred to as their "football". Do I have that right?

Even if I don't, Dave should thank me for making his thread have some value and success. I'm just happy to see more posts around here. No one will give me credit for trying to save the forum while the mods were happy to see it die away.

But, needless to say, it would be a waste of time trying to get Americans to stop referring to their football as football. Americans are drunk on, and totally in love with, American-style football.

To give you an idea of just how NFL-focused America is, during the last NFL draft I actually heard an ESPN sportcaster state (I forget the exact context, but it was referring to how popular the sport is) that this proves once again that NFL football is the biggest sport IN THE WORLD. He definitely said "in the world". I have to admit that was an example of an American who thought America is the world. But, yeah, Americans are totally in love with American-style football, and no way no day will they stop calling it their football.

I think progress is being made, though, on getting Americans to stop thinking of soccer as "gay". And, the one and only team in this World Cup that seemed better than America's soccer team was Spain. I saw no team that played with more heart than America. The Americans showed they could battle back from behind, and would not be discouraged when anti-American FIFA refs were trying to sabotage them. America lost a close one to Ghana simply because luck was not on their side, and America could very easily have gone to the semis or beyond. It's just a matter of time till that World Cup is owned by America. And Landon Donovan is definitely a better player than Wayne Rooney.
 
Last edited:

Theo

Active Member
Just when you was beginning to make sense,you ruin your creditability with this statement.
They were saying Wayne Rooney would prove to the world he was the best player in the world in this World Cup. He fell far short. Landon Donovan was amazing, though. Hey, I'm to soccer like a girl who gets dragged by her new dude to her first baseball game. But I can only go by what I saw. Landon Donovan was way better.

[youtube]<object width="640" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/qunK3pwr5QU&amp;hl=en_US&amp;fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/qunK3pwr5QU&amp;hl=en_US&amp;fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="640" height="385"></embed></object>[/youtube]
 
Last edited:

malvachat

My eyes are now open
They were saying Wayne Rooney would prove to the world he was the best player in the world in this World Cup. He fell far short. Landon Donovan was amazing, though. Hey, I'm to soccer like a girl who gets dragged by her new dude to her first baseball game. But I can only go by what I saw. Landon Donovan was way better.

[youtube]<object width="640" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/qunK3pwr5QU&amp;hl=en_US&amp;fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/qunK3pwr5QU&amp;hl=en_US&amp;fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="640" height="385"></embed></object>[/youtube]
Oh good clarifcation.
Landon Donovan did without doubt have the better world cup.But he is not the better player.
This is not just my opinion.
That being said I thought the USA did very well and are coming on as a football nation.Unlike England who seem to be going backwards.
 

Theo

Active Member
Oh good clarifcation.
Landon Donovan did without doubt have the better world cup.But he is not the better player.
This is not just my opinion.
That being said I thought the USA did very well and are coming on as a football nation.Unlike England who seem to be going backwards.
Okay, so like I don't know much about soccer/football. But it kinda seemed like when they have this thing in baseball called the "World Baseball Classic". In baseball, better teams often lose games to inferior teams. It seems to be that way in soccer, too. Thus, you can't really have one game to determine anything. In baseball, you need to play a whole season of games to show you deserve to be in the playoffs, and in the playoffs you have to win a series of games against another team to advance on, not just one game. Except in this stupid "World Baseball Classic", which is a joke in determining who is best.

My impression of the World Cup was that luck was a huge factor. Luck is a factor in all sports, but it seemed especially large in the World Cup. I do think the best team won the Cup, as far as I could tell. But I kept feeling like it was unjust that only one game was used to determine who was "better" between teams. Well, I guess in the first round, it wasn't one game. But in that round, it seemed like teams were playing for draws.

As far as Wayne Rooney -- doesn't he usually play on Manchester United, a team stacked with foreign stars? Maybe they make him look better than he is? That is the New York Yankees of soccer, right?
 
Last edited:

malvachat

My eyes are now open
Most football fans/experts? will tell you Rooney is a fantastic player.Any team in the world would want him in their side.
But of course they all could be wrong.
Manchester United are not unlike a lot of clubs,they employ players from other countries as well as their own.
This of course does not make any club "the best"or "successful"
 

Shaw

Active Member
If we judged players off what they were like in a tournament then Milan Baros would be one of the best strikers ever
 

Theo

Active Member
Okay, so like, I could be off on disparaging Wayne Rooney. I guess I'll have to study some tapes of other matches to work out why he's supposedly better than Landon Donovan. In the World Cup, Landon Donovan played about a thousand times better than Rooney, but maybe Rooney had a bad tournament.

But I think I'm right that America fielded one of the best teams in the World Cup, a team that could have won the whole damn thing had luck been more on our side. And, whoa, America's team showed so much heart!
 

Shaw

Active Member
But I think I'm right that America fielded one of the best teams in the World Cup, a team that could have won the whole damn thing had luck been more on our side. And, whoa, America's team showed so much heart!
 

Theo

Active Member
I don't really get your post, Shaw. If America had beaten Ghana, they'd have played Uruguay, and if they'd won that they'd have been in the semis. They certainly could have gone that far. Ghana didn't actually demonstrate they were superior. They got lucky. And they had a player laying on the field delaying the game after they scored to go ahead. I guess that sort of crap is common in soccer, a sport infamous for flopping and fake injuries and so forth.

Ghana only missed the semis because they lost in penalty kicks, and I think we were as good as Ghana despite the loss, and we were as good as Uruguay. So, America was a hair from the semis. Just bad luck kept us out. And we won our group over England despite FIFA refs trying to sabotage us every step of the way, and robbing us of multiple goals and a victory.

Like I said, the only team that seemed clearly better than America was Spain, the team that won the whole thing. And I found it pathetic when I heard the commentators during the final game state that Holland was just trying to kick the ball around and get to the penalty kicks. They were trying to get lucky, instead of going for a real victory. Thank God Spain beat them, but America could've beaten them too.

Spain looked like the best team, so they deserved the cup. America, however, showed they had so much heart, and have as much talent as any team, so they very well might take the cup next time.

England didn't play with heart. England seemed like a team of over-hyped stars who were choking. I heard a lot about some of these English stars and they looked like shit, and seemed afraid to take shots even when they had the chances. England didn't even have a competant goal keeper. England may have played America to a draw, but America had the better team. America is superior at England's sport.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom