Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There is definitely some amount of diving and exaggeration in hockey, for example. Even though anti-soccer hockey fans always point out diving in soccer...
For example, the penalty for a high stick to the face (even accidental) that draws blood is much higher than a high stick with no blood. And so every time a player gets even lightly touched by a stick around the face, they immediately take off their gloves and touch their face all over to see if there is any sign of blood.
I guess it only comes in different forms, it's probably just that it's more evident and maybe common in football/soccer as there's no video technology and given that contact while players are running or on a precarious balance can really cause a fall which means that often players either try to get the most out of it or desperately search for contact to justify a fall.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JJG
Hockey?
I would understand why that would be more popular in Finland.
I really don't think you understood why I asked that question.
So what if hockey is bigger than soccer there?
I think he answered it.
If hockey wasn't so popular in Finland, there would be more energy and interest and resources devoted to soccer, and they'd perform better at the World Cup, Euro, etc.
As it stands now, the attention is divided between the two and soccer is weakened, compared to what it might be if it was totally dominant.
Also, the most athletic kids in Finland are probably split into hockey and soccer when they are young. (At least as far as team sports are concerned.)
Location: New Albany, Indiana (Greater Louisville)
11,974 posts, read 25,483,414 times
Reputation: 12187
Quote:
Originally Posted by almost3am
I believe that there is a generational shift going on in the USA. As a country we used to be interested in only 3-4 sports (baseball, American football, basketball, and hockey in some parts of the country).
A few trends, off the top of my head, are tailwinds for soccer (an other non-traditional USA sports) in the future:
1. Our country is becoming influenced by Mexican immigrants (at various generational levels) to a greater degree, this supports the future of soccer
2. Soccer doesn't get the bad rap that football does with concussions and also is a wonderful sport for physical fitness
3. Little league baseball is struggling and sports are necessary to fill that void
4. Parks used to have baseball fields and basketball hoops, now you see soccer goals at many parks...equipment helps support a game
5. Cable TV brings more options to watch different sports, from soccer to the X Games...I recently saw Major League Lacrosse on Fox Sports.
6. Scholarship opportunities, especially on the girls side, are a motivation for some parents with their children
Soccer will be the 3rd most popular sport in a decade or two. Hockey has always been regional, baseball is fading, world series tv ratings are half what they were 15 years ago.
MLS (our top level pro league) has a done a great job of expanding into good soccer markets. Minor league expansion is also going great. Cincinnati just got a team this year and is averaging over 20,000 fans for home games. In my metro we got a team last year and attendance was often over 9,000.
If hockey wasn't so popular in Finland, there would be more energy and interest and resources devoted to soccer, and they'd perform better at the World Cup, Euro, etc.
As it stands now, the attention is divided between the two and soccer is weakened, compared to what it might be if it was totally dominant.
Also, the most athletic kids in Finland are probably split into hockey and soccer when they are young. (At least as far as team sports are concerned.)
Instead of all the talent pool going to soccer.
Exactly. Very few small countries manage to be good at both, only Sweden and Czechia have been able to pull it off. Maybe Switzerland.
Hockey started to get really professional in the 1970's, indoor ice rinks plopped up like mushrooms in rain, and hockey got enormous amounts of money and talent. Football lagged behind and didn't start to rise in the mid 1990's. And still today domestic hockey players are much better paid than football players.
A friend of my family played hockey in the national team for years, and he clearly admits that hockey is a reason why the state of football is what it is.
Yeah, thanks for reminding me for yet another reason not to like AMerica. Can't believe it starts in about a week...and how I hope UK/Germany to get their ass kicked while Slovakia to progress to say 1/4 finals.
This isn't the impression I get, some rugby players are massive (depends on their position) and rugby players do seem a bit more athletic, of course its probably all perception but American footballers seem a little erm.........fat to me?
Only linebackers and nose tackle (the largest player) may be a bit heavy but in their positions, that's a benefit. Quarterbacks, wide receivers and running backs (often the smallest on the field) are very nimble and quick.
Exactly. Very few small countries manage to be good at both, only Sweden and Czechia have been able to pull it off. Maybe Switzerland.
Hockey started to get really professional in the 1970's, indoor ice rinks plopped up like mushrooms in rain, and hockey got enormous amounts of money and talent. Football lagged behind and didn't start to rise in the mid 1990's. And still today domestic hockey players are much better paid than football players.
A friend of my family played hockey in the national team for years, and he clearly admits that hockey is a reason why the state of football is what it is.
There is some criticism in Canada about there being too much of a focus on hockey and not enough on other team sports.
When I think about how some of my highly unqualified friends were asked to coach their kids' soccer teams, it really doesn't surprise me that Canada hasn't qualified for the World Cup since 1986!
What i think the USA is managing well, it's that it's keeping interest on several sports whereas here in Italy the attention is monopolized on one sport which is football. Aside from that, there's a second sport which changes according to the performances of the Italian athletes, one day it can be basketball, the next one cycling and after that swimming. It depends, the thing is that none of these sports manages to catch a decent amount of attention, cycling gets up to 2 million viewers during the decisive stages Giro d'Italia and Tour de France while motorsports have a number that's around 4 millions usually but it can change quickly.
We are a population of bandwagoners and football obsessed
Quote:
Originally Posted by euro123
Yeah, thanks for reminding me for yet another reason not to like AMerica. Can't believe it starts in about a week...and how I hope UK/Germany to get their ass kicked while Slovakia to progress to say 1/4 finals.
Only linebackers and nose tackle (the largest player) may be a bit heavy but in their positions, that's a benefit. Quarterbacks, wide receivers and running backs (often the smallest on the field) are very nimble and quick.
Linebackers are big but they don't typically have much body fat. They're strong and fast. They generally look like this.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
