USA ranked after Georgia and Romania...

USA ranked after Georgia and Romania...

Marseil
Marseil

October 9th, 2007, 8:32 am #1

... in the Rugby World cup.

http://www.rugbyworldcup.com/home/teams ... index.html

Marseil.
Reply
Share

Nat
Joined: January 1st, 1970, 12:00 am

October 9th, 2007, 12:00 pm #2

Well since almost nobody plays Rugby here I don't think many people will give a crap.
I don't even know where you'd go to see a Rugby game here.
Reply
Like
Share

Bob
Bob

October 9th, 2007, 11:29 pm #3

... in the Rugby World cup.

http://www.rugbyworldcup.com/home/teams ... index.html

Marseil.
I don't know anyone who has played Rugby. I assume that (in U.S.) it is a sport played by the Ivy League rich kids and by few else. As I recall, its rather big in Britain and in Australia. I recall people claiming that Rugby players are tougher than players of American-style football, as the latter wear helmets and several pads for protection, while Rugby players just have shorts and jersies and can get their teeth knocked out from kicks or in collisions (sounds a bit like hockey, but on a grass field).

At a nearby park, I've seen men play Cricket (that's with the flat bats, correct?) They all look to hail from India and they speak to each other in a foreign language.
Reply
Share

Brandon
Brandon

October 10th, 2007, 12:30 am #4

If it is not Baseball, Basketball, or Football then who cares. Hockey is for Canadians and Yankees. Soccer is for the sissies who can't play American football.

Last edited by Nat on October 10th, 2007, 1:54 am, edited 1 time in total.
Reply
Share

Brandon
Brandon

October 10th, 2007, 2:54 am #5

I was semi joking in my last post. I'm not really that big of a sports fan, but the average fan around the South pretty much would fall in line with the beliefs in my previous post.
Reply
Share

Nat
Joined: January 1st, 1970, 12:00 am

October 10th, 2007, 6:13 pm #6

Well Bob and I have had discussions about this- he's a big sports fan but I don't see it. Now if I had a personal state in the outcome of a game- like someone is going to pay me a bunch of money if a certain team wins- I would be rooting like hell- but otherwise I don't see how if team A wins or team B wins effects my life one way or the other.
Reply
Like
Share

Michael
Michael

October 10th, 2007, 8:19 pm #7

... in the Rugby World cup.

http://www.rugbyworldcup.com/home/teams ... index.html

Marseil.
Canada ahead of Jamaica in ice hockey.

USA ahead of Iceland in baseball.

France ranked ahead of world in cigarette smoking...

?
Reply
Share

Bob
Bob

October 11th, 2007, 12:50 am #8

Well Bob and I have had discussions about this- he's a big sports fan but I don't see it. Now if I had a personal state in the outcome of a game- like someone is going to pay me a bunch of money if a certain team wins- I would be rooting like hell- but otherwise I don't see how if team A wins or team B wins effects my life one way or the other.
Nat, I understand your points about the "irrelevance" of following sports for the average fan (as opposed to the health and other benefits that accrue to those who actively participate in athletic activity, or the monetary benefit for those who are employed by or own a sports fracnchise).

In this, I don't think sports fans are alone. People who are audience to any program on TV or radio, on a stage or movie screen -- what do they get out of it? True, there is entertainment value, but the same is true for sports fans. As with sport, the only people who really benefit from a popular TV, radio program or stage production are the actors, directors, producers, talk hosts, theatre or station personnel, station/network owners, stock holders . . and the companies that hope to increase their sales due to their product advertizing being seen and possibly associated with such popular programs. But, for the average viewer or listener, there is no actual benefit (indeed, a cost of time spent not doing something more productive) beyond entertainment.

As for the violent behavior, attacking others and damaging property that has sometimes accompanied major sporting events, I agree that this is a negative aspect of sports. Again, such behavior is not exclusive to sports. All sorts of violent, destructive behavior occurs in and around nightclubs, casinos and taverns (even schools). People get into fights, destroy property, sometimes shoot or even kill others.

The common thread seems to be substance abuse (or, in the case of schools, youth) that inhibits impulse control, impairs judgment and makes it easier for the person to engage in aggressive behaviors while caught up in the emotion of the moment. This can accompany a significant sporting event (note that such behavior seldom occurs with the run-of-the-mill events, but rather during and after key games, including championship games). This can occur ANY TIME people are drinking, smoking, snorting or shooting up at clubs and bars. Someone can bump into another and the fight is on. Some guy can dislike the way (he imagines) another man looks at his woman, and the fight is on. It can be about real or imagined personal slights. It can be about money believed to be owed. It can be for no other reason than a person wants to "get it on". (Meanwhile, the average sports fan, drinking or not, is much more likely to "high five" a fellow fan than to punch someone).

My point is, and has been, that sports (like religion) can get blamed for negative behaviors, when in fact a whole range of other human activities and interests can lead people to behave badly toward each other. And what about the good? Does one instance of rioting following a big game negate all the cheers, hand claps and singing in unison? Does a "religious war" (actually an oxymoron) here and there negate all of the kind acts, the charity and the comfort provided by many individuals in the expression of their faith? I don't think it does. What activity could be considered "good" if any negative behaviors ever accompanied it? I don't think there are many.

Using this logic, should radio towers or tall buildings not be built because some people fell to their deaths from them? I would agree with you that this should not be a deterrent or a reason to consider high places inherrently "bad".
Reply
Share

Nat
Joined: January 1st, 1970, 12:00 am

October 11th, 2007, 2:22 am #9

Well you certainly make some valid points Bob, and I don't mean to denigrate you and other sports fans. As you say- it's just another form of entertainment. And I know I have interest in subjects that absolutely no one else here give a damn about. At least you are in a large majority of people who like sports, and I've been known to watch sports occasionally myself, so it's not that I'm anti-sports- my criticism was directed at the fanaticism of some fans who attach an importance to it that seems all out of proposition to reality. On the other hand, there are still people attending Star-Trek conventions dressed like 'Spock' so fanaticism is found in all areas.
Reply
Like
Share

Brandon
Brandon

October 11th, 2007, 2:33 am #10

I certainly hope the Titans do well in football and the Grizzlies do well in basketball and my college the Memphis Tigers do well in the sports they play. I enjoy going to a game and watching them on tv.

What I don't understand are the fans who call sports radio shows. Their whole lives can revolve around some team and they can get physically ill if the team is not doing good.

I've been to baseball games across the country and the fans are really different in different regions. Fans in the northeast (New York, Philadelphia, Boston) and upper Midwest (Chicago, Cleveland) are too into the game while fans in places like St. Louis and Cincinnati are more my kind of fans, have a great knowledge of the game but aren't cursing and filled with rage if their team loses. People in California are the exact opposite of New Yorkers at a baseball game. L.A. and San Diego fans are very much the stereotypcial laid back dudes.

In the South, there are lots of fanatics over college sports but not as much over the pro teams.
Reply
Share