UK Football Shock!

Jan 12th, 2007, 11:05 AM
  #1  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 3,652
UK Football Shock!

The Miami Dolphins and New York Giants have announced that they will play a regular season American football game in London next year. Cheerleaders and all. Finally, some real 'football' in London for a change.
I suggest they twin it with the London New Year's Day Parade full of American marching bands and cheerleaders galore.
PalenqueBob is offline  
Jan 12th, 2007, 11:17 AM
  #2  
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 5,905
there have been attempts to drum up support for American football in Europe before - I am sure there was a London Monarchs team that played in a European league. I just don't see it catching on.

I may be wrong, but I think part of it is boredom (And I know that sounds strange from a nation that loves cricket). I have watched the occasional highlight show on UK television, and parts of it are quite interesting. What I hadn't realised until I watched a whole game, was how long it took, what with breaks, change overs, time outs etc.

At least real football (i.e. a game played primarily with the feet) has 45 minutes of non stop play at a time.
willit is offline  
Jan 12th, 2007, 11:35 AM
  #3  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 18,945
I hate when they do this. I hate it in baseball, and now in football. So much for the home team's fans who will have one less game to watch next season. I hope they don't have to pay for it in their season ticket package. It will happen at the beginning of the season when it will have the least effect on their playoff chances.

willit, I used to use that argument too, but the 45 minutes of non-stop play usually accomplishes nothing. It's a boring 45 minutes. Footie needs to be more aggressive in the goal-scoring way and less defensive to be more interesting.
Barbara is online now  
Jan 12th, 2007, 11:46 AM
  #4  
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 5,905
Barbara - it is a matter of opinion. I pay serious money every year to watch the 19 home premiership games of my chosen club. I like the way in which football is still a balance between attack and defence. The odd 4-4 draw might be fun at first, but would lose it's attraction.

I like football the way it is - I abhor the idea of changing the game to suit the one place on Earth that doesn't get it. I don't mean the last statement to imply any criticism - America has its own sporting culture.

willit is offline  
Jan 12th, 2007, 12:13 PM
  #5  
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,184
There was a European league for a while, they managed to muster about 4 teams for the whole continent.

The comparison between US and World Football is a false comparison in any case, in the development of all footballs (American, Association, Rugby League, Rugby Union, Gaelic, Australian Rules etc etc) There has always been a distinction between the "running game", played with the feet, and the "carrying game" which speaks for itself.

You should try watching Rugby, 90 minutes of none stop action like soccer, played with the hands, full contact and high scoring like American football, however without all that sissy girl padding.
waring is offline  
Jan 12th, 2007, 12:19 PM
  #6  
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 19,881
Nor is there any of that dressing up in children's clothes that American sports go in for - when you cross that with all the padding you've got to wonder what the target audience for US sports is
alanRow is offline  
Jan 12th, 2007, 12:52 PM
  #7  
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,184
LOL. Knickerbockers is the word that springs to mind.

Correction to my post above, you have the "running game" US, Rugby, and the "kicking game" Association, and a combination of the two Aussie Rules, Gaelic.
waring is offline  
Jan 12th, 2007, 01:16 PM
  #8  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 18,945
I grew up watching my brother and cousin playing rugby. My cousin played for years for his FP club. Now I think they're nuts for playing without helmets.

I know you won't change your minds, but the padding is not "cissy". I used to think that too, until I learned a lot more about it. Any one NFL player is in much better physical shape than most football players.

To go back to the game in London, it has to be a pre-season game.
Barbara is online now  
Jan 12th, 2007, 01:25 PM
  #9  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,458
I agree that Rugby is a very exciting game. It's nice to see a fast, action-packed game that doesn't come to a complete stop for three out of every four minutes elapsed. There's also a problem with American football in that all that padding allows the players to collide with a much greater impact (especially as many of the linemen are 300-pounds-plus) which is quite simply more than the human body (particularly knees and ankles) can endure. Virtually all former NFL players are unable to climb stairs.

And for all the money they supposedly make, the vast majority of them are flat broke and unemployable just a year or two out from the end of their careers. They've been to "college", but the special treatment they received there (in exchange for earning millions of dollars for others) insulated them from any kind of educational input; many pro football players cannot read or write.

Not to say that rugby or soccer players are necessarily any brighter, but at least no one has built an elaborate charade to pretend that they have actual college degrees.

I'm an American, and I love my American games, but not football. Football is overly-organized brutality, full stop. Soccer and rugby and even Aussie Rules are much more interesting.
fnarf999 is offline  
Jan 12th, 2007, 01:49 PM
  #10  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 18,945
fnarf999, I agree that the issues you mention are real for some players, but I think you are unfairly tarring them all with the same brush.
Barbara is online now  
Jan 13th, 2007, 02:08 AM
  #11  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 3,057
It' at Wembley - I'll be interested to see how many tickets they sell. My guess? about a dozen.
audere_est_facere is offline  
Jan 13th, 2007, 05:30 AM
  #12  
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,184
Barbara is right, it is waste of time and money having them play in England. It will never take off as the English simply don't get it.

I understand that American kids learn the "plays" from a very early age, and having watched Channel 4's attempt to televise it in the 80's, it's a thing that you don't pick up overnight.

I couldn't name you one player and frankly the game makes no sense to me whatsoever.
waring is offline  
Jan 13th, 2007, 06:21 AM
  #13  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 5,056
I don't know, it might do quite well from a novelty point of view. I can't see it suddenly making us all fall in love with it and making UK teams spring up everywhere, but people might go just to see something different. It doesn't appeal to me but neither does real football.
nona1 is offline  
Jan 13th, 2007, 06:22 AM
  #14  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 5,056
I also think it's a little unfair to tar professional sportsmen as 'thick'. Some are, some aren't, same as the general population. Muscle/athletic ability is not connected to intelligence either way.
nona1 is offline  
Jan 13th, 2007, 06:36 AM
  #15  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 3,652
Could this NFL 'real' football game be the death knell of English football...aka soccer?
PalenqueBob is offline  
Jan 13th, 2007, 07:07 AM
  #16  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,264
Funny!
We just signed (overspent?) the great football star Beckham. Made the second page of my sports section.

Front page was our Barry Bonds steriods story.

Hope he can jump-start the Worlds Greatest Sport...so they have said.... inside my country, but I think it will be just another fading star, interesting for a short while, and will fade into the background.

Americans are too deep into their football. Soccer will be still a third rate sport in the USA.........and that will be too bad!
bmw732002 is offline  
Jan 13th, 2007, 07:13 AM
  #17  
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 5,905
Nona - I am not sure about thick, but there is a shortage of obviously "intelligent" footballers playing in England - certainly among English players. Bright players are not considered "one of the lads".
willit is offline  
Jan 13th, 2007, 08:16 PM
  #18  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,458
No, footballers or other sportsmen are not by definition thick. But because they are not selected for, uh, thickness, they will tend towards the thick end.

It's not the (American) football that annoys me so much; it's the corrupt, dishonest and exploitative system that has developed around them that torques my jaw.
fnarf999 is offline  
Jan 14th, 2007, 07:04 AM
  #19  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 5,056
Do you think David Beckham will have much real effect on the status of football proper over in the US?
nona1 is offline  
Jan 14th, 2007, 07:28 AM
  #20  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 3,652
none more than Pele did decades ago - a few year spurt then the big flop in popularity and the league disbanded.

UK football fans:

American football vocabularly:

Grid Iron - name for the playing field; gridders. The Red Zone...

Hash marks

Goalposts Goal line

Onside kick

Roughing the punter, quarterback butnot halfback or fullback

4 downs and a cloud of dust

1st and goal

face masking
PalenqueBob is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy -

FODOR'S VIDEO

All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:49 PM.