<p>Hockey, rugby, and (American) football always rank highly for hardest hitting and toughest sports. Soccer/football I’m afraid does not.</p>
<p>Rugby is a brutal sport. Some of my friends are on the rugby team at my school and I’ve played/practiced with them and it’s way intense.</p>
<p>American football is the best sport there is because there is something happening every play. Soccer, although I like it, takes too long to develop. </p>
<p>Also, the US disgraced the game of soccer this year. The whole team sucks. The coach sucks. And to think that they put that team together 4 years ago and were expected to be one of the top ten teams this year is unbelievable. America still has trouble excepting soccer as a sport and given their performance this year, Americans will probably never view soccer as a serious sport. </p>
<p>I set my hopes way to high. How can you lose to the Czech Republic and lose to Ghana? The US captain that faked an injury after getting the ball stolen from him, which resulted in a goal, during the Ghana game. That is the biggest WUSSY I have ever seen. You get the ball stolen from you, so you fake an injury. This was our captain! This is disgraceful and is why Americans, including soccer fans, will continue to classify soccer as a wimpy sport for p u s s i e s.</p>
<p>
there are other ways to display athletic ability besides long, marathon tests of endurance. boxers have 2 minute rounds, and sprinters only run for a few seconds, but no one questions that great athleticism is necessary to be a boxer or a sprinter. football plays are much shorter than boxing rounds, but it is still necessary to be in tip-top shape to get anything accomplished within the 5-10 seconds.</p>
<p>come to think of it, I would argue that endurance is also important in football, as you have to go through hundreds of these plays within a single game.</p>
<p>you can be a 500 lb fatass and play football, to play soccer you need much more speed, endurance and overall ability… its continuous play as opposed to having breaks every 20 seconds</p>
<p>JERK you are a fuccccking moron dude… the US national team was ranked fifth in the world going in , dont buy in to the world propoganda that says we suck because we didnt advance- we got put in the group of death, thats why you moron… CZECH WAS RANKED SECOND IN THE WORLD BTW (its far from a disgrace to lose to them)</p>
<p>why cant you all like both…it either american football or real football for you guys. I happen to enjoy each very much. most linemen in american football are 300-375lbs, but that doesnt mean you get to call running backs, wide recievers, free safeties and such fatasses…</p>
<p>And the whole beauty of real football is watching the scoring develop…seeing the fast cuts and long volleys. Of course the continuous play in football does contribute alot to diving, players will dive or ask for the stretcher just to get some extra rest and such.</p>
<p>Both sports have their good and bad points…and both sports are very entertaining</p>
<p>The only reason Americans generally classify soccer as being a wimpy sport it get this, we never win the World Cup, nor are we ever going to win it [and don’t even bother bringing up the exceptional women’s team b/c like it or not, media doesn’t give them the coverage that they deserve], so instead of admitting this fact, we generally dismiss it as being unworthy. </p>
<p>Also, to continue the defense of the current US team. The only reason we couldn’t advance was: a)wait really, the winning team was in our group!!!, b)Czech Republic was ranked 2nd, and c) Ghana excelled beyond everyone’s expectations and carried that underdog flag far.</p>
<p>“were never going to win the world cup”
i highly contest that statement… weve come as far as 3rd place in the tournament, and in 2002 made it to the quarterfinals</p>
<p>i agree, we had a bad year and were put in arguably the hardest group (the world cup champions, the 2nd ranked best team, and ghana who played absolutely phenomenally) </p>
<p>but give US soccer another 20-30 years, and we will have a title</p>
<p>stonecold23: “the US national team was ranked fifth in the world going in…”</p>
<p>Do you have any idea how ignorant you sound saying that??? Do you have any idea how these ranking are developed? They are formulated in a way that gives weights the CONCACAF almost on par with the UEFA, and for every match you play, even losses, you get a certain amount of points, also there are weights for the various large tournaments. The problem is that an above average team like Mexico or the USA are essentially just boosted like no other because 1. they play in one of the worst confederations 2. they play lots of friendly matches as compared to say the Netherlands, Czech Republic, Italy, etc. The rankings need to be fixed to reflect both appropriate conferedation and tournament weights as well as points per match. If these huge discrepancies were corrected I can assure you that the USA would be ranked around #20 and Mexico around #12…</p>
<p>In addition, the Czech Rep., Italy, and Ghana are great teams…The Czech Republic and Italy are in a whole other tier while the USA is probably on par with Ghana. The USA had absolutely no chance going through into the 2nd round…most people who actually know about football could have told you, except you probably live in the USA where people don’t really know anything about football and the media over-hypes bullSh1t rankings.</p>
<p><a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FIFA_World_Rankings[/url]”>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FIFA_World_Rankings</a></p>
<p>A new system, based on results over only four years, and with other amendments to the criteria, will be introduced after the 2006 World Cup. The first edition of the new series of rankings will be issued on 12 July 2006</p>
<p>-Obviously, the rankings were crap and needed to be fixed. We will see the new rankings tomorrow.</p>
<p>In the meantime, Stonecold, you can take the rankings and shove them up your candy
a s s because the Rock said so
…and so did the JERK. Itlay was ranked 13th and France was ranked 8th. Brazil played sloppy this year, but in my opinion they are still the best team. These 3 teams with maybe Germany and Argentina make up the elite teams. Czech Republic please. Be honest with yourself. No way in hell should they be ranked 2nd. Suck it.</p>
<p>people need to get their heads out of their asses and figure out that football isnt only what you see at the world cup. the world cup is a show, not much more… its not something to wait for new strategies to be employed; people just care about winning regardless of the play. They’ll wait for mistakes rather than incite them etc. faking injuries is just a means for a way.</p>
<p>by the way whoever said a headbutt to the chest wouldnt do anything… this is a player who is used to apply great strength to headed balls and the other has no padding like in football… a stronger hit CAN cause death.</p>
<p>yeah, but head butting someone in the chest isn’t by any stretch considered a normal, legal play within the rules. Its an assinine and borderline criminal act, like a hockey player taking a swing at an opposing player with a stick. Whether a well placed headbutt at an opponent in the sternum/chest could kill someone is completely irrelevant here. On the other hand, completely fair play in American football carries infinitely more risk because of the physics involved in the collisions. My apologies in advance if you weren’t somehow trying to build a case for soccer’s non-wussiness.</p>
<p>hey stone cold steve austin,</p>
<p>football>>>>>>>>soccer</p>
<p>None of this changes the fact that soccer is the most boring sport in the world.</p>
<p>None of this changes the fact that anything anyone says in this forum (and site, for that matter) is absolutely meaningless.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>There’s a reason why they wear all those pads. It’s a vicious, high-impact game where people get pounded every second.</p>
<p>Your “time” logic makes no sense. That’s like saying a tennis player is tougher than a boxer because a match can take up to 5 hours while a fight only has 3 minute rounds. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>LOL. Ask Donovan Bailey or Maurice Green or Jesse Owens how they can be considered athletes if their events last barely 15 seconds.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Get some class and stop swearing. That FIFA ranking is meaningless, and your adherence to it only shows your ignorance. The U.S. sucked, which is why they tanked. No excuses. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That’s about as accurate as saying that all soccer players are weak girly-men, and about as mature as well.</p>
<p>Some of these “fatties” are more athletic than any of you ever can hope to be. Mario Williams, the #1 draft pick of 2006, is 300 pounds but can run a 4.7 40-yard dash. That’s unbelievably fast for a man his size. Someone like Julius Peppers is even faster. </p>
<p>Sure, some of the O-linemen are pudgy, but that’s just a component of the game. What about the receivers, defensive backs, and safeties who are just a shade slower than world-class sprinters? Or the impossibly agile running backs? Or the rare combination of speed and muscle possessed by linebackers? Or the high sports IQ required of quarterbacks?</p>
<p>
Both soccer and football are about skill, agility, fitness. Neither are about how many concussions you can give today. I’ve never really played soccer, but I can still appreciate the skill that it takes to maneuver a ball through defenders, etc. But having played football I can also say that it takes just as much skill to find open holes, to perfect pass rush techniques, etc. And please don’t tell me that soccer is a harder game because there aren’t stoppages in time. Just watching the World Cup half the time the players are walking or standing there watching the action. It’s not like all 22 players are actively involved in the game at one moment.</p>
<p>Please don’t be so closeminded to other sports, and infer that they lack skill, agility, etc.</p>
<p>I personally prefer football because it’s the game I grew up playing but I also have respect for soccer. So maybe if you want soccer players to not be seen as pansies then you stop being so narrowminded. It just makes you look like an idiot.</p>
<p>soccer players fall on every occasion to draw a free kick or a penalty kick, or just to get a turnover. its just the way modern soccer is played, especially by the italians and the portugese.
PS soccer haters suck. just like baseball haters. if you think those sports are boring, you dont understand them.</p>
<p>I know that soccer players are not really hurt and don’t really have the pain threshold of a 5-year old.</p>
<p>But I call them wussies in that they’re willing to look ridiculous and sacrifice their “manliness” for the sake of winning some cheap fouls.</p>
<p>cheap fouls can cause big goals, and big goals can cause very big bucks, especially in the world cup ;)</p>