Your Favorite Sport

[pboily]

... or play boot hockey on the block.

Is that what Minnesotans call it... I'd say road hockey or hockey-balle.

EDIT: by my count, that's 7 for hockey

 

[Lozzy_Ozzy]

1) Table tennis
2) Tennis
3) Hockey

 

[Zarn]

Call it what it is.... street hockey

 

[De Lorimier]

Wether I played it on skates, rollerblades or shoes I never used an adjective to describe it. I always called it hockey.

 

[farting bob]

Formula 1, cricket (only when we're winning) and to play it would be tennis.

 

[Urederra]

Hockey is only played in Canada, Russia and in the northern states of USA. It shouldn't be in the poll because is not global. Baseball has even less players, It shouldn't be either. American football lasts three months on TV. If you forget to watch a match, the season is over.

And, what is the poll about anyway? Favorite sport to watch or to play?

I agree with Marla. Real football (yeah, that one that consists on kicking a ball with your foot, not nursing a oblong thingy in your chest, that is why it is called football) can be played by a multitude of people. You don't have to be tall or weight 200 kg to play it. All you need is skills, that's why Marla says that football is an art, because good football players stand out due to their skills with the ball, not because they are tall or heavy.

Overall, sex is the best sport to practice.

 

[Lozzy_Ozzy]

Hockey is only played in Canada, Russia and in the northern states of USA. It shouldn't be in the poll because is not global

What?

Is your version different to ours?

I play it, and my aunt played on the Scottish team...

And I like to watch drag racing as well.

EDIT: Ahhhh, do you mean ICE hockey?

.

 

[Urederra]

What?

Is your version different to ours?

I play it, and my aunt played on the Scottish team...

And I like to watch drag racing as well.

EDIT: Ahhhh, do you mean ICE hockey?

.

Yeah, you are right, ICE hockey.

 

[De Lorimier]

Hockey is only played in Canada, Russia and in the northern states of USA. It shouldn't be in the poll because is not global.

Really?
There's national federations of hockey in all those countries: (Link)

Andorra, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Belarus, Belgium, Bosnia and Hercegovina, Brazil, Canada, Chinese, Taipei, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Great Britain, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Kazakhstan, Korea, Latvia, Liechtenstein,
Lithuania, Luxembourg, Namibia, Netherlands, Norway, New Zealand, Poland, Russia, Serbia & Montenegro, Slovenia, Slovakia, South Africa, Spain, Switzerland, Sweden, Thailand, Turkey, Ukraine, UAE, USA.

Sounds global enough for a winter sport.

 

[phoenix_night]

How so? That game requires alot of strategy.

Does it really though? I mean, relatively so?

Americans always seem to be describe their sport as an immensely strategic game to us admittedly ignorant Europeans, but are you perhaps also not recognising the strategy of the likes of football and rugby?

Some Europeans think American whatever is just throwing and catching, but don't some Americans also think football is just kicking a ball into a net? Do you really think your sport is so strategically advanced?

 

[farting bob]

Ahhhh, do you mean ICE hockey?

.

Yea, why cant they call it ice hockey? Real hockey played on nice warm ground is called hockey. hockey played on ice that involves alot of trying to kill your opponants, is called ice hockey.
De lorimier, theres a federation in all those countries, but i would be surprised if half of those generate any interest in there general public, and very few professional players/leagues.

 

[De Lorimier]

I'm saying that it is a global sport based on the numerous countries playing it. Of course, it's not super popular in all of those countries, but it is a sport played and love in a lot more places than Canada, the US and Russia as Urederra said.

There's only one real global sport in the sense that you mean it, it's soccer.

As for hockey being called ice hockey: you do what you want.
Here if I say hockey, nobody thinks "grass", we think skates and ice. The same could be said in the US and in most european countries.

 

[Smokey_Monkey]

Absolutely rugby all the way!!!!!

Just wondering if you ever get tackled like this in Yank Football?

Rugby players don't wear any padding either

 

[seasmath]

You want to die?

 

[Smokey_Monkey]

Oh and by the way that tackle wasnt very rough just really funny!

 

[Zarn]

Does it really though? I mean, relatively so?

Americans always seem to be describe their sport as an immensely strategic game to us admittedly ignorant Europeans, but are you perhaps also not recognising the strategy of the likes of football and rugby?

Some Europeans think American whatever is just throwing and catching, but don't some Americans also think football is just kicking a ball into a net? Do you really think your sport is so strategically advanced?

I cannot just tell you how complex US football is. You would have to actually learn the game. What makes a good player is not just be big and tall. The game isn't just throw and catch, either.

Many Americans see football as just kicking a ball into a net with a pass here or there. It may not be true, but that is the judgement made.

 

[Martacus]

I voted other. I'm a runner by nature. Short to medium distance; no sprints, hurdles, or marathons for me. I don't excel at it, but it is what I'm best at when it comes to sports. Though fencing is pretty close; I have talent for it, but not much practice. As for team sports, it's hockey for me if I want to sit down and watch a game. US, NFL-style football usually doesn't hold my interest, though I found the 2004 Super Bowl really held my attention. It's a shame that whole halftime fiasco had to happen, because it really was quite an amazing game. actually, it's a shame how over-commercialized the NFL has become; it's about as bad as the NBA, if not worse.

 

[Chukchi Husky]

I don't like sports...

 

[Gangor]

2. Since all rugby players need to be somewhat athletic, they don't have to deal with the prospect of being tackled by a 6'9" 375lbs. (206cm 170kg) defensive lineman.

There are professional rugby players that tall and that heavy (although usually not at the same time). There are many different specialist positions in Rugby (as in Gridiron), but in Rugby a 5'6" 90kg player (halfback or flyhalf) must be prepared to tackle (and be tackled) by someone 6'3" and 130kg (prop) or so (for instance). Can Gridiron boast such disparity?

3. The fact that there are frequent stoppages in play makes it more exciting, and more intense than other games (there will be no one on the field jogging at all, as in soccer, in fact nearly everyone will either be sprinting or making a hit/blocking one). Furthermore, the plays that a coach calls are more important than in any other major sport.

Untrue. In Rugby the entire team must learn many "set plays" which are similar in many ways to your "coaching calls", except that they can't rely on the coach to lead them through it on a whiteboard a minute beforehand, and the team has to orchestrate these plays during general play.

 

[phoenix_night]

Many Americans see football as just kicking a ball into a net with a pass here or there. It may not be true, but that is the judgement made.

Yeah, much as Europeans see your sport as throwing and catching. Certainly not true either! But as Europeans are likely to take such a simplistic view of your sport, isn't it just as likely that Americans view football in the same manner?

Do you view it as kicking into a net?
Are you familiar with football, are you just claiming your version to be more complex...just because...?