Europe: [Futbol] Looking at the Olympics...

[midnightpulp]

So much delusion.

Ortiz has 3 events where he blows Duncan out by such a huge margin, Duncan isn't making it up for by barely beating Ortiz in the high and long jumps.

"But Duncan is thin!"

Thinking thin people are naturally more athletic is delusion. Duncan has very little athleticism left. He ain't running over 15mph on those knees and with that frame.

[DAF86]

That's my biggest complaint about baseball. There's way too many games, the season should be half as long. It should be a weekend and holiday sport only, Thursday-Monday at the most. The game lengths are long but that wouldn't be so bad if there were fewer of them. The games and rivalries would mean more as well if there were fewer of them. They could even do a promotion and relegation system if need be, 162 games is more than enough to determine who the best team was and like the old days hold a World Series. All those games and they still do 1-game playoffs (not the WC playoff game)?



True, boxing is just as accesible and cheaper than even soccer (just two people fighting will do).

I just go back to what I said about people growing up with it. That's why soccer is more popular than handball.

But why do people grow up with it, dumbass?

That's what I have been asking you since the beggining and you can't answer? You know why? 'cause the answer is that they grow up with it, 'cause since its invention soccer developed into the most popular sport among those poeple. They found it more fun than sports with bigger history and that were invented earlier, but weren't as fun. That's the basic fact you won't dignified to admit.

[DAF86]

Ortiz has 3 events where he blows Duncan out by such a huge margin, Duncan isn't making it up for by barely beating Ortiz in the high and long jumps.

"But Duncan is thin!"

Thinking thin people are naturally more athletic is delusion. Duncan has very little athleticism left. He ain't running over 15mph on those knees and with that frame.

Thinking Ortiz would win the 100 metres.
Thinking Ortiz wouldn't die midway the 400 metres.
giving the throwing events to Ortiz just because (is he a pitcher now? Doesn't Duncan have to throw pretty often too in his sport?)

Seriously dog, I have never seen a more delusional argument than yours regarding baseball and athletic demands. Even kobefans aren't as delusional.

Take a hint from all the other baseball fans not backing you up on this and lay low son.

[midnightpulp]

But why do people grow up with it, dumbass?

That's what I have been asking you since the beggining and you can't answer? You know why? 'cause the answer is that they grow up with it, 'cause since its invention soccer developed into the most popular sport among those poeple. They found it more fun than sports with bigger history and that were invented earlier, but weren't as fun. That's the basic fact you won't dignified to admit.

Cheap to play.

"But baseball, rugby, etc are cheap to play too!"

The difference is that you can better simulate a soccer game with garbage you find on the street than you can simulate other sports. Rugby you can simulate quite well, but I think its convoluted rule set make it more inaccessible.

You can also practice soccer more easily by yourself than other sports aside from maybe basketball, but basketball needs proper equipment. It's the only reason I can think of why a simplistic, cliched goal sport with big design flaws is the "world's game." Great accessibility. I'm not salty about this fact. Enjoy it. I just don't buy the idea it is an inherently more fun game than other sports.

[Caltex2]

But why do people grow up with it, dumbass?

That's what I have been asking you since the beggining and you can't answer? You know why? 'cause the answer is that they grow up with it, 'cause since its invention soccer developed into the most popular sport among those poeple. They found it more fun than sports with bigger history and that were invented earlier, but weren't as fun. That's the basic fact you won't dignified to admit.

I never denied any of what you said. It just is what it is. Just don't try to sell me on low scoring being so great by itself or how technical and tough it is to compared other sports.

Like I said, if it was back and forth, with great shots and great saves yet still low scoring, that'd be one thing. I've watched entire halves of soccer with just 0-1 direct shots on the goalie: boring! Many of soccer's goals are on penalty shots in-game and not on regular plays.

Either ease offsides or place fewer players on the field. That would really test the players' endurance. But soccer will go on as is because that's just you fans like and is tradition, just like basketball holding on to rules like the backcourt violation and 8/10 seconds because they've always been in the rulebook even after the shot clock made them not matter at all.

[midnightpulp]

Thinking Ortiz would win the 100 metres.
Thinking Ortiz wouldn't die midway the 400 metres.
giving the throwing events to Ortiz just because (is he a pitcher now? Doesn't Duncan have to throw pretty often too in his sport?)

Seriously dog, I have never seen a more delusional argument than yours regarding baseball and athletic demands. Even kobefans aren't as delusional.

Take a hint from all the other baseball fans not backing you up on this and lay low son.

Comparing throwing strength of an NBA player to an MLB player

Where's Duncan's top speed analytics? I'll wait. And thinking Duncan's knees wouldn't disintegrate running 400m at max speed.

I don't think Duncan has jumped this high in a decade:



" Duncan plays a sport I like, a sport than has some running and he's thin, so he's naturally more athletic "

Why would I lay low when I'm winning this debate? First you morons claimed that baseball players weren't athletic. I destroyed that argument real quick, actually showing how ty floptrot players are athletically by comparison (Ronaldo dunking on an 8 foot rim ). Best players in floptrots are literally midgets with skinny fat bodies and no muscle mass.

And basketball players outside of wings are pretty poor athletes, inhibited by their height. 7 foot bigs couldn't literally couldn't play any other sport. That's why like 14% of people who are 7 feet and above are NBA players.



https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/re...PDK/story.html

7 footers are average to below average athletes who basically won the height lottery.

[DAF86]

Cheap to play.

"But baseball, rugby, etc are cheap to play too!"

The difference is that you can better simulate a soccer game with garbage you find on the street than you can simulate other sports. Rugby you can simulate quite well, but I think its convoluted rule set make it more inaccessible.

You can also practice soccer more easily by yourself than other sports aside from maybe basketball, but basketball needs proper equipment. It's the only reason I can think of why a simplistic, cliched goal sport with big design flaws is the "world's game." Great accessibility. I'm not salty about this fact. Enjoy it. I just don't buy the idea it is an inherently more fun game than other sports.

That's the you think 'cause you don"t really know soccer and really haven't play it at an organized level.

It isn't the same to play soccer on a well groomed grass field than on a ing uneven piece of dirt.

It isn't the same to play it with a regular bouncing ball than with a ty made up one made of socks, that isn't even round.

It is not the same to play it with an actual goal than with a couple of small rocks on the ground where you have to imagine if the shot was over or under the crossbar.

In baseball it isn't the same to play it with a stick than with a bat, or with a tennis ball instead of a baseball. But then, the quality of the field is pretty much irrelevant, and yiu have no goal. You just say "above the fence is a home run", and that's it.

Seriously son, really think an argument through before spitting it out. The only reason you said this is because of the many pictures you can find of third-world kids playing soccer on their feet on a random poor piece of ground. But guess what? They don't play it becuase it is the "easiest game to simulate", they play it because it is the most fun.

[DAF86]

Comparing throwing strength of an NBA player to an MLB player

Where's Duncan's top speed analytics? I'll wait. And thinking Duncan's knees wouldn't disintegrate running 400m at max speed.

I don't think Duncan has jumped this high in a decade:



" Duncan plays a sport I like, a sport than has some running and he's thin, so he's naturally more athletic "

Why would I lay low when I'm winning this debate? First you morons claimed that baseball players weren't athletic. I destroyed that argument real quick, actually showing how ty floptrot players are athletically by comparison (Ronaldo dunking on an 8 foot rim ). Best players in floptrots are literally midgets with skinny fat bodies and no muscle mass.

And basketball players outside of wings are pretty poor athletes, inhibited by their height. 7 foot bigs couldn't literally couldn't play any other sport. That's why like 14% of people who are 7 feet and above are NBA players.



https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/re...PDK/story.html

7 footers are average to below average athletes who basically won the height lottery.

"I'm winning this debate" cute, tbh.

Son, you are delusional. You can bore me with all the walls of words saying the same over and over again 'till I stop replying, but that won't change the fact that I have already ted on every single delusional argument you have tried to make over this . I will stil reply to some of them from time to time when I have the time and feel in the mood. But know that, if I don't reply to them, it is not because you are not making a ing delusional argument. It is because I have already ted on those and it gets repe ive and boring. God bless.

[DAF86]

I never denied any of what you said. It just is what it is. Just don't try to sell me on low scoring being so great by itself or how technical and tough it is to compared other sports.

Like I said, if it was back and forth, with great shots and great saves yet still low scoring, that'd be one thing. I've watched entire halves of soccer with just 0-1 direct shots on the goalie: boring! Many of soccer's goals are on penalty shots in-game and not on regular plays.

Either ease offsides or place fewer players on the field. That would really test the players' endurance. But soccer will go on as is because that's just you fans like and is tradition, just like basketball holding on to rules like the backcourt violation and 8/10 seconds because they've always been in the rulebook even after the shot clock made them not matter at all.

Dude, that sport already exists and nobody gives a flying about it.

And I'm not trying to sell you . You like what you like, and I like what I like. I'm just trying to tell you that the popularity of soccer had nothing to do with tradition.

[cobbler]

And basketball players outside of wings are pretty poor athletes, inhibited by their height. 7 foot bigs couldn't literally couldn't play any other sport. That's why like 14% of people who are 7 feet and above are NBA players.

And that's why Wilt stands head and shoulders above all. His basketball greatness aside, he was also a well decorated cross country/track & field athlete (actually winning a division 1 high jumping conference le), volleyball player, weight lifter etc.

[DAF86]

It's not like Duncan was a pretty damn good swimmer or anything.

[midnightpulp]

Game. Set. Match for DAF86

But none can touch Parker in an open sprint, at least not so far this season. Parker has reached a high speed of 20.9 miles per hour in one stretch of in-game sprinting, easily the highest speed any of these guys have registered. Rubio is next, at 19.4 miles per hour, and the rest of the crew falls into the 17 range.

http://nba.nbcsports.com/2012/03/08/...rd-in-the-nba/

"17mph range," and these are measuring just point guards.

Ortiz running 16.4mph.

http://m.mlb.com/video/topic/7395516...al-second-base

So you would have to believe Duncan is marginally slower than some of the fastest NBA PGs who register at about 17mph in open sprints.

[midnightpulp]

It's not like Duncan was a pretty damn good swimmer or anything.

Yeah, 23 years ago.

[midnightpulp]

"I'm winning this debate" cute, tbh.

Son, you are delusional. You can bore me with all the walls of words saying the same over and over again 'till I stop replying, but that won't change the fact that I have already ted on every single delusional argument you have tried to make over this . I will stil reply to some of them from time to time when I have the time and feel in the mood. But know that, if I don't reply to them, it is not because you are not making a ing delusional argument. It is because I have already ted on those and it gets repe ive and boring. God bless.

Yeah, your " ting" doesn't go any further than saying "you're delusional."

You gonna go at me, I want stats, evidence, and not just qualitative "eye test" opinions from you. "B-B-But Duncan is lean and Ortiz is fat, um, fat people can't be fast!" That's basically your whole argument. You rate athleticism by physique. I actually rate it by something called evidence.

Funny, when Lakerfans pull that eyetest with Kirby and I counter with hard evidence, you agree. But I make the same argument in favor of something you're biased against, and it's "y-you're delusional."

16.4 mph. You want to prove Duncan can run a faster 100m, show me an example of him running faster than that in the last couple of years (we're comparing modern Duncan vs. modern Ortiz).

[Caltex2]

Dude, that sport already exists and nobody gives a flying about it.

And I'm not trying to sell you . You like what you like, and I like what I like. I'm just trying to tell you that the popularity of soccer had nothing to do with tradition.

And what sport would that be? Serious question, I'm not BS'ing?

[DAF86]

Yeah, your " ting" doesn't go any further than saying "you're delusional."

You gonna go at me, I want stats, evidence, and not just qualitative "eye test" opinions from you. "B-B-But Duncan is lean and Ortiz is fat, um, fat people can't be fast!" That's basically your whole argument. You rate athleticism by physique. I actually rate it by something called evidence.

Funny, when Lakerfans pull that eyetest with Kirby and I counter with hard evidence, you agree. But I make the same argument in favor of something you're biased against, and it's "y-you're delusional."

16.4 mph. You want to prove Duncan can run a faster 100m, show me an example of him running faster than that in the last couple of years (we're comparing modern Duncan vs. modern Ortiz).

What evidence son? There's no evidence for the we are arguing. Unless Duncan and Ortiz actually get into a decathlon there's no evidence to be had. Base running isn't the same as running on a basketball court where you pretty much never have to go full speed (specially not bigmen).

Besides, I'm not all that familiar with the re ed miles system you use up there, but since when is 16.4 some kind of good speed mark?

[DAF86]

And what sport would that be? Serious question, I'm not BS'ing?

Actually there's a lot of them. Some poster posted a couple of them, earlier in this thread. You have futsal, beach soccer, showball, etc.

[Caltex2]

Okay, but I mean on a grand scale. On a full-sized soccer/football field, a game with fewer players or eased/no offsides. If regulation soccer was 5-5 minus the goalies (in other words, 6/6), I guarantee you the goalies would be tested way more often and player endurance would be way more of a factor. We'd see more 5-4 games and a lot more shots-on-goal.

[midnightpulp]

What evidence son? There's no evidence for the we are arguing. Unless Duncan and Ortiz actually get into a decathlon there's no evidence to be had. Base running isn't the same as running on a basketball court where you pretty much never have to go full speed (specially not bigmen).

Besides, I'm not all that familiar with the re ed miles system you use up there, but since when is 16.4 some kind of good speed mark?

Um, they have 3/4 length court combine sprint times, where it is a full sprint without ball handling.

16.4mph or 26kph (using your French imposed system) is decent speed by athlete standards. The slowest players in the EPL floptrot league run about the fast.

Let's look at the 3/4 court sprint time (72 feet or 22 meters) for young NBA 7 footers.

http://stats.nba.com/draftcombine/#!...R_SPRINT&dir=1

Average looks about 3.5ish seconds, with the slowest being 3.65.

In the Ortiz example I posted, he covered 22.5 meters in 3.74 seconds, pulling up as he reached second base, so he slowed down. With Duncan's bad knees and age, I seriously doubt he's faster than the slowest young big coming out. Ortiz looks to be about as fast as the slowest NBA big at the combine, and probably could shave a .10 off his time if he ran straight through and didn't wear a helmet.

Nothing suggests Tim is faster than Ortiz over 100m.

That's how you make an argument. With facts. Not appealing to dumb speculation by measuring physiques.

And it would take a reach of idiotic proportions to think Duncan is competing with an MLB player in throwing events.

[dfens]

football is a GREAT sport and so loved because it is almost a perfect sport as it SCALES perfectly. It is:
- very economically accessible : a couple of trash cans and a ball) but if you need a ton of money (short and long term) to have a great team (development schools, scouting, training grounds, team-building, etc)
- physically accessible : as long as you are fit any type of body can contribute : small and skilled, tall and slow but good tactically, etc ... any fit bodies with sufficient knowledge and skill are good enough, tactics can also be tailor made for body types ... you just need a right combination, you don't need 6'6+ roid addicts.
- tactically and rules accessible : You don't need much skill to get a 5v5 court game but you need extraordinary individual skill to do what suarez does on the offside trap, extraordinary tactical skill to do what xavi does, and extraordinary skill to plan an entire game as a coach with almost no control after it started (in comparison to basketball, american football, etc). You also need to be a master at fouling to avoid getting sent off (pepe is an artist tbh )
- culturally accessible : long ball english game, tiki-taka, nigball, continental, italian, iceland-style : there are many styles of play suited for different types of peoples, body types and cultures.
- because the game is so varied tactically and culturally you get counter strategies for every team, only rarely are there truly dominant teams (2002 brasil - stacked beyond god tbh). Italian style usually counters german style, chilean style counters argie style, french style counter spanish style, german style counter argie style and so on ... that's why you get REAL grudge matches.
- goals mean something : it's always do or die, you don't get many scoring chances. It's like life, you don't get what you want all the time, when you got the chance you got to man up and take/exploit it. DAF86's analogy is a good one tbh

An accessible easy to learn hard to master game. It's no wonder EVERY country loves it except for the mentally impaired people who think sport = athleticism only. Sport is like life sons, you adapt to win, it doesn't matter how you win (athleticism, smarts, planning, intelligence, creativity), the game doesn't railroad you into playing a certain way. The beautiful game is like life flexible, ever adaptive, accessible yet hard to conquer, the game is alive. Imo this is very hard to grasp for americans because you live is such a closed railroaded world tbh, there is much to learn outside of it sons.

[midnightpulp]

football is a GREAT sport and so loved because it is almost a perfect sport as it SCALES perfectly. It is:
- very economically accessible : a couple of trash cans and a ball) but if you need a ton of money (short and long term) to have a great team (development schools, scouting, training grounds, team-building, etc)
- physically accessible : as long as you are fit any type of body can contribute : small and skilled, tall and slow but good tactically, etc ... any fit bodies with sufficient knowledge and skill are good enough, tactics can also be tailor made for body types ... you just need a right combination, you don't need 6'6+ roid addicts.
- tactically and rules accessible : You don't need much skill to get a 5v5 court game but you need extraordinary individual skill to do what suarez does on the offside trap, extraordinary tactical skill to do what xavi does, and extraordinary skill to plan an entire game as a coach with almost no control after it started (in comparison to basketball, american football, etc). You also need to be a master at fouling to avoid getting sent off (pepe is an artist tbh )
- culturally accessible : long ball english game, tiki-taka, nigball, continental, italian, iceland-style : there are many styles of play suited for different types of peoples, body types and cultures.
- because the game is so varied tactically and culturally you get counter strategies for every team, only rarely are there truly dominant teams (2002 brasil - stacked beyond god tbh). Italian style usually counters german style, chilean style counters argie style, french style counter spanish style, german style counter argie style and so on ... that's why you get REAL grudge matches.
- goals mean something : it's always do or die, you don't get many scoring chances. It's like life, you don't get what you want all the time, when you got the chance you got to man up and take/exploit it. DAF86's analogy is a good one tbh

An accessible easy to learn hard to master game. It's no wonder EVERY country loves it except for the mentally impaired people who think sport = athleticism only. Sport is like life sons, you adapt to win, it doesn't matter how you win (athleticism, smarts, planning, intelligence, creativity), the game doesn't railroad you into playing a certain way. The beautiful game is like life flexible, ever adaptive, accessible yet hard to conquer, the game is alive. Imo this is very hard to grasp for americans because you live is such a closed railroaded world tbh, there is much to learn outside of it sons.

It has more to do with people from different cultures liking different things. An Indian could write the same poetic description of cricket as you do of soccer. A Canadian can say such about ice hockey.

We're not all obliged to like soccer because it's "the world's game."

[140]

I played in high school, going against centers 75lb heavier on average. I used my vertical (better than Ronaldo's max in my day

it just keeps getting better

[midnightpulp]

it just keeps getting better

Ronaldo's vert was lab measured at 30". Any American kid who played a lot of basketball growing up beats that pathetic mark.

I'm not talking up my own athleticism, but laughing at Ronaldo's. Shredded and lean, and a measurably mediocre "athlete."

[140]

Ronaldo's vert was lab measured at 30". Any American kid who played a lot of basketball growing up beats that pathetic mark.

I'm not talking up my own athleticism, but laughing at Ronaldo's. Shredded and lean, and a measurably mediocre "athlete."

If you want to keep pretending that re ed video is "evidence" of his real leaping ability I'll use this photo as a counter argument since it's just as credible:

[midnightpulp]

If you want to keep pretending that re ed video is "evidence" of his real leaping ability I'll use this photo as a counter argument since it's just as credible:

Oh, you mean a video that shows scientists testing naldo under lab conditions as opposed to "photos" that can be skewed by perspective optical illusions?

Watch it and weep, son.



30" running vert (a two step is considering "running")

17" no-step

This is an IMPRESSIVE no step.