The DEFINITIVE English football banter thread

[B-MCINTYRE]

Just go back to the wwe section and feed your trolls

but that's why i am here...

[Y2Jryder]

Muhhahaha that's what you think.. *evil face*

Nah messing man, It's just the Dutch I hate. Nice bantering with you too mate.. look forward to the next time!

Jealousy is a sin

[akbar]

Top 23:

How does Champions League winner Juan Mata get no love?

[B-MCINTYRE]

How does Champions League winner Juan Mata get no love?

He is the invalid points category...

[akbar]

Sack the Interim dude now Roman, he won't always be available this overrated gem of a manager.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/20943089

[B-MCINTYRE]

Soccer is shit,

[B-MCINTYRE]

Why Soccer SucksThe ever-growing list of reasons why soccer sucks.

Soccer participants actually fellate one another.

Soccer participants are walking advertisements.

France is successful at participating at soccer. That should say something, especially to the British.

The "World" Cup is not the a World's Cup, but a competition among 32 countries, disproportionately allotted to European countries.

Soccer hooligans.

Soccer is boring. Soccer is absurdly slow. I've had soccer apologists say with false pride how the average soccer participant "runs" 4 miles in a game. Newsflash: that means they are jogging less than 3 miles per hour. Translation: they are mostly standing around. BORING.

Soccer participants act like they've been shot - what pussies. Meanwhile, real athletes like Donovan McNabb or Bobby Baun play on broken legs.

Soccer is too simple an activity.

Penalty kicks. You are determining a winner by a random event that has no relevance to the rest of the game. It would be as stupid as replacing extra innings with batting practice.

Fruity penalty cards. How stupid is it to flash up some card to indicate the severity of a penalty? Richard Simmons was inspired to use them in his diet system. Are all penalties the same? Again, the inability to use the upper torso hampers soccer participants. Use hand signals, you troglodytes.

Psychotic fans. The South Korean loser who set himself on fire is one example. The mental stability of the murderer who killed that one player because he sucked (free clue: all soccer participants suck) is another.

Ties: 55% of games are ties. Ties suck.

Why not use your hands? Or your brain?

Soccer participants do not bathe.

Soccer hairdos.

Pompous pseudo-intellectual Europeans who become soccer fans in order to convince the populace of their link to the common man.

Soccer participants with one name. I can understand why your parents would disown any soccer participant, but they should take at least any last name.

[B-MCINTYRE]

http://www.soccersucks.net/soccer_sucks.html

[B-MCINTYRE]

Soccer hilites concentrate on what almost happens. WhenESPN has the poor sense to show soccer hilites, they show missed shots, missed passes, etc. Any real sport shows things that actually contribute to the result. Soccer participants do not care about the result.

Soccer fans justify the activity based entirely on its popularity. Not only are the reasons why soccer is popular an argument against soccer, but it really shows how pathetic said activity is when that is the only argument soccer fans come up with.

The correct term for 0 is zero, not nil. Take a math class.

Buy a freaking cup, you pansies.

Soccer is not objective. There is no play clock. The game doesn't end after the clock has run down. This adds bias, subjectivism and appeals to lower intellects, and it destroys the drama from last second victories. Contrast such clumsy timekeeping (shame on the Swiss, who should know better) and the lack of any discernable strategy with the strategic precision of the two-minute drill in football.

Soccer is not objective, part two. The lack of offensive chances leads to ties, which, as we know, suck. Soccer's "solution?" Let's randomize the result (in those cases where a tie suddenly becomes an affront, the "World" Cup) by having penalty kicks.

Soccer participants on the same team have different jerseys. The obviously higher intelligence of hockey (goaltender) or football (offensive linemen) fans and referees is evident, since we don't need a different uniform to indicate a different privilege in the rule book.

Soccer is Third World inexpensive. Ordinarily, this would not be a problem. Most people don't consider buying hockey or football equipment expensive in civilized countries, but in the context of the rest of the world, it is expensive. On the other hand, soccer is dirt cheap - and by dirt cheap, I mean slum kids in Brazil rolling up balls of dirt to kick around.

Soccer apologists say the reason it is not popular in the US is because it wasn't invented in the US. First, soccer originated from the North American game called pasuckuakohowog several hundred years before the British played something resembling it. Second, basketball was the creation of a Canadian, yet is very popular in the US. Third, football was the creation of a Canadian, yet is very popular in the US.

Soccer apologists say the reason it is not popular in the US is because the US is not any good at that activity. The US soccer team won the World Cup in 1991 and 1999. Better find another reason.

Soccer apologists say soccer is an athletic activity. Using the Olympics as a barometer, it is pretty obvious that those countries that lack athletic prowess (Britain, France) are successful at soccer. Interesting to note, despite the inclusion of activities like soccer and walking in the Olympics (and the wrongful exclusion of football and rodeo), how those countries where soccer is not popular outperform those countries where soccer is popular athletically.

Soccer apologists steal terms from real sports. Hint: a pitch is something an option QB does. A draw is a running play designed to counter a strong pass rush. Football is a real sport that involves athletes in pads and helmets, not sissies playing kickball.

[B-MCINTYRE]

Courtesy of:

http://www.soccersucks.net/soccer_sucks.html