Soccer or Football
Allen TaylorSmith
In article <19...@orstcs.CS.ORST.EDU> you write:
>
> Could anybody tell me why we are using the word "soccer" instead of
> using the more appropiaate "football"?
>
When one speaks the language of a particular country, one uses the words
as they are used in that country. In America, football means a
particularly contrived and bloodthirsty descendant of "football" as it
is played in other countries. We SOCCER afficianados and players are
fighting for country wide acceptance of our favorite sport. To the
unitiated, using the term football would be confusing.
> It is extrange that in a group with people from so many countries in
> which football is the main sport, we are using a word coined in a country
> where football is just a curiosity.
>
I object to you referring to soccer as a curiosity in this country. Maybe
American soccer is not as advanced as in some (but not all) parts of the
world, but I have seen estimates of from 5 to 20 million people in
America playing soccer.
> Armando Scalise
> sca...@jacobs.cs.orst.edu
==============================================================================
Allen D. TaylorSmith University of Washington tayl...@cac.washington.edu
Information Systems Seattle, Washington USA Human 1st - World Citizen 2nd
==============================================================================
Geert Hogen Esch
>
>In article <19...@orstcs.CS.ORST.EDU> you write:
>>
>> Could anybody tell me why we are using the word "soccer" instead of
>> using the more appropiaate "football"?
>>
>When one speaks the language of a particular country, one uses the words
>as they are used in that country. In America, football means a
spoken in many countries. If it should be associated to a particular
country why not England or the UK as the name 'English' suggests.
I think, in countries like the UK (Can British support me in this
thought?) the game we are watching the WC of in Italy is called
'football'.
Why not call the american variety by some other name or name
it 'American football' like 'Australian football' or name it
to something equivalent to 'rugby'?
In spanish the game is even called 'futbol' which I think
can be directly derived from 'football'.
The american claim to give its own name to a game which
originated somewhere else is not right I think.
It reflects an imperialistic attitude, an attitude the
gringos should be cured of, I believe.
Geert.
Geert Hogen Esch
>In spanish the game is even called 'futbol' which I think
>can be directly derived from 'football'.
and no doubt the scandinavian words are similar.
(Don't let me down, 'noormannen')
>It reflects an imperialistic attitude, an attitude the
>gringos should be cured of, I believe.
Geert.
Jason Trenouth
>>>>> On 29 Jun 90 23:14:19 GMT, tayl...@milton.u.washington.edu
(Allen TaylorSmith) said:
Allen> When one speaks the language of a particular country, one uses the words
Allen> as they are used in that country.
Agreed, and since we all seem to be using ENGLISH I suggest that the
sport is called "football" as it is in ENGLAND... :-)
Football covers a variety of sports from real football, through Rugby football
and Gaelic football, to Australian Rules football. As befitting another
variety, American football should be called simply "American football".
All the less popular kinds of football (incl. American football) place a great
deal of emphasis on using your hands, and as a result they are not accurately
described by the word "foot-ball". In fact most of these are variants of Rugby
football. Hence the sport popular in America should really be called
"American Rugby football".
Ciao - JT
--
______________________________________________________________________________
| Jason Trenouth, | JANET: j...@uk.ac.exeter.cs |
| Comp. Sci. Dept., Exeter Univ., | UUCP: j...@expya.uucp |
| Devon, EX4 4PT, UK. TEL: (0392) 264061 | BITNET: jtr%uk.ac.exeter.cs@ukacrl|
Piang Li-Lian
>All the less popular kinds of football (incl. American football) place a great
>deal of emphasis on using your hands, and as a result they are not accurately
>described by the word "foot-ball". In fact most of these are variants of Rugby
>football. Hence the sport popular in America should really be called
>"American Rugby football".
I suggest the name "American Handball".
> Ciao - JT
--- Piang
p...@cacs.usl.edu
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Richard Caley
I suggest the name "American Handball".
The real football can be renamed Argentinian Hanball, so no favorites
are played.
--
r...@uk.ac.ed.cstr
Rasmus Lerdorf
>When one speaks the language of a particular country, one uses the words
>as they are used in that country. In America, football means a
>particularly contrived and bloodthirsty descendant of "football" as it
>is played in other countries. We SOCCER afficianados and players are
>fighting for country wide acceptance of our favorite sport. To the
>unitiated, using the term football would be confusing.
I think the point was that people post from all over the world, not just
from America. If your theory is to hold, then all these people posting from
outside the US should be using the term "Football" as that is indeed the
word as it is used in their country. Even if the native language is not
English "Football" is what the local term translates to in all languages I
know of anyway. Since we do communicate in English, one would think we should
follow the usage proposed by the English (from England) and use Football!
--
Rasmus Lerdorf | geac!dmntor!rasmus (Work) | '94 WC prediction
UW SD Eng. '93 | geac!contact!rasmus (Home) | Denmark will take the Cup!
edward.lor
>I think the point was that people post from all over the world, not just
>from America. If your theory is to hold, then all these people posting from
>outside the US should be using the term "Football" as that is indeed the
>word as it is used in their country. Even if the native language is not
>English "Football" is what the local term translates to in all languages I
>know of anyway. Since we do communicate in English, one would think we should
>follow the usage proposed by the English (from England) and use Football!
We shouldn't just consider the language we communicate, but also the
medium, USENET.
USENET was initiated in America about 10 years ago. At that time, there
were 4 groups for the 4 American major sports: football, basketball, baseball,
hockey. There wasn't even a group called "soccer" until 6 months ago.
It's not until the inception of rec.sport.soccer that the net has a strong
international favor. I read a lot of other groups, I have rarely seen
postings from foreign countries (besides Canada) until this year.
If you guys are that much into names, those of you in European countries
should have started a USENET1 and had your own rec.sport.football 10 years ago.
When we came up with the group for gridiron football years ago, for a net meant
to be CIRCULATED MOSTLY IN AMERICA, should we think "football" was inappropriate
for gridiron football because it's another sport in the rest of the world?
Get real!!!
--
Edward Lor
AT&T Bell Labs
Donal O Coileain
>It's not until the inception of rec.sport.soccer that the net has a strong
>international favor. I read a lot of other groups, I have rarely seen
>postings from foreign countries (besides Canada) until this year.
Rubbish !. For the last 2 - 3 years there has been a strong international
contribution to the net, the groups I regularly read (comp.sys.*, comp.unix.*
rec.music.misc, soc.culture.celtic, rec.sport.soccer, etc) have always
contained many international postings.
>If you guys are that much into names, those of you in European countries
>should have started a USENET1 and had your own rec.sport.football 10 years ago.
Charming, "it's my ball and if I'm not winning you can't play !!!".
Werenfried Spit
>It's not until the inception of rec.sport.soccer that the net has a strong
>international favor. I read a lot of other groups, I have rarely seen
>postings from foreign countries (besides Canada) until this year.
Maybe I'm interested in typically european subjects, but
in most groups I read lots of europeans are posting.
>Get real!!!
Please do! I don't think 10 years ago .football was
a bad name for an american newsgroup, but this group
should be called .football, as it is the name most
of us use for this sport. Things are changing, you
know.
W.S.
Marlon Cole
I'm glad to see the net giving England some support at last (-:
Highlights :-
swa...@omni.eng.clemson.edu (Swaminathan Murali) writes:
>Germany has made into the finals for the 4th time defe
>ating England in a thrilling game. Germany meets its old foe of 1986 world cup
>for the Championship cup! May the best team win. :wq
That would make a change in this World Cup, wouldn't it?
P85...@BARILVM.BITNET (Anthony Waller) writes:
>.... Beardsley
>actually played a good game - the best I've seen him play for a long
>time...
Yes, he did continually pass with unnerving accuracy to the Germans, didn't
he?
> England had a tremendous game and thoroughly deserved their
>"draw" after extra-time. I think that tactically England did
>very well. Germany's feared strikers were barely sited.
This was because England got their defense in order this time, Walker
played Klinnsman right out of the game, Parker shut down Brehmers wing
attacks, and Mattheus was more concerned with trying to keep Gazza quiet (which
he completely failed to do (-: ) than playing himself.
> Well played both teams. The saddest part of the game was when Gazza
>was booked - he had tears rolling down his face and was clinching his
>teeth - he realized that should England win he wouldn't be playing.
maur...@iris.ucdavis.edu (Eric Maurincomme) writes:
>The English were the best defense I've ever seen, and always very fair play
>and correct. Gascoigne almost cried after he received a yellow card.
>..... The booking of Gascoigne was quite
>severe, because he was just playing the ball.
The Gazza booking incident was nothing short of scandalous. It was extra
time, all players were tired, he'd just lost the ball and went to reclaim it,
but the challenge was slightly late. The ref. gave a foul because that's what
it was with no malicious intent - he showed no initial intent to book
Gazza. However, the German who was fouled rolled over 3 or 4 times away from
the challenge as if his leg had been amputated - the only skill the Germans
seem to think worthy of porting from Latin American football. The situation
occured right in front of the German bench, the occupants of which leapt to
their feet screaming at the ref. Only then did the ref. take out the yellow
card. IMHO this type of conning of the referee is as bad an infringement in the
game as any professional foul.
>But I have to say I was rooting for England, mainly because it is the cleanest
>team I have seen for a long time. If they lose the ball, that's it, they
>rarely commit a fault to stop the game. They are the fairest players in this
>World Cup. Thanks for the example...
Permit me a little flush of pride at this point....
... that's better (-:
P85...@BARILVM.BITNET (Anthony Waller) writes:
>.... Interesting to note that
>the top two games so far according to net ratings are Eng-Bel and
>Eng-Cam. I think this one is also up there.
Agreed?
How can this be for games involving such a "boring" side? Those who know
the game know that England can (but not always - but then who can?) play well
and in an exciting fashion - if all you've seen of England is their showing in
this W.C. and want to base opinions on the First Round games you wouldn't know
this - same applies to any team.
Is it merely co-incidence that every team looks forward to a meeting with
England, because they know they will get a good game, and be allowed to play -
if they can? England may not be the best team in the world, but they seem to
get involved in the best games!
I'm deflated by the result from last night, but then again I'm proud of the
way England played.
No sour grapes in this message - a game is only enjoyable if both teams
play and credit must go to the Germans for this too - the Germans this time had
the piece of luck and I wish them well against a team who continue to ride
theirs - how soon will it run out?
Cheers,
Marlon
Stephen K Mulrine
>It's not until the inception of rec.sport.soccer that the net has a strong
>international favor. I read a lot of other groups, I have rarely seen
>postings from foreign countries (besides Canada) until this year.
It was only when the Dutch backbone started distributing the rec.sport
groups (along with the alt and talk hierarchies) throughout Europe that the
group became necessary. That happened last October or thereabouts. Notice
how other groups have been created since then: soc.culture.british/german/
french, rec.sport.cricket; all due to an increased international feed.
So the situation is reversed from what you suggest.
--
Stephen K Mulrine * o__
smulrine%cs.stra...@nsf.ac.uk * |%%|A|=-
smul...@uk.ac.strath.cs * |~~
Deutschland vor! Noch ein Tor! * DSC Arminia Bielefeld
Werner Uhrig
well, a "British" team lost one they deserved to win - too bad.
(and thanks in advance to all the friendly reminders that
Britain # England :-)
it is really a shame that the British "hooligans" in the stands
have hurt the players on the field, who usually shine by their
fairnesss and technique (on better days) - and I suspect it to be
like every where else: there are reslly only a few rotten apples
who, unfortunately, ruin the fun for everyone else.
applause for England, please ...
edward.lor
>Rubbish !. For the last 2 - 3 years there has been a strong international
>contribution to the net, the groups I regularly read (comp.sys.*, comp.unix.*
>rec.music.misc, soc.culture.celtic, rec.sport.soccer, etc) have always
>contained many international postings.
OK, the last 2-3 years. How about the 7-8 years before that? Where were
you when the names of the net.sport.* groups (the predecessors of the
rec.sport.* groups) were decided? Too bad you didn't voice your opinions then.
>>If you guys are that much into names, those of you in European countries
>>should have started a USENET1 and had your own rec.sport.football 10 years ago.
>
>Charming, "it's my ball and if I'm not winning you can't play !!!".
That's right.
On the other hand, let's rename rec.sport.soccer to rec.sport.football because
it's called football everywhere else. How about prohibiting the entire
American public from calling the gridiron game "football"?
At least I like my charming quotes better than your bully tactics.
Morna J. Findlay
>
>
> it is really a shame that the British "hooligans" in the stands
Don't worry, I'll ALWAYS remind you that you mean "English", so
if you're fed up being reminded, stop deliberately casuing offence and
disinformation.
> applause for England, please ...
Must we?
M
Morna Findlay JANET: mo...@uk.ac.ed.lfcs
LFCS, Dept. of Computer Science UUCP: ..!mcvax!ukc!lfcs!morna
University of Edinburgh ARPA: morna%lfcs.e...@nsfnet-relay.ac.uk
Edinburgh EH9 3JZ, UK. Tel: 031-667-1081 Ext 2807
M Smith
>In article <8...@earth.cs.utexas.edu> wer...@cs.utexas.edu (Werner Uhrig) writes:
>> it is really a shame that the British "hooligans" in the stands
>
>Don't worry, I'll ALWAYS remind you that you mean "English", so
>if you're fed up being reminded, stop deliberately casuing offence and
>disinformation.
Do you really think Werner Uhrig was deliberate in causing offence?
I think not. You'll have to preach to a lot more than this net to get
the message through that England is not Britain.
>> applause for England, please ...
>Must we?
>Morna Findlay JANET: mo...@uk.ac.ed.lfcs
No, but you ought to.
--
Mark Smith.
-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Edinburgh Parallel Computing Centre.
m...@castle.edinburgh.ac.uk
Brian Wylie
>In article <50...@castle.ed.ac.uk> mo...@lfcs.ed.ac.uk (Morna J. Findlay) writes:
>>In article <8...@earth.cs.utexas.edu> wer...@cs.utexas.edu (Werner Uhrig) writes:
>>> it is really a shame that the British "hooligans" in the stands
>> Don't worry, I'll ALWAYS remind you that you mean "English", so
>> if you're fed up being reminded, stop deliberately casuing offence and
>> disinformation.
>Do you really think Werner Uhrig was deliberate in causing offence?
>I think not. You'll have to preach to a lot more than this net to get
>the message through that England is not Britain.
Sorry to be pedantic, but the hooligans were British. That's what it
says on the piece of paper which allows them to "honour their nation"
around the world, regardless of whether they were there to "support"
England, Scotland, Cameroon, or whatever. It's sad, but unfortunately
true. Although I *never* consider myself British -- I'm a Scot (and a
European) -- I too am ashamed by the way I'm humiliated in the eyes of
the world by those who undeniably are my national representatives.
>>> applause for England, please ...
>> Must we?
>> Morna Findlay JANET: mo...@uk.ac.ed.lfcs
>No, but you ought to.
>Mark Smith. m...@castle.edinburgh.ac.uk
I see no justification for that last remark. I feel no obligation to
support/applaud any team/cause on national grounds, nor any less
"patriotic" on choosing not to.
Slainte, "Since parallel programming tools exist,
Brian. MIMD machines are easy to use". -- Meiko 04/90
PS: To free up some space on the "high, moral ground", I see no reason
to support/applaud England on *any* grounds.
Morna J. Findlay
>>In article <8...@earth.cs.utexas.edu> wer...@cs.utexas.edu (Werner Uhrig) writes:
>>> it is really a shame that the British "hooligans" in the stands
>>
>>Don't worry, I'll ALWAYS remind you that you mean "English", so
>>if you're fed up being reminded, stop deliberately casuing offence and
>>disinformation.
>
>Do you really think Werner Uhrig was deliberate in causing offence?
Yes I do think he was deliberately causing offence.
First he says "Thanks in advance for the reminders that Britain
doesn't equal England" (can't find the reference now), and
then he deliberately uses the word 'British".
(Of course if I have misunderstood him, I naturally apologise)
Maybe it doesn't matter to you, but I GO TO GAMES, and I don't
want to be
1. Treated with suspicion because (deliberately) mis-informed people think
that being "British" makes and my friends hooligans.
2. Harassed by police who think we will cause trouble
3. Set upon by local troublemakers looking for a fight.
Look - it's all very well for you to be complacent if you never
watch fitba outside of your living room, but some of us actually
GO to games and WENT TO THE WORLD CUP.
And if you read this group regularly, you will know that I
have defended the decent English fans who already suffer
these problems.
Fortunately the Italians, who are very knowledgeable about fitba,
knew perferctly well that
SCOTTISH AND ENGLISH FANS ARE DIFFERENT
THERE IS *NO* "BRITISH" TEAM
WE SCOTS HAD A GREAT AND TROUBLE-FREE TIME IN ITALIA
And so the people of Torino and Genova welcomed us and joined in
the fun and games with us.
Witness the difference in atmosphere when the English arrived in
Toprino station, as reported in the press.
It is important to me that I can perhaps GO to some of the European
championship qualifying games abroad and not be treated like a criminal. You
can sit at home and be complacent if you like.
To the later poster, whose message I unnacountably can't reply
to, I repeat the above. To say that Scottish fans are also
British is a red herring. There are no "British" teams in the
sense that you imply.
There are English fans who follow English teams who have a
reputation for causing trouble. Local thugs sometimes
set upon them and provoke them. Do you want this to happen
to other groups of fans too? This is what will happen if
we don't KEEP DISASSOCIATING OURSELVES FROM THE VIOLENCE.
No-one need fear visits by Scots/Welsh/Irish fans - indeed
they should probably look forward to them.
Morna
Miguel A. Ramirez
>In article <18...@prles2.prl.philips.nl> col...@nvpna1.prl.philips.nl (Donal O Coileain) writes:
>>Rubbish !. For the last 2 - 3 years there has been a strong international
> ^^^^^
>>contribution to the net, the groups I regularly read (comp.sys.*, comp.unix.*
>>rec.music.misc, soc.culture.celtic, rec.sport.soccer, etc) have always
>>contained many international postings.
>
>OK, the last 2-3 years. How about the 7-8 years before that? Where were
>you when the names of the net.sport.* groups (the predecessors of the
>rec.sport.* groups) were decided? Too bad you didn't voice your opinions then.
>
>>>If you guys are that much into names, those of you in European countries
>>>should have started a USENET1 and had your own rec.sport.football 10 years ago.
>>
>>Charming, "it's my ball and if I'm not winning you can't play !!!".
>
>That's right.
^^^
NOW THIS IS EXACTLY WHY 'MERKINS ARE SOME OF THE MOST HATED PEOPLE IN THE
WORLD. KEEP IT UP ED, WE REALLY NEED IT.
>On the other hand, let's rename rec.sport.soccer to rec.sport.football because
>it's called football everywhere else. How about prohibiting the entire
>American public from calling the gridiron game "football"?
>
>At least I like my charming quotes better than your bully tactics.
> Edward Lor
> AT&T Bell Labs
Charming? Yeah, right about as charming as UNIX itself.
--
Miguel A. Ramirez
Sanctions against South Africa- now more than ever!
one man one vote OR one settler one bullet.
Andrew Sherman
>> applause for England, please ...
>Must we?
>M
A teabag can stay in the cup for more than 10 minutes.
:-)
Andrew Sherman
INGRES European Technical Centre, 99, Kings Road, London SW3 4PA, England.
an...@ingres.com {amdahl,mtxinu,sun}!rtech!andys an...@rtech.uucp
Michael Purvis
writes:
>
> it is really a shame that the British "hooligans" in the stands
> have hurt the players on the field, who usually shine by their
> fairnesss and technique (on better days) - and I suspect it to be
> like every where else: there are reslly only a few rotten apples
> who, unfortunately, ruin the fun for everyone else.
>
> applause for England, please ...
Thanks Werner for reminding us that the English fans do not reflect the
cleanliness of play that the English team exhibits! Most English fans
are like you or I, it is just that only the louts get media representation!
Restricting entry of fans - fair enough under some circumstances - but the
teams cannot be blamed for the behaviour of the fans!
England wasn't perhaps the cleanest team in the WC, but it was ONE of the
cleanest - I feel proud to be an English supporter, but I am also disgusted
with the minority of supporters that unfortunately call themselves FANS (but
are hooligans) and come to tournaments under the English flag just to cause
trouble! The English team did themselves proud in the WC this year - I am just
glad that the hooliganism displayed by some 'fans' did not reflect the play
of the English team!
England for the WC in '94! (Well, why not?)
Biased? Of course I am!...but not unfairly so!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------ACSnet: mi...@tasis.utas.oz ARPA: mick%tasis.eec...@uunet.uu.net
AARNet: mi...@tasis.eecs.utas.edu.au
UUCP: {enea,hplabs,mcvax,uunet,ukc}!munnari!tasis.utas.oz!mick
Elec Eng & Comp Sci Dept, Uni of Tasmania
Box 252C GPO Hobart, Tasmania, AUSTRALIA 7001