Home team listed first or second?
py...@inav.net
I have found that one of those American things that is different from the
rest of the world, which previously was simply a quaint curiosity, is now
an issue of confusion now that televised soccer is growing in the US.
Outside the US, the home team is listed first in all scores posted. That
may not always be the case, but that is the standard convention used by
the media. In the US, the convention is in reverse; the home team is
listed second.
As a result, British or European games shown on ESPN can be confusing
when, at a glance, one cannot determine which team is playing at home.
I have seen them do it both ways so I don't know if they have yet settled
on a convention.
This clash of soccer cultures is a serious issue I tell ya.
P.
Karel Stokkermans
In article <33C853...@inav.net>,
py...@inav.net writes:
> I have found that one of those American things that is different from the
> rest of the world, which previously was simply a quaint curiosity, is now
> an issue of confusion now that televised soccer is growing in the US.
> Outside the US, the home team is listed first in all scores posted. That
Of course, that's the natural and civilized way.
> may not always be the case, but that is the standard convention used by
> the media. In the US, the convention is in reverse; the home team is
> listed second.
> As a result, British or European games shown on ESPN can be confusing
> when, at a glance, one cannot determine which team is playing at home.
> I have seen them do it both ways so I don't know if they have yet settled
> on a convention.
> This clash of soccer cultures is a serious issue I tell ya.
You're implying the US has a soccer culture?
Cheers,
Karel
--
-- Karel Stokkermans, Institut fuer Computerwissenschaften, University Salzburg
-- email: stok...@cosy.sbg.ac.at
-- url: http://www.cosy.sbg.ac.at/~stokkerm/stokkerm.html
-- rsssf: http://www.risc.uni-linz.ac.at/non-official/rsssf/nersssf.html
Chuck Pearson
Karel Stokkermans (stok...@cosy.sbg.ac.at) wrote in response to somebody:
: > This clash of soccer cultures is a serious issue I tell ya.
: You're implying the US has a soccer culture?
http://www.jump.net/~netminder/quitameehu/opencup/
granted, it's not as dominant a culture in the US as it is in the rest of
the world. but it's definitely there.
chuck
--
fear is a fool who just won't shut up. (thanx to dime store prophets.)
cpea...@freenet.columbus.oh.us
Stan Collins
Karel Stokkermans wrote:
>
> In article <33C853...@inav.net>,
> py...@inav.net writes:
>
> > I have found that one of those American things that is different from the
> > rest of the world, which previously was simply a quaint curiosity, is now
> > an issue of confusion now that televised soccer is growing in the US.
>
> > Outside the US, the home team is listed first in all scores posted. That
>
> Of course, that's the natural and civilized way.
No, it utterly arbitrary. At least here in the USA we can say there's a
reson why we do it. Other than the terminally arrogant "it's the
civilized way." Fine, then. Driving on the right'hand side of the road
is the civilized way.
The reason why we do it is this: In baseball, the home team comes to
bat second. We list all home teams second in all sports in order to be
consistant. There are advantages to this approach:
1. We can use the word "at" to denote the location of the match, e.g.
Chicago at Miami.
2. In a PK/Shootout situation, the home team goes second. Therefore,
listing them second makes eminent sense.
> > This clash of soccer cultures is a serious issue I tell ya.
>
> You're implying the US has a soccer culture?
Indeed we don't, but we have a sporting culture that is just as old, and
more richly varied, than anyone else's.
Stan Collins
Beldin
Karel Stokkermans wrote:
>
> In article <33C853...@inav.net>,
> py...@inav.net writes:
>
> > I have found that one of those American things that is different from the
> > rest of the world, which previously was simply a quaint curiosity, is now
> > an issue of confusion now that televised soccer is growing in the US.
>
> > Outside the US, the home team is listed first in all scores posted. That
>
> Of course, that's the natural and civilized way.
>
The tradition in the United States of listing the home team second most
likely comes from baseball, where the visiting team bats first.
Therefore, they have the first chance to score. (If someone knows the
exact reason beyond my conjecture, feel free to post it.)
Besides, isn't it the "natural and civilized way" to treat your guests
well, by giving them first choice of seats, etc.?
Beldin
Colin Morris
In article <33CA67...@trinity.edu>, scol...@trinity.edu wrote:
>Karel Stokkermans wrote:
>>
>The reason why we do it is this: In baseball, the home team comes to
>bat second. We list all home teams second in all sports in order to be
>consistant. There are advantages to this approach:
Great, but we're playing soccer and this isn't what the soccer world does.
Perhaps you could explain also why "box scores" (results with details to
non-Yanks) typically put neither the home team nor the away team first but the
winner?! Now there's a brain dead convention if ever I've seen one.
>
>1. We can use the word "at" to denote the location of the match, e.g.
>Chicago at Miami.
If there is a consistent convention there is no requirement for such a
moniker.
>
>2. In a PK/Shootout situation, the home team goes second. Therefore,
>listing them second makes eminent sense.
From the Laws of the Game: " The referee tosses a coin and the team whose
captain wins the toss takes the first kick." Perhaps this is something else
the US makes up as it goes along?
>Indeed we don't, but we have a sporting culture that is just as old, and
>more richly varied, than anyone else's.
A very dubious statement given the relatively recent settling of the "New
World".
--
Colin Morris Walnut Creek, CA cmo...@ccnet.com
"Three fresh players, three fresh legs" -- Jimmy Hill
Beldin
Colin Morris wrote:
>
> Perhaps you could explain also why "box scores" (results with details to
> non-Yanks) typically put neither the home team nor the away team first but the
> winner?! Now there's a brain dead convention if ever I've seen one.
Actually, that is incorrect. When only the score is listed, as in last
night's baseball game between Boston and Detroit (Boston 18, Detroit 4),
the winner is listed first.
In the box score, it appears this way (from the McPaper web site):
DETROIT ab r h rbi bb so lob avg
B L Hunter cf 3 0 0 0 0 2 1 .258
a-Pride ph-lf 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 .227
Higginson lf-rf 3 1 0 0 1 1 1 .278
Fryman 3b 4 1 1 0 0 1 0 .292
To Clark 1b 4 1 2 1 0 0 0 .284
Casanova c 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .274
Hamelin dh 3 0 0 0 0 3 3 .292
b-O Miller ph 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 .226
Nieves rf-cf 4 1 1 3 0 2 2 .258
Easley 2b 4 0 2 0 0 0 0 .270
Walbeck c 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 .278
Nevin c-1b 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 .271
D Cruz ss 3 0 0 0 1 0 3 .207
Totals 34 4 8 4 2 9 12
a-grounded to third for B L Hunter in the 7th; b-hit into
fielder's choice for Hamelin in the 8th.
BATTING: 2B - Easley (20, Suppan); To Clark (15, Suppan); Nevin
(11, J Corsi). HR - Nieves (12, 6th inning off Suppan 2 on, 2 out).
RBI - To Clark (75), Nieves 3 (46). 2-out RBI - Nieves 3.
Runners left in scoring position, 2 out - D Cruz 1, Higginson 1.
GIDP - B L Hunter. Team LOB - 5.
BASERUNNING: CS - Easley (6, 2nd base by Suppan/Stanley).
FIELDING: E - Higginson (5, throw); Walbeck (2, throw); Pride
(1, bobble); Fryman (7, throw).
BOSTON ab r h rbi bb so lob avg
N Garciaparra ss 6 2 2 1 0 0 1 .296
M Benjamin pr-ss 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .158
John Valentin 3b 6 2 3 2 0 1 2 .297
M Vaughn 1b 4 3 2 1 1 0 1 .335
Mckeel 1b 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 .000
Stanley c 4 2 2 2 0 1 1 .312
Hatteberg c 1 1 1 3 0 0 0 .282
Jefferson dh 5 1 2 1 0 0 1 .348
W Cordero lf 5 2 3 3 0 1 0 .295
Tavarez lf 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .143
Oleary rf 5 2 2 1 0 0 2 .306
Bragg cf 4 2 2 2 1 1 2 .264
Frye 2b 5 1 2 2 0 0 1 .267
Totals 46 18 21 18 2 4 12
BATTING: 2B - Bragg (22, Jarvis); Oleary 2 (19, Jarvis, Sager);
M Vaughn (11, Jarvis); Stanley (14, Jarvis); Frye (8, Bautista);
John Valentin 2 (28, Bautista, Sager). 3B - N Garciaparra (6, Jarvis).
HR - Hatteberg (6, 7th inning off Sager 2 on, 1 out); W Cordero (12,
7th inning off Sager 1 on, 1 out). RBI - M Vaughn (49),
N Garciaparra (47), John Valentin 2 (44), Frye 2 (19), Stanley 2 (43),
Jefferson (40), W Cordero 3 (44), Oleary (40), Bragg 2 (40),
Hatteberg 3 (22). 2-out RBI - Frye 2, W Cordero, Oleary, Bragg 2.
Runners left in scoring position, 2 out - Stanley 1, N Garciaparra 1,
Bragg 1. Team LOB - 6.
BASERUNNING: SB - John Valentin (3, 2nd base off Jarvis/Walbeck);
Bragg (9, 2nd base off Jarvis/Walbeck); Frye (9, 2nd base off
Jarvis/Walbeck).
FIELDING: E - John Valentin 2 (15, throw 2). Outfield assists -
W Cordero (To Clark at home). DP: 1 (Frye-N Garciaparra-M Vaughn).
--------------------------------------------------
Detroit - 000 004 000 -- 4
Boston - 102 226 50X -- 18
--------------------------------------------------
DETROIT ip h r er bb so hr era
Jarvis (L, 0-1) 4 1/3 9 7 5 1 3 0 10.98
Bautista 1 3 3 3 1 0 0 6.41
Sager 1 9 8 8 0 0 2 4.53
M Myers 1 2/3 0 0 0 0 1 0 5.34
BOSTON ip h r er bb so hr era
Suppan (W, 3-0) 6 6 4 4 2 8 1 5.69
J Corsi 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 4.60
Hudson 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 2.50
Slocumb 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 6.52
IBB - M Vaughn (by Bautista). Pitches-strikes: Suppan 99-69;
J Corsi 21-12; Hudson 17-11; Slocumb 14-7; Jarvis 78-48; Bautista
24-14; Sager 28-19; M Myers 18-10. Ground balls-fly balls:
Suppan 4-4; J Corsi 3-0; Hudson 2-0; Slocumb 1-2; Jarvis 3-7;
Bautista 2-1; Sager 1-2; M Myers 1-3. Batters faced: Suppan 25;
J Corsi 4; Hudson 4; Slocumb 3; Jarvis 23; Bautista 7; Sager 12;
M Myers 6.
UMPIRES: HP--Larry Barnett. 1B--Greg Kosc. 2B--Al Clark. 3B--Dan
Morrison. EJECTIONS: DETROIT's Hamelin by L Barnett (6th).
T--3:13. Att--21,997. Weather: 92 degrees, overcast.
Wind: 9 mph, out to right.
______________________________________________________________________
Beldin
James Farrar
In article <33CB80...@rosetower.thevale>, Beldin
<hunc...@rosetower.thevale> writes
>Colin Morris wrote:
>
>>
>> Perhaps you could explain also why "box scores" (results with details to
>> non-Yanks) typically put neither the home team nor the away team first but the
>> winner?! Now there's a brain dead convention if ever I've seen one.
>
>Actually, that is incorrect. When only the score is listed, as in last
>night's baseball game between Boston and Detroit (Boston 18, Detroit 4),
>the winner is listed first.
>
>In the box score, it appears this way (from the McPaper web site):
>
erm, ok, I for one follow baseball, but I don't need this clogging up a
FOOTBALL newsgroup
This listing of the winning team first reaches bizarreness when you
get:-
Los Angeles 3, at San Diego 1
at San Francisco 10, Colorado 5
Just plain ridiculous.
--
James Farrar
Michael Babyak
Colin Morris (email@address_in_signature.com) wrote:
: Perhaps you could explain also why "box scores" (results with details to
: non-Yanks) typically put neither the home team nor the away team first but the
: winner?! Now there's a brain dead convention if ever I've seen one.
I agree, it would be a brain-dead convention...if it were true. Box
scores always list the home team last, or on the bottom of the box.
: >
: >2. In a PK/Shootout situation, the home team goes second. Therefore,
: >listing them second makes eminent sense.
I'd guess that this is adopted from baseball, where the home team always
has the last at-bat.
Mike Babyak
_________________________________________________________________
In Flumine Stercoris Noli Undas Facere
_________________________________________________________________
Colin Morris
Michael Babyak wrote:
>
> Colin Morris (email@address_in_signature.com) wrote:
>
> : Perhaps you could explain also why "box scores" (results with details to
> : non-Yanks) typically put neither the home team nor the away team first but the
> : winner?! Now there's a brain dead convention if ever I've seen one.
>
> I agree, it would be a brain-dead convention...if it were true. Box
> scores always list the home team last, or on the bottom of the box.
They may list the details of the home team last (or to the right) - at
least for baseball, is this done consistently for other sports? - , but
the result 'banner' at the top of the box always lists the winner first,
ie in a manner completely inconsistent with the 'a at b' convention
for fixtures.
--
Colin Morris cmo...@infoscape.com Infoscape, Inc.
"Den Xiaoping has just died and I'm here to talk about Walsall"
-- Danny Baker
Huw Morris
Stan Collins wrote:
> The reason why we do it is this: In baseball, the home team comes to
> bat second. We list all home teams second in all sports in order to be
> consistant. There are advantages to this approach:
> 1. We can use the word "at" to denote the location of the match, e.g.
> Chicago at Miami.
> 2. In a PK/Shootout situation, the home team goes second. Therefore,
> listing them second makes eminent sense.
Whether the home team is listed first or second, it doesn't matter
as long as it's consistent. (I personally think the home team should
be listed first as the hosts, but that's irrelevent.) What I find
annoying is the tendency of the American media to list the *winners*
first. I know who the bloody winners are, they're the ones who scored
the most points/goals!
Huw
-----BEGIN BRIT CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 1.1
Brit(E/W) H--:- a-- s-:-- hd++ b+ y+ X---: P- M-- R-- A+ C- T- TV-(++) Ci>+
MuR++I+ B>+ V++
------END BRIT CODE BLOCK------
H. Brent Howatt
In article <5qer6i$9ce$1...@ccnet2.ccnet.com>, email@address_in_signature.com
(Colin Morris) wrote:
+From the Laws of the Game: " The referee tosses a coin and the team whose
+captain wins the toss takes the first kick." Perhaps this is something else
+the US makes up as it goes along?
Not any more. Winner of the toss picks the goal they will attack; loser gets
the ball first.
H. Brent Howatt, Director of Ins. Svc.| The first days are the hardest days,
Humboldt County Office of Education | Don't you worry any more.
Eureka, California | When life looks like Easy Street,
Behind the Redwood Curtain | There is danger at your door.
============================================================================
bho...@humboldt1.com FINGER for PGP public key
bho...@humboldt.k12.ca.us
Colin Morris
H. Brent Howatt wrote:
>
> In article <5qer6i$9ce$1...@ccnet2.ccnet.com>, email@address_in_signature.com
> (Colin Morris) wrote:
>
> +From the Laws of the Game: " The referee tosses a coin and the team whose
> +captain wins the toss takes the first kick." Perhaps this is something else
> +the US makes up as it goes along?
>
> Not any more. Winner of the toss picks the goal they will attack; loser gets
> the ball first.
>
I was referring to the penalty shootout procedure, not the coin toss for
the start of the game.
Jesper Lauridsen
On 14 Jul 1997 09:53:04 GMT, stok...@cosy.sbg.ac.at (Karel
Stokkermans) wrote:
>
>In article <33C853...@inav.net>,
>py...@inav.net writes:
>> This clash of soccer cultures is a serious issue I tell ya.
>
>You're implying the US has a soccer culture?
Of course it has, and it's far superior to that of the rest
of the world. Haven't been reading this group?
James Farrar
In article <5qkf7r$dpr$1...@usenet81.supernews.com>, "H. Brent Howatt"
<bho...@humboldt1.com> writes
>In article <5qer6i$9ce$1...@ccnet2.ccnet.com>, email@address_in_signature.com
>(Colin Morris) wrote:
>
>+From the Laws of the Game: " The referee tosses a coin and the team whose
>+captain wins the toss takes the first kick." Perhaps this is something else
>+the US makes up as it goes along?
>
>Not any more. Winner of the toss picks the goal they will attack; loser gets
>the ball first.
As far as I was aware the winner of the toss could choose goal or to
take first or second, much as with the coin toss before the start of a
game....
--
James Farrar
Mike Pitt
In article <mikmoore.869177553@sol>,
Mike Moore <mikm...@sol.carleton.ca> wrote:
>Just goes to show that you can learn something new every day!
>I am always surprised to find that most captains still don't know that
>they have to kick first when it comes down to the penalty shootout to
>break the tie unless they manage to LOSE the toss!
On a related vein, when I was training to be a ref the starting toss rule
was something like "The winner of the toss shall have choice of ends or
kick off", so most refs used to offer the other choice to the losing
tosser (if you'll pardon the expression)... which is allowed but not in
the rules. In fact beyond that choice it was up to the ref who went where
if the winner choses KO and if...
Anyway I digress..
--
Mike Pitt mike...@chiark.greenend.org.uk or
mike...@geocities.com
"Happy those, who can remain at Highbury." Jane Austen, Emma
Karel Stokkermans
In article <33ce561e...@news.daimi.aau.dk>,
rors...@daimi.aau.dk (Jesper Lauridsen) writes:
No, just discovered it. Have I missed something?
Michael Babyak
Colin Morris (cmo...@infoscape.com) wrote:
: They may list the details of the home team last (or to the right) - at
: least for baseball, is this done consistently for other sports? - , but
: the result 'banner' at the top of the box always lists the winner first,
: ie in a manner completely inconsistent with the 'a at b' convention
: for fixtures.
Yes, the banner is winner first, but any game summary beyond just the score,
for gridiron, basketball, baseball, always lists the home team last. Now
of course, the banners on ESPN2 and CNN list the home team last or on the
bottom, but have a little dot, square, or other mark next to the winner,
just in case the reader cannot understand that 5 runs is more than 2 runs.
Mike Babyak
James Farrar
In article <5qntgd$51k$1...@news.duke.edu>, Michael Babyak
<mba...@acpub.duke.edu> writes
>
>Yes, the banner is winner first, but any game summary beyond just the score,
>for gridiron, basketball, baseball, always lists the home team last. Now
>of course, the banners on ESPN2 and CNN list the home team last or on the
>bottom, but have a little dot, square, or other mark next to the winner,
>just in case the reader cannot understand that 5 runs is more than 2 runs.
>
--
James Farrar
Jesper Lauridsen
On 18 Jul 1997 09:37:04 GMT, stok...@cosy.sbg.ac.at (Karel
Stokkermans) wrote:
>
>In article <33ce561e...@news.daimi.aau.dk>,
>rors...@daimi.aau.dk (Jesper Lauridsen) writes:
>> Of course it has, and it's far superior to that of the rest
>> of the world. Haven't you been reading this group?
>
>No, just discovered it. Have I missed something?
Not really. It's filled with weirdoes, especially that
tosser from Austria, who posts results from tons of
leagues, that you've never heard about.