Crazy Ted posted:

You would think that of all the videos to disable comments on upon uploading that one would have been a real good candidate.

julian assflange posted:

Almost 25% downvotes for fucks sake

Mr Snips posted:

quote:

Because of that history, a tangle of state manipulation and sporting competition, soccer may never make it as a championship game in North America. It is, to put it in bluntly, un-American and un-Canadian. And it may not deserve to continue to make it elsewhere, either. In a world that increasingly relies on open markets and borderless trade and global exchange, the organization of soccer is an geo-political anachronism.

As soccer has unfolded under FIFA, the beautiful game has become a grotesque and overblown contest of nations, rather than just a contest of teams. How did a team sport become a game of national rivalries, pitting Germany against Spain, Uruguay against the Netherlands? And why, occasionally, do political leaders — French President Nicolas Sarkozy, for example, or former North Korean dictator Kim Jong-il — become directly involved in the operation of their national soccer franchise?

quote:

The authors of these books tend to think this is all history, and that the modern World Cup contests signal a new era in which democracy and globalization will lift soccer out of its dismal statist past into a glorious democratic future. Soccer belongs to liberal democracies. The subtitle of Soccernomics is: Why England Loses, Why Germany and Brazil Win, and Why the U.S., Japan, Australia, Turkey — and even Iraq — are Destined to Become the Kings of the World’s Most Popular Sport.

The theory is that globalization of the sport, and rising incomes around the world, will turn soccer into a sport dominated by people in lands with rising incomes and greater freedom, with the U.S. and Japan — and, who knows, Canada — taking the lead. But I have my doubts. The history of soccer, as told in these books, seems totally incompatible with American and Canadian sport values and the free-market economic structure on which those values are based.

Wherever soccer is king, the market in sports competition has been and remains restricted or even non-existent. Even in England, where cricket is also a major sport, there’s a political class-driven explanation for cricket’s continued existence. In North America, where sport is entertainment and not national religion, the games people play and watch are determined by entrepreneurs, not despots and politicians. That competition has produced a sports economy that is dense and multifaceted. We have hockey, baseball, football, basketball — not one of which owes much to any politician, but all of which are rivals for national attention.

Blue Star Error posted:

http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/terence-corcoran-wherever-soccer-goes-politics-and-power-follow
Because of that history, a tangle of state manipulation and sporting competition, soccer may never make it as a championship game in North America. It is, to put it in bluntly, un-American and un-Canadian. And it may not deserve to continue to make it elsewhere, either. In a world that increasingly relies on open markets and borderless trade and global exchange, the organization of soccer is an geo-political anachronism.

As soccer has unfolded under FIFA, the beautiful game has become a grotesque and overblown contest of nations, rather than just a contest of teams. How did a team sport become a game of national rivalries, pitting Germany against Spain, Uruguay against the Netherlands? And why, occasionally, do political leaders — French President Nicolas Sarkozy, for example, or former North Korean dictator Kim Jong-il — become directly involved in the operation of their national soccer franchise?

Crazy Ted posted:

"Soccer is for queers, foreigners, and Communists"

Gigi Galli posted:

I can't wait to support my national soccer franchise in the Euros next year.

opus111 posted:

that post is making my head hurt. Do americans think football is waning in popularity?!

Shrapnig posted:

You mean Canadians.

Blue Star Error posted:

quote:

As soccer has unfolded under FIFA, the beautiful game has become a grotesque and overblown contest of nations, rather than just a contest of teams. How did a team sport become a game of national rivalries, pitting Germany against Spain, Uruguay against the Netherlands? And why, occasionally, do political leaders — French President Nicolas Sarkozy, for example, or former North Korean dictator Kim Jong-il — become directly involved in the operation of their national soccer franchise?

opus111 posted:

that post is making my head hurt. Do americans think football is waning in popularity?!

Lightbulb Grease posted:

Every sentence is hilarious, but this one stands out to me because Terrence Corcoran has clearly never heard of the Olympics.

MrL_JaKiri posted:

Or cricket or rugby or whatever

vyelkin posted:

North America has FOUR WHOLE SPORTS with ONE WHOLE LEAGUE EACH, the rest of the world is just jealous of our dense and multifaceted sporting biosphere.

African AIDS cum posted:

Football isnt, but soccer sure is a dying sport.

Blue Star Error posted:

heil... iitler?

Blue Star Error posted:

heil... iitler?

Blue Star Error posted:

heil... iitler?

Blue Star Error posted:

heil... iitler?

Blue Star Error posted:

heil... iitler?

Blue Star Error posted:

heil... iitler?

Blue Star Error posted:

heil... iitler?

vyelkin posted:

Weaponized Cum posted:

Weaponized Cum posted: