Greatest fucking game of football you will ever see

Boomlala wrote:I am god at letting threads become popular.

In American football, the game starts with a kick. Hence the football. Wether or not it's a correct name is not the matter, but football is more ambiguous than soccer, since football refers to 2 sports, and soccer to only one.

All you're doing is repeating yourself, which doesn't help your cause at all. Let me spell it out for you. You KNOW the definitions of soccer and football, so calling one more ambiguous than the other BASED on those definitions doesn't work. Ambiguous, "Open to more than one interpretation". FOOTball is straight and to the point. Someone who has never heard of it before, can look at the word and have a basic idea of what it is. Soccer is a completely random word. There is literally no possible connection between the word and what it could mean, why SOCCER is more ambiguous than FOOTball.

The problem with you is that you don't watch the best league(s) in the world week in week out, with both pre match and post match punditry from former managers and players who analayse key positions during matches.

Nay, i don't. The only time I really watch soccer is when there is a Euro Cup or a World Cup. There is a soccer channel, but it is pay-to-view and since nobody in the house is interested, there are almost no matches on the regular television set. Blame our money-sucking soccer league.

If you know how a 4-4-1-1 works (which from reading ur previous post, you dont) then you would realise that in certain situations a 4-4-1-1 serves a very different, but more important service than a 4-4-2 or a 4-3-3

What is the service of 4-4-1-1 exactly? One shooter and one "miscellaneous" player who roams 'somewhere' in the offensive zone (depending on strategy required)? But wouldn't this make the offensive side (with only one designated shooter) quite weak? Or are they aiming for the defensive line to be crushed by the numerical advantageous midfield?

wingers do not 'lob' balls into the box

You know what I meant. I find the "crossing-lob + volley"-offense to be a neat style, and if executioned perfectly unstoppable.

Yes, they do pass backwards at times, but so many times do you see a winger like Ashley Cole or Patrice Evra bomb on forward infront of the winger; SWP and Ronaldo respectively.

I don't understand this line: wingers bombing on wingers? Sounds like a WII air battle scene, hehe.

Ah yes, in terms of defensive wing play, have you seen a case where a wing back tackles a winger? Ever heard of it?

Yes, ofcourse. But our pussy league's wingers are rather timid, and even in World Cup matches I don't see wing back-on-winger action very much.

Yes. Carrick isn't the only example either; there are loads - he just does his job better than most.

Can you explain why the other center backs (or the midfielders) don't immediately cover him? I mean, he looks like he is quite a famous player in England, if your team is going against his team (Man Utd?) then you better get him covered. The space he gets is ridiculous.

@ Haldir:

am⋅big⋅u⋅ous [am-big-yoo-uhs]
–adjective
1. open to or having several possible meanings or interpretations; equivocal: an ambiguous answer.
2. Linguistics. (of an expression) exhibiting constructional homonymity; having two or more structural descriptions, as the sequence Flying planes can be dangerous.
3. of doubtful or uncertain nature; difficult to comprehend, distinguish, or classify: a rock of ambiguous character.
4. lacking clearness or definiteness; obscure; indistinct: an ambiguous shape; an ambiguous future.

Origin:
1520–30; < L ambiguus, equiv. to ambig(ere) be uncertain (amb- ambi- + -igere comb. form of agere to drive, lead, act) + -uus deverbal adj. suffix; see -ous

You're giving me #1, I'm giving you #1.

Like it or not, football has more than one meaning: American football and soccer. You agree with me here (I hope).
You may interpret foot+ball as much as you want, but the fact stays that the word is referring to 2 things. Agreed?
Soccer on the other hand does not have multiple meanings, being a synonym for association football or European football. Agreed?
Soccer comes from asSOCiation football. Asser or assoccer (lol) was not a viable option, for clear reasons. It was coined in the 1890s.

Based on my previous statements, soccer is thus not ambigous.

4-4-1-1 It's quite hard to defend against the 'roamer', since he can pop up anywhere in midfield. Defensive midfielders in a 'diamond' formation or a 4-1-3-2 usually have the job of keeping players like carrick in check. Also, if you're playing against Man United, there are other threats like Ronaldo et al.
Also, the guy who roams everywhere can take up the traditional role of 'sweeper' which doesn't really exist in football anymore.

"I don't understand this line: wingers bombing on wingers? Sounds like a WII air battle scene, hehe."

bombing forward is slang for running forward at high pace.

4-1-3-2?

Man, football has become more exotic over the years.

It's more straightfoward in practice.
Standard 4-4-2 except one of the center-mids sits back in front of the defense and behind the other midfielders to do a defensive duty - defensive midfielder it's called.
For example, Claude Makalele

Hey, I know that guy. Isn't he from [soccer fail]Arsenal[/soccer fail]?

No, Chelsea

Close enough. He seems to be a very dominant player in that position.

I googled it

He's actually at PSG now, but yeah, he was at Chelsea

Boomlala wrote:[@ Haldir:

am⋅big⋅u⋅ous [am-big-yoo-uhs]
–adjective
1. open to or having several possible meanings or interpretations; equivocal: an ambiguous answer.
2. Linguistics. (of an expression) exhibiting constructional homonymity; having two or more structural descriptions, as the sequence Flying planes can be dangerous.
3. of doubtful or uncertain nature; difficult to comprehend, distinguish, or classify: a rock of ambiguous character.
4. lacking clearness or definiteness; obscure; indistinct: an ambiguous shape; an ambiguous future.

Origin:
1520–30; < L ambiguus, equiv. to ambig(ere) be uncertain (amb- ambi- + -igere comb. form of agere to drive, lead, act) + -uus deverbal adj. suffix; see -ous

You're giving me #1, I'm giving you #1.

Like it or not, football has more than one meaning: American football and soccer. You agree with me here (I hope).
You may interpret foot+ball as much as you want, but the fact stays that the word is referring to 2 things. Agreed?
Soccer on the other hand does not have multiple meanings, being a synonym for association football or European football. Agreed?
Soccer comes from asSOCiation football. Asser or assoccer (lol) was not a viable option, for clear reasons. It was coined in the 1890s.

Based on my previous statements, soccer is thus not ambigous.

Seeing as how you still just restated what you said previously, without taking a minute to understand what I said equals a pretty sad failure.

You're looking at the words AND their definitions, instead of looking at the words for HOW they could mean them. That's the difference, and that's how ambiguity is found. Not by looking at already established meanings.

I KNOW!

I did read your comment, soccer has more to do with the name 'football' than American football. Foot+ball, like I said.

But we're talking about ambiguity here: one thing can reference to two things (or more). And that's exactly what I said. Maybe we are disagreeing about what is covered under ambiguity? I would have no other idea why our discussion is stuck.

And there is no reason to say that the other one fails in a discussion. But somewhere along the lines we are miscommunicating.

It's a failure because all your doing is restating the same thing, over and over and over instead of bringing more reasoning into the discussion.

And go back and read my post, I was in the middle of editing it. I had hit enter before I was done.

I am all out of reasoning juice.

So, to play your ball game (yes, pun intended! omg I'm so badass):

- football refers to ball sports played with the foot: this means soccer (obviously) and rugby and American football (both games feature kicking)
- soccer refers to asSOCiation football as some kind of abbreviation (like said), and there is only one type of association football: soccer.

So soccer still is less ambiguous. In my point of view.

Just call them Football, American football and Rugby for chrissakes.

Or Football, pussies in padding with egg - ball and Rugby

Boomlala wrote:I am all out of reasoning juice.

So, to play your ball game (yes, pun intended! omg I'm so badass):

- football refers to ball sports played with the foot: this means soccer (obviously) and rugby and American football (both games feature kicking)
- soccer refers to asSOCiation football as some kind of abbreviation (like said), and there is only one type of association football: soccer.

So soccer still is less ambiguous. In my point of view.

Kay, I'm going to help you out and tell you to stop using bigs words in a language other than your own native tongue.

Matthew wrote:Or Football, pussies in padding with egg - ball and Rugby

Um Pussies? People actually get hurt jackass people can die playing Pussyball as you just called it.

The only 3 'big words' I used in the quote are:

- association, as in association football: the name Wikipedia uses for soccer.
- abbreviation: things like an acronym, shorter word, ... I do not know how one would linguistically call 'soccer' in terms of 'association football'.
- ambiguous: my experience with this word hails mostly from programming. A statement is ambiguous when the compiler can interpret the statement in multiple ways. This is an error since compilation is deterministic. I use ambiguous as it is used in the programming context, and I repeat myself here, when one thing can mean multiple things. Dictionary.com states the same, and more.

Besides:

Kay, I'm going to help you out and tell you to stop using bigs words in a language other than your own native tongue.

Can we say ad hominem?

C2G Shadman133 wrote:

Matthew wrote:Or Football, pussies in padding with egg - ball and Rugby

Um Pussies? People actually get hurt jackass people can die playing Pussyball as you just called it.

All sports can be lethal, ever got a baseball bat up your schnicker?

Ever got decked in the Adam's apple with a softball at full force? They really arent that soft.

The protection American football players wear isn't for fun. The wide receivers get a load of big defensive players on them.

C2G Shadman133 wrote:Ever got decked in the Adam's apple with a softball at full force? They really arent that soft.

haha, good thing we don't play that alot here. ^^

C2G Shadman133 wrote:Ever got decked in the Adam's apple with a softball at full force? They really arent that soft.

Its been proven that football/soccer IS the most dangerous sport.