's Forum Archives - Non-Cycling Discussions

Archive Home >> Non-Cycling Discussions(1 2 3 4 )

baseball sucks.......(20 posts)

baseball sucks.......african
Oct 17, 2003 2:50 PM
the biggest sporting event this year is the Rugby World cup. Baseball sucks, overpaid bunch of homos.

The Rugby world cup is the 3rd largest sporting event behind the Olympics and Soccer world cup.

And when the team wins they are the world champions, not the Champions of America that get called the "world champs"

WTF, how can the Bucs be world champs when no other country was involved in the sport, and check when the Yanks win they will be the world champs, my but, world champs of what? US cities?? Give me a break.

Rugby is a real sport, * rant over*
Sounds lilke your drinking club has a rugby problemRoyGBiv
Oct 17, 2003 3:03 PM
Have a nice weekend.
And don't forget, the Buffalo Bills are three point favourites over the Washington Redskins.
Why are they the world champions?TJeanloz
Oct 17, 2003 3:07 PM
It's not entirely clear how you've made the Rugby World Cup the 3rd largest sporting event - largest in terms of what?

But aside from that, it's fair for the winner of Major League Baseball's World Series to be the "World Champion" because MLB draws the top talent from all over the world. There is not a better baseball team in the world than the one that wins the MLB. Many, if not most, of the players on an MLB roster are foreign-born, and they come from virtually everywhere in the world, excluding possibly Africa and Europe. Same goes with the NBA - except there are African, European, and Asian players in the NBA.

"Rugby is a real sport" - I love that one. People who play rugby in the U.S. are the washed out losers who couldn't play football. How can the Bucs be world champs? Is there another team in the world that could beat them? If not, doesn't that make them the world champs?

The U.S. doesn't field a professional rugby team, so by your logic, your precious world championship doesn't count either - because not all nations are represented.
US has a team at the world cup...african
Oct 18, 2003 2:47 PM
just for your info, they have a team and not to bad either.

Honestly how can you be the world champions at somthing that no other country competes in the event, think about it.

If the yankies want to be the world champions then play a team from cuba, japan or anywhere else for that matter, then you can be the world champions when you beat teams from the world, not teams from US cities with some foreiners.

Imagine that Manchester United win the premier league and call themselves the world champions, ha ha not.
US has a team at the world cup...mickey-mac
Oct 18, 2003 5:24 PM
"just for your info, they have a team and not to bad either."

The US is indeed fielding a team for the World Cup, but I have a hard time agreeing with the second part of your sentence when the US's stated goal is to take away one win from the Rugby World Cup. They might make the US's performance at the 1998 Soccer World Cup look impressive in comparison. I just hope they don't run up against the All-Blacks, or even Japan for that matter. ;-)
I think they do play Japan...african
Oct 20, 2003 4:32 AM
The US team is improving, I would love to see them play the All Blacks, then we will see how far behind they are.
That would be reasonableTJeanloz
Oct 20, 2003 5:11 AM
Is there a team in the world (outside of MLB) that could beat the World Series winning team? No. I would think that that would make them the world champions, wouldn't it. It's true that baseball is played professionally in many other countries - but consider that the two all-time greatest players in Japanese history (Ichiro and Matsui) have come to the United States, and are good, but not great, players. And consider that cast-offs who were cut from MLB rosters go to Japan and are immediate all-stars.

It's hardly even the same game. You could say the same thing about the NBA - pro basketball exists in many places, but nowhere else on that level.
Rugby..... What a bunch of sissies.MR_GRUMPY
Oct 17, 2003 5:26 PM
The wouldn't last five minutes in a Hurling match. Talk about a tough game. In a similar way, if you had them put on pads, they would all be physically destroyed by any small time college football team.
Hurling, Ive dont that...african
Oct 18, 2003 2:51 PM
drank too much one night and hurled.

Put it this way I have tried to compare rugby and football and you can't they are 2 different sports, similar but yes if rugby players tried to play football they would loose to a high school team, but then the Bucs would loose in a game of rugby to a rubgy high school team, especially with that woes Sapp, he would not last 20 minutes on a rugby field - why, well they are 2 different sports.

Rugby is fast and flowing, football is stop start stop start, watch a comercial, start stop.
Hurling.......Imagine the Blackhawks playing field hockey.......MR_GRUMPY
Oct 18, 2003 5:41 PM
where high sticking is OK, and players don't wear facemasks.
Hurling, Ive dont that...Live Steam
Oct 19, 2003 10:12 AM
Me too after drinking a whole bottle of Southern Comfort! Yuck!
I've seen hurling.dr hoo
Oct 19, 2003 5:27 AM
That is closer to a riot than a sport. Even at my most stupid and testosterone filled point in life I would never have considered playing THAT sport.
I think that the average player has three teeth and one eye..nmMR_GRUMPY
Oct 19, 2003 5:21 PM
Homoerotic sportsfiltersweep
Oct 18, 2003 7:30 AM

Rugby is at least as homoerotic as baseball- probably is moreso... should be somewhere along the lines of American football.

Aren't rugby players always getting naked together? Whats up the the scrum, anyway? Maybe I better not ask...?

I won't argue any of your points on "world champs"- but there is no other sporting body contending these titles (it certainly isn't like boxing or "professional wrestling" ;) ).

Frankly, as all of North America develops attention deficit disorder, there will be no fans of baseball left... my guess is it will eventually fade away as a pro sport. You know there is a problem if it is dubbed "the thinking man's sport" ;) My European relatives have absolutely NO appreciation for the sport.
Homoerotic sportsafrican
Oct 18, 2003 2:56 PM
I guess all sports have some homoerotic element to them, but baseball and football have those tight pants, camel toe anyone?

True there is no other sporting body to contest the title, still in my book means you can't have the title, but I think the title was given by the media.
dude, rugby has the scrum, and as far as homoerotic...dr hoo
Oct 19, 2003 5:24 AM
... goes a big mass of sweaty men in a big pile pushing back and forth is pretty darn homoerotic.

Rugby is a sport of war and territory. Baseball is a sport of life: small things strung together moment to moment, starting in the spring with hope, growing to full riot in summer, and ending as the last of summer slips away.

The two hardest sports, fyi, in terms of calories burned are water polo (1) and olympic style wresting (2). Water polo is a game, like rugby. Wrestling is a REAL sport.

And very homoerotic too, for that matter.
Oct 20, 2003 4:35 AM
about the calories burned. But surely a sport is only homoerotic if you find it homoerotic. If I can watch wrestling, (I don't) and not find it homoerotic, yet you (for example) do find it homoerotic what does that say?
Are you kidding?filtersweep
Oct 20, 2003 5:03 AM
The rules alone place wrestling in that category- first man to pin another man on his back? What else do you need to know?
"Do you like movies with gladiators in them?" ;) (nm)ColnagoFE
Oct 20, 2003 8:08 AM
seeing is not the same as feeling.dr hoo
Oct 20, 2003 8:46 AM
It is possible to state that something has characteristics of homoeroticism, while still not feeling turned on by it. You can also say something is scary without being scared by it. Zombie movies are scary (for many people) even though they don't scare me.