View previous topic | View next topic

stopped being called football

Page 1 of 2
Goto page 1, 2  Next

zhurayaa
1068260.  Thu Apr 10, 2014 2:00 am Reply with quote

Should football stopped being called football? Football aka soccer has another name, which I already stated soccer. Why is it still being called football? It gives confusion with american football, everyone should start calling it soccer, it has the name and people still say football, go home sons.


Last edited by zhurayaa on Fri Apr 11, 2014 5:02 am; edited 1 time in total

 
sally carr
1068269.  Thu Apr 10, 2014 3:22 am Reply with quote

Football was football in Britain because here we kick the ball. 'Soccer' is a word derived from Association. It is the FOOTBALL ASSOCIATION that governs the game of FOOTBALL in this country.
It's the American version that should have a different name. Now you go home.

 
djgordy
1068273.  Thu Apr 10, 2014 4:13 am Reply with quote

zhurayaa wrote:
Why is it still being called football? It gives confusion with american football, everyone should start calling it soccer, it has the name and people still say football, go home sons.


It is easy to avoid confusing American Football and proper football. If you are watching a game and fall asleep from boredom after ten minutes it is proper football. If you die from boredom after ten minutes it is American Football.

 
swot
1068282.  Thu Apr 10, 2014 6:11 am Reply with quote

I recall Rory McGrath talking about this on Balderdash and Piffle a few years ago. He said it was something to do with socks rather than an abbreviation of 'association', but I don't remember exactly what he said and I'm struggling to find stuff about it. Etymonline says it's an abbreviation. The OED website is being stubborn.

 
swot
1068284.  Thu Apr 10, 2014 6:20 am Reply with quote

Actually, I found an OED entry via Wikipedia, which explains that 'soccer' is part of the Oxford "-er" and is analogous to 'rugger' for rugby.

<edit> the oed website isn't easily fooled. You'll have to click on the oed link in Wikipedia ourself if you're not a member.

 
suze
1068290.  Thu Apr 10, 2014 7:00 am Reply with quote

The etymonline entry includes what passes for a joke in the world of lexicography. It notes that the word soccer has "An unusual method of formation, but those who did it perhaps shied away from making a name out of the first three letters of Assoc".

[Digression] At this point, someone is likely to say "Hold on just one cotton picking minute. Would English chaps of the 1880s even have known how Americans referred to their derrières?"

Well, yes they would. Like many Americanisms, that sense of ass was British first. Why do you suppose that Shakespeare turned Bottom into a donkey in A Midsummer Night's Dream? Bottom was, to use more modern parlance, a bit of a prat - so did Shakespeare intend to suggest that he was an ass either way?[/Digression]

Much of etymonline is taken directly from the 1933 edition of the OED. (Mr etymonline asserts that edition as out of copyright in the USA. The point is arguable, but Messrs Oxford seem not to mind.)

Whether that is the source of the Ass gag I don't know, but the OED did contain a fair number of silly comments back then; most of them have disappeared from later editions. The Concise Oxford at one time described soccer as "poor form for association football"; again, value judgments such as that have largely disappeared from more recent editions.


The alternative notion that the word soccer is nothing to do with assocations and everything to do with socks has been around for a long time, but is not generally accepted. It is expounded here.

 
CharliesDragon
1068376.  Thu Apr 10, 2014 4:29 pm Reply with quote

To me there seems no practical way of shortening "association" verbally without getting "asso" or "assoc." Add an -er and you get assoccer, which I think would quickly morph into "soccer." "Wanna have a game of assocc-er?" The A can get lost if speaking quickly/sloppily, which I think boys are bound to do when talking to their mates, Oxford students or not.

 
NeilP
1126010.  Thu Mar 26, 2015 10:50 pm Reply with quote

Here's one good way to start an argument... Australian Rules Football is the only code that can be truly called 'Football' - because you can only score a goal (or the highest point score) with the foot (actually from below the knee). Soccer, Gridiron, etc allow carrying the ball, header, etc.

 
suze
1126093.  Fri Mar 27, 2015 10:09 am Reply with quote

This caused me to look up the rules of the Australian code of football. I already knew that the game has four posts rather than two at each end of the field. The two central posts are called the goalposts, and are taller than the two outer posts which are known as behind posts.

To score a goal (six points), you must kick the ball between the two goalposts. If you kick the ball between a goalpost and a behind post, you score a behind (one point).

You're not allowed to throw the ball in Aussie Rules, but you are allowed to hit it with your hand. If you put the ball between the goalposts with your hand you get a behind rather than a goal - so you can score with your hands, but you can't get the best kind of score. Good, I understand that now!

Now, is there any restriction on scoring with your hands in other codes of football? Clearly not in American or Canadian football or in either flavour of rugby, where carrying the ball into goal is the preferred way of scoring.

I then wondered about Gaelic football, a sport about which I know practically nothing. A Gaelic football goal looks like a rugby goal, except that the bottom part has a net attached like a soccer goal. Into the net is a goal (three points), between the posts above the bar is a point (one point).

As in Aussie Rules, you can't throw the ball but you can hit it with your hand - and you can score a goal with your hand. So I reckon your assertion may be correct.

Just to finish, soccer. Everybody knows that you're not allowed to handle the ball in soccer except a) to take a throw in, and b) if you are the goalkeeper. You can't score directly from a throw in - if you throw the ball straight into the goal, it doesn't count as a goal - but if the goalkeeper throws the ball down field and it goes into the goal the other end, that does count as a goal. (I checked!)

It will be a rare event, but it is therefore possible to score with your hands in soccer.

 
CharliesDragon
1126115.  Fri Mar 27, 2015 10:47 am Reply with quote

suze wrote:
Good, I understand that now!


I'm not sure I do, but I'll nod along anyway. The only sport I have a decent grip on the scoring rules for is Quidditch, so I can sort of relate it back to what Rowling has been inspired by and how different rule sets likely have developed in regards to each other.

 
14-11-2014
1126357.  Sat Mar 28, 2015 3:32 pm Reply with quote

suze wrote:
It will be a rare event, but it is therefore possible to score with your hands in soccer.


So you haven't read all rules... Any player can score a goal with her or his hands, or even with the hand of God. The conservative rules aren't that good.

josephsblatter.com wrote:
The decisions of the referee regarding facts connected with play, including whether or not a goal is scored and the result of the match, are final.


Of course your honest fact is far more interesting than a referee's wrong decision.

 
Posital
1126400.  Sun Mar 29, 2015 3:46 am Reply with quote

I can confirm (from Pos Jr's playing yesterday) that it's not possible to score a goal in Gaelic Football.

But seriously - there are goals and points. Points are by kick or passing. Goals need to be kicked - but I think can be redirected in flight with hands. Well, that's how I understand the rules.

One goal = 3 points.

Admittedly the rules also include:
"(iii) The ball may not be lifted off the ground with the knees."

Huh?

 
Alfred E Neuman
1126405.  Sun Mar 29, 2015 5:06 am Reply with quote

NeilP wrote:
Here's one good way to start an argument... Australian Rules Football is the only code that can be truly called 'Football' - because you can only score a goal (or the highest point score) with the foot (actually from below the knee). Soccer, Gridiron, etc allow carrying the ball, header, etc.


Strictly speaking, you can only score a goal in rugby by kicking. A converted try is a goal. When rugby began, you got no points for getting a try, you got the right to try for a goal, by kicking, or converting it into a goal. So, while you get points for a try and a conversion these days, a full seven pointer is still technically called a goal. Also, the correct term for a penalty is a penalty goal. And then you get dropped goals.

So all three forms of goal in rugby are scored with the foot.

 
Awitt
1126408.  Sun Mar 29, 2015 5:28 am Reply with quote

Australia and Ireland have, over the years, played matches, where they've learnt our code and our players have done theirs. Some Irish players have come here and one prominent player, who died of cancer a couple of years ago, was a result of this.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Stynes

 
suze
1126420.  Sun Mar 29, 2015 8:37 am Reply with quote

Posital wrote:
Admittedly the rules also include:
"(iii) The ball may not be lifted off the ground with the knees."


As far as I can tell, this means that you're not allowed to kneel on the ground, grip the ball between your knees, and then stand up with it so gripped. Why anyone would ever want to do that, I have no clue.

As for scoring a goal with the hands, I think the rule means that you may punch a moving ball for a goal. But if you catch the ball, you can then only score a goal by kicking it.

Alfred E Neuman wrote:
Strictly speaking, you can only score a goal in rugby by kicking.


This is a very good point, and I think I must klaxon myself and give you some points. While the main objective of rugby is to score tries, the scores actually called goals are achieved by kicking.

And indeed, it's the same in American and Canadian football. The main objective is to score touchdowns, but the scores actually called goals are achieved by kicking.

Incidentally, drop goals are actually allowed in the NFL. The legendary quarterback Doug Flutie knew this, and talked the coach into letting him try it for a bit of fun in his last game before retirement. He scored it and it's on every "strange things that happened in the NFL" video, but it was the first time it had even been attempted for over sixty years.

Mr Flutie's drop goal was a point after touchdown (i.e. a conversion, in rugby terms). A drop goal in open play is also allowed but even rarer; it was last done successfully in 1941, but Mr Flutie's antics led to two unsuccessful attempts being made in recent years.

 

Page 1 of 2
Goto page 1, 2  Next

All times are GMT - 5 Hours


Display posts from previous:   

Search Search Forums

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group