Ted Hughes wrote:Saul Goodman wrote:Calling it soccer as an insult to North America isnt an insult against this country. If you intended it as an insult then youre insulting England as theyre the ones that invented the word soccer and first used it to describe the sport.
Way back both rugby and football were called football. Then, in order to make things easier, they called them rugby football and association football. Assosciation football was later shortened to soccer while rugby football was shortened to rugger. The US then picked up on that as thats what you guys were calling the sport.
Why did they call that sport where they all leg it about in loads of padding, then chuck the ball at each other, then stop for an advert break, then take loads of drugs, kick the shit out of their wives 'football' then ?
Edit: sorry I've just realised I could be confusing Australians here: Why did they call it 'American football' ?
Ted Hughes wrote:You don't know whether I'm atome.
rosbif cuisson 'bleu' wrote:Ted Hughes wrote:You don't know whether I'm atome.
well what comes first , Ted v opinion ? or is it Opinion v Ted?
usually the former is a tome
AG7 wrote:*SIGH*
Is this supposed to be another 'Next' thread?
DoomMerchant wrote:Saul Goodman wrote:thats not from wikipedia you fucking retard.
if you're gonna butt into other people's conversations at least have something meaningful to offer.
Cheers
Hey genius,
http://www.amazon.com/The-Ball-Round-Gl ... 1594482969
Read a fucking book instead of just copying and pasting articles from The Atlantic. You'll get a lot more educated. And my apologies to Wikipedia. I didn't realize it was an article you read a month ago while following the WC, mister superfan.
And yes, it's a well-established fact that the word "soccer" is an English term created by the English. And your fucking point is what exactly? Plenty of colloquial terms that are in and out of fashion everywhere.
If you are going to spout off and quote articles and clip paragraphs and paragraphs from them without getting to the point and making something *your own* and having an opinion to share and have an actual conversation instead of the dross you usually type, then expect someone to gently punch you in the dick now and then big fella.
If i want 6 paragraph reads at least Ted is sharing an opinion when he gets his quill and ink out and writes a tome.
cheers
lovecity8utd wrote:First game of the season for me and can't wait. It's been a long time since 11 May.
All being well, I will be sinking my first beer in around 13 hours from now.
roblues wrote:It's a strange game this one, I always go into it expecting a win and can't even remember Stoke scoring, let alone taking any points, in previous fixtures, yet we still haven't won at the Britannia in the Premier League. I'll check out the over/under on field goals before having a punt on this one, but I'm sure the Stoke fans will be a touch down-hearted at having to turn over so much money to see another road loss at the Etihad.
LookMumImOnMCF.net wrote:This is all a bit meta.
LookMumImOnMCF.net wrote:This is all a bit meta.
kinkylola wrote:not very exciting as far as burnouts go though ... thought it would take off for a second.
I hate when we play stoke, and I hate that hughes is their manager. Maybe i'm wrong, my perception is that we always underperform against stoke ... would like a professional performance, 4-0. 3 for Jovetic, 1 for ferny.
kinkylola wrote:well ya, apart from that.
City64 wrote:Plenty of tickets still on sale for this fixture , Stoke have returned a whole block (115) and only sold 1100 . It is really looking like the ticket price hike is having a big effect so far .
Return to The Maine Football forum
Users browsing this forum: BlueinBosnia, Burt, city72, Majestic-12 [Bot], Mase, MIAMCFC, ruralblue, salford city and 327 guests