| Posted by | Message |
ohiovol 
Tennessee Fan
Member since Jan 2010
13188 posts
| re: Why didn't soccer follow the Europeans to the new colonies? (Posted on 2/10/13 at 8:07 am to Anfield Road)
quote:
think it's a legitimate hypothesis. If you look at baseball, for instance, the countries where baseball is most popular are the countries that were under the US's sphere of influence (Latin America, Japan). When soccer spread in popularity, the Brits ruled or had a sphere of influence over most of the world.
ETA: IMO, The US would be a soccer nation if we had become independent in the 20th century.
Based on the evidence, it seems far more likely that we would be a "Cricket" nation (although probably not because Cricket sucks). In fact, it seems that in comparison to other countries, soccer isn't nearly as popular in British colonies.
This post was edited on 2/10 at 8:08 am
|
| Back to top | |
Dandy Lion 
Iowa State Fan
On a Horse Farm
Member since Feb 2010
18506 posts
| re: Why didn't soccer follow the Europeans to the new colonies? (Posted on 2/10/13 at 9:12 am to ohiovol)
quote:
Based on the evidence, it seems far more likely that we would be a "Cricket" nation (although probably not because Cricket sucks). In fact, it seems that in comparison to other countries, soccer isn't nearly as popular in British colonies.
Good comment, except for the cricket sucks comment, unless you´ve extensively played, that´s pretty lame. Baseball sucks balls for any person with some semblance of intelligence, but you must admit, it is fun to play.
|
| Back to top | |
joey barton
TBD Fan
Member since Feb 2011
5750 posts
| re: Why didn't soccer follow the Europeans to the new colonies? (Posted on 2/10/13 at 9:47 am to Dandy Lion)
I think that he's Indian
Back to the original question:
quote:
so why didn't games like that come to the colonies and develop rules/adopt rules in the 1800s
How do you think that football developed?
Also, soccer was reasonably popular in the early 20th century.
|
| Back to top | |
corndeaux 
LSU Fan
Member since Sep 2009
3118 posts
| re: Why didn't soccer follow the Europeans to the new colonies? (Posted on 2/10/13 at 10:34 am to TFS4E)
quote:
How did other sports take root in the "states", and it take so long for soccer to catch on?
The same way soccer became huge in Europe- barnstorming teams going on tours to promote the game. Locals see it and want to play too
|
| Back to top | |
Dandy Lion
Iowa State Fan
On a Horse Farm
Member since Feb 2010
18506 posts
| re: Why didn't soccer follow the Europeans to the new colonies? (Posted on 2/10/13 at 11:15 am to corndeaux)
quote:
The same way soccer became huge in Europe- barnstorming teams going on tours to promote the game. Locals see it and want to play too
Major
Fail
Run of the mill shipyardmen, construction workers, engineers, etc., played it during their free time.
shite spread like wildfire, and obviously they told those they were in contact with, of the officialization activities of the infant sport on the isles.
This post was edited on 2/10 at 11:18 am
|
| Back to top | |
Jumbeauxlaya
LSU Fan
Denham
Member since Jan 2011
15556 posts
| re: Why didn't soccer follow the Europeans to the new colonies? (Posted on 2/10/13 at 11:21 am to Dandy Lion)
I think we can all agree that both baseball and cricket are lame as hell to watch and probably fun to play.
|
| Back to top | |
Vicks Kennel Club 
USA Fan
In Spielman We Trust
Member since Dec 2010
13003 posts
| re: Why didn't soccer follow the Europeans to the new colonies? (Posted on 2/10/13 at 11:45 am to Dandy Lion)
quote:
Baseball sucks balls for any person with some semblance of intelligence
|
| Back to top | |
Dandy Lion
Iowa State Fan
On a Horse Farm
Member since Feb 2010
18506 posts
| re: Why didn't soccer follow the Europeans to the new colonies? (Posted on 2/10/13 at 11:50 am to Vicks Kennel Club)
´Tis true IMNSHO, and why the hell are you partially quoting (taking things out of context)?
This post was edited on 2/10 at 11:52 am
|
| Back to top | |
corndeaux
LSU Fan
Member since Sep 2009
3118 posts
| re: Why didn't soccer follow the Europeans to the new colonies? (Posted on 2/10/13 at 11:54 am to Dandy Lion)
So teams from Scotland/England didn't go on tours throughout Europe and South America and grow the game?
Inverting the Pyramid spends a good deal of time talking about this early on. These touring teams inspired and challenged locals to play the game more seriously than just for fun.
quote:
Run of the mill shipyardmen, construction workers, engineers, etc., played it during their free time. shite spread like wildfire, and obviously they told those they were in contact with, of the officialization activities of the infant sport on the isles.
Obviously.
Run of the mill blue collar workers were in contact with people who could create official FAs for countries during the Victorian era 
|
| Back to top | |
Dandy Lion
Iowa State Fan
On a Horse Farm
Member since Feb 2010
18506 posts
| re: Why didn't soccer follow the Europeans to the new colonies? (Posted on 2/10/13 at 11:59 am to corndeaux)
FAs were fruit of consensus amongst clubs.
Athletic de Bilbao for example, was an outgrowth of English shipyard workers in Barakaldo, Portugalete, etc..... playing with locals.
Other locals, from a sporting club then formed an official side, which they named Athletic Club.
No ´barn storming´.
Year, 1898, although the club was official in 1901.
|
| Back to top | |
Tweezy
west of east
Member since Apr 2008
10461 posts
| re: Why didn't soccer follow the Europeans to the new colonies? (Posted on 2/10/13 at 12:47 pm to Dandy Lion)
i always thought the nickname 'wanderers' was pretty cool, implying the club would travel to play games. i was looking at old nhl franchises the other day and some of them had their roots with clubs named 'wanderers'
|
| Back to top | |
Dandy Lion
Iowa State Fan
On a Horse Farm
Member since Feb 2010
18506 posts
| re: Why didn't soccer follow the Europeans to the new colonies? (Posted on 2/10/13 at 12:52 pm to Tweezy)
the barnstorming he speaks of must have taken place on the isles.
|
| Back to top | |
Vicks Kennel Club
USA Fan
In Spielman We Trust
Member since Dec 2010
13003 posts
| re: Why didn't soccer follow the Europeans to the new colonies? (Posted on 2/10/13 at 12:53 pm to Dandy Lion)
Cause it was a backhanded compliment. You said it is fun to play, but only morons would watch it. I did not take anything out of context.
|
| Back to top | |
Tweezy
west of east
Member since Apr 2008
10461 posts
| re: Why didn't soccer follow the Europeans to the new colonies? (Posted on 2/10/13 at 12:55 pm to Dandy Lion)
i dont really follow british soccer too much, so i couldn't comment. they could've very well 'barn stormed' the isles, but i think the name was just there bc there werent a lot of clubs. so teams looking to play someone from the isle could see the 'wanderers' and know that was a potential matchup.
|
| Back to top | |
Tweezy
west of east
Member since Apr 2008
10461 posts
| re: Why didn't soccer follow the Europeans to the new colonies? (Posted on 2/10/13 at 1:00 pm to Vicks Kennel Club)
baseball is an interesting sport, i grew up playing it bc my dad has coached it from the youth levels to the collegiate level. got burned out in high school though. it can be extremely taxing to sit through an entire game sometimes. i find it to be the same case with american football too. it can be very difficult to sit through a full 4 quarters, for me at least. i think basketball is a somewhat inferior sport as far as tactics and skill are concerned, but it is fairly fluid so games are fun to watch.
|
| Back to top | |
Dandy Lion
Iowa State Fan
On a Horse Farm
Member since Feb 2010
18506 posts
| re: Why didn't soccer follow the Europeans to the new colonies? (Posted on 2/10/13 at 2:31 pm to Vicks Kennel Club)
quote:
Cause it was a backhanded compliment.
Nothing backhanded about it. Definitely on the up and up.
Great to play, boring as hell to watch.
|
| Back to top | |
thenry712 
Gonzaga Fan
Zasullia, Ukraine
Member since Nov 2008
13805 posts
| re: Why didn't soccer follow the Europeans to the new colonies? (Posted on 2/10/13 at 4:22 pm to Dandy Lion)
A few prominent club names in Argentina, Spain and Brazil:
River Plate
Boca Juniors
Newell's Old Boys
Corinthians
Athletic Club (Bilbao)
Sporting Clube de Portugal (SCP)
Those are really authentic Portuguese, Basque and Spanish names. The British really had a minimal role in spreading football .
Economic indirect colonialism brought loads of British subjects around the world who spread football. It never really took off in some British directly controlled colonies, but other British games did (i.e. rugby in Australia, New Zealand; cricket in South Asia).
Most American sports are evolved forms of British counterparts. American football is an offshoot of rugby union. Baseball evolved from the schoolboy game rounders and also cricket. Ice hockey from field hockey etc.
Simon Kuper is one of the most respected soccer experts in the world. I think he knows what he's talking about.
|
| Back to top | |
ohiovol
Tennessee Fan
Member since Jan 2010
13188 posts
| re: Why didn't soccer follow the Europeans to the new colonies? (Posted on 2/10/13 at 11:03 pm to Dandy Lion)
quote:
Good comment, except for the cricket sucks comment, unless you´ve extensively played, that´s pretty lame. Baseball sucks balls for any person with some semblance of intelligence, but you must admit, it is fun to play.
I wouldn't say 'extensively,' but (as Joey Barton mentioned) I am Indian and it's not like I'm unfamiliar with the game.
That said, I'll concede that it was a cheap shot. Obviously, people are entitled to their own opinions.
|
| Back to top | |
ohiovol
Tennessee Fan
Member since Jan 2010
13188 posts
| re: Why didn't soccer follow the Europeans to the new colonies? (Posted on 2/10/13 at 11:10 pm to thenry712)
quote:
Those are really authentic Portuguese, Basque and Spanish names. The British really had a minimal role in spreading football .
I'm not saying the British didn't have an important role, but I think it's quite an oversimplification to say soccer is popular because of British influence.
quote:
It never really took off in some British directly controlled colonies, but other British games did (i.e. rugby in Australia, New Zealand; cricket in South Asia).
Which is why I think it's an oversimplification. If it was truly just about British influence, you would probably expect soccer to be more popular in England's more recent colonies than many other places around the world.
|
| Back to top | |
Joe Blow 
Auburn Fan
Member since Nov 2007
1443 posts
| re: Why didn't soccer follow the Europeans to the new colonies? (Posted on 2/11/13 at 7:47 am to Dandy Lion)
quote:
Great to play, boring as hell to watch.
Bull shite. Even MLB players look bored half of the time during games.
|
| Back to top | |
