The advert thing developed out American Football's need to keep changing players, teams and formations between plays. When US TV came to the game they realised they could exploit these breaks for the TV viewer. Over here, I think it's nice that the BBC have the British broadcasting rights at present because whilst American audiences have yet another pile of crap flogged at them, our audience gets a little interesting education, chat and analysis. Basically, the game would last rather more than an extended time even if TV wasn't there.
Hmm...well I watched the first half but I'm not sure I could watch it every week. When you have a situation where one team deliberately lets the other score the winning points, something seems not quite right. But all sports have their downsides I suppose - football (real) is exposed to boring 0-0's and time-wasting for example.
American football, and the morons who made up the rules for that tournament, both violate the all important K.I.S.S. principle that football has relied on to be popular for the last hundred years. You score goals, you win games. I don't really have anything against it though as I'm sure if I was a Yank I would be more of a fan of it. Probably get the video ref to make a decision for them.
It's the same kind of principle as running the ball into the corner instead of going for a goal at the end, though. Why score (or attempt to) and put your team at risk when you can take it into the corner to burn up time? It's far from amazing sportsmanship but (especially considering it's so rare) can hardly be counted as a negative aspect of the sport.
Brought back bad memories of Crouch going for goal instead of running it into a corner, the other team (Everton?) scored and we lost important points in our relegation year.
Silly sport. I played touch football on a beach with some Yanks, Australians and Kiwis a few years ago. me and the antipodeans soon got bored of the touch aspect and started playing full contact instead - the Americans were horrified that we would risk our, and their health with such reckless, dangerous moves. It just served to remind me that there is more skill in Rugby simply because players are not as well protected. Being at a game live is a different matter though, as the pre and post match car park barbeques plus the beer during the 4 hour game make it a brilliant day out. Not the same watching it on the telly.
The American viewing public watch sports very differently to us. I went to the Chicago Bulls vs San Fran Nicks at bounceball when Michael Jordan and Rodman etc were playing. People didn't *watch* the game intently as such, it was more of a social occasion where people got to see their mates, eat corndogs and drink beer......hence American Throwball suits them pretty well too.
.....mind you, I won't be forgiving Budweiser for murdering She Sells Sanctuary in the ad break.......
Like chess, I'd imagine it's much more fun to play than it is to watch. The yanks are very good at creating a spectacle, even if their sports leave something to be desired.
Skill at not getting injured Dan - takes quick feet and sharp eyes to dodge some 15 stone lump who's out to break your bones, less need to if you are armoured to the eyebrows.
Skill at not getting injured, I suppose. Though if played without pads there's a far higher risk of injury in American Football.
