Magox

Humor doesn't fit you. Just stick to your bread and butter - Cynicism. Oh wait.....That was cynicism.

Now that's rich!

Pure ignorance.

No doubt, the best.

Uh, I'm guessing you actually didn't read the link. The link according even to their standards didn't state in their view which sports required the most stamina, it simply listed 6 different sports. And your second link wouldn't open. Also: http://sports.yahoo.com/top/news?slug=ycn-10764123 http://www.livestrong.com/article/474836-what-sport-burns-the-most-calories-per-hour/ There it is, there is no other team sport throughout the entirety of the game that uses as much cardio as soccer. As I said before, so yes, it is fact, not opinion. The point isn't to to attempt to convert people into liking soccer, I could give a rat's patooty what they like. It's a matter of mocking ignorance, and it doesn't matter whether it's politics, economics or sports, ignorance is ignorance. People want to make declarative statements, that's fine, but I'll correct them if they are wrong. Statements such as: "how many miles you have to run isn't really too relevant." "7 miles over 105 minutes is a 15 minute mile. That's not exactly exhausting." " What I'm saying is if guys like Sherman, Graham, LeBron, CJ, and dozens of other football and basketball players grew up playing soccer instead of the other sports, they'd dominate the game. DOMINATE. " "Ah, now I get it--it's like....gymnastics! Another sport that gets "serious attention" every 4 years by people who don't really care about it. " Statements like this is pure unadulterated ignorance, and it's begging to be mocked. Listen I get it, people don't like certain sports, that's their prerogative. However, there are always those dou***bags that always have to go out of their way to state how much they hate the sport. I'm not a big fan of a couple sports, if someone asks me about it, I may let them know why I don't particularly care for it. But that's not the way it is for the dou*ches, who incessantly have to make their point. That's fine, but if they say something ignorant, I'll correct it.

Nigeria vs Argentina. Great game!

You mean as opposed to a sport that most people don't ever pay "serious attention" to? Sure

Wow! How can we even begin to have a conversation when your levels of comprehension is that of a 9 year old. From your link, Soccer and Hockey were listed as the only two team sports. I rate your comprehension levels that of a - nincompoop

Netherlands, Brazil or Germany. Outside shot France, Belgium.

This just goes to show you how clueless you truly are. The only way they would be able to "dominate" is if they grew up somewhere where there was a culture for the sport. You think these guys just go and play high school and college soccer and Voila! CHAMPIONSHIP!! No, the best teams in the world begin recruiting them at the age 9-10. In other words, the professional teams have their schools, in which they basically buy their rights to play for them at this early age. They provide schooling, shelter and eat and breathe soccer every single day. In many of the cases, the kids leave their parents house to other cities to play at these academies for soccer. It is year round. The idea that based on training that like what we see here in the U.S and then all of a sudden you will have some physical studs step in, somehow equates to "DOMINATE"ing the sport is simply ignorant.

Uh, no, it is a fact, not an opinion. Try reading up some.

I didn't suggest that they aren't capable.. But they would need to get in Soccer game shape in order to do so. They CERTAINLY couldn't right now. And you keep spouting this "7 miles over the course of 105 minutes" notion, as if they are just jogging in a nice evening around the track. They've been keeping track of the miles run during WC coverage and the subs that are coming in after the 70-75 minute are typically clocking in over 8 miles, which means throughout the course of WC games, where they press a lot more in defense, they run between 9-10 miles. And it's not just jogging, there are constant burst of sprints. If you truly don't believe that there isn't more conditioning and cardio in Soccer than any other team sport, then you are absolutely deluding yourself. That's a Fact. Not an opinion, but a fact Umm, you are factually 100% incorrect. Why don't you try rephrasing your sentence.

And you can repeat this till your blue in the face and it will never change the fact that it will always be a game faster, more fluid and entertaining than American Football in the eyes of most sports fans.

Bless your little soul Are you serious? As does the drivel you post

umm, no it's not. That is the common criticism overseas about American Football, is the lack of action and fluidity. I always trying explaining to my South American friends the nuances of the game, and the amazing athleticism and strength, the strategy behind blocking and defense, but they just think it's a bunch of big guys ramming into each other, they find it to be horrendously boring. Sorta like talking to some of you guys about soccer. Oh well, each side misses out on what I consider to be the two best sports in the world.

Lalas, Cobi Jones, John Harkes, Claudia Reyna, Tony Meola and others were part of the the teams back in the early 1990's that really revolutionized U.S Soccer. These guys were our hero's back then, these guys in my opinion are what really kick started the ascension of soccer in the US Lalas now is the most renown Soccer commentator in the US for ESPN.

Oh, I would think they will ban him for the rest of the world cup, and I wouldn't be surprised he would be banned from all FIFA sanctioned matches for an entire year. This was done on the largest public viewing stage. It's an embarrassment to the world cup and to himself. One year ban

So what do you believe George Will was implying in his article?

So who is the victim here?

http://www.hollywood...ing-espn-714034

They have to be directly involved with the play.. You can have a guy that is in an off sides position, but if the ball goes to another intended player and he is on sides, then there is no infraction.

There are only ties in the group stages. A win = 3 points, a tie = 1 point and a loss = 0. Once the top two qualify, then there are no more ties as it becomes a bracket of 16. Winner advances, loser goes home.

The give away from Bradley was the crucial play. He had a good first half and definitely dropped off in the second half. If the U.S doesn't qualify, that give away will haunt Bradley's mind for the rest of his life. Having said that, I think we'll qualify. Grant it, the two teams we are pulling for the most, Portugal and us are coming off a very physically exhausting game in high heat and humidity, and we only have three days of rest. Not to mention we have to travel over 1500 miles. So, we are at a disadvantage in that regard. But I believe we will score a goal in the match, and I'm hoping that if Germany scores a goal in the match that they will look to take the pedal off of the medal.

A few points, from a political point of view, it absolutely can and should be a liability for Hillary Clinton, and here's why: 1) I don't know if you guys remember, but when Obama kicked off his campaign to go against Mitt Romney, he addressed the issue of his opponents career in private equity. Basically it went like this, "Mitt was a successful Wall Street guy, he made lots of money of for millionaires and billionaires, there is nothing wrong with that, but it came at the expense of jobs being shipped overseas to place like China, and I don't think those are the sort of qualities the American public want for a president". Never mind the fact that he wasn't being completely forthtelling on his career, but none the less this line of attack became a central part of how they systematically delegitimized his success. Keeping this in mind, here are a few points to consider regarding this case with Hillary. 2) Despite what some of the reports say that she was the defendant's court appointed attorney, that is not what Hillary says on the audio. What she says is that the prosecutor contacted her and wanted a female attorney, and if she would do it as a "favor" to him. In which she accepted. Which implies that she voluntarily took the case. That's an important point, simply because you know, Hillary is a "champion" for women and girls. 3) Obviously she knew he was guilty. Yes, even if you know your client is guilty, as a lawyer, you are suppose to still give your best defense. But lets just keep this in mind going forward. 4) One of the key portions of evidence that defense had, was the missing portion of the underwear that had the blood on it. Somehow the prosecution lost it. Hillary goes on to explain how she found this world-renowned forensic expert, and how she traveled over to New York to see him, and that the purpose of her visit was to show her this underwear that had the missing blood portion to see whether or not it would still be useful evidence for the prosecution. The forensic expert stated according to Hillary "Can't Prove anything" , that it was worthless. She got on the phone with the prosecution, told him "Well this guy is ready to come from New York to prevent this miscarriage of justice!" Then she goes on to laugh, in mid sentence mind you.She wasn't obviously laughing at the victim, but she was laughing at the idea of that it was a to "prevent a miscarriage of justice". Completely understanding the irony, the irony in that the real miscarriage of justice was the ridiculously lenient one year sentence. 5) Knowing that her client was guilty, this is what Hillary had to say in a written affidavit regarding the 12 year old rape victim: So she's smearing the 12 year old child's character by basically saying that she was fantasizing hooking up with older men. Yeah, sure, she did her job, but that's cold. 6) In the interview from the rape victim So she categorically denies it. Conclusion: Back to the Romney attack. "Mitt was a successful Wall Street guy, he made lots of money of for millionaires and billionaires, there is nothing wrong with that, but it came at the expense of jobs being shipped overseas to place like China, and I don't think those are the sort of qualities the American public want for a president" Well, that obviously was fair game, because it was part of a narrative that helped elect him as president. For Hillary, sure, she did what some good lawyers would do. She smeared the character of the victim to discredit their claims, despite knowing that they were true and was a little lucky that the prosecution bungled the case with the lost bloody underwear. Good ruthless lawyering skills. Great.But for the American public, are those the qualities you want from a supposed champion of girls and women's rights? Hardly. It runs completely counter to that narrative. That she voluntarily took a case to defend a pedophile, she knew that he was guilty, yet she smeared the character of a 12 year old rape victim in order to help secure victory. Then goes on to callously and insensitively smugly chuckles at the irony of her defense that she wanted to "prevent a miscarriage of justice" on the pedophile's behalf. "Hillary was a good defense attorney, and she certainly helped some bad folks get out of doing some serious time, which is what some lawyers do, but sometimes it came at the expense of some innocent victims, and I don't think those are the sort of qualities the American pubic want for a president"

http://www.thedailyb...ictim-says.html Check out the audio, Hillary certainly appears to be smugly chuckling how she beat the jury with a defendant she knew was guilty, by destroying the character of a 12 year old who was raped by a pedophile.