mma & hockey > both

something i noticed 2/3 british are in here with no bias only facts, yet all of the americans are commenting with opinions, bias and almost complete ignorance. it says a lot.

I noticed you being contradictory in almost every post or just trying too hard? idk
everything i've said is based on facts tho lol my only opinion was that football is better, supported by facts

quote and explain my contradictions or retract.

lol. it;s k
there is no such thing as unbiased, tho

pussy, can't back it up.. just more opinions and still no facts.

I was just scanning this thread.....dont really care about thos.topic at all its just europe vs america....which i mean....who cares...?

But

America is the entertainment capital of the world....so wouldnt it be fair to say that our vote in a worldwide vote would weigh quite a bit more heavily then others?

No one is unbiased. it's a fact
you sound dumb

if i'm the richest man in the country does my vote weigh more than someone on welfare?

no.

and i have been very unbias in this thread, i came in calling it a dumb thread for a start. if you believe that you cannot see things without bias then you are not very intelligent and find disconnecting opinion from fact impossible.

But i think we both know whos vote wouod be more credible....regardless....

ok lets start with this first sentence of your post.

you answered wrong. a rich persons vote means more than a poor persons. not on paper. but the rich person can help fund the campaign of the dude/thing he is voting for

thats how democracy works in the world. rich people push there money around to get richer

but thats besides the point.

a few posts ago, you stated the NFL stops games to play commercials. that is a blatant lie. the game never stops for commercials. the game is stopped when it goes to commercials.

if it is a change of possession, it will go to a commercial. if there is a timeout. it will go to commercial. if a play is being challenged and reviewed, it goes to a commercial. if someone is injured. it goes to commercial

in all of those instances, play is stopped already. you are wrong.

admit it.

now witty, good sir. you claim something is televised, when it isnt. i can go to bangbros.com. but that doesnt mean im a member. i have to pay to watch that pornography.

in order to watch rugby, you have to pay for special channels.

therefore it isnt televised.

we have been saying that the super bowl is televised in your country. you don't need to purchase a special channel for it. therefore a game of american football IS televised in your country.

you claimed football isnt entertaining to you, after saying it is probably the most entertaining sport to the average person. which doesnt make sense to me, but you are entitled to your opinion.

i'm not saying american football is the best sport. i am simply defending the sport from all of your guys ignorant statements.

these are all facts.

just read the thread.

Read a book Sey. Europeans are biased towards soccer and/or rugby because they most likely grew up on it. Americans are biased towards football. It's science, it's fact.
Your homework for tonight is to pm me the definition of bias. I expect it by 8 35 am sharp on tuesday.

Id also like to point out that i was comparing wealth of knowledge and experience based sucess in relation to the topic at hand vs lack there of

So the rich guy vs poor guy comparison wouldnt be an accurate comparison.

@Bags Payne...the majority of people would vote that they prefer rugby, is what i meant.


@uh oh...if something is shown on television it is fuckung televised son lmao wtf. I said I enjoy the sport but not what comes with it, not gonna explain it again, i explained it fully with my last few posts, i am not attacking ur sport... did you read all of what i said?

It hurts the Americans more to say you hate their sport(s), because they try insurmountably harder to impress others than any other nation.

^ That hit in your sig ain't shit homie.

Then try and imagine how it would feel without padding.

They are very different. Tough in their own ways. Most players would play through pretty crazy injuries... Rugby takes a lot more fuckin endurance - but football players can put it all into a huge ass hit.

I can say this though:
When I started a Rugby team as a senior in HS, about 60% of our players were football players coming off winnings states...and about 25% were soccer players.

the football players had a REAL hard time tackling... combo of form and lack of pads, the soccer players were far superior out the gate.

i had the most reckless abandon since i was a goalie and already comfortable getting kneed and kicked in the face :D

BUT -- i can also say by the end of the season, while 'on average', our soccer players were still the better tacklers, our two best tacklers were both football players.... one was a LB and the other DB/safety.... probably not surprisingly.

There are a lot worse tackles out there. I posted a whole video of them.

I know it's hard to compare since football players have helmets

but i had to add that while i've seen people play both sports with fingers going the opposite direction


Rugby is the only sport i've seen a dude go back in with HALF OF HIS EAR ripped down, literally, we taped the shit around his head so it wouldn't flap downward like a damn puppy.


from that day forward, we all taped our ears lol.