www.ditl.org

RK_Striker_JK_5 wrote:

Royal_Foxx wrote:

Mikey wrote:Take the tickets first, then do the cactus-smacking.

Oh, he's not buying my ticket, I have to buy my own ticket. He's a cheap pervert.

Okay, get his ticket, smack him in the face with the cactus and then kick him in the gut and... someplace else. Let me lend you my steel-toed boots for the kicking.

Thanks but I have my own steel-toes boots. Part of my job is inspecting wastewater treatment plants. They're required gear.

McAvoy wrote:

Jim wrote:

Royal_Foxx wrote:And now my boss wants to go to a baseball game with me. I would rather smack myself in the face with a cactus then go with him to a game.

A) he's married
B) he's a pervert.

Worst of all is the baseball portion of the situation.

What's wrong with baseball?

He's in Pittsburgh, he's probably only ever seen the Pirates play.

Royal_Foxx wrote:

McAvoy wrote:

Jim wrote:Worst of all is the baseball portion of the situation.

What's wrong with baseball?

He's in Pittsburgh, he's probably only ever seen the Pirates play.

What is wrong with baseball is that it is... well.. baseball. Is there a more boring sport to watch? 1/2 second of action between 90 seconds of standing around. Why do the batters have to re-adjust EVERY piece of equipment that they are wearing between every pitch whether they swung or not? There is an old saying something like "I went to a boxing match and a hockey game broke out." With baseball it is more like "I went to take a nap and a baseball game broke out."

Jim wrote:s there a more boring sport to watch?

1. Curling.

2. Test cricket. At least with baseball - even AL baseball - one can be reasonably certain that you won't have to miss more than one meal in order to continue watching.

Certainly there is a lot of down time in baseball, and the ridiculousness of shaking off a catcher for 5 minutes - or stepping out of the box to grab your crotch for 30 seconds between every pitch - can get annoying. But when the winning run is on second, there's two outs, and the batter is down 1-2, that few seconds in which the pitcher is trying to decide to climb the ladder with some cheese or go to some heavy junk serves to build dramatic tension rather than detract from the game.

*EDIT* BTW, Jim - did you know that Pittsburgh once had one of the most dynamic home-run duos in all of baseball? Toward the end of his career, Detroit sent Hank Greenberg to Pittsburgh, where he played with a young slugger coming up by the name of Kiner - Ralph Kiner, whose HR to at-bat ratio wasn't exceeded until McGwire.

Jim wrote:What is wrong with baseball is that it is... well.. baseball. Is there a more boring sport to watch? 1/2 second of action between 90 seconds of standing around. Why do the batters have to re-adjust EVERY piece of equipment that they are wearing between every pitch whether they swung or not? There is an old saying something like "I went to a boxing match and a hockey game broke out." With baseball it is more like "I went to take a nap and a baseball game broke out."

Golf.

McAvoy wrote:

Jim wrote:What is wrong with baseball is that it is... well.. baseball. Is there a more boring sport to watch? 1/2 second of action between 90 seconds of standing around. Why do the batters have to re-adjust EVERY piece of equipment that they are wearing between every pitch whether they swung or not? There is an old saying something like "I went to a boxing match and a hockey game broke out." With baseball it is more like "I went to take a nap and a baseball game broke out."

Golf.

Indeed. As Mark Twain once said, "Golf is a good walk... spoiled."

Mikey wrote:2. Test cricket. At least with baseball - even AL baseball - one can be reasonably certain that you won't have to miss more than one meal in order to continue watching.

Now, now Mikey. The game is organised specifically so you don't have to miss any of it to go and eat, unlike virtually all other sports, which tend to set start times that clash with dinner.

The most boring of all sports has to be American football - as soon as anything interesting happens they stop play.

Captain Seafort wrote:Now, now Mikey. The game is organised specifically so you don't have to miss any of it to go and eat, unlike virtually all other sports, which tend to set start times that clash with dinner.

Oh, right, I'm sorry. I forgot - in test cricket they take breaks for breakfast, lunch, and dinner... and overnight until they pick up after breakfast the next day.

Captain Seafort wrote:The most boring of all sports has to be American football - as soon as anything interesting happens they stop play.

This is generally a complaint given by people who misunderstand the mechanics of the sport. That's not a jab, I completely understand that you may have no desire to understand it. However, the game is organized into downs - there can't be any other way but to have stoppages between plays. There is also an aspect of gamesmanship involving usage of personnel for specific situations, an aspect which often goes unappreciated by the uninitiated. Lastly, in what truly is an annoyance, in the U.S. we have commercial TV. Broadcasting football is a promise of big bucks for a network, so the so-called "TV time-out" is an unavoidable pitfall. At least the clock stops when game time isn't being run off - in soccer, the clock never stops... they just arbitrarily add time to the length of the game at whim.

Mikey wrote:Oh, right, I'm sorry. I forgot - in test cricket they take breaks for breakfast, lunch, and dinner... and overnight until they pick up after breakfast the next day.

It's called civilisation.

However, the game is organized into downs - there can't be any other way but to have stoppages between plays. There is also an aspect of gamesmanship involving usage of personnel for specific situations, an aspect which often goes unappreciated by the uninitiated.

I understand the underlying concept. The problem is, as intellectual as the game may be, it ultimately makes it as about as interesting a spectator sport as chess.

Lastly, in what truly is an annoyance, in the U.S. we have commercial TV. Broadcasting football is a promise of big bucks for a network, so the so-called "TV time-out" is an unavoidable pitfall.

It doesn't make it unavoidable at all - our commercial TV channels manage to show football matches without constantly interrupting for adverts.

At least the clock stops when game time isn't being run off - in soccer, the clock never stops... they just arbitrarily add time to the length of the game at whim.

Ditto with rugby which, while largely as incomprehensible to me as American football as far as the rules are concerned, is far more interesting to watch because play does not stop whenever someone gets tackled. Also, the players don't look like they're walking out to face Curtly Ambrose.

Captain Seafort wrote:It's called civilisation.

That word looks quite like the word "civilization," but obviously must mean "ridiculous" rather than being synonymous.

Captain Seafort wrote:I understand the underlying concept. The problem is, as intellectual as the game may be, it ultimately makes it as about as interesting a spectator sport as chess.

I'd say that it must be due to the fact of a limey trying to appreciate a Yank sport, but that's belied by the consistent sell-out of Wembley every time it hosts an NFL game.

Captain Seafort wrote:Ditto with rugby which, while largely as incomprehensible to me as American football as far as the rules are concerned

To me, a large part of this problem is the fact that nobody can actually agree on what the rules are. League, Union... at least over here, the rules for one football game are the same as any other.

Captain Seafort wrote:play does not stop whenever someone gets tackled.

"Tackle" in American football is not the same as "tackle" in soccer. The equivalent to a soccer tackle would be a forced turnover, which event most assuredly does not stop play. A tackle in American football is expressly purposed to end a play.

Captain Seafort wrote:Also, the players don't look like they're walking out to face Curtly Ambrose.

Rugby is an inherently violent sport based in part on sheer physicality, no doubt; but it just doesn't comprise the same sort of player size or strength, or raw brute force, that American football does.

Mikey wrote:

Jim wrote:s there a more boring sport to watch?

1. Curling.

Captain Seafort wrote: it ultimately makes it as about as interesting a spectator sport as chess.

I find both interesting to watch.

Griffin wrote:

Mikey wrote:

Jim wrote:s there a more boring sport to watch?

1. Curling.

Captain Seafort wrote: it ultimately makes it as about as interesting a spectator sport as chess.

I find both interesting to watch.

I find both to be slightly less interesting than watching my dog sleep.

Mikey wrote:

Griffin wrote:

Captain Seafort wrote: it ultimately makes it as about as interesting a spectator sport as chess.

I find both interesting to watch.

I find both to be slightly less interesting than watching my dog sleep.

I enjoy playing chess ... I wouldn't want to watch it though.

Like in all things, it's usually more fun to play (especially if you know how to) than watch.