Futbol vs Football
May 24, 2007 6:28 AM   Subscribe

Why do Americans switch the names of Football and Soccer?
posted by honorguy7 to Sports, Hobbies, & Recreation (34 answers total) 1 user marked this as a favorite
 
hint:

association football

rugby football
posted by dorian at 6:35 AM on May 24, 2007


Australians do it also. Football is AFL in Melbourne, and Rugby in Sydney. Soccer is ... soccer (it's not really football).
posted by strawberryviagra at 6:39 AM on May 24, 2007


Wikipedia has a comprehensive lists of sports called football.
posted by mmascolino at 6:50 AM on May 24, 2007


Names for football (soccer)
posted by smackfu at 6:51 AM on May 24, 2007


Rugby football was banned in amercia for being too dangerous (the pansies)

This is why they invented amercian rules football, which is basicly the exact opposite rules of rugby

eg:
you throw the ball forward instead of backwards

You have a line of scrimage not a scumage.

You Must wear padding vs You Mustn't wear padding

but they kept the name
posted by complience at 6:53 AM on May 24, 2007


Why do non-americans switch the names of Soccer and Football?
posted by yohko at 6:53 AM on May 24, 2007


Because we enjoy the irony of calling a sport in which throwing the ball is far more important than kicking the ball - football. :)
posted by caddis at 7:16 AM on May 24, 2007


Wait, do other countries call American football soccer? That's kind of what the question implies. I was not aware of that, if that is the case.

As an American, I do think it's kind of silly that we don't call soccer football. I mean, American football doesn't use feet nearly as extensively as soccer does.

Apparently soccer refers to Association Football. I never would have known that. So ... does Association Football have another meaning in other countries? Or does this clearly refer to the game we call soccer?
posted by tastybrains at 7:19 AM on May 24, 2007


Yeah, Soccer is actually a British abbreviation of "Association Football" that happened to stick in America.

And it has nothing to do with Rugby being banned in America. I can't find any evidence that this actually happened, though 18 players died in the US in 1905, which led to a lot of the rules changes.

The Wikipedia section on the history of American Football is a good reference point.
posted by atomly at 7:23 AM on May 24, 2007


complience

You are both wrong and stupid. Rugby is not banned in America. We have a National team, an extensive network of college teams, men's club and youth league.
posted by electroboy at 7:30 AM on May 24, 2007


It's tempting to think that there's some piss-taking going on. After all, one can come up with historical explanations as to why Americans chose to call a different sport football, or to re-dub football as soccer.

But it takes a special kind of commitment to then go and invent a new sport called "kickball."
posted by Clyde Mnestra at 7:33 AM on May 24, 2007


Wait, do other countries call American football soccer?
In the UK it's just usually going to be inseparable from the 'American' - i.e. never referred to as just football (US expats aside I guess), or sometimes 'gridiron.' If we talk about it at all :p
In China they call football 足球, the characters for 'foot' and 'ball,' and American football 橄榄球 - "olive-shaped ball.' Confusingly, that's also the name for rugby. It's your odd-shaped balls. I believe in Taiwan American football is called 美式足球 - "American-style football."
posted by Abiezer at 7:36 AM on May 24, 2007


OK I wasn't going to touch this overly well travelled ground but...

(it's not really football) < ---- are you having a lend?br>
Association football is the most foot-ish ball there is - like, most contact of foot and ball.

Anyway, judging from the 'Futbol' reference in the title, I'd presume the OP is (Continental) European and may be unfamiliar with the variety of games called "football". (eg Gaelic football hasn't been mentioned yet.)
posted by pompomtom at 7:42 AM on May 24, 2007


in fact the word "soccer" originated among upper class brits at fancy schools in the 19th century as a nickname for association football. there's a whole article here.

presumably the posh nickname spread to americans and got stuck over on this side of the atlantic, but i guess because it was only used in rarefied society, the more popular (and populist) "football" stayed home and regained precedence in britain.

(that's just my guess.)
posted by thinkingwoman at 7:51 AM on May 24, 2007


You are both wrong and stupid. Rugby is not banned in America. We have a National team, an extensive network of college teams, men's club and youth league.#

currently playing in the churchill cup in England..
posted by ascullion at 8:26 AM on May 24, 2007


There are still plenty of upper-class Brits who would normally understand "football" to refer to Rugby football and "soccer" to refr to Association football. Famously, and I quote from The Times: Upon being told by counsel in 1990 that the litigant Paul Gascoigne, known as Gazza, was the well-known footballer, Mr Justice Harman asked “Rugby or Association?”. Their days are numbered, come the revolution and all, but it is a mistake to think that referring to Association Football as "soccer" or to the various egg-chasing sports as "football" is an American thing.
posted by nowonmai at 8:30 AM on May 24, 2007


Rugby is banned in America? Quick, let me go tell my two teenage daughters who both play for their high school girls rugby team.
posted by lpsguy at 8:36 AM on May 24, 2007


You are both wrong and stupid. Rugby is not banned in America. We have a National team, an extensive network of college teams, men's club and youth league.

And those echoing the remark. Electroboy's comment was that rugby "WAS" banned, which he then linked to a historical point about the development of American football.

I don't think that is right. But before throwing around "wrong and stupid," you might want to bone up on the use of tenses.
posted by Clyde Mnestra at 8:43 AM on May 24, 2007 [1 favorite]


By "Electroboy" I meant "complience." Which makes me the stupidest.
posted by Clyde Mnestra at 8:46 AM on May 24, 2007


Why call Rounders "Baseball"?
(more or less)
posted by meehawl at 8:53 AM on May 24, 2007


It seems to me that it's just another example of language drift. Why do the Brits call a truck a "lorry"? Why do they call an elevator a "lift"? Why do they call the second floor of a building the "first floor"? Why do they call a cigarette a "fag"?

Different usage, that's all. It's the kind of thing that happens.
posted by Steven C. Den Beste at 9:34 AM on May 24, 2007


Why do they call a cigarette a "fag"?

Note: This is an odd one out in your list. "fag" is entirely slang (and reasonably localized at that), "cigarette" is standard official usage across the UK, as "lift", "lorry" and "first floor" are.
posted by wackybrit at 10:05 AM on May 24, 2007


Clyde Mnestra: It wouldn't be a huge stretch to interpret complience's comment to say that rugby was banned, and that this was still the case. In either case, I've played rugby, and I've never heard of a time when rugby union was banned in the US permanently, or temporarily (incidentally, banned by who, exactly? The US Congress?).

To the OP, we call it soccer in the US because we have our own language here, and the word for that sport is "soccer". We share our language with another few countries, where they variously call the sport you call "football" other things, including "soccer" and "football." Some countries call the sport "futbol," because they speak a different language. This is how language works.

Or: American call football "soccer" because we're stupid and don't understand the game, which is really what you were searching for, wasn't it?
posted by Inkoate at 11:43 AM on May 24, 2007


Maybe its all the saturday morning premier league coverage we get on Sportsnet, but I find "English football" creeping into the language in Canada.
posted by Deep Dish at 11:52 AM on May 24, 2007


Inkoate, you are right that it wouldn't be a huge stretch. But somebody (not you) saying another is "wrong and stupid" should try reading with a little care before doing so, lest they themselves appear wrong and stupid. And rude.

As to your question, I assume that it meant to be a generalization about state and local practices. I have no reason to believe that's correct, however.
posted by Clyde Mnestra at 12:18 PM on May 24, 2007


You're right, of course, the "wrong and stupid" comment was probably uncalled for on the part of electroboy. However, complience calling American's sissies because he (incorrectly) perceives that ruby union isn't being played in the US was really more uncalled for, especially in a thread about why Americans call "football" "soccer," and having not much at all do to with rugby union. It is that aspersion I believe electroboy was responding to.
posted by Inkoate at 12:34 PM on May 24, 2007


rugby banned in america? back in the early 70's during my hitchhiking/train hopping days, i got a ride from southern california to northern california with a collegiate rugby team going to a meet - swell fellows all. their head cheerleader was known as "miss rugger hugger". i still don't understand their game for shit.

the op's question reflects the futility of challenging the world's current pre-eminent machine of culture and language creation and definition. as an american, i'm happy to tell you that football is a game played with a prolate pigskin spheroid, our most durable and satisfying autumn/early winter sports ritual. soccer is a confusing, chaotic thing that came over here from europe and latin america when i was younger, and as much as i admire the stamina and conditioning it takes to run around nonstop for 90 minutes, the strategic nuances (and the rules) will likely remain forever beyond my ken.

america is in decline, sportswise. at an international baseball conference couple of years back, our team finished third in the nafta league, behind canada and mexico. in basketball, europeans have been whipping our ass recently. football, authentic football, is our last bastion of superiority. i don't expect to live long enough to see a foreign team defeat my country's team in an authentic, nfl-style football game.
posted by bruce at 1:34 PM on May 24, 2007


soccer is a confusing, chaotic thing that came over here from europe and latin america when i was younger

Actually, soccer (as in, association-like rules revolving around minimal hand contact) existed in colonial times in north America, and became extremely popular during the mass immigration from Europe of the lower (catholic) classes that really kicked off with the hiberno-Irish after 1848 or so. I've read several papers that argue that the creation of us-style rugby-like football came about as a deliberate attempt within elite, protestant schools to create a suitably mannered game for a more refined breed. This also fed into the nativist ideologies of the time. A deliberate and sustained campaign to smear soccer as foreign, effeminate, etc seems to have succeeded quite well.

rugger hugger

In my (protestant) schools in Ireland, Rugby was known as "rugger" and Association as "soccer". So you see the symmetry. There was a definite class thing going on. Private schools tended to field rugger (and cricket) teams, and public schools tended to field soccer (and rounders) teams.
posted by meehawl at 1:53 PM on May 24, 2007


I stand by my comments. Rugby never was, nor is currently banned in America.
posted by electroboy at 2:05 PM on May 24, 2007


Electroboy,

I believe you are right on the merits. I think that a modified form of rugby, already Americanized, came under sharp criticism in the early 20th century. (I just looked up a quote by President (Teddy) Roosevelt to the effect that "I demand that football change its rules or be abolished. Brutality and foul play should receive the same summary punishment given to a man who cheats at cards! Change the game or forsake it!.") So I think the original assertion was misremembering a controversy over the brutality of American football and associating it with purer rugby.

As I suppose you understand, I was objecting to the "stupid" reply, which seems a little peculiar when the comments you "stand by" did not even come to grips with the assertion you were opposing. Stand by them if you must.
posted by Clyde Mnestra at 3:20 PM on May 24, 2007


The original assertion was based on petty nationalism and secondhand "facts". Be as generous as you like in defending the original poster, his coments are still wholly without merit.
posted by electroboy at 10:26 PM on May 24, 2007


This is yet another interesting example of social conventions on the net. I believe the comment about "pansies" was meant jokingly, and was never meant to cause offense -- and I can't believe anyone would take offense. (If this counts as "petty nationalism," well, don't travel, and brace yourself for being thought of as a hypocrite.) I also can't believe you would ever say "wrong and stupid" in response were this not on the web, but maybe that too was meant to be lighthearted?

And I can't believe I'm typing this when the OP, the offense-causing commentator, and everyone else has already packed up and left.
posted by Clyde Mnestra at 10:01 AM on May 25, 2007


I never said rugby is banned in America.

go away read what i said, then .. oh wait actually i don't care.
posted by complience at 5:31 PM on May 26, 2007


In America it is a football game, rest of the world regard it as a football match...

Hhmm...
posted by Webbster at 8:09 PM on June 3, 2007


« Older How to use email to get some jobs done   |   Where to watch NHL games in Kingston, ON? Newer »
This thread is closed to new comments.