Football(not American) I could give a reason but the real reason everyone has for their answer is "because I like it".
Unless Richmond is in the grand final and they just slaughter the fuck out of the other team.Australian rules football. Fast paced. Play can go anywhere. Tackles from any direction. And only small stoppages before play continues.
But because this thread will be full of Americans who have never watched it.
American Football
Idk how the poll choices dont have tennis but do have both golf and baseball.
Dunno about that, I can enjoy a team absolutely ripped apart by another team with great skill.You have to admit that soccer has a pretty bad parity problem (by design), so while individual matches can be sublime, watching a random match can result in absolute stinkers.
Truuuuuue.Basketball and Hockey are the only ones that are tolerable. The real answer is competitive Super Smash Bros. Melee.
It's hockey. Game 7 with Sharks down 3 nothing in the 3rd period with a little over 10 minutes remaining in the game, on the verge of elimination and their captain and leading scorer goes down with a scary injury. Watching what happened after this last year was just amazing:
Video is as unavailable as my heart is to hockey. I've seen a few minor league hockey games live and they were incredible. On TV it's atrocious to follow.
Is it only unavailable when playing it embedded on Era or when you try to play it on YouTube too?
Edit: Looks like it doesn't work embedded. I edited my post to have a direct link.
I just watched it again and it still is amazing to watch.
I don't know why but the ridiculously high score count and cramped court make me really dislike basketball. It's a giant, confusing mess.
I chose soccer. I like the slower-paced tension, the action looks "cleaner," and the matches don't drag on forever like American football and baseball.
it's one of those things that's way better to watch live in person. one of those sports where tv doesn't do it justice.
Soccer - and I don't even really like Soccer. The rules are mostly transparant so you can follow along (I have no fucking clue why teams are getting penalities in Rugby for instance), and the pitch size/player count means play is flowing but not too hectic (eg Basketball). And play builds up naturally to attacks on goal which is a great tension generator. Basketball is too fast paced for that IMO.
And although they don't score that often, I think maybe that helps with the excitement. Its kind of like blue balls until people score
I think this is a necessary element of most sports. It's often easy (especially for newer fans of any sport) to take good teams for granted. If most games are close it can give the wrong impression of the skill gap between teams or leagues or players (or however a sport is organised). A reasonable solution to this is a system that occasionally allows, say, Champion's League-class teams to play against amateurs. That's also a system where, even more occasionally, that Champion's League-class team loses to the amateurs. Giant-killings are rare in any sport, but I think football is probably the sport that provides the best chances of them happening.You have to admit that soccer has a pretty bad parity problem (by design), so while individual matches can be sublime, watching a random match can result in absolute stinkers.
Let me see you handle a mistimed 1-legged tackle to your ankles, as your boots are firmly rooted to the ground due to it's immense spokes under the boots.Soccer lol you guys are outta your minds. Watching two tortoises having a paint drying contest is more exciting than three hours of grown men pretending to be hurt.
It's hockey for me personally, but I can see the argument for basketball as well.