A game by any other name - is it football or soccer?

albe says:

06:24am | 14/12/09

football is football indeed. I think much of the pride we world game fans have in using this name comes from all the years we were told we couldn’t use it. Which just disconnected us from the football world.

Point is, if we’re part of the world of sport, then clearly its football. And thank gawd we now are. 

If i could ask your punter a question, it’d be if ‘Football in Australia is AFL,’ then what would Aussie rules be known as if/when it expands beyond these shores? Surely they aren’t planning on going after FIFA for a trademark breach.

Cameron says:

07:08am | 14/12/09

Whatever it is called, it bores me to tears! There was a time when I found it entertaining, but not longer.

T.Chong says:

07:17am | 14/12/09

Soccer is soccer. Football/footy is for the proper codes of league-( the gods favorite code), union,(almost as good) and at a stretch, AFL.

Louis McLennan says:

07:42am | 14/12/09

Yeah it’ll be soccer for me.

Someone had to tell them says:

07:45am | 14/12/09

Will the Victorians please not comment on Australia wide forums.  Your insular 1950s ways and your AFL are nothing to do with the rest of the country and put us in a bad light.  Please phone up 3AW for your wobbly ball discussions as it is of no interest beyond your suburbs.  BTW the MCG is an awful sports ground.

Gerry says:

07:56am | 14/12/09

I place a lot of the blame for increased violence in society directly at the feet of “soccer”. Lord help the bloke who loses his footing in a pub scuffle. The “sink the slipper” culture has never been as strong as it is now. If oyu had the misfortune to be kicked in the 70s it was usually at the hands (feet) of some sharpie hoodlum. These days, any goose with a poncey haircut and an Ed Hardy shirt is a likely boot merchant.

northern monkey says:

08:15am | 14/12/09

@ Gerry - sorry, but what the funk are you on about? Bananas strudle peace cup green monkey… That’s about the level of your “argument”, if that’s actually what it is.

Come back with a brain.

Peter says:

08:24am | 14/12/09

Football is FOOTBALL
afl is Vicball
League is BORING
And Union is YAWNION..END OF SUBJECT

Ray says:

08:25am | 14/12/09

Soccer, Football, it all equals the same….......BORING SPORT…....Fair dinkum its far more exciting watching grass grow

SLF says:

08:40am | 14/12/09

Technically the roundball game is called soccer. Schortened from Association Football.

As for a boring sport…guess nobody watched the EPL this week, other than the half a billion in 202 countries who tuned in. Goals, drama and excitement or watching paint fry…guess all those people cannot be wrong. 

Still it cannot beat 13 blokes charging at each other five times in a row before kicking the ball high up in the air. Now that ladies and gentlemen is excitement. Seen one game of league, seen them all., christ even union is more exciting.

scott says:

08:48am | 14/12/09

it is boring, but also easily fixed.  Widen the goal by one metre, and ditch the offside rule.  instant fix for all that is wrong with soccer (oh, except for the diving).

Beau Brummell says:

09:44am | 14/12/09

I call it soccer in response to FIFA’s offensive appropriation of the generic word football. Like some fascist juggernaut FIFA is set on world domination. Have already failed as you’ll never conquer America .. or us.

Garry says:

10:09am | 14/12/09

As a European I grew up calling the world game Football, here in Australia I still call it football not because of some ‘it is the real football’ but because well,.played with the feet. If you can catch, run, bounce and then kick it how is that football? Thats a bit like throwing a hand grenade in the lake and picking up the dead fish and calling it fishing!

I understand AFL has an identity problem but to call it football, really, come on.

But then the argument might be, ‘well we need to show we are different to the world so it is our own kind of football’

I must admit, many Aussies finding the Wrold Game boring, sure it may seem that way but then how much entertainment is there in a game that one side can win 100+ points, have so many changes of players, so many umpires that they still miss decisions, and sadly, certainly more stopping and starting as in football… oh and don’t forget the hugging and bum slapping as in football… yeah so maybe some similiarities.

Beau Brummell says:

10:16am | 14/12/09

Garry - let’s take it slow.  What do you kick? A ball. With what do you kick? A foot. Hence, football applies to all codes. As for the “world game”; that’s another risable FIFAism.

Jon says:

10:20am | 14/12/09

In soccer you can score a goal with your head. Does that make headball? And some times you can score your hand. Does that make it handball? Or maybe it’s kneeball, diveball, bumball, and even wedding tackle ball, ouch!. The point is FIFA has no logical claim to the word Football.

albe says:

10:35am | 14/12/09

@ Jon ... aside from 95pc of the world calling the game football. Even in the uk, the rugby codes wouldn’t bother trying to call themselves football. Its laughable that some people think we should stay in some isolated little sporting enclave. Sporting nation my arse !

Pieman says:

10:39am | 14/12/09

Football is generally what the local populace calls the dominant local “football” code.  In NZ it’s rugby, in Sydney it has always been rugby league, in the US of A it’s always been what we call gridiron, in Melbourne it has always been Aussie rules - because they are all the DOMINANT code in those places.

I’m not sure if that applies to a code that has run to summer to avoid being swamped by the other codes, and whose free-to-air TV contract is still umm… well it’s here somehere I’m sure.

What you call it and what I call it really makes no difference - we can argue about it over a cool drink - but it’s personal.

IBut I do object to the media giving what I call soccer the title of football.  The way I see it, it gives that code a status in this country that it has not earnt.

Toddzilla says:

10:47am | 14/12/09

Soccer: A game designed for women, but played primarily by feminine men.

Gweeds says:

11:15am | 14/12/09

Ah….the whoary old chestnuts about soccer vs.football.  Of course who cares?  It really doesn’t matter.  But id does.  Why?

Well I believe because of these reasons:

1) It’s an abbreviation, not a proper name.  its a contraction of the word “Association” with reference to “Association Football”.  n 1889 the word was “socca”, later it was “socker” in 1891 and finally seemed to settle on “soccer” by 1895. The word is supposed to have evolved in University slang, created by shortening the word “Association” and adding “er”. They had other expressions such as ” “rugger” for “rugby.”  So next NRL season please refer to the sport as ‘rugger’.  I mean, it’s only fair.

2) It’s accurate. Let’s see the ‘rugger’ codes and Australian Rules.  The ball is kicked but is also carried, handballed etc. Association Football is the only code where the ball is kicked by a foot.  Therefore ‘foot-ball’

3) Also the main reason (and we can see it in some of the inane comments on this thread) is that the football-phobes use the term ‘soccer’ as a way of putting down the code.  Yes, Rugby and AFL can be called football, but ther real football can’t.  This was shown by a letter bu such footballphobe once “You can call yourself football all you like, but remember you will always be ‘soccer’ in Australia’ .  So football, football football for the world code!

Garry says:

11:21am | 14/12/09

@Beau, True… but how much of the game of AFL is played with a foot? Over 50% for would that not be a mark (no pun intended) to make is a Foot ball game. And yes, it is a world game, name another sport that has so many players and fans played in so many countries around the world?

I really do not think AFL or NRL should fear the round ball game because I can promise the game has a huge following here in Australia. Will it become a dominate sport? I think that will be up to the people, do the AFL or NFL fear that?

I suppose the one thing about this debate is as pieman suggested ‘what the local populace call the local ‘football’ code. Who gets in first wins that debate.

gazza says:

11:31am | 14/12/09

funny how two sports, 1 played mostly in Vic, the other in NSW & Qld, can lay claim to the name football, when both games are played with the hands & very little foot action. When you look at history, didn’t rugby league come from Union? Union.. where did that come from?? Somone who couldn’t handle the early form of “football” & stuck the ball up his jumper & ran with it!! Real football may not be that big in this country, but our world cup includes more than 5 or 6 countries that could win it. There aren’t that many countries that play your sports at a level you could caal world class. The rugby league world cup is just another tri-nations. Oh, when was the last world cup for AFL???

Dan says:

11:36am | 14/12/09

Toddzilla, what a mature contribution to the discussion. Nice. You really are enlightened.

Someone had to tell them, Victorians have a right to comment on this forum. Our AFL is the biggest winter sport in the country, and our wobbly ball discussions are of great interest beyond our suburbs. Australian football is the country’s biggest football code. As for the MCG being an awful sports ground, are you serious?!

Danny says:

11:52am | 14/12/09

For years now AFL been pushing people not to use Football. Why would people want your audience to get confused? For example everytime they talk about the ‘Footy Show’ I do not know what they are refering to NRL or AFL. Everyone hears Football as the game they were raised with so when Soccer advertises itself as football the majority of the audience misunderstands.  Do they want to promote to the already converted or are they trying to get some new fans onboard? Soccer Australia needs to learn the basic skill of differentiation. Also the one name throughout the world assumes there is only one language which is simply not true.

Rohan says:

11:58am | 14/12/09

“Football” has many codes.  All the various abbreviations tell you that.  AFL = Australian FOOTBALL League.  NFL in the US (grid iron) = National FOOTBALL League.  RFU in England = Rugby FOOTBALL Union.  In Australia, 4 of them have big followings.  If you say “football”, people will just assume you mean whatever the dominate code is.  Say it in Melbourne, they think AFL.  Say it in Sydney, its rugby league.  Go to America, its grid iron.  In a country like Australia where so many different codes squabble for followers, trying to call any one game football over and above any others just confuses me.

Razor says:

12:01pm | 14/12/09

Is it an Equal Opportunity, anti-racial discrimination, minority supporting policy of The Puch the reason for continually running stories about Soccer?

northern monkey says:

12:20pm | 14/12/09

@ Razor - there are so many soccer/football stories on the Punch because the haters and the lovers are so passionate and these blogs always get posts. Great for the numbers.

I think the point of the article in the first place is that it doesn’t matter what you call it - then two-thirds of the replies say it must/must not be this or that.

Who cares what it’s called, football, soccer, footy, footer, wogball, umbongoball - it’s still the best game in the world.  And you know it.

ChrisG says:

12:38pm | 14/12/09

I remember coming across the original definitions when the three main codes came about in England: Soccer is a gentleman’s game played by thugs; Union is a thug’s game played by gentlemen; and League is a thug’s game played by thugs.

Not sure about Australian Rules - isn’t it just a cricket off-season past-time played by some colonials?

Tank says:

01:04pm | 14/12/09

Of course it is soccer. The national team is called the Socceroos… not the footeroos… or the handballroos…or the ``whoops don’t mend me I’m very femine’’ aroos.
Still, it is a silly game. All those pratt falls and shirt tugs. The soccer world cup is hilarious with all those grown men clutching at their ankles and rolling around crying as soon as some opposing player looks at them.
Soccer is game for little sooks whose mummies thought the chess club was too darn rough.

Andrew says:

01:29pm | 14/12/09

I call it football.  I call it football as that is what i was brought up calling it. I have no problem with the world soccer but to me it just doesn’t sound right however unlike a lot of my football brothers who seem hellbent on it, i don’t correct people nor do i care if other people call it soccer. And when fans of other codes beat their chests about the lack of macho tackling, fighting and regurgitation of generic comments about rolling over clutching their ankles everytime someone gets tackled i just shake my head and wonder why do they feel the need to act so manly and tough.

We are comfortable about our football while we also admit that their are some areas that need to be eliminated. The simulation of diving and time wasting sure is one, but it is nowhere near as widespread as NRL/AFL/ARU fans will point out to try and belittle it.

As for its called soccer and its because the team is called the socceroos. Well the socceroos are a brand that has enormous appeal in the Australian sporting market. You don’t change that (pluss footeroos or football roos just sounds stupid). The N in NRL stands for National depsite not having any team from SA, WA, NT, TAS. To me that doesn’t sound national however like the socceroos it is a brand name that carries weight.

I don’t care what anyone calls the sport and i don’t think anyone should (and that includes my sometimes way over the top and excitable football/soccer fans).

Rowdy says:

01:31pm | 14/12/09

ROFLMAO!! gotta laugh at people like Tank…...he hates the sport yet he can’t help but read the article and post a comment….if you don’t like it, don’t read!!!! and certainly don’t get involved in the blog!!!! Tank….you’re a w*nk…....

Auman says:

01:47pm | 14/12/09

okay, was going to stay away from the insults (and this may get me banned but stay with me moderator)

Comments such as those of Toddzilla and Tank show their stupidity, this coming from a AFLgame that has a history of boozing to the limit where fighting, urinating in public, breaking property is just the start. Dare I mention the fact that drugs seem rather rife and need I get into the discussion on the way the players treat women?

So remember he who throws stones….

@northern Monkey - agreed, whatever we call it the game is still the best in the world.

Could you imagine if some time down the track and the Socceroos hit the final or (God willing) win what that would do to the game here in Australia. Maybe AFL and NRL fear that.

Tim says:

02:17pm | 14/12/09

For all the idiots saying that it is called “football” because you use your foot to kick the ball, please learn some history.
Football refers to the fact that it is played on-foot as opposed to games on horse-back.
So arguments saying that one game uses the foot to kick the ball more than others are pointless.

Oh and by the way, its SOCCER.

Auds says:

02:24pm | 14/12/09

CHICKEN just like your sport.

Hammo says:

02:35pm | 14/12/09

Its Soccer. No other country that has 4 codes of football and calling it Soccer means we know what people are talking about. Soccer is not an Americanism. I read once that Soccer is an English term that is an abbreviation for Association Football. By the way Matty (11.50am)in NZ its called Soccer too.

Bob says:

02:40pm | 14/12/09

It is a political decision to start calling what has been known as soccer in this country for decades to football. The sports actual name is Association Football. Other sports in the football family include Rugby Union Football, American Football, Rugby league Football. Etc. etc. They are called football because they where played on foot rather than on horseback, unlike the other popular sports of the day. In fact the original football (now referred to as folk football) involved hardly any kicking, as has more similarities with American football or Rugby than it does to the modern Association Football. So Association Football has no greater claim to the title than any other of the football codes. They are all football. Soccer is just a shortening of the full title, such as League (Rugby league Football) or Rugby (Rugby Union Football).

Macca the Villan says:

02:43pm | 14/12/09

LOL @ all those calling it Soccer

I sense you are all suffering from a bit of Demetriouitis; fearful of the attention your smaller cousin is receiving.
But don’t worry, I’m sure you’ll keep getting the attention if you keep throwing tantrums

God forbid a country full of European and Asian Immigrants would ever follow the World Game

Jeb says:

02:54pm | 14/12/09

@ Tim:

You’re confusing the etymology of the word with it’s current meaning. It MAY (not proven) have been called football originally to differentiate it from games played on horseback (horseball). But in modern times, sans mass horse play, people the world over (yes, many in australia) call it football because they kick the ball with their foot. 

Why does the name matter: it doesn’t. It’s football to me and my mates, but it may be soccer to you. doesn’t worry me. why does it worry you what others call it?

Charles Kelly says:

03:12pm | 14/12/09

Tim from 03:17pm, 14/12/09 is spot on when he says that “arguments saying that one game uses the foot to kick the ball more than others are pointless” - and grossly inaccurate.

Historically “football” is named NOT in reference to the action of a foot kicking a ball - but because it’s played on foot, not on horseback. The word originally referred to a variety of games in early Europe which were played on foot by peasants, as opposed to the horse-riding sports more often enjoyed by aristocrats.

Originally carrying the ball with the hands was allowed in the game of football, and it wasn’t until 1863 when Association Football (“soccer”) officially started and the NEW official rules as we basically know them today were formulated (even then, handling the ball was allowed to some degree, until it was gradually phased out - eventually being restricted to just the goalkeeper and any player throwing in from the sideline). The official rules for Rugby Football were written 15 years EARLIER in 1848, although it was played in a similar manner for MANY years prior to that. The point here is that the original game of football involved the use of hands, and the code banning the use of hands (Association Football) is actually the newcomer.?
They’re ALL “football” codes, but if any code has the least right to call itself JUST “football”, it’s the one NOT PLAYED ACCORDING TO THE ORIGINAL RULES - Association Football, or “soccer” for short.

We’ve all seen that Australian soccer clubs have attempted to rebrand themselves as “football” clubs, and that’s as far as it’s going to go. Only soccer clubs and already established supporters of the game are actively endorsing the move. Anyone who genuinely thinks that Australia as a whole will eventually embrace this rebranding is a delusional fool. There is, and always will be, fervent resistance from a large part of the Australian community - marking the rebranding as a seriously misguided, idiotic exercise.

At least four codes in Australia have the right to use the term “football”, and that SHOULD tell you something. The official managing bodies of EVERY code BUT soccer are well aware that as there is more than one prominent football code in Australia, each code NEEDS to have its own point of identification. This is what’s known as basic common sense and intelligent thought - something that historically has been dismally lacking in the managing bodies of soccer in Australia (which is actually what prompted the rebranding in the first place).

Insisting that the round ball game be referred to as “football” in any country where there are more dominant football codes is pure ignorance, simple as that.

Oh, and although there are other ways to score in the various codes, the universal point scoring method in all football codes is the “goal”. In EVERY CODE BUT Association Football (soccer), the ONLY way you can score a goal is off your foot. In soccer you can score a goal off other parts of your body.

Glen says:

03:31pm | 14/12/09

Care?  It doesn’t matter what you call it is still the most boring waste of time and money I coud imagine.  I’ll not pay a cent to watch it and neither will anyone in my family.  We have lives to lead.  Maybe the unthinking soccer hooligans need to get off the grog and experience life, ten they will kick the habit and take up something more interesting like watching grass grow or paint drying.

Charles Kelly says:

03:34pm | 14/12/09

In Australia, when we want to eat Thai food we go to a Thai restaurant - but in Thailand we’d just go to a restaurant.

In Australia, when we want to eat French food we go to a French restaurant - but in France we’d just go to a restaurant.

The same goes for football - in any other part of the world our national football code has to be referred to as “Australian Football” or “Aussie Rules Football” to distinguish it from other football codes, but in our own country it’s the only code with the official right to call itself JUST “Football”.

If we went to the UK and insisted that Australian Football be officially referred to as simply “Football”, they’d think we were ignorant morons. The same applies in Australia, where only idiots who don’t know any better would even consider referring to Association Football as just “Football”. It’s ironic that the Rugby codes are regarded as “meathead” sports, when at least they’re intelligent enough to realise the importance of distinguishing their codes from all others.

Tim says:

03:46pm | 14/12/09

No Jeb,
people call it Football because that’s what its always been called in other countries. Just because they mistakenly believe that the word “Football” has something to do with kicking the ball doesn’t mean they are correct.
And no the name shouldn’t matter all that much, but try having a conversation with a Soccer (Football) fan, and the militant ear-bashing one receives for calling the game Soccer is beyond a joke.
In Australia for the majority of people the game is called Soccer, deal with it.

IMHO says:

03:59pm | 14/12/09

Yawn!

Vic says:

04:36pm | 14/12/09

There is only one “Football”. It’s the sport you actually play with your ‘Foot’.
For all those Rugby league fans out there. Let’s face it, within 20 years time your game will be history. AFL may hang on a little bit longer but ultimately Australia will experience the Football the rest of the world is already experiencing (except for the yanks ) However any country that calls a game where all the participating teams are from the US “world series” cannot be taken seriously.

Andrew B says:

05:12pm | 14/12/09

I’m an unabashed fan of Australian rules football (it’s not called AFL!)  or football as it is known in the states of Victoria, SA, WA, Tasmania, and NT. But I also enjoy the other ‘football’ codes. Some people may well find it disappointing that soccer in this country is not called football. But what gives these soccer afficiandos the right to lay claim to a word which means so much to so many people? Sure, I accept that soccer is the most played sport in the world, but just because people in Australia don’t share your same enthusiasm for the game doesn’t mean that they are inferior and that they must be exorcised of their wicked sporting ways. Some soccer zealots are like the missionaries from back in the day telling indigneous peoples to leave their ‘savage’ existence and embrace Christianity. I believe that the debate on soccer/football is symptomatic of the ‘cultural cringe’ Australians still suffer from. We still seem to seek approval from the overseas, because we struggle to embrace aspects of our own society. The cultural cringe stems from a number of factors, but if i were to put my finger on it, I’d say its come about from the previous generations treatment of the Aborginal people, the old White Australia policy, and the notion that Australians are simply born racist! Let’s not kid ourselves, Australians (that means all Australians, don’t use the fact that you’re of Asian,African, or European descent to weasel your way out of this) are racist, but no more than any other country or race in the world. So we have a cheqeured past? A lot of countries do…. But back to my main point. The fact that we have our own football code is something all Australians should be proud of. Regardless of whether you like the game or not at least respect the history of the game in this country, and the fact that millions of people derive great joy from it. In Melbourne alone, it still stands that our oldest suburbs continue to carry the names of many current day AFL and VFL football clubs. English football/soccer (notice I didn’t simply call it EPL, that’s being culturally aware) aside, you would be hard pressed to find many other sports in the world which have such a strong link to the suburbs . Our accent aside, I believe that nothing is more Australian than our own form of football. I know that when someone from overseas comes to Australia the one thing I love to show them is a game of Australian rules football. Moreover, a lot of them will have seen a bit of the game on TV or heard it being talked about and then ask what it is all about. I say that is our own brand of football that is hugely popular and is attended by huge crowds week in week out. How wonderful that we have this treasure in our own backyard, we should cherish it. To tell you the truth, soccer is a bit like McDonalds, it’s a US company but is really a global ‘brand’. It may conform to cultural standards (ie-halal, kosher etc), but overall it’s the same product. Don’t get me wrong, Maccas is great, but I much prefer to eat a nice home cooked meal. It really would be a sad day if we all started eating Maccas. How boring! How sad that we would succumb to a global brand because we didn’t respect our own football code enough?

NPR says:

05:45pm | 14/12/09

People here speculate on the etymology of the word ‘football’. It is inconclusive where the term originated (more specific than just ‘England’) and what it originally meant, so don’t even try to appropriate it for your argument.

In particular two popular arguments for the origins of the word are as follows: a ‘foot-to-ball action’ vs. ‘on feet opposed to horseback’. These are frequently copied from Wiki, which ironically admits “there is no conclusive evidence for either hypothesis regarding the origins of the word”.

So drop the pseudo-historical bullcrap you use to to reinforce your weak arguments. ‘Football’ is in the eye of the beholder.

Jeb says:

06:22pm | 14/12/09

@ Tim. I seriously don’t know why people are incorrect if they believe football refers to kicking a ball with, oh i don’t know, maybe a foot? Refer previous comment re original meaning and current meaning. Simple difference. Others call it soccer. I deal with it. Lots of people call it football - sounds like you can’t deal with it.

@Charles Kelly: re restaurant analogy - how come people talk about modern australian cuisine. those ignorant morons! Shouldn’t it just be cuisine? BTW I love the way you think you talk for the whole of australia. Talk about a militant ear-bashing. Refer also to comment re etymology. Your history is up for debate but i couldn’t care as the meaning of the word has changed anyway.

Timmuh says:

07:40pm | 14/12/09

Association Football has an abbreviation, Soccer, which was given by the English to differentiate it from “Rugby Football”. Rugby Union is Rugby Football is Rugby, Rugby League is League. Australian Football has no other name, AFL is a competition of Australian Football.
Neither rugby code actually uses the foot for much, and both have another easily identifiable name. Australian Football is the only one that requires its major scoring to be done by foot (or nearby). Association Football can have its scores from any part of the body other than the arms and hands.
“Football” is what each person wants it to be, but in most of Australia it is used primarily for Australian Football - and Association Football types shouldn’t be trying to claim exclusive ownership of the term as they so often do. In NSW and Qld it doesn’t matter, the other games have other names. In Vic, SA, Tas, WA, NT, its entirely different; the Australian game is even more entrenched than the throwball games are in NSW and Qld, and the game has no other name.

Charles Kelly says:

01:13am | 15/12/09

Really Jeb and NPR, that pitiful effort is the best you can do?

Maybe you’re only capable of regurgitating Wikipedia pages, but some of us have done more thorough research. Maybe if you did the same you wouldn’t currently look so ill-informed.

Some forms of early “football” barely had any foot contact with the ball at all - so the tired old line that “people the world over (yes, many in australia) call it football because they kick the ball with their foot” is incontrovertibly FALSE. They may ignorantly think that’s why the game is so named, but history shows that they are WRONG!

The original Football Association (soccer) rules written in 1863 still allowed all players to handle the ball to some degree - until it was gradually phased out, eventually being restricted to just the goalkeeper and any player throwing in from the sideline. Besides, the original Rugby Football rules were written 15 years earlier in 1848. So once again, if any code has the least right to call itself JUST “football”, it’s the one NOT PLAYED ACCORDING TO THE ORIGINAL RULES - Association Football (or “soccer” for short) as we know it today.

The ONLY reason people call the round ball game just “football” in many parts of the world is pure ignorance, nothing more. Clearly you insist on counting yourselves among their ranks.

Jeb says:

09:16am | 15/12/09

CK - I’ve never disputed YOUR version of history. I know this annoys you. All I’m saying is that it doesn’t matter. I don’t think you get the concept that etymology and current meaning (literal or otherwise) can be two different things. I don’t think any game has or hasn’t the right to call itself anything. I know this annoys you too. I’ve never called it football to gee up preachy, condescending people like you, but I’m beginning to think its a good enough reason to keep doing so.

Steve says:

09:20am | 15/12/09

AFL = Aussie Rules = Football
NRL = League = Football
Super 15 = Union = Football
A-League = Soccer = Football

If I hear one more Mexican try to tell everybody else that they cant use the term football I will vote for the use of nukes to wipe them off the face of our great and diverse sporting nation.

Charles Kelly says:

09:58am | 15/12/09

What you are clearly incapable of comprehending Jeb, is that YOUR “current meaning” stems from ignorance, nothing else. You’re welcome to colloquially call the game what you like, as are the rest of us (“pansy dive-ball”, “girly ball”, “nancy ball” - it’s all good).

It’s the OFFICIAL name of the game that’s the issue here - and by Australian soccer officials insisting that their code should OFFICIALLY be referred to as “football” and nothing else implies that it is THE ONLY “football”, which clearly it isn’t.

Once again, if we went to the UK and insisted that Australian Football be officially referred to as simply “Football”, they’d think we were ignorant morons. The same applies in Australia, where only idiots who are intellectually incapable of knowing any better would even consider referring to Association Football as just “Football”.

The official managing bodies of EVERY code BUT soccer are well aware that as there is more than one prominent football code in Australia, each code NEEDS to have its own point of identification. This is what’s known as basic common sense and intelligent thought - something that historically has been dismally lacking in the managing bodies of soccer in Australia. As I said, it’s ironic that the Rugby codes are regarded as “meathead” sports, when at least they’re intelligent enough to realise the importance of distinguishing their codes from all others.

The ONLY reason people call the round ball game just “football” in many parts of the world is pure ignorance, nothing more. It’s unfortunate that intellectually you appear to have no choice but to count yourself among their ranks.

Jeb says:

11:53am | 15/12/09

@CK - I agree with you: the official title of the game is association football. It isn’t the only type of football. don’t know if anyone is disputing that besides you. Similarly no one is INSISTING on calling it football or saying that you can’t call your game that, you ignorant morons. Besides you. Good to see your true feelings towards the game coming through. Bad to see that you’ve got issues.

That’s all I’ve had enough.

Charles Kelly says:

12:16pm | 15/12/09

You’re not going to learn anything if you continue to stick your head in the sand Jeb.

Clearly you don’t understand the difference between an OFFICIAL title and a colloquial name, and the implications of the former.

You’re welcome to wallow in your self-righteous ill-informed denial - if it doesn’t bother you that a large number of intelligent people consider you and your ilk to be illiterate morons then that’s just fine. If it’s true as they say, that “ignorance is bliss”, then you and your “it’s called football” mates must be positively ecstatic!

Ranto says:

01:30pm | 15/12/09

This blog thread is hilarious.

I like most codes of football, but football/soccer is my favourite. My favourite used to be Australian Rules Football - gee, I wonder why they felt they had to put the Australian Rules there - perhaps to differentiate it from the other kinds of football? - but they kept changing the rules which confused me too much.  Likewise Union, I saw recently in lineouts they were actually lifting each other up which used to be a penalty against as I recall.

With my football (read soccer) friends I refer to the round ball game as football.  Sometimes I’ll use the term soccer when the context makes it ambiguous, or when I’m talking to a Collingwood supporter.  I don’t really care either way, but if you held a gun to my head, sorry, it’s FOOTBALL.

The etymology of football and soccer is interesting, but it’s an academic discussion now.  Language changes.  Deal with it.

Nevertheless, the multitudes have spoken.  Soccer is the World Game, the football game played and watched by billions, whether they call it Calcio (kick) in Italy, Futbol in the Latin countries, football/futbol in the Americas.  Football Federation Australia and FIFA know this, so sorry guys, Soccer Australia merely was falling into line with world opinion by becoming the FFA.

Call your favourite game whatever you like - but Soccer - oops Football, sorry - has already won the day.  Whatever you call it in Australia doesn’t amount to a hill of beans.

Freddo says:

02:03pm | 15/12/09

Football in the Americas Ranto?
Never been to the USA then have you.

ranto says:

02:12pm | 15/12/09

Freddo:  Gotcha!  The USA is one country in the Americas and is sadly outnumbered by other, more sensible nations.

Mr Subramanian says:

02:42pm | 15/12/09

Was going to try and post a sensible observation, but I’m glad to see that Pieman @ 11:39am and Rohan @ 12:58pm have already made it - well done, gents! Nice to see that there are SOME intelligent life forms on this planet!

I wonder if you spoke to an Irishman about “football” what he would think about? Anyone know how the popularity of Gaelic Football rates against soccer?

James Shaw says:

02:55pm | 15/12/09

Ha-ha dear oh dear. It amazes that soccer fans continue to rant about that they have exclusivity over the generic term “football”.

Supporters of Rugby Union, Rugby League, AFL and Soccer all at times refer to these sports in a colloquial way as “football”. The thing is no one really seems to care except for fans over soccer that seems to think they own this term. It would be laughable if it weren’t so frustrating to hear their rantings. I remember when a politician in Melbourne referred to the sport as “soccer” and he was booed off the stage by m0r0n soccer fans claiming it was “football”.

As an analogy - it would be like athletes 100M sprint at the Olympics arguing that they have exclusive rights to the term “running” and that all other events such as the longer distance races can not refer to themselves as “running”. Running is a generic term that could interchangeably refer to many different events in the Olympics.

To the respondents who push that it is only Australia who doesn’t call it “football”, it is you who should wake up to yourself. I spend a fair bit of time in the USA and Canada and they do not refer to Rugby Union, Rugby League, Soccer or AFL as “football”, they refer to what we call gridiron as “football”.

Football is a generic term so soccer fans should get used to it.

Charles Kelly says:

03:03pm | 15/12/09

Wrong Ranto, Soccer Australia were not “merely was falling into line with world opinion by becoming the FFA” - it was a deliberate rebranding excercise to publicly distance their organisation from the decades of incompetence, dissension, mismanagement and embarrassment infesting the Australian Soccer Association and the National Soccer League. Clearly the name change did nothing to dispel the incompetence, because the decision to brand any organisation with a name that instantly generates such a massive amount of negative public opinion would be high on the list of all-time marketing FAILS.

Freddo says:

03:06pm | 15/12/09

Ranto,
i know the USA is one country in the Americas.
The biggest, most populous and wealthiest nation in the Americas.

m watson says:

03:53pm | 15/12/09

How well did Kempy play for Victory! He deserves a call up for the Kuwait game for sure. However, his goal was not goal of the week, watch the replay of Jobe Wheelhouse’s goal for Newcastle against the not-so-mighty Gold Coast, a quality volley from 20 yards, top right.

S.L says:

04:36pm | 15/12/09

@ m watson. One lucky strike does not make an international player. You have to look at the overall picture. He had an average game blinged up by the Mariners usual home form (chew your arm off terrible!).
As for the football argument I grew up calling my prefered code Soccer and League, League with Union, Union and AFL Aussie rules. No code was referred to in the 60’s and 70’s in my part of Australia (Sydney) as Football. Now for arguments sake I believe AFL is the only “football” where you can go the whole game without a foot going anywhere near a ball! In League and Union you at least have to kick off!

Dan says:

06:16pm | 15/12/09

I got tired of reading most of these usless comments so i skipped to the end, what a game is called doesn’t really matter the name of the game is only there to help people communicate about it, so everyone may just be better off following the old saying “When in Rome do as the Romans do” ie. when in Rome call soccer football, when in the southern states call AFL/aussie rules football, when in NSW of QLD call rugby football, when in the USA call gridiron football and when in rome call soccer football.

It’s not that bloody hard, in fact it just shows some respect for the culture your living/came to live in.

Richard says:

10:47am | 16/12/09

Memo to all those who have come here from another country:  You have come to a country with its own very strong sporting traditions, including for example a football code entirely invented here, which happens to be the most popular sport in the country and which is thriving and growing. Such sporting traditions are an important part of our culture.  After all, isn’t multiculturalism supposed to be about respecting all cultural traditions, including Australian?
So, while there is obviously no problem with you continuing to play and follow your own traditional sports, such as soccer, and calling them whatever you like amongst yourselves, please don’t seek to dictate to us what we should call your sport, so as to distinguish it from the other codes played here.  Also, please do not seek to belittle our sporting traditions simply on the arrogant and presumptuous basis that you don’t like or understand them, that your sport is played in many other countries, and that therefore we should abandon our own sports and adopt yours, as a result of some spurious international majoritarian argument.  Why should we seek to be the same as everybody else?  Why should we have to play and follow a sport most of us, quite frankly, do not like, simply because lots of other countries do? 
There is of course no problem about you seeking to have your precious soccer World Cup played here, but please don’t ask us to seriously disrupt our traditional sports to allow it or to contribute many millions of our taxpayer dollars towards it.  In exchange, we will promise not to ask you to disrupt your soccer season for any AFL special events, or ask you to contribute many millions towards them.

Richard says:

10:52am | 16/12/09

@ S.L: You have obviously never seen a game of AFL.  Your extraordinary claim that a foot never goes near the ball in AFL is completely laughable and displays an ignorance of such proportions as to disqualify you from making any useful contribution to this discussion.

Lauren says:

01:35pm | 16/12/09

Clearly any place that has a dominant sport will call it “Football”. VICs, SAs, and WAs refer to AFL as Football because we don’t have a name for it. NSWs and QLDs refer to Rugby as Football. Americans refer to NFL (watered-down version of rugby, IMO) as Football.
The fact of the matter is that ‘soccer’ Football got naming rights first, years and years ago. But no one cares about that. It’s like saying Americans are not allowed to call Jelly ‘Jello’ because its not proper English.. just pointless.

NPR says:

02:43pm | 16/12/09

Well CK I am an aussie rules fan and generally am cynical about FFA’s marketing approach. Was merely pointing out that fans of any code of football will appropriate the word without historical basis. But you’re so partisan, you wouldn’t have realised the point I was making. If you are an AFL fan, I’m embarrassed to be lumped into the same group as you.

As for your “thorough research”, show me primary documents. Otherwise you’re just another wiki.

S.L says:

04:34am | 17/12/09

@Richard. Why don’t you read what I said before getting on the “AFL is better” bandwagon. I will clarify my statement. In Soccer you can’t use your hands so to propel the ball you have to kick it, in both rugby codes you can run around holding the ball all game but at the beginning you have to kick off. Now good old precious AFL god bless it! The greatest game of all that can’t seem to break out to north of the Murray! The umpire balls it up at the start of the game, the ruckman attempt to tip it to there team mates and the game has started. Now players could handball all day with out looking like kicking it. No need to kick at all. An improbable scenario for sure but quite possible. Ruckman?  handball? Where did I get those terms from Richard? I know I must have watched a few games off the great southern code!

Charles Kelly says:

07:49am | 17/12/09

Oh boo hoo NPR (or is that “Jeb” or “Ranto”, it’s hard to tell?). Your self-righteous diatribe was revealed for the empty rhetoric that it so clearly was, and you’re a little miffed. All the information is available online, you’ll just have to pay a little more attention next time.

And Lauren, can you read? If you could you’d clearly see that “the fact of the matter is that ‘soccer’ Football” DID NOT get “naming rights first, years and years ago” - FAR from it. The rules for Rugby were written first, Rugby clubs were original founding members of the Football Association, and the world’s oldes football club is a Rugby club.

This topic has at least achieved one thing. Although the perpetually unenlightened will still insist on the managerial bodies of Association Football in Australia officially calling their code just “Football” - at least they’ll now be aware (if they’re actually capable of basic reading and comprehension) that they have NO historical, logical or etymological right to the name in this country, and the ONLY reason people call the round ball game just “football” in many other parts of the world is pure ignorance, nothing more.

That goes for YOU too David Hall.

Richard says:

08:35am | 17/12/09

@ S.L: Your argument is, as I said before, laughable.  As you know, if in fact you have as you claim watched AFL, the ball, unlike NRL or Rugby, must be kicked to score a goal.  Also, the nature of the field and the game means that foot skills are vital and the ball is in fact kicked far more often than in any other code except soccer.  Your contribution is fundamentally irrelevant and puerile.

S.L says:

09:45am | 17/12/09

@Richard FAIR DINKUM! I will explain again. It is quite possible to handball all game but improbable as all you would be scoring is behinds but a game of Aussie rules can be played entirely without the foot. All the other AFL officianado’s that write to the Punch haven’t taken me to task because obviously they can see it is possible. That’s not knocking the code it’s just a fact. I wasn’t going to add this one but now I will, it’s the only game of any description I know of where you can score a point for missing? Now Richard are going to try to tell me that some players actually aim to score a behind? No? I didn’t think so!

Richard says:

10:18am | 17/12/09

@ S.L: I guess the only further response possible to this childish rubbish is - so what?  I guess it would be possible in soccer for the 2 goal-keepers to simply pick up the ball and kick it down the field to one another.  But why would they?
How puerile can you get.
And, just for good measure, the old chestnut and incredibly dumb last resort about scoring a point for missing!!  Give me a break.  Just for the benefit of all those who bring this up because they can’t think of any other argument (now concentrate):  The team in attack gets a reward for attacking and having a shot for goal.  This rewards attacking play and maximises the chances of a result, especially one in favour of the team which was in attack more often.  (A considerable contrast to a certain other code.)  OK?

S.L says:

10:52am | 17/12/09

@Richard the reward shouldn’t be for attacking the reward should be for scoring. Not close enough is good enough. What other sport rewards attacking play with points? In all other football codes you can get hit with a sucker punch (counter attack) so you have to watch your back in other words. Take away the behind posts and see what a different game it would be. Childish argument? Maybe but my original argument stands…...........

Charles Kelly says:

12:25pm | 17/12/09

S.L, ignoring for now the fact that the original game of “football” was NOT named in reference to a foot contacting a ball (making your entire point irrelevant), your belief that “AFL is the only ‘football’ where you can go the whole game without a foot going anywhere near a ball” is technically incorrect. You would be just as likely to “go the whole game without a foot going anywhere near a ball” in soccer as you would in Australian Football. Did you forget that the round ball can be moved around the field through contact with plenty of other body parts besides the feet? As long as it’s not the hands, arms, or elbows (except for throwing into play) it’s all legal - even scoring off body parts other than the hands, arms, or elbows is perfectly acceptable within the rules of soccer. Regarding the “kick-off” in soccer - I’m certainly no expert on the game, but as far as I’m aware, as long as the balled is passed to another player, it’s not against the rules to “kick” the ball with another part of the body (sweeping the shin perhaps?). As far as I can see, FIFA rules stipulate that the ball has to be “touched” so it moves forward, but they don’t specify that it has to be by the foot. Yes it’s “an improbable scenario” as you say, “but quite possible” (well, at least just as possible as it would be in in Australian Football).

Ironically, it appears you’ve shot yourself in the “foot”.

S.L says:

05:50pm | 17/12/09

@ Charles Kelly.I’ve not shot myself in the foot at all. The start in soccer is refered to in the rule books as a “kick off” which of course meens propelling the ball with the foot. Other than that you are quite correct. The start in AFL is more similar to basketball than another football code anyway.
Also Charles I know the theory of the origin of the reference to the expression “football” and before your at me about what game was around first and what code has the oldest clubs to diminish my argument I agree Australian Rules, Rugby (Union as League wasn’t around until 1906 as a breakaway competition) and good old Association Football (Soccer) are around the same age with one or two Australian Rules clubs or Rugby clubs reportedly older than any Soccer clubs here or overseas.
P.S for any league followers reading this I know the Sydney first grade competition began in 1908 but 1906 was when league was started here.

Jeb says:

06:45pm | 17/12/09

@ S.L. damn, you got in before me. Was just about to tell CK that the law relating to a kick-off states “the ball is in play when it is kicked and moves forward”. Massive Fail. Oh, don’t go all “what’s the definition/etymology of the word ‘kick’” on me now CK. 

btw I’m an idiot for coming back to this thread.

Charles Kelly says:

07:00pm | 17/12/09

Go on then S.L - show me exactly where in the FIFA rules it says a “kick off” absolutely has to be with the foot?

Charles Kelly says:

09:31pm | 17/12/09

I read that it’s acceptable within the rules of soccer to stomp on the ball with the sole of your boot, causing the ball to move forward and then spin backwards. That’s NOT a “kick” in the literal sense - so the term “kick” in relation to the “kick-off” obviously contains some ambiguity.

If it’s against the rules to use something other that the top, side or toe of the boot (ie. a literal “kick”) to “kick-off” then there’d be a penalty awarded. Show me evidence of this penalty?

And really, that’s it? That’s all you’ve got? The addition of one kick per half to an otherwise (potentially) kickless game? Did it occur to you that the longer you persist with petty pedantry, the stupider you look? The reason S.L started on this ludicrously juvenile tangent was clearly to infer that Australian Football wasn’t really “football” because “you can go the whole game without a foot going anywhere near a ball”, which we all know is irrelevant and ignorant. Even with the insistence that a “kick-off” must specifically be with the top, side or toe of the boot (if that can indeed be proven), it’s perfectly clear that the possibility of ANY of the other football codes having more “foot to ball” contact than a game of soccer does indeed exist. Not that this fact makes the whole “foot to ball” argument any less ridiculous or futile.

S.L says:

06:33am | 18/12/09

As Mr Kelly is rushing off to the library to find every rule book on every football code to try to prove what an idiot I am (forgeting the infantile personal attacks which I won’t engage in) I’ll state again. I’m not knocking any code or saying that one is better than the other. My prefered code is Soccer, a game played in every country in the world and refered to mostly overseas as football. My observations on AFL are correct. The original subject was “is it football or soccer?”. I think we should all agree to disagree.

Jeb says:

06:49am | 18/12/09

for some reason Fifa doesn’t think its warranted to spell out what a ‘kick’ is. But i think its a fair summation to think that it involves some kind of foot to ball action (yes, maybe even a stomp) which is 100% more than is required in aussie rules. Totally irrelevant? - of course.

Charles Kelly says:

10:44am | 18/12/09

Petty pedantry is all you’ve had from the begining Jeb, so you may as well go with that. You’re wrong, deal with it.

And S.L, I don’t need to try and prove what an idiot you are. You did that all on your own when you chose to infer that Australian Football wasn’t really “football” because “you can go the whole game without a foot going anywhere near a ball”. Pathetic.

Once again, although the perpetually unenlightened will still insist on the managerial bodies of Association Football in Australia officially calling their code just “Football” - at least they’ll now be aware (if they’re actually capable of basic reading and comprehension) that they have NO historical, logical or etymological right to the name in this country, and the ONLY reason people officially refer to the round ball game as just “football” is pure ignorance, nothing more.

Jeb says:

02:01pm | 18/12/09

ha, ha. “at least they’ll now be aware…” You really rate yourself as a source of knowledge don’t you CK?

But nice job proving the undisputed point anyway - who has claimed any historical or etymological right to call association football just “football”? I think there’s a logical reason to call it that but hey thats my opinion only. I don’t think that any code has sole rights to the name. Free country etc… There’s no trademark.

Of course for a long time half the country called afl “football” and the other half called rugby league (my code of choice) “football”. Now a lot of people call association football “football”. To them it makes sense. If it annoys people like ck then bonus. Language is in flux. The country is evolving. It’s harmless. No sensible person would care or be confused. 

that’s it from me.

Freddo says:

02:23pm | 18/12/09

Last Word.
Yes I win!!!
[/Thread]

Charles Kelly says:

03:49pm | 18/12/09

No Jeb (or “NPR” or “Ranto” - whatever), I “rate” my ability to interpret and rationalise freely available information and documentation. I understand that due to your personal failings in this area it fills you with jealously, and for that I apologise.

It’s perfectly clear from what is written here that any claimed “logic” behind officially referring to soccer in Australia as “football” fails dismally on many fronts. Only stubborn ignorance remains, and evidently the lack of intellect in many Australians will see it linger on for some time.

S.L says:

10:32am | 19/12/09

Charles you’re the perfect example of what you have just written about. To try to determine what is refered to as a kick? Are you a lawyer? You sound like an overpaid Barister trying to get a crooked busnessman of a fraud charge! At the end of the day I’ll still watch and enjoy all codes of Football (handballs, kicks and all) while some people try to determine the meaning of the universe. CK I suggest you get a life…............

Charles Kelly says:

12:06pm | 19/12/09

I suggest you get a clue S.L. Your argument was revealed as the petty irrelevant pedantry that it is, and naturally you’re upset about that. You can say what you like at this stage but it won’t do any good, because nothing will erase the inane sophistry of your initial proposition that Australian Football isn’t really “football” because “you can go the whole game without a foot going anywhere near a ball”. You dug the hole you’re in, and if you want to keep digging that’s your choice.

Michael C says:

08:50am | 23/03/10

Simply - there is a game in Australia that plays by the “Laws of Australian Football”.  It is a local variant of football.  Similar to American Football, Canadian Football, Gaelic Football, Rugby Football and Association Football - - it is a member of the broader family tree to ‘football’.

It is ignorant for a soccer person to MOVE to Australia and NOT make themselves aware of local cultures.  Now - whilst not everyone in Australia is a Christian, and no one demands Muslims to convert on the way through customs - - it is appropriate to understand that Australia celebrates Christmas and Easter (even if just as commercially driven festivals of over consumption).

Likewise, come to Australia but don’t try to tell us that soccer is the one true football, the only football and that ‘Australian Football’ is the local installation of the ‘world game’. 

We know that ‘football’ and ‘soccer’ are interchangeable in England.  We’ve seen how Les Murray adores his first edition copy of the respected English publication “World Soccer”.  In the English language - we understand that ‘soccer’ was an English own abbreviation of ‘Association’ and that it works perfectly to disambiguate.  Especially as the English speaking world is the MOST diverse ‘football’ demographic.

So, whether you’re a Pom, or from Italy or from Korea - - come to Australia and learn some respect.  Don’t be petulant.  Don’t be demeaning.  And learn to embrace diversity because Australia is head for head the worlds MOST diverse, and competitive ‘football’ market.