Actually there are only two cultures OF SIGNIFICANCE in Australia.

The Rugby and Rugby League followers on one side, supporting a game where points have to be earned through skill, cunning, strength and going through your opponents defence

And on the other side Melbourne Rules players and supporters: a game, according to historian Geoffrey Blainey, that was invented to suit the mid-19c mercantile nature of Victorian society, where anything goes and it was quite acceptable to seek to go over your opponents rather than having to face them full on, a game with no offside rule and no send off, meaning that a player could not be penalised in the game for cheating and unmanly play. Rugby, a game where the hands can be used to catch and throw, and tackle an opponent to the ground, and Melbourne Rules where the prime aim seems to be burying your knees in an opponents back mid air.

Whatever other cultures exist in this country are on the sideline to these two codes, the manly one of Rugby and the beat your opponent by bi-passing him of Melbourne Rules.

Soccer doesn't have a clue. It is a game for those who consider talking to be more important than action, like a 90 minute conversation where nothing is actually said: no wonder women and men from the more voluble 'cultures' enjoy it.

Rugby (Union or League) is to UGLY as Soccer is to BORING (and I'm not talking about the Rugby players, though you could count that too).

Aussie rules rules - sure. In about 4 states in a small country. Bring on the Aussie Rules world cup. It would be like the US baseball world series. Of course, Rugby Union has a world cup, as does Cricket. How many countries actually play those sports, again? And then there is a Rugby League world cup (snigger).

Look, nothing wrong with these games, really. Just that, compared to football (the one code truly capable of being called that) they are SMALL TIME. And beneath the bluster of the foregoing posts, that is the point that irks everyone deep down. They may be our sports, but hardly anyone else wants to play.

Doesn't bother me at all that Aussie Rules is small, there's hardly a nation that could find people that wouldn't be too scared to play it. Look at the pathetic player reactions to small collisions in Soccer, and you'll see that there's very few other nations that could stand the pain of REAL footy. ;)

Hatz wrote:

Doesn't bother me at all that Aussie Rules is small, there's hardly a nation that could find people that wouldn't be too scared to play it. Look at the pathetic player reactions to small collisions in Soccer, and you'll see that there's very few other nations that could stand the pain of REAL footy. ;)

I have yet to see a real tackle in your 'real footy', When a Melbourne Rules player can face up to a charging 120k opposition player who is determined to go through him rather than just kick the ball over him you can tell me about pain in 'football'.

Melbourne Rules - the original name - a game designed to keep cricketers fit in winter.... not even invented for its own sake.

Soccer is a great game for kids. It's really simple, so any 8 year old can understand the rules, and it requires virtually no physical stamina.

Ironically, the very things that make it good for kids make it dull for adults. Unfortunately, hundreds of millions of people around the world have never been exposed to sports that are physically demanding for the players and intellectually stimulating for the spectators, so they don't know what they are missing out on.

The fact that hundreds of millions of people are obsessed with soccer does not make it interesting, just popular. Hundreds of millions of people read Paulo Coelho too, but that doesn't make it great literature.