Really?
Turning a two score game is not that rare in european football either, though. 14-0 is in a way a bit misleading, as it's still only two scores. Turning a three score game is a lot rarer, in both the NFL and in football. It's obviously more common in the NFL, but that's what makes it "less" exciting imo. In football, scoring three times is more "valuable", as turn around like that are rarer, and even more magical when they happen.
If that's your logic of what phase of play decides the game, then I give up.
So basically scoring the last point of the game then is what wins the team that match? I honestly hope no one with that understanding watches any sport.
In football, that is how it works. A single goal can decide the game in the 10th minute. Basketball is NOT like that. THAT HAS BEEN MY POINT FROM THE START.
You just don't want to understand his point, do you?
Nah, I don't, and don't hope to either.
Clearly not. Never even tried.You just don't want to understand his point, do you?
His logic is that, if a team takes a 10 point lead in Q1, and the rest of the 3 Qs are completely even, the deciding point was the scored in the end, and not the 10-0 run the team went in in Q1 that made the difference. So yeah, I'm not gonna pretend that it makes sense to me.You just don't want to understand his point, do you?
No, my logic is that in this case there is no single decisive contribution. Again, a major difference compared to a football game where you can often point out that "hey, this was the winning goal". This gives goals a certain weight and tension that I miss when watching high-scoring sports.
I won't lie if I said I stopped reading after that. Couldn't have made it simpler.
Well it's hard to debate if you don't actually read what I wrote.
Just to play devils advocate (because I do understand your point), I don’t entirely agree that that goal is the single decisive moment which wins a game. What if your goalie saves a penalty? Opposition striker misses a sitter? These are also decisive moments.
Come on, you know that's not what he means. I understand it as a 10 point lead in the first quarter means "nothing", in the way that it's not a significant lead at all after the first quarter. If Golden State Warriors are down 33 - 23 to the Phoenix Suns after the first quarter, they're not even stressed out. A 10 point lead after 12 minutes of basketball isn't even close to being 1-0 down after 23 minutes of football. I guess you can call it "points inflation" or something like that.
This argument was like a soccer match that was over in the first half. If it was basketball you might have kept going.
Err, the no of possessions in basketball are limited and evenly distributed, unlike football. If a team takes a good lead in a big game early on, there's an easy possibility they would not throw that away till the end and it would take something equally special to overcome that. But in any case, the phase of play that decides the match can come at any point, and not just the one that happens at the end.
Comparing the two sports as far apart as them is usually pointless but still had to retort on 'only the last quarter matters or is supposed to be watched' comment.
Yes, that is true but not important here: the point was that a single goal can be decisive in a way that only happens at the very end in other sports. A single goal can be THE moment even very early on. Once Scholes scored, we knew there was a real chance that it would be the goal that takes us to the CL final. That is somewhat unique to football (well, maybe not unique but hockey games rarely finish 1-0). The low-scoring nature of the game is often derided by those who don't like it but I think the very high value of goals is the best thing about it.
But is it special to be leading with 10 points in basketball? Sure, it would take something equally special to overcome it, but then again, it's not really special, is it? It happens several times in almost every single game, with way bigger leads than that!
It's even simpler than that, actually: a single goal is far, far, far more valuable than a single "basket". That makes it rather special, no matter when it happens. That is a big difference between football and high-scoring sports such as basketball, handball or even American football.
Like I said, loads of teams throw all their cards in Q1 or Q3, and they rest the main players for a lot of the remaining game, especially in playoffs where the fatigue kicks in, you ideally want your best players to make a defining impact in a short period of time and Q1 has been used to do that plenty of times. Cavs did it to Warriors in 2016 finals. Not sure what makes going on a 10/15-0 run in Q1 makes it less special whereas both teams scoring the same no. of points in Q4 without any such scoring display makes that part "decisive".
The same could be said for a baseball game that ends 1-0 with the run scored in an early inning.
Now, I do watch a lot of basketball as well. I understand how the game is played, the tactics, and how teams can run away with a game early on. But you're overstating how valuable that lead is. In late playoff stages, sure. A 10 point Warriors lead against the Clippers can be fatal to LA, but most usually, they'll come close, force a lead change or two, before the better team turning it back on in the third or fourth quarter.
Hence the Q1 lead being significant for the final result.
I watch a ton of sports (some would say too many actually), and I have a team I follow in multiple sports. I know football is a low scoring game which makes a goal more... special or whatever.
I edited it to the first quarter, they took the lead in the very end of the first quarter, and by the break, the bucks were only up by 2 if I remember correctly. And I'm not saying it's "insignificant". Every point scored is significant to the end result. But coming back from a 10 point deficit in basketball isn't rare or special in any way, shape or form.
Good post.
You have my respect, sir. You get baseball.
If you can't appreciate quality D play then that's on you.
No doubt. But the scarcity of the game deciding moment still makes a sport different from others. One can have a preference for one type or the other.
I also dislike catenaccio so I'm consistent at least.
Truth. I love a good defensive slug fest.
In my experience baseball is just about hotdogs and $9 beers.
You wish.
Colorado Rockies?
Yep, a few times, really enjoyed it to be fair but had absolutely zero clue what was happening on the field.
