Congrats Caps!

[Big RR]

that bottom video looks like a wedding from hell. Trying to get the Vegas players even more miserable?

[MajGenl.Meade]

Stanley Cup?????

[Lord Jim]

Gee Gen'l, I'm sorry you find this so uninteresting...

Perhaps this sports news will be more to your liking:

Champs again! Warriors thrash Cavs to complete sweep of NBA Finals



CLEVELAND – The selfless superstar with the deadly 3-point shot smiled, and Stephen Curry’s teammates smiled with him.

The prolific scorer who still catches flak for his free-agency decision two years ago, gave his teammate a deep hug. After Kevin Durant did that, Klay Thompson hugged right back.

The ferocious defender screamed even louder than he does at opponents and referees, and Draymond Green’s teammates roared in unison.



The Warriors are champs again. With a 108-85 drubbing of LeBron James and the Cleveland Cavaliers on Friday night , the Warriors completed a four-game sweep and claimed the NBA title for the second year in a row and the third time in four years.

“This was the hardest year we’ve had of the three championships, by far,” Warriors coach Steve Kerr said. “Just the length of the journey. These guys aren’t just incredibly talented, but they’re selfless, they love each other and play for each other, and you see the result.”

The sweep was the first since 2007 when Cleveland was swept by San Antonio and only the ninth in Finals history. The Warriors own two of them, having swept the Washington Bullets in 1975. That had been their last championship until 2015. And then 2017. And now 2018.

https://www.mercurynews.com/2018/06/08/ ... ba-finals/

[Bicycle Bill]

Good.  They got done in time to clear the stage for the next over-hyped bit of sportsball frenzy, the World Cup.  Then it will be time for the NFL pre-season, then the MLB playoffs leading to the so-called World Series, then the NBA should start up again.......

Panem et circenses, anyone?  And the beat goes on........

-"BB"-

[MajGenl.Meade]

Supremely indifferent, LJ. Now, THIS was a real man's game:

Siya Kolisi celebrated becoming South Africa’s first black Test captain by leading his country to a thrilling 42-39 triumph over England on Saturday in the first Test in Johannesburg.

The Springboks’ expected renaissance under Rassie Erasmus took a while to get going but when it did, it was met with thunderous approval.

The Boks came from 24-3 down to win the opening Test against England and although they dominated the middle stages of the match they were required to hang on grimly at the end against a game England team.

[RayThom]

Siya Kolisi celebrated becoming South Africa’s first black Test captain by leading his country to a thrilling 42-39 triumph over England on Saturday in the first Test in Johannesburg.

A test? Big whoop! So when do they play the real game?

[Lord Jim]

I think this is the game where the guys put on short-shorts and then do a group a hug....

[MajGenl.Meade]

Siya Kolisi celebrated becoming South Africa’s first black Test captain by leading his country to a thrilling 42-39 triumph over England on Saturday in the first Test in Johannesburg.

A test? Big whoop! So when do they play the real game?

A test is when two international teams representing their countries play a series of games against each other. Of course, USians wouldn't know about that because (with the exception of soccer) y'all don't have any teams that represent the country and play against other countries - y'all just play each other and slap the word "World" in front of the games.

[Big RR]

Not entirely true--baseball uses "world", but then there's no other teams that can compete against the US teams in that sport (remember the hue and cry when it was tried to be entered as an Olympic sport? Race walking and other fairly local sports fine, but no baseball). Football (our football) doesn't use "world", but again no country has even tried to field a team. Basketball also doesn't use "world" for its championships, but how many olympic teams grab NBA players every 4 years. Hockey is more international, and we have both a national team, as well as US and Canadian teams comprised of people from all over (and again, it doesn't use "world" in its championships)

[ex-khobar Andy]

Siya Kolisi celebrated becoming South Africa’s first black Test captain by leading his country to a thrilling 42-39 triumph over England on Saturday in the first Test in Johannesburg.

A test? Big whoop! So when do they play the real game?

Bad weekend for English sport all around. England lost to RSA in the rugby; Lewis Hamilton could only manage a 5th place in the Canadian GP and hence lost his world championship lead to Vettel; and England lost to Scotland (!!!!) in the cricket. OK so I'm Welsh for the rugby, Scottish for the football and English for the cricket. I may have to rethink this.

[RayThom]

... A test is when two international teams representing their countries play a series of games against each other. Of course, USians wouldn't know about that because (with the exception of soccer) y'all don't have any teams that represent the country and play against other countries - y'all just play each other and slap the word "World" in front of the games.

Now I get it. Just like intramural sports in high school.

[MajGenl.Meade]

Not entirely true--baseball uses "world", but then there's no other teams that can compete against the US teams in that sport (remember the hue and cry when it was tried to be entered as an Olympic sport? Race walking and other fairly local sports fine, but no baseball). Football (our football) doesn't use "world", but again no country has even tried to field a team. Basketball also doesn't use "world" for its championships, but how many olympic teams grab NBA players every 4 years. Hockey is more international, and we have both a national team, as well as US and Canadian teams comprised of people from all over (and again, it doesn't use "world" in its championships)

Oh pshaw and pshish! You know very well that NFL and NBA teams consider themselves "world" champions if they win their respective sports highest USA trophy. You've seen the banners and heard the hype. Even the Australians don't think that winning Aussie-rules football makes them "world champions".

Olympic teams don't "grab" NBA players - them is USian/furriners who choose to play for the furrin national teams (Italy couldn't "grab" LeBron 'cos he aint Eyetalian). There are 108 furrin players in the NBA from 42 countries.

Now the USA basketball team - world champions (if they bothered entering the world championships which they don't).

You have one real world champion team - and it's in women's soccer. They really do take on the world. Be proud!

Oh and I suppose Little League once in a while.

[Big RR]

them is USian/furriners who choose to play for the furrin national teams (Italy couldn't "grab" LeBron 'cos he aint Eyetalian). There are 108 furrin players in the NBA from 42 countries.

I guess it depends how you define "foreigners"; true they must have some claim to the ex-U citizenship, but they do not need to have been born there or have even visited the country--an Italian grandparent (who might have even been naturalized a US citizen) is enough. and if the players weren't generally the best in the world, why would the ex-US countries US this distant tenuous connection to recruit them? After all, some of their are players are part of championship (even word championship) teams.

Even the Australians don't think that winning Aussie-rules football makes them "world champions".

I'll take your word for that, but then neither do NFL players (I guess we hear different hype. Although I would maintain both are world champions in their particular sport. Just because the rest of the world cannot or will not field competitive teams in these sports is no reason to denigrate their achievements. FWIW, how many of the cricket championship countries are former British commonwealth countries--it is really that much different for India to be playing England than for California to be playing NY?

FWIW, I have nothing against world championships and national all-star teams (and will be watching the world cup), nor do I have anything against league pay in or among countries. And I cannot see how the only way to say you are the word champion requires head to head play in a special tournament; quality play day in and day out should be recognized as well (and often is); the best team does not always wing the championship--and the World Cup champions are just that, not necessarily the best soccer team in the world (ditto for Olympic champs). A great achievement which should be celebrated for what it is, and not hyped into more.

[MajGenl.Meade]

Well, Big RR, some people enjoy playing for "their" country (and I wrote USIAN slash Furriners, respecting the grandparent thing) and choose to join real international competition and enjoy a chance to become a world champion. A real one. There isn't a world USA basketball team in the FIB. OTOH, I bet not many bother to go join Italy or Germany or wherever. Season's long enough here.

I'd not denigrate the achievements of the Superbowl champs, or the NBA or the MLB winners - they just are not world champs no matter how often they say it. (And why is it MLB Baseball? That's as bad as ATM Machines .....bunny trail)

Had to laugh at comparing England vs. India with NY vs California. Not sure who should feel insulted about that; you know India is a different country, right? Even I'd not accuse California of being a different country. . . oh, maybe you have a point.

You know, the NBA has floated a Jnr NBA World Championship with teams all over the globe (that round thing that looks really blue from American space) - may be a real world champion. But, semantically, if they think there is a "Junior" world championship, do you think there's a "Senior" one?

DALLAS (Reuters) - The winner of the Super Bowl will be declared the ‘world champions’, a title sometimes mocked by non-Americans but one that NFL players seem to relish. Quarterback Ben Roethlisberger said he loves the label. “It’s awesome, that’s what we tell the young guys - if you win this game, you are the best of the best, the best football team in the world,” he said.

Although American football is broadcast around the world, professional teams are scarce outside of the United States, especially since the 2007 demise of the NFL Europe league. That leads some, even those close to ‘world champions’ themselves, to question whether the title is accurate.

“My wife is, ‘How can you guys be world champs when other countries don’t play football?’ She gives me trouble about that,” Steelers tight end Heath Miller, whose wife Katie played soccer at youth international level for the United States, told Reuters.

The moniker originates from the first three Super Bowls, before the full merger of the old AFL and NFL, when the occasion was labeled the AFL-NFL World Championship game.

[Big RR]

Had to laugh at comparing England vs. India with NY vs California. Not sure who should feel insulted about that; you know India is a different country, right? Even I'd not accuse California of being a different country. . . oh, maybe you have a point.

Ok, I tis independent of England, but it wasn't always so; and many of the cricket countries recognize the same head of state as England, do they not? Maybe it's more like NY and Puerto Rico, or Guam, or USVI? The point is that California is part of the US in the same way that India was part of the British commonwealth--certainly India is an independent country now, so it's not an identical situation, but I just wanted to point out that many of these countries were part of the same commonwealth and were not independent countries (indeed, aren't some of the competitor among the British Virgin Islands?

as for international competition, who is the world champion--the Olympic or world cup champ? Are the national all star teams superior to the league teams (e.g. is the Spanish team superior to Real Madrid or Barcelona). should the world champion be the best team in the world based on a season (or seasons) of play or based on play in a single tournament?

FWIW, back before the Super Bowl, the NFL named its champion based on season play, not based on play in a small series of games (as the old saying goes, on any given Sunday any team can beat any other team), and a number of diehards say we should go back to that (fat chance with all the revenue the Super Bowl generates).

[Long Run]

FWIW, back before the Super Bowl, the NFL named its champion based on season play, not based on play in a small series of games (as the old saying goes, on any given Sunday any team can beat any other team), and a number of diehards say we should go back to that (fat chance with all the revenue the Super Bowl generates).

Actually, the NFL had a championship game, pitting the winner of each division (East/West were the divisions before the Super Bowl) against each other. That is why the Baltimore Colts versus the New York Giants in the first overtime championship game in 1958 was considered the greatest game ever played. But you are correct, there was not a prolonged post-season, just the one championship game (like the World Series was the AL season leader against the NL season leader before 1969).

[Big RR]

I checked that and you are correct LR; I never really looked into it but I recall many men my father's age saying that the team with the best record in season play was champion; I never realized that this changed when they were young, I took it as a given that this lasted until the late 60s. you learn something every day--at least I do. Thanks.

[ex-khobar Andy]

FWIW, back before the Super Bowl, the NFL named its champion based on season play, not based on play in a small series of games (as the old saying goes, on any given Sunday any team can beat any other team), and a number of diehards say we should go back to that (fat chance with all the revenue the Super Bowl generates).

Actually, the NFL had a championship game, pitting the winner of each division (East/West were the divisions before the Super Bowl) against each other. That is why the Baltimore Colts versus the New York Giants in the first overtime championship game in 1958 was considered the greatest game ever played. But you are correct, there was not a prolonged post-season, just the one championship game (like the World Series was the AL season leader against the NL season leader before 1969).

Using football (i.e., soccer) as an example most national leagues have a season (league) competition and a cup competition. In England there are two champions every years - the winner of the Premier League (40-odd games over the course of the season) and the winner of the FA Cup (a single match knockout which takes place throughout the season). Any team in the country can enter the FA cup so in theory Ditchling United could fluke their way through a few knockout stages and meet Man U in the semifinals for a glorious once in a lifetime payday. And every now and then some team does the double and wins both league and cup. The NHL has the President's trophy for the team with the best regular season record, but no-one remembers who wins that because it is overshadowed by Lord Stanley's little knick-knack. Personally I think that the President's Trophy is more indicative of the best team in hockey for the year than Stanley's prize; and for most European and S American soccer teams I think the league, not the cup, is the more desirable trophy.

[rubato]

We need some better hockey team names like "the implants" "the appliances" or "the bridges"


yrs,
rubato

[wesw]

I m with ovechkin...., why waste money on implants until he retires.....