Sports that you've learned to love later in life

[Julian87]

I put so much time and mental energy into the two sports I properly follow that doing anything more than casually following something else seems like too great an ordeal for me to really follow through with. I think in theory I could really enjoy baseball, rugby union and American football but I've only really dabbled on the outskirts of occasionally watching them.

This is pretty much me as well.

I used to semi enjoy watching many other sports like soccer, formula 1, tennis, AFL and union. But now pretty much only rugby league and cricket.

 

[ronharry033]

I never thought I'd get into cricket, but it slowly grew on me—the strategy, the pacing, the drama! It's funny how tastes evolve. Like how I used to overlook packaging, but now I notice great custom print boxes everywhere—they really elevate a product's appeal. Funny what you learn to love!

 

[Ali TT]

Wtf

 

[Coronis]

Would NBA count at the elderly age of 20?

 

[Molehill]

Would NBA count at the elderly age of 20?

This would be the opposite for me, a sport I’ve learned to loathe. Quite liked it as a kid, just cannot abide it now.

 

[sledger]

This would be the opposite for me, a sport I’ve learned to loathe. Quite liked it as a kid, just cannot abide it now.

How come?

 

[Furball]

I find scoring points is almost meaningless given how often it happens.

 

[Coronis]

I find scoring points is almost meaningless given how often it happens.

I mean, one could argue the same about cricket and runs, for that matter.

 

[ripper868]

You could, but the runs aren't as easy to come by as points are in NBA. A low scoring NBA game is rare these days, and generally, games don't reach a point where misses 'matter' until mid 4th quarter, which leaves 3.5 quarters of pretty mid back n forth with some highlight dunks/3s thrown in.

That said, it's been yeeears since I watched a full nba game. It just feels real sterile whenever I see it these days.

 

[Furball]

I mean, one could argue the same about cricket and runs, for that matter.

It's why I was less of a fan of the shorter formats.

 

[Ali TT]

You could, but the runs aren't as easy to come by as points are in NBA. A low scoring NBA game is rare these days, and generally, games don't reach a point where misses 'matter' until mid 4th quarter, which leaves 3.5 quarters of pretty mid back n forth with some highlight dunks/3s thrown in.

That said, it's been yeeears since I watched a full nba game. It just feels real sterile whenever I see it these days.

The change in the game in the last decade has made it less interesting in my view but the 7 game playoff series are like 5 test series in cricket in that you get to see ebbs and flow in momentum, interesting match ups between players and the psychology of keep having to turn up and perform under increasing pressure.

 

[Coronis]

The change in the game in the last decade has made it less interesting in my view but the 7 game playoff series are like 5 test series in cricket in that you get to see ebbs and flow in momentum, interesting match ups between players and the psychology of keep having to turn up and perform under increasing pressure.

I’d completely agree with this actually. A lot of the regular season is just not worth watching. But that feels like its been the case for a bit.

 

[ripper868]

The change in the game in the last decade has made it less interesting in my view but the 7 game playoff series are like 5 test series in cricket in that you get to see ebbs and flow in momentum, interesting match ups between players and the psychology of keep having to turn up and perform under increasing pressure.

Oh for sure, the BO7 playoffs in NBA and NHL are great for the sub-plots that develop. I'm a big enjoyer of the NHL and will regularly tune in for playoff games (when I can because timezones) but if it's my team, I'll pay for the months subscription and deal with being tired at work....my team did not make playoffs this year (Rangers).

 

[Molehill]

I find scoring points is almost meaningless given how often it happens.

You score, we score, you score, we score….

That and the orchestrated time running out, who scores last wins. It feels like some cheap Hollywood drama, will they stop the bomb in time before the clock runs out? Who cares!

 

[GIMH]

I mean, one could argue the same about cricket and runs, for that matter.

Yeah but the wickets element balances that out

 

[BoyBrumby]

It's not that high scoring sports (looking at you here basketball and Aussie rules) are necessarily worse (or better) than lower scoring ones, I just think what one is raised on plays a massive part in determining one's preference though.

Being raised on association football, which is (probably?) uniquely low scoring and consequently has a massive premium on goals, it seems odd watching sports where each side routinely score 100 points.

Someone (I think it was Barney Ronay, but apologies to whoever else it was if it wasn't him) said something that I always thought was pretty on the money: in Aussie rules a goal is a kiss on the lips; in (association) football it's an orgasm.

Incidentally I tried to search for the quote's author for proper attribution and AI's reply quite tickled me:


How marvellously literal.

 

[GIMH]

Reads like a Richard post

 

[Ali TT]

It's not that high scoring sports (looking at you here basketball and Aussie rules) are necessarily worse (or better) than lower scoring ones, I just think what one is raised on plays a massive part in determining one's preference though.

Being raised on association football, which is (probably?) uniquely low scoring and consequently has a massive premium on goals, it seems odd watching sports where each side routinely score 100 points.

Someone (I think it was Barney Ronay, but apologies to whoever else it was if it wasn't him) said something that I always thought was pretty on the money: in Aussie rules a goal is a kiss on the lips; in (association) football it's an orgasm.

Incidentally I tried to search for the quote's author for proper attribution and AI's reply quite tickled me:

View attachment 48224
How marvellously literal.

Across a lot of sports there's been a move to higher and/or faster scoring. This is especially true in basketball, American football and cricket, possibly also rugby union but less so football (can't speak for AFL). This has probably made them more entertaining to many but I think loses some of the intensity and intrigue when there's more of a balance between offence and defence.

With basketball, I don't recognise that it's only a we score - you score back-and-forth. People who say that probably think Americans can't deal with cricket because baseball is a game for people with short attention spans. There's usually quite a few shifts in momentum in basketball as teams adjust tactics and players during the game with streaks and runs, back-and-forths and even defence-on-top scoring-comes-to-a-standstill periods. However, the modern version, where each team has a bunch of shooters that can knock down 3s at any point, has made games a bit more samey.

 

[GIMH]

I don't know the stats but I feel like there are far fewer 0-0 draws than there used to be. I kind of assumed football was a bit higher scoring than a decade or two ago, albeit not as high scoring as it once was

 

[Furball]

I don't know the stats but I feel like there are far fewer 0-0 draws than there used to be. I kind of assumed football was a bit higher scoring than a decade or two ago, albeit not as high scoring as it once was

Certainly true of major tournament football as a whole, and most of the rule changes in the last 30 years have been made with an aim of encouraging attacking play.