Football and basketball are two of the most common sports that are played in many parts of the world. For an individual who is torn between selecting which of the two sports he should play, it can be very helpful to know the characteristics of the two sports and compare these qualities in order to select the one that interests a particular person the most. One of the most obvious differences between the two sports lies in the way they are played. While football is in most cases played outdoors in areas that may not necessarily have artificial lighting or controlled temperatures, basketball is mostly played in indoor fields that have both artificial lighting and temperature control. The size of the football field is also several times bigger than that of basketball.
The other difference lies in the way the players interact with the ball. In football, the ball is played by fumbling, while in basketball, the ball is played by bouncing the ball up and down on the floor repeatedly in an action known as dribbling. In football, the main objective of the game is to capture the territory of the opposing team in ten yard segments, eventually driving the ball to the opposing team’s end zone. In basketball, the main aim is to throw the ball as many ways as possible into the opposing team’s basket, given that the more baskets a team makes, the higher the score.
Another major difference is that physical contact between basketball players of opposing teams is highly discouraged and may actually result in a foul. This is especially the case when a player knocks another player of the opposing team to the floor. In football, contact is highly encouraged.
Contact in football is referred to as a tackle. Another difference between the two sports is way players dress. While basketball players adorn vests as the uniform of the game, football players are usually dressed in long sleeved t-shirts and trousers. They also wear helmets to protect their heads during tough tackles. Another notable difference between the two sports is why a player may be suspended from the game. The most common reason behind players being ruled out of a basketball game is the fouls that they cause, but in football, injuries are the most common reasons that remove players from the game. The kind of scores in each of the games also differs greatly. In football, 3 is the least number of points that the opposing team can score at a single time, while in basketball, 3 is the most a player can score at a time. Finally, the origin of each of the games also differs. While football is thought to have originated in the early 1900s as a violent collegiate sport for men, basketball is believed to have originated from a gymnastics practice for women.
You can enjoy our professional essay service which can help with writing your comparison essay on Football and Basketball. Get 100% original custom compare and contrast essay written from scratch!
0.00 avg. rating (0% score) - 0 votes
Back to blogNov 27, 2014
Filed under: Example Papers — Tags: comparison essay, football and basketball essay, sports essay — Joan Young @ 8:50 am
I AM not in the habit of answering moot questions, so it comes as a surprise to learn that the proposition that football outranks baseball requires any defense.
Having played and observed both sports, I have always instinctively counted football as better. As a schoolboy in Fort Worth, I learned my football in the most torrid of football systems, the Texas Interscholastic League. At the same time, owing to my older brother's penchant for baseball, I became immersed in that sport as well. For many a season I rooted for the Fort Worth Cats, the Brooklyn Dodgers' affiliate in the Texas League that provided the requisite apprenticeship for the likes of Carl Erskine, Irv Noren, Dick Williams and Duke Snider, all early heroes of mine. On the sandlots (aptly named), I played third base and shortstop for the Panther Boys Club, a recreation-league team that served to hone my brother's considerable skills at managing baseball (seeing the light, however, he chose law).
Looking back, those were glorious, unfettered days of youth and of another age, when football and baseball could be played and enjoyed unburdened by the sort of venal environment that threatens them today. Given this early balance of involvement with the two sports, why is it that I think football the better sport, indeed why is it so? Upon reflection, this is not simply a question of comparing apples with oranges (or pigskins). I believe that the appeal of sports is rooted deeply in the human psyche, conditioned and animated there by fundamental competitive traits that have shaped our evolution as a surviving species. Surely, Vince Lombardi's ''winning is the only thing'' echoes this idea to an extreme. The idea not only explains our attraction to sport as players, it also underlies our vicarious behavior as fans. (Though it fails to explain the peculiar crowd reaction at baseball games known as the ''seventh inning stretch''; probably, this is a mask for a collective yawn.) So this nonissue boils down to which sport resonates more successfully with our psychological conditioning. As a moment's thought makes clear, football appeals to those of us who are conditioned to appreciate variety and excitement, while baseball's adherents are apparently drawn to a slow sort of sameness.
History records these distinctions from medieval times, when kicking an inflated pigskin between villages was a preferred activity (there is no mention of playing fungo apples). Later, in 18th century England, rugby came to the fore as a man's sport, while baseball's progenitor, cricket, felt the need to spell its interminable activities with afternoon teas. It was the genius of Walter Camp at Yale that shaped football from the clay of rugby while, as we have recently learned from Tass, modern baseball may well be a product of the Russian proletariat. Perhaps that explains why professional baseball wages are on average far less per contest than are those of professional football.
But enough of generalities. What specific ingredients of football elevate it over baseball? Let us examine first the fundamental skills common to both sports, running and throwing. Clearly, football demands a greater variety of running skills by a halfback (or even a lineman) than does baseball of any of its positions. Further, no part of the gridiron is denied, a priori, to the halfback, while in baseball the batter is constrained, much as a hamster in an exercise cage, to circle the diamond ad infinitum in counterclockwise fashion. Such perverse sinistrality, which in the days of the Spanish Inquisition would have inevitably led to the stake, may have the effect today of producing baseball players whose right legs are somewhat longer than their left ones.Continue reading the main story