I guess we should never criticize anything. Everything is shitty in one way or another. You're right. See you in the middle school lunchroom.

He's been a fugitive from the US for 40 years. Nobody let him off the hook is the point, and just because he's not in jail doesn't mean he's not been punished.

Well, it's your life. I guess people who actually boycott certain products on principal are just suckers wasting their time? Because if they really thought about it they'd have to boycott everything? Nice logic. Do you like Ayn Rand?

1. Roman Polanksi wasn't let off the hook, obviously…bad example
2. You or I are not OK with sweatshop conditions in China, but owning an iPhone is still tacit acceptance of these things. You could actually, believe it or not, choose to not have an iPhone. Just like animal rights people choose to be vegan. You could…

No, you can't say that about anything. Only about things of similar scale and severity. Which there aren't a ton.

So you don't think doping is widespread, and even if someone does it, it's not an advantage? You're an incredible apologist

All you sports defenders…are you OK with players getting away with beating their spouse (even when it's caught on camera) because owners are willing to pull strings to protect their assets? Probably not. But apparently things like this are an acceptable trade-off if Cleveland can temporarily feel warm and sunny.

Just because I pointed out that there is bad to go along with the good, it's quite a leap for you guys to bring that to "well if that's true then nothing matters." As I pointed out below, it's an issue of scale, frequency and severity.

That's a bad argument. Of course nothing is perfect or without negative outcomes. It's an issue of scale and frequency. I would argue that professional sports are, at this point, more of a function of capitalism and corporatism than pure actual sportsmanship. That's my issue and I've never heard a compelling argument…

OK, "half" is hyperbole but if you don't think doping is a widespread issue in all major sports you're dreaming. The point is, it's widespread enough that anytime an athlete performs well, due diligence requires that you consider the fact they might be doping…which is very sad

1. If you go past the folklore and read about the Rite of Spring premiere, it wasn't actually a "riot," more like a bunch of people cat-calling and a handful of them throwing things at the stage. Nothing like 50,000 people stampeding in a soccer stadium
2. Even so, that is a notable exception, things like that almost…

OK, we're getting somewhere and I can see what you're saying, even if I don't feel those things. My original point was that if the author wants to write about why sports matter, the kind of things you're talking about are more convincing than just citing Cleveland, which feels like an "ends justify the means" approach.

Yes, but the same forces that brought Cleveland together, have also resulted
in people being trampled to death or outright murdered at soccer
events. Some occasional good stuff does not negate all the shittiness that also goes along with sports. Also, half of them are doping anyway. Don't be so rosey-eyed.

I do own a tv, but see nothing inherently pompous about not owning one
or thinking that's a better lifestyle choice. If you do, then — again
— that's on you and your attitude. You realize you have a choice about what you get worked up about, right? Maybe you should be more discriminating.

But why are they aesthetically pleasing? That's what I want to know. Defend your position. You probably think I'm just trolling you at this point but I'm sincere. Why are sports moments pleasing? Don't just say "the same reason you like art," that's a cop-out. They're apples and oranges.

I think one problem is the assumption that anyone who questions sports
or expresses their apathy toward it, is trying to be "above it all."
I've never used "sportsball" but very occasionally (like once every year or
two) posted something making fun of my own lack of interest/knowledge in
sports…joking that I don't…

(sigh) Let's try this again, you smarmy cocktrumpet. Why do you feel a thrill watching a brilliant goal/home run/game winning moment? Why is Gretzky a Picasso of the ice?

How do those players represent you, what does that mean? And if they are representing you, why do you take pride in them? You're still not understanding the fundamental nature of my question. And I'm still wondering if you read my post.

I don't see the tweets, or your Game of Thrones example, as pompous - at least not without a lot more context. On their own they are pretty vague, so that we should probably give them the benefit of the doubt (good humor) rather than reading into them to find negativity. That reaction speaks to your own jadedness more…

Those tweets in the article are so benign. People are poking fun at their own out-of-the-loop-ness for not liking sports. The last one is just expressing sincere confusion at it all.