--DoReFuckMi--

--DoReFuckMi-- OP t1_j67e76m wrote

Reply to comment by OregonKlee8367 in Everyone is wrong about footballs, it is neither the shape of a ball nor does it have any feet. by --DoReFuckMi--

Quoted from gang green nation:

"It is widely assumed that the word "football" (or "foot ball") references the action of the foot kicking a ball. There is an alternative explanation, which is that football originally referred to a variety of games in Medieval Europe, which were played on foot. There is no conclusive evidence for either explanation."

Nothing to do with length. A ball is a sphere, not oval, HANDOVAL!!

1

--DoReFuckMi-- OP t1_j67dm0s wrote

Reply to comment by tyrant454 in Everyone is wrong about footballs, it is neither the shape of a ball nor does it have any feet. by --DoReFuckMi--

This is stated by "gang green nation"

"It is widely assumed that the word "football" (or "foot ball") references the action of the foot kicking a ball. There is an alternative explanation, which is that football originally referred to a variety of games in Medieval Europe, which were played on foot. There is no conclusive evidence for either explanation."

So nothing to do with the length, but STILL, for a sport derived by sports that involved kicking and feet action, handovals are handled by hands more than feet

1

--DoReFuckMi-- OP t1_j677ko5 wrote

Reply to comment by Zestyclose_Judge614 in Everyone is wrong about footballs, it is neither the shape of a ball nor does it have any feet. by --DoReFuckMi--

Exactly! For a ball that has any relation with a foot on a short and small occasion that only happens a couple times a game at least, it sure is handled by hands more. I think it should be called the handoval, cause it's oval shaped and spheres aren't oblong

1