June 19th, 2010
02:02 PM ET

Why Wimbledon is better than the World Cup

Wimbledon's big screen will not show any football during the tournament.
Wimbledon's big screen will not show any football during the tournament.

London, England - With all the hype surrounding the World Cup in South Africa, it is easy to forget that there are other major sporting events taking place this summer. Wimbledon, the world’s oldest and most prestigious tennis tournament, has found itself unfortunately sandwiched into the middle two weeks of the biggest sporting competition on the planet.

However, officials at the All England Club have declared the Championships a soccer-free zone, choosing to show only tennis on the venue’s big screen during the June 21-July 4 event. There will be no screenings even of any of England’s World Cup matches which may fall during the Wimbledon fortnight.

The decision is unpopular - but the fact is that tennis deserves to remain the center of attention during its own tournament. Tennis doesn’t need to try and compete with football, but if it did, it would surely win hands down. Here are five reasons why.

1. No honking of vuvuzelas
For those who have been outraged by the noise coming from their television sets the last week or so, it is important to know that the vuvuzela, or any similarly noisy instrument, would never be allowed anywhere near the gates of Wimbledon. Those looking for some respite from the continuous drone of the plastic horn - which is driving everyone to distraction in South Africa and slowly deafening the rest of us watching from home - need look to no further than the lawns of SW19 in south-west London.

The crowd might increase in volume when home favorite Andy Murray steps onto the court, but mostly audience participation will be refined to polite clapping, and the occasional "oooh" or "aaah" at a particularly magnificent shot.

2. Someone always wins
So far the World Cup has proved to be  a non-event, with six of the first 13 games ending in draws and eight of the first 16 featuring just one goal or less. A tennis match always has a winner. You are guaranteed a minimum three sets of action in the men's singles and at least two with the women.

Soccer fans often leave the stands before the end of the match if their team is losing, but you would never see anyone leaving Wimbledon until rain or bad light forces them to do so. It's proof that it is much more exciting to watch a sport where you have to stay to the end, because with no time limit, you have no idea who is going to win until the final ball has been hit.

3. The golden era
Tennis is experiencing one of the greatest eras in its history, with the Federer/Nadal rivalry at the top of the men's game providing excitement and spectacular matches.

The last few Wimbledon finals have seen some of the greatest match-ups in the history of sport, with the 2008 Nadal-Federer clash widely considered the best of all time. And with the rest of the field now raising their game to compete with the top two players, even early-round matches rarely disappoint fans.

You have to go a long way back before you can bestow the same praise on any World Cup final. The reason no-one has any idea who is going to win the World Cup this time is because no one team really stands out over any other - a fact reflected in the number of draws so far, as well as the poor performances of favored teams such as Spain and England in their opening matches.

4. It's more international
While just 32 teams represent their countries at the World Cup, more than 500 tennis players from all over the world take part in the Wimbledon Championships in men's, women's, doubles, junior and veteran competitions. Last year, participants came from as far and wide as Uzbekistan, Finland, Kazakhstan, the Philippines and the Netherlands Antilles to south-west London, giving fans everywhere someone to cheer during the tournament.

In the World Cup qualifying nations normally come from the traditional footballing heartlands of Europe and South America, as do the winners. Only seven countries have ever lifted the trophy but players from 15 countries have won either the men's or women's titles at Wimbledon.

5. A class above
Finally, tennis is generally a much more civilized sport than football. You don’t play in the rain, the cold or the dark, and the players themselves are usually better behaved than soccer players.

You won’t see any tennis spectators fighting in the stands or rioting on the streets if a result has not gone their way either. Rather than watching a game fueled by beer, spectators at Wimbledon can be seen quietly tucking in to a bowl of strawberries and cream, in full appreciation of the sport being played in front of them.

So these are my five reasons why Wimbledon beats the World Cup hands down - but what do you think?

Posted by ,
Filed under:  Football • Tennis
soundoff (193 Responses)
  1. eric

    are you trying to convince us or yourself?

    June 19, 2010 at 3:59 pm | Reply
  2. Jack Sniper

    Football rocks man!!

    June 19, 2010 at 4:09 pm | Reply
  3. Neil Casey

    So basically tennis is the game for the toffs, football the game for the great unwashed.

    This is one of the most cringe-inducingly snobbish pieces of writing I have ever seen.

    June 19, 2010 at 4:13 pm | Reply
  4. RayF

    You have just give 5 reasons why the World Cup beats Wimbledon!
    In addition – in football
    a) no team ever totally ouclasses the other team for one poortion of the game (read set), then goes on to lose woefully in the next part.
    b) I have never seen a soccer player explain to the ref that hes sorry but he nevre went to the loo before the game so can they just stop the game while he leaves to relieve himself
    c) can you just imagine the whole game being stopped while the trainer gets called on and gives a relaxing massage for ten minutes!

    Lastly, what sort of exitement can you call it when the "fan" is able to contain himself totally, not even wiggle in his seat until a goal is scored. He then has a measured time to express him/herself and then politely sit down and wait for the next "exitement

    June 19, 2010 at 4:26 pm | Reply
  5. Garrett

    I didn't know CNN had a humor section!

    June 19, 2010 at 4:28 pm | Reply
  6. gitano

    Wimbledon is also great, but... with all due respect, Mrs Helen Chandler does not know what she is talking about. This tipe of comments w. no serious basis, is the reason for soccer not being popular in USA.

    June 19, 2010 at 4:29 pm | Reply
  7. Hendriks

    This article is bogus, the World Cup is much better than Wimbledon hands down. Just check the sheer number of world viewers in the WC.

    June 19, 2010 at 4:32 pm | Reply
  8. Celia

    Rubbish!! Count the number of persons watching each of the 2 events and then get over yourself!!! LOL!!!!

    June 19, 2010 at 4:32 pm | Reply
  9. BAR

    you are so wrong. the world cup happens once every four years and its the most popular sports.

    June 19, 2010 at 4:34 pm | Reply
  10. RealityCheck

    26 billion of viewers..period.

    June 19, 2010 at 4:35 pm | Reply
  11. Rick

    While I agree with some of your 5 reasons and also love tennis, your last reason explains precisely why football is the greatest sport on planet Earth: because it is played and watched by all people, not only by the elite.

    June 19, 2010 at 4:38 pm | Reply
  12. Ashley

    Personally, I love FIFA and the World Cup, but I will be watching Wimbledon as well. Tennis is a great sport.

    I think trying to elevate it to some superior level above soccer is sort of like comparing apples to oranges. It's all tastes. Sometimes people want to go to a "game fueled by beer", other times, maybe not.

    I'm in the states, and there is the constant debate about how American football is somehow superior to world football. It's ridiculous. It's all personal taste.

    Why does it have to be one or the other? I like both, they are both different games, so one really can't be "better than the other" because while at their core they may be sports, how they go about "sporting" is total different. You can't really compare them unless you have a normative platform by which to define "good sports" and "bad sports."

    June 19, 2010 at 4:47 pm | Reply
  13. Ozzscot

    Tennis has to be one of the most overrated games around. It is dieing out here in Australia with less and less people playing it every year, a fact confirmed by the Australian tennis federation who do not know how to reverse the decline. You just can't compare a team sport like football which is growing exponentally every year to a game similar to ping pong.

    June 19, 2010 at 4:53 pm | Reply
  14. Alvaro

    What???

    And who exactly made you the jury of whats best and whats not?.

    Football is the game of the world, and Americans SUCK at it (i would love to see them qualify if they had to face Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay or Chile in the qualifiers......)

    On the other hand, America is regarded for their tennis, and deservedly so, but come on, this is just a message to the public to guide their attention in competitions in which the USA has more chances to win. Is that simple.

    Point No. 1: To be happy and to express it is GOOD rather than bad. The noisiest crowds are those from the countries with most titles (italy, Brazil, Argentina, etc) Its a sport, might as well watch it and be exited about it right? (but then again in the US people go to stadiums to drink beer and eat hot dogs so what am I talking about).

    Point 2: Football is about the exitment of every play, thats why the WORLD (sadly, not america) prefers it. Only an immature society would prefer quantity of points (like in American football, Basket, etc) over quality.

    Point 3: Ever heard of MESSI, C.RONALDO, KAKA, SPAIN??? ...golden era....

    Point 4: In order to even QUALIFY to the world cup, almost EVERY NATION ON EARTH competes in a period of 4 years. There, in your face.

    Point 5: Its a class above? right there you called Tennis an elitist game. Do I favor elitism?? dont think so.

    June 19, 2010 at 5:04 pm | Reply
  15. ranj

    Very true. And with hawkeye available at the players' disposal, there is a lesser chance of dodgy refereeing decisions going against them.
    And its also highly unlikely that 2 players will be challenging for the same ball as well as tugging and shirt-pulling at any point in time unless its a doubles match. And finally, diving(or simulation, as it is known in soccer) is unlikely to result in any favors from the umpire in a tennis match.

    June 19, 2010 at 5:18 pm | Reply
  16. Dan

    Stupid comment!
    The whole planet watches this event,. If you do not understand "soccer" then shut-up, period. Tennis is wonderful ( I like Nadal) but whether or not the american public likes is or not, that does not mean that the event is no 2 in the world right now. Wrong!
    Do not look only for ratings...

    June 19, 2010 at 5:19 pm | Reply
  17. Paul

    Agree for the most part, but I'd take a few pints with my tennis over strawberries any day.

    June 19, 2010 at 5:20 pm | Reply
  18. jorge sao

    Tennis is a "class above" ? serious ? Did you ever watch a game of John McEnroe ? 🙂

    Awesome feature you forget.... 5 hours to discover who win is a little to much for me pal.

    June 19, 2010 at 5:26 pm | Reply
  19. jsalsta

    wow... the article did ignore the fact that the World Cup is the most widely viewed sporting event in the world with an estimated 715.5 million people watching the final game in Germany 2006. Over 208 nations and territories compete over a period of two years to qualify to the final stage of the tournament, the actual world cup. This makes this tournament much more international than any tennis tournament.
    The fact that any team can win the World cup makes it even more exciting, in tennis its always the same: Federer or Nadal... boring.
    What a disappointment to see such an unprofessional and bias article on CNN.

    June 19, 2010 at 5:32 pm | Reply
  20. Roger de Vries

    This blog is full of facts!! Although I love the World Cup and want Holland to win, there's nothing more beautiful than watching Roger Federer on Wimbledon's grass.

    June 19, 2010 at 5:35 pm | Reply
  21. Jason

    Hi
    First,
    Are we really going to degrade ourselves to the level of 4 year olds claiming which sticker looks prettier? Or testosterone fueled 16 year olds seeing who can piss further?

    Second,
    I'm going to assume this a satire of anti-soccerists if you don't check you facts.

    In fact, I'll help you start:
    World Cup FINALS, World Cup starts with the qualification rounds throughout the world.
    William, "shove this ball down your throat"
    Safin, Hewitt, Roddick, McEnroe all threw fits, racquets and, words
    January 15, 2007 Croatian and Serbian tennis fans get in a fight at the Australian Opens, but you're the news so you already knew that right?

    Answering this doesn't help anything or anyone. You're entitled to your opinions and me to mine. But as a news source, please try to stay as objective as possible.

    Thank you,
    Jason

    June 19, 2010 at 6:03 pm | Reply
  22. Yoothana Mumme

    Remember...the World Cup is technically a 2 year event involving all FIFA member nations: about 205. The World Cup finals is actually the last 32 teams in the 2 years. Same goes for the Euros.

    But good for Wimbledon to have the big screens to only show tennis. They have all the right too.

    I will have to disagree with you on one topic. The World Cup is held every 4 years, while Wimbledon is on every year. So I think for those two weeks every 4 years, Wimbledon will most likely take a huge step back.

    June 19, 2010 at 6:06 pm | Reply
  23. langa

    what a wet-blanket report Helen, as for "tennis is more civilised" i say it's more of the same from the western press.

    June 19, 2010 at 6:15 pm | Reply
  24. Joaco

    Could not agree more !!!!

    June 19, 2010 at 6:15 pm | Reply
  25. noooooo

    let me guess...this is written by a white, probably rich guy who consideres himself better than the rest! Of all the things that might be wrong with football...you choose the vuvuzella to make a point why football is bad? please just leave africans in peace....you sound like a bigot...I guess the day more africans come on the tennis pitch then you will turn your back on tennis as well...maybe thats why you prefer tennis to football....because it is still a white sport, inspite of the william sisters.eat that!

    June 19, 2010 at 6:17 pm | Reply
  26. Ben

    Don't get me wrong, I grew up an avid tennis player as well as a footballer, but there is no comparing the World Cup to anything. It is simply in a league of its own when it comes to sport. Wimbledon is a fantastic tournament and its competitors top notch, but has it ever stopped a war?

    Cheers!

    June 19, 2010 at 6:18 pm | Reply
  27. Nostromo45

    Well, everyone is entitled to his/her opinion, however debatable that may be.
    Personally I have always preferred tennis, either masculine or feminine and I sit there on the edge of my seat watching exciting action from (usually) well-behaved sportsmen and women.
    So I go along with this article: football is rowdy, bawdy, uncouth, often uncivilised – players or crowd, very macho..... and boring.
    Oh, I am male, by the way... as if that mattered

    June 19, 2010 at 6:27 pm | Reply
  28. Hayley Alexander

    Spot On!

    June 19, 2010 at 6:41 pm | Reply
  29. astonysh

    You're entitled to your mistaken opinion.
    Men's tennis on grass is just about as boring as sports gets. A guy with a big serve hammering the ball down – if you get the occasionally rally, you are extremely lucky. The only game to capture the imagination is Federer against Nadal, and it takes two weeks to get there. On clay, on a hard court, OK you get some good games, but on grass – sorry, no.
    The women's game is more enjoyable and more competitive, and usually gets less attention for some reason. Even so I think, on balance the World Cup from the quarter-finals onwards will hold my attention more.

    June 19, 2010 at 6:43 pm | Reply
  30. MG

    cannot compare the two. for your correction ma'am, over 700 players in soccer represent the 32 countries. I am sure you are not suggesting that the 500 tennis players represent 500 countries.

    Vuvuzela 4 Life... si shay' ivuvuzela. Ayoba South Africa – Ayoba!

    June 19, 2010 at 6:48 pm | Reply
  31. Danny

    I see no one posted anything yet? Tennis is all well and fine but no French man going to take it home and cheer. Its just dull, while in world cup you feel joy with your TEAM and not person.

    June 19, 2010 at 6:54 pm | Reply
  32. roberto

    For those reasons it should remain an Englishman's sport ...

    June 19, 2010 at 6:58 pm | Reply
  33. gbm

    No honking of vuvuzelas – its part of football environment, you wouldn't understand.
    . Someone always wins – this does not matter for real football fans, only for americans.
    The golden era – every era is golden era in football.
    . It's more international – qualification matches take place all over the world before the world cup, is there an irani player in wimbledon or someone from Belize?
    A class above -all men sports play in the rain, snow, etc. expept for tennis (p u s s ....ies)

    June 19, 2010 at 7:12 pm | Reply
  34. Yumil Muro

    Those are 5 good reasons to like tennis but I have 25 to like football better.

    June 19, 2010 at 7:15 pm | Reply
  35. Gosego

    what??? i love both sports...tennis and soccer, each sport is beautiful in its own way, person who wrote this is very ignorant, first round is is about points so when the teams draw there each get 1 point and the top two teams in points move on to the next round and then the next round thats when teams get knocked out, come on now cnn come on!!!!!!

    June 19, 2010 at 7:27 pm | Reply
  36. sid skippy marcus

    100% absolutely correct. However, it takes a little more talent to play tennis compared to soccer. But most obvious it is much more interesting and much more enjoyable to see how the arms and the legs are in concert with ones body, where as in soccer the arms are basically usless.

    June 19, 2010 at 7:34 pm | Reply
  37. roger

    I agree. I am an avid soccer fan, but those vuvuzelas are outright obnoxious and are poisoning the game for me. Thank the heavens for Wimbledon and tennis, ...a life saver.

    June 19, 2010 at 7:36 pm | Reply
  38. Marcelo

    Wimbledon better than WC?
    I would assume you are not serious in this article, but nevertheless,
    do let me know what you smoked when you wrote it.

    June 19, 2010 at 7:46 pm | Reply
  39. Seb

    That is ridiculous! The world cup comes around every 4 YEARS, while there is a Wimbledon tournament every year. Plus, just the qualifing campaign to the WC creates much more of a hype internationally that wimbledon, which is a 2 weeks tournament. And how are vuvuzelas the #1 reason?? Please, they create an atmosphere of joy and excitement during the games, plus they add identity to this tournament in particular. Ohh and another thing: How come CNN has a "Who´s crateing world cup buzz?" blog everyday? Where the one for "Where´s wimbledon´s buzz?" And a final point: Someone always wins in the world cup, and the good part comes in the knock-out stages, when there´s teh penalty shoot-outs, and everybody is on the edge of their seats waiting to scream GOOOOLLL!!! When do u get that in a tennis match? Overall, the World cup trump Wimbledon every day! Just look at the TV ratings!

    June 19, 2010 at 7:57 pm | Reply
  40. Wishing

    Wimbledon better than the World Cup? In your dreams buddy – Look at the numbers of people showing up to a World Cup soccer match (60,000 or more) to a few hundreds in a tennis match... get a grip!

    June 19, 2010 at 8:09 pm | Reply
  41. JL the snail

    Dear Helen,

    Just as it is with many things in life, one man's meat is another's poison. It is simply a matter of personal preference and I am sure there are several strengths in both sports to prove/disprove your views.

    1) The vuvuzelas, although controversial, are far from being banes to
    everyone's existence. They are certainly loud, but have are culturally-linked to the host nation and continent. Arguably, the inclusion of the instrument in the world cup is a great show of how soccer/football is truly a global/inclusive sport.

    2) Someone always wins – how is the world cup a non-event with draws. The qualifying stages of the world cup finals are 'round-robin' in design (which gives teams the best chance possible in proving their 'worthiness' to advancing to the next round). If you would have taken the time to learn the design of the following quarter and semi-finals, as well as finals, you would have noticed that the aforementioned rounds are knock-out rounds, much like Wimbledon. Now as you know, some players/teams have good and bad days. Therefore, there are instances when draws in round-robin qualifiers could mean everything to a team's destiny in the following finals.

    3. The golden era – The Nadal-Federer clash is an epic battle between two men, but once again, this is only two men. With soccer, there are great teams as well who have won several world cups. I don't understand how you could say there is a lack of differentiation in the quality of the teams. once again, teams have good days and bad days and you do have have to also consider the fact that a draw is not counted as a wasted match, there are points for attaining a draw. How would you feel if your country, e.g. a small and relatively unknown country manages to achieve a draw with one of the greater, more popular teams, i bet you would definitely feel a sense of pride.

    4. It's more international – Your understanding of the World Cup appears to be solely-based on these finals and because of that they are quite inaccurate. Every country in the world with a soccer team participated in this world cup. Preliminary world cup qualifiers for this World Cup have been going on for the last two years comprised of matches from all countries in the world with soccer teams. Imagine that, every country listed under FIFA participating in the qualifiers with each country sending teams of at least 18 men. I'm sure the math would surprise you. I'm also sure that Uzbekistan, Finland, Kazakhstan, and the Philippines were also involved in those World Cup qualifiers.
    Additionally, the World Cup is held in various countries across the globe. Every year we see Wimbledon being played in... well, Wimbledon. How is that more international than a competition whose location is located every four years?

    5. A class above? This is terribly subjective and how can a truly international sport agree on a common definition of class? There are rotten apples, i.e. hooligans, that are associated with soccer fans. But there are also instances in which top tennis players have thrown awful tantrums at supporters, officials and their opponents during matches. I don't think I have to name names here.

    All in all, I will agree that there are strengths and weaknesses with both sporting events, but the criteria are as different as the people who have decided to establish such criteria. Instead of trying to gauge which sporting event is better, can't we all just enjoy these events for what they truly are about – competition among the world's finest sportspeople, and fantastic portrayals of the human spirit?

    June 19, 2010 at 8:10 pm | Reply
  42. steve Ortiz

    This article is so retarded. While it is true only 32 teams play in the World Cup all countries in the world go through elimination to make it to the World Cup. The qualification rounds is sort of like the regular season 3 years before the World Cup and once the World Cup starts it is like the playoffs where every team starts with a 0-0 record. I will agree the vuvuzuelas are annoying they are not present in every World Cup. Brazil 2014 will not have vuvuzuelas but Samba and Soccer and Samba go hand in hand.

    June 19, 2010 at 8:11 pm | Reply
  43. SS

    I think you are wrong

    June 19, 2010 at 8:11 pm | Reply
  44. Fire-ball

    What a lie, Wimbledon is ok, but does not even deserve to be compared to the great WORLD CUP. Dear miss Helen Chandler, pay more attention to your writings, turn on your TV and you see what is going on in the world today: SOCCER – Forget about tennis, wirte something about it after the World Cup ends.

    June 19, 2010 at 8:14 pm | Reply
  45. JK

    Helen with all due respect you have no idea of sports and your critical reasoning is questionable!

    1. Vuvuzelas – Some like it some don't. A very weak point.

    2. Football has league games as filtering process. Eventually some one will always win. In fact this allows a team more chances to improve and hence does more justice.

    3. You do not know who Argentina and Brazil are..right?

    4. International...haha...32 teams no doubt...but do you have any idea how many followers and fans!!!!!!!!!! You cannot count huh!

    5. Class...well don't start the class system in democratic world...it is very immature.

    June 19, 2010 at 8:29 pm | Reply
  46. Luis Craik

    Well, that's a nice list. However, tennis is really really boring. And that's why it will never be better than the World Cup. (Vuvuzela!!)

    June 19, 2010 at 8:47 pm | Reply
  47. Anon

    1. this is an incredibly weak argument, considering this is the first WC with the vuvuzelas (which, by the way, I don't mind at all, and none of my friends have complained about as much as you 'media types').

    2. Yea you're right, sometimes nobody wins the world cup. Rarely is there a championship match. Oh wait, you're completely wrong on that point as well. Round of 16 is single elimination, so there won't be any more ties. And just because you can't appreciate the beauty of a 1-0 game doesn't mean the rest of the world can't.

    3. So you're saying for a tournament to be interesting, there has to be a clear favorite? Sounds like another seriously flawed argument.

    4. The world cup is the most watched sporting event in the world. Also, 204 teams tried out for the cup, not just the 32 that advanced. It would be a year long competition if every single team was allowed to play. The only reason that many tennis players are allowed to play is because an overwhelming majority aren't televised. So if nobody sees them play, how is that international? Again, you lose.

    5. I'll concede this. I guess it comes with the territory considering my grandparents watch wimbledon.

    Weak weak weak. Don't try and knock the beautiful game, especially with such lackluster arguments.

    June 19, 2010 at 8:53 pm | Reply
  48. Avatar

    Comedy Gold this article

    Americans just need to say anything to criticize football ,the world's most popular sport and the world's most popular sport again🙂

    1- You said tennis to beat football and you mentioned vuvuzelas as if it's a common feature and always a part of the game of football. It's part of this WC -unfortunately- and that's it

    2-Someone always win the WC, the national league, the continental championship. SO what if single matches in league-like rounds cna end in draws? What's the big deal? At least that's better than the unfair act of giving a team in the NFL the attacking advantage when it goes to extra -time. As for "Soccer fans often leave the stands before the end of the match if their team is losin" , you just humiliated yourself. Don't talk about football if you don't watch it please

    3-Again you mentioned football, yet you're specifying the WC. Well considering that it seems you watch too few football matches, all the WC's are thrilling nd we always have real stars every tournament , that is, there's always a golden age of football

    4-Do you really think that all the world watch the Tennis matches. I don't think so even if a native of a country is playing. Football is the most popluar, that is watched by the whole world. WC ius the most popular tournament second only may be to the Olympics. That alone answers the "more international" claim.

    5- LOL ( So you're more civilized if you're "oh mom there's rain, I can't play?") And rioting, celebrating and all is what makes a sport means more thrilling, more exciting to watch . Compare that with a tennis player winning a GS. Reaction in the streets: None. So dull.

    BTW, I am Tennis fan, but I don't go writing articles and weird thoughts about it.

    June 19, 2010 at 8:54 pm | Reply
  49. TheG

    How could you compare tennis with the most anticipated tournament in the world? wimbledon its played once every year while the world cup its only every 4 years, in some countries when there team played there is no work everyone is watching the game. there is nothing to compare the world cup its better than wimbledon,

    June 19, 2010 at 8:56 pm | Reply
  50. Henk

    What Nonsense. World Cup beats tennis hands down any day. That`s why the Entire Planet is watching the World Cup and not Tennis.

    June 19, 2010 at 8:58 pm | Reply
  51. Les McBain

    Don't be daft – it's only tennis.

    June 19, 2010 at 8:58 pm | Reply
  52. Tommy

    you are nuts.world sport blog.

    June 19, 2010 at 9:07 pm | Reply
  53. Elvudu

    Most people (outside N.America) will not accept this! World Cup Soccer throughout many years have been Proven to be the Biggest Event Ever! Its even bigger than Olympics with the other Major sporting events combined! People living in North America cannot and should not make comments because soccer is totally unknown to them and should only comment on American football and baseball which they are good at and relatively unknown to the Rest of The World! We've got nothing against Wimbledon but Do Not Compare Soccer World Cup to anything else 'cause there is nothing like it!

    June 19, 2010 at 9:21 pm | Reply
  54. Peter Pinto

    I like both sports, but I have to tell you that the most exciting games i've ever seen have been the soccer ones.
    I bet Helen Chandler is the kind of person that only likes one sport.

    I saw the NBA finals, loved them. I'm still in love with soccer.
    Most popular game in the world!!!

    "tennis is generally a much more civilized sport than football" Ignorant statement. But hey, we have to tolerate your comments on CNN. Good luck

    June 19, 2010 at 9:24 pm | Reply
  55. Kevin Camilleri - Malta

    Well... Tennis is a sport for the elite, for the business man, and for the rich. Football or Soccer as it is called in the US, is the sport of the people, of the poor, of the middle class and of the rich. It is played with a normal ball, with a ball made of cloth, with any ball made of any material that can be kicked. Football is called the beautiful game... it is the biggest sport on the planet, joins a whole nation, irrespective of color and belief. Football is by far the best sport. Sorry – a sport is someone that anybody can practice and enjoy. Tennis is not one of these sport.

    June 19, 2010 at 9:29 pm | Reply
  56. Rivf

    It seems that the one that wrote this article knows littler about football. The tournament actually started two years ago were all (except 8) countries tried to classified. A game in order to end tide also means something....in group phase, those that are not able to win should not win via something like "free trows".... Is Ok to said that you just don't like a sport....but trying to explain why you don't like it, might show your ignorance (poor tolerance) about it. Feel free to disagree, that's part of been humans, and the best of all is that when it comes to sports issues no one is wrong.

    June 19, 2010 at 9:45 pm | Reply
  57. Varun

    What idiotic article.
    "it would surely win hands down."
    Are you on LSD.

    More countries try to qualify for FIFA WC then there are countries in UN and at the Olympics. Thats called international, Missy.

    Golden gen? ya you do watch womens tennis, its sucks balls.

    Class,ask McEnroe, if he was in Football he would be yellow/red/carded to his change room.
    Civilized? is this article supposed to be sarcastic 'coz it totally is on dope, so those billions more who paly it are uncivilized barbarians and tennis is such a upper society social sport, rite, pffff gimme a break from this stupid BS.

    I won't be missing those wonderful ad breaks every 2 games in Tennis as well.

    I want passion form the crowd, not clap around like silly spoiled aristocrats.

    p.s To CNN, quit moderating comments u censoring Nazis, i have seen it being done over many months now, and it ain't even for posts which are overly offensive with profanities which are serious. Stop being hypocrites CNN we all know your China coverage.

    June 19, 2010 at 9:49 pm | Reply
  58. Todd

    and... no grown men rolling around on the court crying until the referee calls a penalty

    June 19, 2010 at 9:51 pm | Reply
  59. Chine

    This is a really terrible trollish article written to attract readers.I won't even bother pointing out the silly points made,it would be a great waste of my time.

    June 19, 2010 at 10:02 pm | Reply
  60. Hi Newspaper

    I dnt think Wimbledon can be better than the World Cup in anyway. Its good the reporter acknowledged that the world cup is the greatest sporting event on the planet. I don't want to believe the World cup hitting Africa makes it unpopular today.

    For the vuvuzela, for once, Africa won cos much as the western media tried to advocate for its ban, they never succeeded. I don't think the vuvuzelas make more noise than human screams in the premiership. As for the wins and draws, it shows how smaller teams, especially from Africa, have come of age. I'm sure the reporter expected a better result that Ghana 1- Australia 1.

    How could the writer compare 736 world cup players (32 teams X 23 players each) with less than 500 tennis players from all over the world that take part in the Wimbledon Championships. The truth is between June 11 and July 11 there are richer sports people in South Africa than at the Wimbledon Championships.

    June 19, 2010 at 10:14 pm | Reply
  61. Jose

    Your article was quite amusing. I did not laugh as much as smile slightly, but it did entertain me. Of course, I know you where not serious saying Wimbledon is better.
    No vuvuzelas: I don’t understand the hate against these horns. I have watched all the matches I could and they just end up being a background noise. The reason there is no noise at Wimbledon is that nobody actually cares who wins. Go to a Davis Cup match and we can talk about noise.
    Someone always wins: Yes, and that someone is normally Federer, or maybe Nadal, or maybe..no wait. One of those two. In football you can never be 100% sure. Unless it’s Brazil against Aruba, the game can and sometime does go any way. This cup has made it very obvious with Germany losing their match, Brazil getting very nervous only facing North Korea and England playing, and I use the term lightly, very bad indeed. And maybe you can have draws but the playing is the fun part with the result important to see who continues.
    The golden era: Only in tennis can you consider it a golden era when the only emotion is to see if either Federer or Nadal is going to win. Football is fantastic because who can win is never sure, a country can do great in the previous games and fail at the cup. There is always the possibility of a surprise. And yes, maybe you can normally only consider England, France, Spain, Italy, Brazil, Argentina, Germany and Holland as possible winners, but that is certainly more than the two in tennis.
    More international: Should I even reply? The only reason there are not more countries in the world cup is that there is no room. I believe there are more than 200 countries officially in Fifa. I just read an article from your Indian correspondent saying the fanatics in that country even from thought it has not gone to a world cup in forever. In Somalia, people risk their life trying to watch the cup. Country where I live Chile went to their last world cup 12 years ago. Sure many names are repeated, but everybody gets the chance and those that don’t go quickly choose other teams to support. I still remember the barbecue we had to watch the 94 final between Brazil and Italy and the fun we had watching the game. There was not a Brazilian or Italian in the room expects for a friend that had been in Brazil 2 years ago for vacations and I don’t think that counts. You can’t get more international then that.
    Class above: yes, boring, very, very boring. And I could mention the Davis Cup again if we want to look at violence but we are talking of Wimbledon. I remember a joke from “Mafalda” writing by Quino, an argentine humorist. “If living is lasting, let me be a song by the Beatles and not a long play from the Boston Pops”.

    June 19, 2010 at 10:30 pm | Reply
  62. MarylandBill

    This article feels like its written by someone with an inferiority contest. Yes, the vuvuzelas are annoying, but they are not endemic to the World Cup in general, but rather to this particular World Cup.

    In any case, just keep in mind, that the only place where more people will be watching tennis than soccer is at Wimbledon itself. Even if England is not playing, more people will be watching Soccer in England than tennis, and I suspect that will even be true in America.

    June 19, 2010 at 10:30 pm | Reply
  63. Erick

    I agree with this opinion on its 5 points. However, most football fans would then just think that tennis is boring because there is nothing of that vibre felt at a stadium.

    Most people who follow football not only like football because they prefer that sport. They like it because they can meet with their friends to have a beer in a restaurant or at someone's home while cheering their team. Or, they can go to the stadium and have a massive party with the followers of the same team.

    So even if tennis is better than football, football and any other similar sport that is a "class" below tennis will be more popular. This has been a tendency since ancient times. During the age of the Roman Empire there were many forms of public entertainment. The most civilizaded were theather or music performances. However, the most popular were chariot races and gladiator fights. These cruel or lower class entertainment were more exicting to the common Roman and even to some emperors.

    While football may be inferior to tennis, most people will prefer the mug of beer over the strawberries with cream. Their fans will assist to a stadium even if it rains or snows just because they love football. I can say "most people" because we just have to look to how many people assist to South Africa and how many millions around turn their TV's to watch the World Cup and make it the most seen event in the world.

    June 19, 2010 at 10:47 pm | Reply
  64. Hahaha good joke

    Sorry but football attracts more talent in 1 year than tennis has in its entire history.

    Tennis is, next to golf and cricket, the most tedious and boring game to watch and play. Nothing worse than watching 2 people sprinting themselves to exhaustion up and down the baseline smacking a ball around a small rectangle. Even I feel tired watching it.

    It is also a sport requiring one of the smallest skill sets, all you need is stamina, the ability to smack a small ball accurately with a racquet and occasionally a bit of imagination. But usually it's the one who can hit it accurately into the corners as many times as possible who wins.

    June 19, 2010 at 10:54 pm | Reply
  65. ALDO

    I don't understand if she trying to be funny or not. Comparing soccer, a sport played even in the poorest countries in the world bit balls made out of raw materials, to a sport when you need pay to play its crazy...

    June 19, 2010 at 11:05 pm | Reply
  66. Anon

    hahaha the author is getting ripped apart here... cheers to all the footy fans out there!!

    June 19, 2010 at 11:08 pm | Reply
  67. Graciela Blaum

    I do not agree! Maradona himself is more well known everywhere than any tennis player. Same thing can be said about other excellent football players from other countries.

    And to get to the World Cup many countries played in order to get a spot in the tournament, obviously you cannot expect ONE team from every country to be represented in the World Cup, that would be impossible to implement, that is why there are matches before the Cup to be played in order to get to the CUP.

    And there is ONE winner in the World Cup.

    Thing is, I know that in the US soccer is not popular (but it is in the rest of the world).

    June 19, 2010 at 11:10 pm | Reply
  68. Gassan

    Helen please look for another job, because with all do respect sports is not your strong point.

    June 19, 2010 at 11:13 pm | Reply
  69. gkedpage

    I can give you 5 reasons why World Cup is better than Wimbledon:
    1. It is only 90 minutes long(+extra time), so its short and sweet.
    2. You don't have to wait hours looking at two people shooting a ball to and fro.
    3. People do not enjoy it as much as people enjoy football cuz they don't cheer.
    4. The atmosphere is BORING.
    5. If people were passionate about tennis they would watch it even if its rainy, dark or cold.
    I can write 100 more reasons.
    Football is the best sport in the world and World Cup is the best tournament.

    June 19, 2010 at 11:21 pm | Reply
  70. alexei

    Tennis is the sport for noble virtuous persons, while soccer is for fans.

    June 19, 2010 at 11:57 pm | Reply
  71. Bob

    Yea, tennis is better because fans eat strawberry and cream, don't blow vuvuzelas and someone always wins (Federer/Nadal)

    June 20, 2010 at 12:02 am | Reply
  72. mash

    Are there more rich people or poor people in the world? Does soccer have more fans or tennis? That is why!

    Not everyone in the world can afford buying a tenis racket... while a single soccer ball gives game to a couple of dozen of kids...

    The rules of soccer are primitive. Very easy for people to understand. You don't need education for that. You don't need to be smart. Just kick the ball into the net! Voila!

    How many people have died at a soccer stadium? Have often do fans throw garbage at the players? This is obviously a sport for uneducated people.

    Which is better? Honda or Porsche... most people say Honda sells more... but that "most people" can't afford a porsche!

    June 20, 2010 at 12:16 am | Reply
  73. Pierre

    How about golf ;)?

    June 20, 2010 at 12:23 am | Reply
  74. Joe

    Sorry but football is superior to tennis as it is better in every way: support, number of viewers, number of players, range of skills required etc.

    Btw I have NEVER seen anything in sports like the stabbing of Monica Seles. Joke of a sport.

    June 20, 2010 at 12:37 am | Reply
  75. philip

    FUNNY PIECE!!!

    June 20, 2010 at 12:41 am | Reply
  76. toddsaed

    Gustav V , king of Sweden, played tennis at age 98,
    it is a sport anyone can play , even practice alone, at any age,
    soccer can never claim this, this is what counts, what gets your own body moving , healthy , socializing, and improving, enjoying, tennis hands down, how many actually play soccer, so what if billions watch a sport, billions more listen to rock and roll than jazz and classical music, and any musician knows they are far superior. SO grow up, do your life, uplug the couch potato, and do life to the max. Tennis for the health of it, and your own liberation.

    June 20, 2010 at 1:20 am | Reply
  77. Angel

    Calm down man! clearly fan of tennis you are... not shame at all... but you're one in a thousand! not offense... unless.. well, better yet, that's ok, tennis is better sport... but football man, is not a sport! is a religion!...

    June 20, 2010 at 1:24 am | Reply
  78. Rodrigo

    Worst article in CNN history.

    June 20, 2010 at 1:44 am | Reply
  79. Albert

    Actually no 4 is incorrect. Three years prior to the 'finals' of the world cup, 200 countries participated in the World Cup qualifiers. Helen Chandler needs to work harder on research.

    No 3, half of the world is not even familiar who Federer/Nadal are.

    No 2. there has always been a winner in all the World Cups.

    June 20, 2010 at 2:10 am | Reply
  80. Elizabeth

    Wow. What a snooty article. As much as I love tennis, I can watch Wimbledon next year, or the next year, or the next, as it happens every year, unlike the World Cup. And really, while tennis does have some awesome match-ups, it is always the same people who are top-seeded every year. It changes very little. Football changes a bit more as the team changes. It's much more exciting.

    June 20, 2010 at 2:10 am | Reply
  81. Sam

    Helen, you can't be serious... Football vs tennis? What a mismatch comparism| No chance on earth for tennis., not in this or next generation!

    June 20, 2010 at 2:13 am | Reply
  82. melvyn

    in football the COUNTRY wins, in tennis, its the PLAYER!
    its completely different!

    June 20, 2010 at 2:14 am | Reply
  83. PMR

    Comparing an individual sport with a team sport is right off the bat wrong...that's why I love both of these sports: each one brings unique and different emotions...

    The international comment is bogus, as a tennis player seldom brings a nation together (as it shoudn't) but a football team does (as it should). Try doing business in Brazil when they are playing in the World Cup. On the flipside, never had a problem doing business when Kuerten (only Brazilian no.1 in history) when he played, the country moved on.

    Surprised to see this coming from CNN...

    June 20, 2010 at 2:18 am | Reply
  84. Georges F H

    The World Cup is above any event in the World, every four years we celebrate around the world that fact. All Sports and all events are great, Tennis, american Football, Baseball, even the Olympics, each of them deserve attention, and plausible cheers, but when the World Cup Arrives, you have to make way for the King.

    Why deny that fact every time it comes around?

    June 20, 2010 at 2:20 am | Reply
  85. piesual

    Would have been WAY more valid if it had been written by someone who knows even a little bit about football.

    Just the comment about tennis being more international than football is incomprehensible. I don't know if you actually research before you start hitting the keyboard randomly, but what we are watching these days is the final stage of the World Cup. It actually started about 2 and a half years ago and it actually involved almost every country in the planet.

    I would go on arguing about your other points, but what's the use in debating about an article that should have been named "Why FOR MY SPECIFIC TASTE Wimbledon is better than the World Cup". And, as any other random opinion of a person who is not informed thoroughly about the facts, shouldn't have had a place in a news outlet.

    June 20, 2010 at 2:24 am | Reply
  86. letsgobrazil

    Helen, thanks for the article – I enjoyed reading the deluge of comments and corrections it generated.

    Tennis better than football – I am reduced to tears in laughter!

    Maybe next time you can write about how hopscotch is better than the world cup!

    Your reasoning will certainly make Pele, Maradona, Zidane, Cruyff, Ronaldo, and Messi cry.

    June 20, 2010 at 2:38 am | Reply
  87. Ammar Zafar

    No offence to the author but this is one of the worst articles I have ever read. The author is obviously a tennis fan and is, in my opinion, suffering from an inferiority complex due to the massive attention given to the world cup as compared to tennis at the moment.

    The author's attitude and assertions are quite childish. It is simply a matter of opinion. Whosoever likes football will see the world cup and whosoever likes tennis will watch Wimbledon. To turn this into a war between to sports and then extolling the virtues of one is just plain ...............

    June 20, 2010 at 2:44 am | Reply
  88. letsgobrazil

    I'm from the Philippines, and I didn't even know that we had someone play at Wimbledon. It would have been interesting news – that's all.

    But the World Cup, now that's different. My own country never qualifies at all (maybe someday) – yet that hasn't stopped me from enjoying the games, wearing the jerseys, following the developments, and literally dropping everything else when BRAZIL, ENGLAND, ARGENTINA, GERMANY, SPAIN or PORTUGAL plays.

    And when I meet people during my travels around the world, guess what would be a great way to start a conversation (besides the weather) – yes, FOOTBALL.

    This year, only a few Asian teams made it to the World Cup. But there are millions of viewers – whose teams are not even in South Africa – staying up late at night and very early in the morning (2:30-4:30am) just to see the titans of football play.

    How many millions stay awake in the wee hours of the morning – on a workday – to watch Wimbledon?

    June 20, 2010 at 2:59 am | Reply
  89. jp

    Class above?

    Do not you remember Mrs.Williams saying I will kill you to a ref????

    June 20, 2010 at 3:19 am | Reply
  90. Andres

    I'm not even reading this article...bt there is no way...no matter what u have to say...that this is bigger than the world cup...the world cup is the best sporting event in the world...n its not just my opinion...

    June 20, 2010 at 3:33 am | Reply
  91. Danny

    I didn't even know that there was a Wimbledom (or however you write it) happening on the planet.
    I think you need to check your facts before you publish this type of nonsense.

    June 20, 2010 at 3:37 am | Reply
  92. Rick

    Dear Ms. Helen Chandler, you are so wrong.
    I highly doubt a Nadal/Federer match can sell out a 90,000 seat stadium, so how can tennis be better...if it doesnt attract as much people as football does. Maybe to you it is, but dont forget the other 6billion people. Give the tournament its respect. Nothing can beat the World Cup, it just not possible. And I live in the states, so for all of the world...yes people we like Futbol!! its just not as televised as other sports here. some of us wish it was.

    June 20, 2010 at 5:58 am | Reply
  93. IrishBlood02

    I have never seen the Wimbledon stop a civil war to watch tennis.

    June 20, 2010 at 6:55 am | Reply
  94. JP

    I am a BIG tennis fan and prefers Wimbledon over World Cup but this article is... too much.

    June 20, 2010 at 7:41 am | Reply
  95. Norwegian Footballfan

    199 teams tried to qualify for WC football incl. my own national team. Do I watch WC football? Of course. Every day.

    June 20, 2010 at 9:53 am | Reply
  96. Khalid

    FIFA is popular as fans wait to c how hardwork their players made for last 4 years to qualify for FIFA.

    Their are strategies among teams and people must shout its good for their health (as science approved already it will decrease your furustration).

    Their are thousand of thousand thinks which I can add to support all FIFA Fan. If someone ask me to score FIFA and Tennis for entertainment. Then it will be 100:20.

    June 20, 2010 at 10:07 am | Reply
  97. Aditya

    Wimbledon........Hands down.......totally agree with the author!!!!

    June 20, 2010 at 10:12 am | Reply
  98. Dan

    Take Wimbledon, add in the Superbowl and World Series. Throw in a heavyweight title fight in Vegas. Add the Olympics (summer and winter). Double it. Treble it. You're about halfway to the greatness and significance of the World Cup.

    June 20, 2010 at 10:14 am | Reply
  99. ArtVF

    toddsaed said "Gustav V , king of Sweden, played tennis at age 98,
    it is a sport anyone can play , even practice alone, at any age,
    soccer can never claim this,"

    How can a child who can't afford a tennis racket practise tennis? And if a 98 year old man can play tennis, he can kick a ball around. You can practise soccer on your own at any age and anyone can play it – are there tennis courts everywhere? It's an expensive sport to play and to be good you have to spend a LOT of money. The wealthy rise to the top, unlike football.

    June 20, 2010 at 10:18 am | Reply
  100. Jack

    Tennis is the sport of the elite, requiring expensive facilities and equipment. Soccer (real football) is the sport of the people and is played anywhere kids find something to kick around. Let the thousands of rich folks enjoy their champagne as they watch tennis- but respect the billions of the world's people who play futbol and drink beer!

    June 20, 2010 at 12:09 pm | Reply
  101. Oscar

    Each sport is unique.....why compare 2 sports that aren't similar in any way to begin with???

    June 20, 2010 at 1:50 pm | Reply
  102. JoeyDee

    The Deal with Soccer and Scoring:

    Many years ago, I tried to get into it. I think the problem for us Americans is that we want a big score like a big war–as long as we're winning. Soccer is not about scoring. It seems to be about the athletic conditioning, positioning on the field, "passing", strategy, and of course defense. The clock runs for a total of 90 minutes divided into two halves. Someone once explained to me that the "tension" of the sport is the first, momentous (and maybe only) goal of the game.

    It's a huge field with a large goal, but it's news if a team puts up three goals. It would be like a major league baseball team scoring over 10 runs or an NFL team 50 points. At least in the NHL, in between the fighting and goon play, a pair of teams might run up a 7-6 or 6-5 score. The NBA just keeps getting uglier. The Lakers took the title 83-79. In game six, they held the Celtics to 67 points. We used to score that in our YMHA recreation leagues. College basketball these days is a more elegant game. I miss the NBA of decades past where teams routinely ran up 120 or 130 points. The NBA player ran and looked like a track star. Today they're muscle bound and defenders act like muggers in an alleyway.

    Well, in soccer, if you're interested in goals and scoring, don't blink. Hell, if they took away the goalie, there wouldn't be that much scoring. There are plenty of 0-0 ties.

    June 20, 2010 at 2:50 pm | Reply
  103. Adele

    There is only one problem with this article: tennis is boring as hell compared to football. I am just saying.

    June 20, 2010 at 3:12 pm | Reply
  104. Desmond

    thats a big lie,,tennis is no where near soccer,,,soocer has more following than any religion,sport whatsoever......tennis is an elitist sport

    June 20, 2010 at 3:35 pm | Reply
  105. Mischpoke

    Oh oh oh ....

    Both Wimbeldon and Football were founded in GB. Please ask a Englishman what he prefers.

    Ask any other European. Ask Italians, Spaniards, ask Southamerican, Africans, Russian...

    Ask Boris Becker, who wins Wimbeldon serveal times...

    In Germany we postpone the election of our president (not Kanzler) to a day without play of a football game. It's crazy, I know, but it is how it is😀

    I think the author wanted to provoke some answers and she did very well😉

    June 20, 2010 at 3:46 pm | Reply
  106. Favio

    Regardless of gender, soccer is THE MOST INTERNATIONAL sport in the world. There are more nations in FIFA than countries in the U.N. If you don't believe this, do some research...

    The World Cup paralyzes countries, drives passions, unites the world, serves for artists to make songs which will get money to help children, etc. All you need to do is go to a World Cup to truly understand what a World Cup is about... I'd recommend you travel to Argentina or Brasil or Italy or New Zealand or Korea to see what happens when their team is playing in the world cup... so you understand what soccer does to the World. You can't speak and publish articles like this without even doing proper research... is bad journalism. You are entitled to your opinion but you need to do research to backup what you say with factual data...

    This article should be in the comedy section ;p

    June 20, 2010 at 5:01 pm | Reply
  107. JL the snail

    The responses to this article are ovewhelming and it is obvious that many consider the argument in this article poorly considered and shallow.

    I hope CNN avoids posting such polarising articles for the sake of attention-seeking in future. The World Cup is a competition in the sport of soccer. There is no reason that the event should be compared to a tennis event or event in any other kind of sport.

    June 20, 2010 at 5:04 pm | Reply
  108. Donna

    The World Cup has been a real yawn this year. I do like both sports, but whereas a Nadal Federer match will be 3 hours of fantastic viewing, I am about to give up on the WC. They are such different sports, it's impossible to compare. However, whereas a whole team can be pathetic and limp through a match or depend on their stars, a tennis player has only himself to count on and has to take all the blame/credit on his own.

    June 20, 2010 at 5:09 pm | Reply
  109. Administrator

    I very much hope this article was written tongue-in-cheek. Obviously it is pointless to argue which sport is better. I enjoy watching both.

    However it might be worth pointing out that football is the sport of the people and that, by comparison, tennis audiences are a bunch of pretentious wannabees.Your definition of "civilized" probably has more to do with sipping champagne, seeing famous people and being seen than with any true sense of civilization, which would have to encompass certain values of equality, humanitarianism... or at least something of value to the people and their culture... which, by the way, is up for the people to chose, not a prescription from the upper classes who, in any case, would not want to mingle with mere mortals.

    June 20, 2010 at 9:58 pm | Reply
  110. Celeb76

    Wimbledon has been in existence for centuries! All of a sudden, they're talking about banning vuvuzelas! Who ever said they were gonna bring vuvuzelas to Wimbledon? The soccer World Cup is in South Africa, where vuvuzelas are part of their "soccer" tradition. Now you people are having sleepless nights thinking Brits are suddenly gonna turn into South Africans? That's just crazy!!!!

    June 21, 2010 at 1:10 am | Reply
  111. toddsaed

    Actually ArtVF, you may have a point, but to actually play soccer
    and run around , find a team, and a field would be difficult for most
    98 year old people. But there are tennis courts everywhere, probably more than soccer fields, or open spaces for soccer, you can play doubles and socialize easily at an advanced age, not as taxing as kicking a ball and running around, it has more action and involvement , is faster, with only two or four people involved everyone gets lots of chances to hit the ball, not the interminable waiting for it llike in team sports, and it is as cheap or cheaper than soccer, a racket used maybe ten dollars, balls three dollars, less than a soccer ball, so most or your points are erroneous. But what about unplugging the couch potato, do both if you can, play music , better than llistening, and then you will kn\ow why jazz and classical is better than rock and roll, and likewise playing tennis will show you why it is better as a life long sport. the best life long sport

    June 21, 2010 at 1:50 am | Reply
  112. toddsaed

    So ArtVF, upon googling , giggling, and gargling, I found there are
    up to 100 million tennis players in the world, and up to 1 million tennis courts, no figures there for soccer except one possibly facetious one that there are 3.5 billion soccer players, past and present. and no numbers for the number of fields at google. SOccer is the number two cause of dental fractures in sports, in the US maybe 17 million players, 24 million tennis players. Tennis injuries are rare, and not serious. As to the elitist charge, many champs came from poor families, and to take the broader look at history, precision agriculure, and all the third wave knowledge based economies may end poverty, so no elites, looking to the future then can produce more positive and creative conclusions. TEnnis on the moon with low gravity, and infinite possiblities, tennis replacing religion, metaphysics, and politics in the utopian future.

    June 21, 2010 at 2:41 am | Reply
  113. prax

    whoever says that this is golden era of tennis hasn't watched sampras,rafter,scud,ivanisevic,etc #wimbledon pales in comparison to #worldcup

    June 21, 2010 at 10:12 am | Reply
  114. lostemperor

    After England's aweful performance it is no wonder Wimbledon is more popular than the soccer world cup. Have you seen the pigeon who found the most quiet place in Cape Town to rest. It was on the goal net of Algeria. It was a peaceful place and nothing passed the line there! :):)

    June 21, 2010 at 11:03 am | Reply
  115. tomtom

    "While just 32 teams represent their countries at the World Cup, more than 500 tennis players from all over the world" ???
    What are comparing, countries against players? The "32" teams are in average 576 players, and many more teams going through the qualifier rounds first. Do you have 500 players playing in the two week of Wimbledon?
    Tennis is the most boring game to watch, ping Pong is more exiting, playing it is great (I play myself) but watching it???

    June 21, 2010 at 11:47 am | Reply
  116. Robert

    You won't see any of the french tennis players going on strike!!!

    June 21, 2010 at 12:19 pm | Reply
  117. hakeem

    Dear Madam,there is nothing finer than watching a hard fought goal celebration.

    June 21, 2010 at 1:05 pm | Reply
  118. Ryan

    There are comments here I would not agree with both from Helen as well as various respondents. my humble opinion is below.

    Tennis is a beautiful game. The grace that a Federer brings to the court coupled with the power and accuracy is a joy to watch. Nadals accurate passing shots or his smashes make one wonder if he is from this earth.

    Football is also a beautiful game with the artistry of a Ribery, Robben, Messi, Xavi, Torres or the brute force of Wayne Rooney.

    In Helens defence, i dont believe she meant to say that football is a game for the masses while tennis is a game for the classes. What i believe she was referring to was the excitement of the tournament. The general level of football has been quite disappointing. Currently it only appears that Argentina is playing at their true level, with much fancied England, (Please note that this is only an example and not a critique of any sort on the actual plauyers or the team) being held to draws by the USA & Algeria. And lets be fair, England has appeared lackluster, France has been a walking disaster, Brazil has no flair.

    I have been watching Wimbledon since 1986 and following the fooite World Cup since then as well. I think there is space for both these sports for todays fans, and ultimately each of one us is free to express our choice by watching the WC or Wimbledon.

    June 21, 2010 at 1:46 pm | Reply
  119. Antonio

    Tennis is boring! YAAAWWWNNN! Give me my World Cup ANY DAY over anything Tennis or Olympics for that matter!😀

    June 21, 2010 at 3:48 pm | Reply
  120. Turk

    This is like comparing figure skating to baseball. Give me a break! Appreciate the differences and celebrate the victories. Show some sportsmanship already!

    June 21, 2010 at 4:13 pm | Reply
  121. John Harry

    you are wrong !
    footy is more international, more kids can afford a soccer ball. Anything can be a goal and boundries. no net involved.

    It's more international ? No even close.

    Someone always wins-

    More people win, No one can say our team. Nadal-Federer yep them millionaire players won whoooopdeee.
    well all walk around in shirts
    "Federer United"

    The golden era
    yeah its more civilized, elitist status
    Previously, players bowed or curtsied to members of the Royal Family seated in the Royal Box upon entering or leaving Centre Court. In 2003, however, the President of the All England Club, His Royal Highness the Duke of Kent, decided to discontinue the tradition.

    Wimbledon traditions include the eating of strawberries and cream, drinking Pimms spritzers, royal patronage and a strict dress code for competitors.

    June 21, 2010 at 7:00 pm | Reply
  122. Sikandar

    I suggest, Wimbledon officials must have rescheduled the event😉

    June 21, 2010 at 8:27 pm | Reply
  123. Mariela

    There is no passion in tennis, therefore it's not fun.Like somebody already said (Angel) football is not a sport...it's a religion!!!!

    June 21, 2010 at 9:24 pm | Reply
  124. Martin Argentino

    As we see both events are very important but I think there's no need to "split up" them. The World Cup celebration takes 4 years to be again!

    June 22, 2010 at 1:11 am | Reply
  125. hgy

    lol, i didnt know wimbeldon even started, but anyway WC > wimbeldon

    June 22, 2010 at 4:21 am | Reply
  126. Patricia

    Y love tennis and I like world cups, but y HATE VUVUCELAS !!!! PLEASE !!! Someone do something

    June 22, 2010 at 6:58 am | Reply
  127. Karl G

    My god, so much nonsense in one article, I didn't know it was possible.
    1. No vuvuzela's; okay, of course not, NOTHING is allowed on Wimbledon, Wimbledom is a dinosaur slowly dying because of its own (often ridiculous) rules. If you ask me, grass is for cows and horses.
    2. In soccer, someone always wins too, be it not immediately. That's the idea of a COMPETITION. Not enough goals ? Seen Portugal yesterday ? Few goals means teams are equal. Good defending is an art too. I guess things hard to understand for outsiders without much knowledge of the game.
    3. I don't remember any tennis match in particular, oh yes I do, these of the golden area when hard hitters didn't have any chance to win th egame yet. Now if you're 2 meters high and can hit hard, you're as good as in the final ... Exciting !!!
    4. This World Cup started 2 YEARS AGO which much more nations involved than EVER in any tennis tournament.

    June 22, 2010 at 8:09 am | Reply
  128. Artur

    How many kids have you seen running bare foot in the "slums of the world" playing tennis?

    June 22, 2010 at 11:02 am | Reply
  129. Annika

    International? What Caribbean nation has a player who tried out for tennis but we all did for WC.
    Any child on the street can play football with any object (old tins are popular) but it takes money to play tennis. Guess thats why you think its better, it is for the rich.
    This veiw reminds of someone. Oh yes the plantocracy in the Caribbean early 19th century.

    June 22, 2010 at 4:21 pm | Reply
  130. Fire-ball

    Ha Ha HA...It is only tennis , miss Chandler. Why the fuss?

    June 22, 2010 at 7:28 pm | Reply
  131. PiercedPsycho

    Nevermind the fact that FIFA boasts more nation members than the United Nations itself.

    Nevermind that the month-long event that is the World Cup is the culmination of THREE YEARS of competing, all in the hopes of coming to this point, while Wimbledon is every year.

    Wimbledon players play for themselves-in the World Cup, those teams carry the hope and pride of entire NATION when they compete. Just look at Mexico City.

    I fell in love with the most beautiful game in 2006, and I have been a devotee ever since. Soccer, or rather, football, is without compare.

    June 22, 2010 at 7:38 pm | Reply
  132. contradicting

    Number four is just not true, and one of the few measurable arguments made. The authors knowledge of the World Cup is obviously limited. She suggests that the world cup is less international that Wimbledon simple because there are only 32 countries represented in the World Cup FINALS. Many more countries from around the world participate in qualifying the year before to win a chance to play in the World Cup finals. She has however picked up some of the language of the cup as she refers to teams as "qualifiers". She either has not pause to think about what that means or doesn't want to since it destroys the argument. Then she states that there have been more victors from different countries at Wimbleton... which only appears to support the argument... lame. Go watch your tennis. If no football is on I will join you.

    June 22, 2010 at 7:39 pm | Reply
  133. Thomas

    Well, I think the same and I really don't understand why TV operators prefer to show the FIFA World Cup and only specialized and paid ones show Wimbledon, but obviously the great mass of people all over the world are not civilized enough to prefer watching a civilized sport like tennis.

    June 23, 2010 at 1:51 am | Reply
  134. mb

    A. Please DO NOT call it soccer, its called FOOTBALL, its played with your FEET, as for why the americans decided to name football a game that involves mostly their hands just show either a lack of imagination, or just to much stupidity!

    B. Why are we all here defending W.C. although we are ALL right, FOOTBALL, and even more so the WORLD CUP, needs no arguments to on what support it, its like debating with someone else on what your name, USELESS.

    FOOTBALL is the best SPORT in the world, and if a may i will quote a great football genius:

    "Some people think football is a matter of life and death. I don't like that attitude. I can assure them it is much more serious than that. "
    -Bill Shankly, LIVERPOOL MANAGER

    June 23, 2010 at 3:40 am | Reply
  135. Joe South Africa

    Aaaah wha exactly is this article about. I don't believe this. Is this a joke or what? Tennis beating soccer? My father can turn in his grave. If this was meant to humour us, well done.

    June 23, 2010 at 7:45 am | Reply
  136. Tom

    When I was a kid, my parents gave me a tennis racket and tennis balls and tried to encourage me to play tennis. Within thirty minutes the tennis racket was forgotten my brother and I were using the tennis balls to play soccer inside the house, using an interior doorway as a goal.

    That's what I think of tennis compared to soccer.

    This article is ridiculous. Glad you prefer tennis...saying it's "better" than soccer is absurd.

    June 23, 2010 at 11:23 am | Reply
  137. John

    Lord, this is the worsest article i have ever read in my entire life. M hoping and praying not to come across an article similar to this one ever again in my life. Helen what you wrote is soo lame boring and untrue. Get me right please, I dont have anything against you personally but your judgement about football is so unfounded. Please do more research before you attack the most loved game on mother earth again. I am Namibian and not alot of my fellow country man and woman know much about Tennis, why, simply because Tennis is soo unpopular here and you would not find a large percentage of people gathering together on a Sunday afternoon leaving their other commitments to go and cheer for a Tennis game on DSTV but if you find a football game for instance Man U vs Arsenal playing on Sunday people here can even miss a church service just to go watch the beautiful game of football hence football being popular even in a semi arid nation that I call home (Namibia) hope you have heard of it, check it up in the Encys I am sure you will find it in there somewhere. Tennis is a boring game even though I myself enjoy watching it sometimes not because I fancy it but only because i love watching the Williams girls playing. i dont even know what is going on sometimes but just because I am fond of their swagger and determination to always win. That is the true spirit of sport, to always win. With all do respect but your comparison meme was really out of line. Do you watch football games and do you even know who is hosting the WC. Football has brought enermies together to reconcile and put aside their differences. I dont think Tennis has ever done that. If I personally force myself to watch a whole Tennis game man I will die before the game is over.

    June 23, 2010 at 11:33 am | Reply
  138. Lucas

    As almost every single comment here, I agree that Tennis is a good sport, Ok, if you are a huge fan, that is good for you! But please don't compare in that way with SOCCER or FOOTBALL!!!

    World Cup is every 4 years but tennis we can watch almost everyday! Please we can respect you if you enjoy more tennis, it is your opinion, but don't try to do that, don't try to convince us that soccer is going down, cuz that will never happen and please try do make journalism with facts and not with stupid opinions like that. Sorry but Football or Soccer is the most popular sport in the world and will be forever!

    June 23, 2010 at 12:20 pm | Reply
  139. maricela

    this is the stupidest thing I ever heard..... you need money to play tennis.... anyone can play soccer!

    June 23, 2010 at 12:30 pm | Reply
  140. Drew

    Football is #1. What elitist gibberish...tennis! Get a life.

    June 23, 2010 at 3:41 pm | Reply
  141. square pants

    you need to share these views at a football game in london...on a mega phone while sitting in the stands...the consequences will be deserving

    June 23, 2010 at 4:15 pm | Reply
  142. Grondahl

    I agree with a number of the other comments; the author is turning this into a sort of class warfare: Tennis is for the rich, soccer is for the unwashed masses. She should watch her back for hooligans the next time she slums it in London.

    The author talks of Federer vs Nadal as the great tennis rivalry of this age, but also complains of the lack of diversity in World Cup winners. I'm too lazy to Google it, but if somebody could figure out how many of the major tournaments in the last five years were won by those two guys, I'd appreciate it. Better yet, how about the Williams sisters on the women's side of things?

    The conceded point is this: Lack of diversity in winners does not a boring sport make.

    June 23, 2010 at 4:21 pm | Reply
  143. Adam

    Wimbledon is better than the world cup? Tennis is just glorified ping pong!

    With regards to the comment about the limited number of teams in the world cup, I feel you failed to take into account the Qualifying section, which consists of probably more than 100 teams just trying to get into the competition. It is hardly a limited competition!

    In regards to the Vuvuzelas, I am presuming you didn't watch the England match. If you had, you would have heard the national anthem, and the English fans singing and cheering above the sounds of the Vuvuzelas (which happen to be a part of South African football, so if the world cup is in South Africa, surely it is about taking in their culture?). Would much rather cheer in a football stadium of 90,000 than sit with a few snobs clapping "politely" at 2 people hitting a ball backwards and forwards.

    I'm afraid I must agree with you that no-one team stands out and it isn't exciting with no winners. I mean Portugal winning 7-0, Germany winning 4-0, Argentina winning 4-1, all boring games. The Portugal match stands out most for me, so close to being a boring draw!

    One final comment, about tennis players not playing in the rain, cold or dark. Well, to me, that just makes them sound weak. I must admit I laughed when a player stopped the match a while back, when it was so light I think some people could still have got sunburnt.

    Pathetic article!

    June 23, 2010 at 7:04 pm | Reply
  144. Stephanie

    All i have to say is that I love both sports. Today i was watching both games at the same time. I watched the soccer game on tv and the tennis game on the computer.

    June 23, 2010 at 9:08 pm | Reply
  145. Camillo Ferreira

    If you do believe in what you've written, you certainly believe that Wimbledon is bigger than NFL, MLB, NBA... Oh my!
    Each sport has its importance. You should not break ones reputation based on your personal preferences.

    Shameful piece.

    June 23, 2010 at 10:06 pm | Reply
  146. Adam

    I also love the way she is like there is always a decisive winner, i heard there was a match today that was about 9 hours of 2 people playing glorified ping pong lol! Yawn

    June 23, 2010 at 11:47 pm | Reply
  147. Alex

    Shame on CNN for having miss Chandler in their payroll. That some1 as ignorant as her can make a living writing this kind of article is unbelievable. Yes, miss Chandler, 32 teams representing 32 countries made it to the world cup finals in south africa, however, just about EVERY country in the world tried to qualify for it and couldn't. a process that took much much longer than the 1 month of play in south africa. Wimbledon is a nice sporting event, where one person will eventually walk away with over a million dollar check, one team will walk away from south africa with the world cup and a kind of national pride that the wimbledon purse can never buy !!

    June 24, 2010 at 12:11 am | Reply
  148. Leanne

    Wow soccer fans are sensitive! Don't you realise she's written tongue in cheek?

    June 24, 2010 at 3:56 am | Reply
  149. Jeff

    Hello Helen,

    I'd like to comment on your post. While it may seem that your intent was to simply generate controversy, I'd still have to post a rebuttal to your elitist, culturally insensitive post.

    Firstly, the vuvuzela represents somewhat an instrument of culture, as it represents South Africa's partaking in the World Cup and its culture intertwining with the event. Your dismissal of it as "loud and distracting" is snobby and dismissive, and is just the same as saying the bagpipe is annoying and overbearing. It's completely impolite in my honest opinion. Most journalists are very sensitive to the practices and representations of other cultures; while it seems that you have a lot to learn in terms of understanding what other cultures deem appropriate and/or acceptable.
    Also, suggesting that someone always winning (as opposed to soccer/football) is completely dismissive of the intricacies of the sport. Unlike the NBA, soccer/football is about finesse and capability (something that you act like you understand but you obviously do not) and not about a high score. Soccer/football is about anticipation and not about results. Results orientation is what holds the USA back from the rest of the world in terms of appreciating the sport. The ups and downs, the missed chances, and the anticipation of a goal are the facets of soccer/football, and I think you fail to understand that in your article.
    Beyond this, to suggest that tennis is in some sore of "golden era" beyond that of soccer is absolutely ridiculous. In fact, I disagree with you fundamentally. Tennis is dominated by a handful of players, whereas soccer/football is a sport where any team can have an upset victory... Federer and Nadal are almost always expected to show in the semis/finals of any given tournament, where even the smallest country can represent themselves well in the World Cup.
    Suggesting that tennis is more international than soccer is simply a folly, even when trying to comprehend the best intention of the article. The FIFA world cup is watched by far more countries than Wimbledon ever will be. This, of course, is due to the fact that soccer/football requires nothing more than a ball to play and countries that don't have the same advantages as the USA and Europe can still field incredible players because young children can practice and play without the need for a court, a racket, and a significant number of balls. The monetary investment is minimal, which gives non-affluent countries access to the sport – this makes the sport significantly more international than tennis.
    And finally, your suggestion that tennis is "a class above" is downright insulting to the spirit of fans of all sports. You say that cheering for your favorite team – proudly representing them – is not as honorable as enjoying "strawberries and cream" is just ridiculous. Ask any major player what gives them the most passion and inspiration to play their game, and I'm certain a large percentage would say nothing gives them more joy than the appreciation and spirit of their fans – which in large part, is represented by the volume of their cheering.

    It's no wonder that you're a junior contributor; perhaps more appreciation and understanding for the culture around different sports could move you far in the sports world.

    But, for now, you're just another blogger with a misguided opinion.

    Regards,
    Jeff

    June 24, 2010 at 4:35 am | Reply
  150. coco

    After all it's the person who decides according to his/her taste what kind of sport he/she will gonna watch.

    June 24, 2010 at 10:39 am | Reply
  151. batty

    wimbeldon is a joke>>> soccer the best, a man sport, american football a joke,they only play with them self. whoooo

    June 24, 2010 at 12:58 pm | Reply
  152. Amarildo

    You made a big mistake in tour article...
    Soccer is passion,happiness,soul..and Wimbledon is just Wimbledon

    June 24, 2010 at 1:33 pm | Reply
  153. Ricky

    The fact that your number 1 reason is that wimbledon is better than the WC is because of vuvuzelas completely ruins your credibility.

    The vuvuzela is native to South Africa. NOT the world cup, so the fact that you claim tennis would beat football in whatever imaginary competition you thought of is ludicrous.

    Tennis is not more international than football either. Wimbledon may be more so than the World Cup, but that last sentence you said, " Tennis doesn’t need to try and compete with football, but if it did, it would surely win hands down." opens up a completely different can of worms. You made it a battle between sports, not competitions.

    Football is the most widely played sport on the planet, that is undeniable.

    As for your reason of "Someone always wins". Well, someone always wins the World Cup. Its just a matter of the rules of the tournament as far as the group stage is concerned. Some of the best games in the tournament so far have been draws. see: USA vs. Slovenia, Nigeria vs. South Korea.

    Do your research next time you make a statement so bold as to say that tennis would beat football "hands down"

    June 24, 2010 at 1:56 pm | Reply
  154. James

    haha Okay Ms. Hellen KELLER.

    June 24, 2010 at 3:39 pm | Reply
  155. Simon

    I assume this article was written with tongue firmly in cheek.

    If not, CNN need to find another sportswriter. Some of the "points" are just flat out silly. "More international": More international than a game that includes EVERY country in the world?

    Come to think of it, there's no point replying to each point. Simply watch this years Wimbledon and make your mind up for yourself, it's truly dreadful stuff.

    When you're finished watching Wimbledon, watch Italy VS Slovakia and compare the drama.

    June 24, 2010 at 5:00 pm | Reply
  156. Milt Nieves

    Why is it the World Cup does not need to justify it's popularity?
    Because it IS the most popular World Championship...even more so than Wimbledon...Oh, I'm sure they did not ban tennis watching in South Africa so as to keep the people forcibly focused on football...apparently the loyal Wimbledon tennis fans would be watching football instead, if made available.

    June 24, 2010 at 5:13 pm | Reply
  157. J-dub

    What a waste of good web-space!

    June 24, 2010 at 5:28 pm | Reply
  158. Ivo

    Yes, she's right. Thats why there are so many people watching Wimbledon instead of the Word Cup....Oh, actually, maybe not...

    June 25, 2010 at 12:02 am | Reply
  159. Mycroft

    Wimbledon ?
    What is Wimbledon , where is Wimbledon ?
    Unless you mean Wembley, may be.

    Are you living in another planet, no seriously ?
    Come on, those poor tennis players, nobody's watching them, nobody's talking about them, anyway who cares ?

    Except for some frustrated commentator on CNN, whose only quality is humour, or at least this is what I hope for her.

    June 25, 2010 at 8:02 am | Reply
  160. mangweng w. ndlovu

    You can't compare tennis with football the game of billions,the five points you made are what makes tennis a sport for elitists.Where one can't express their emotions because it will be rude or uncivilised,the noise in football is what makes it fun to watch & play.What makes it even more enjoyable is that the outcome is not predictable,any team can win the cup.The euphoria of participating in the WC after playing qualifying games for a period of two years is the most wonderful feeling you can't get in an individual sport like tennis...the vuvuzela is here to stay love what you call noise..its torture to watch a game in silence..frankly that sucks!Typical american mentality of trying to decide what is better for the whole world.

    June 25, 2010 at 4:07 pm | Reply
  161. Lydia

    Being a woman, I don't usually watch football – only at the World Cup. On the other hand, I love tennis. So you can say 90% tennis and 10% football.

    I would never bother to watch local football matches and the game's really boring when no one scores!

    June 25, 2010 at 4:12 pm | Reply
  162. Rafi

    6. unlike football, use of your arms is not considered a foul in tennis
    7. unlike football, grown men dont act like 2 year old kids in tennis

    there you have it, two more reasons why tennis is better than football!

    June 25, 2010 at 7:49 pm | Reply
  163. Luca

    First, why are you comparing 32 teams to 500 players? 23 people per squad means that over 600 players from all over the world take part in the world cup. Not to mention that hundreds of countries compete in qualifying for the world cup.

    Second, it's not true that fans from everywhere have someone to cheer for during Wimbledon. Because tennis is a high maintenance sport, like golf or skiing or hockey or football etc..you will barely see any participants from the poorer nations of Africa or South America or Asia. One of the reasons that soccer is such a widespread sport is that you don't need any equipment other than a ball.

    Third, the nations that qualify for the World Cup are purposefully from all over the world. Top qualifying teams from Asia, Oceania, Europe, South America, North/Central America, and Africa are the ones that make it into the tournament. That's the way it's set up. To try and say that the qualifying nations normally come from Europe and South America makes no sense.

    All sports are different and maybe in some ways tennis is better than soccer, but to say that wimbledon is more international than the World Cup? Seriously?

    June 26, 2010 at 10:00 am | Reply
  164. Jen

    Nice, light article with a touch of dry humour. Most of the commenters seem to have mislaid their sense of irony, sadly.

    June 26, 2010 at 1:39 pm | Reply
  165. Sergio

    More international??????I guess you did not do your homework....first...500 players from many countries doe snot mean more countries.....THE WORLD CUP HAS 1472 players from different countries......the actual WORLD CUP STARTED WITH MORE THAN 200 COUNTRIES...FAR MORE THAN THE COUNTRIES PARTICIPATING IN WIMBLEDON......THE TOURNAMENT IN SOUTH AFRICA IS THE "FINAL" WITH THE BEST 32 TEAMS...GET YOUR FACTS STRAIGHT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    June 26, 2010 at 2:53 pm | Reply
  166. Sergio

    MORE INTERNATIONAL?????? LOL ..........I guess you did not do your homework....first...500 players from many countries does not mean more countries.....THE WORLD CUP HAS 1472 players from different countries......the actual WORLD CUP STARTED WITH MORE THAN 200 COUNTRIES...FAR MORE THAN THE COUNTRIES PARTICIPATING IN WIMBLEDON......THE TOURNAMENT IN SOUTH AFRICA IS THE "FINAL" WITH THE BEST 32 TEAMS...GET YOUR FACTS STRAIGHT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    June 26, 2010 at 2:56 pm | Reply
  167. Max

    CNN.... you have lost a lot of credibility with this article.......!!

    June 26, 2010 at 6:09 pm | Reply
  168. Henry Chapman

    I dont think tennis and soccer as a sport can be compared to one another with an outcome of finding the "better" sport.

    Their both great games played by amazing athletes.

    That some of these great sporting events might overshadow one another from time to time is unfortunate . but let us find enjoyment in them both!

    June 26, 2010 at 10:14 pm | Reply
  169. Damon

    Really arrogant and opinionated piece. I love both.

    June 26, 2010 at 11:53 pm | Reply
  170. ICHUSE2

    Great piece...my sentiments exactly...I was unable to think of so many great reasons tennis is better than football...thanks!!!!!!!!!!!

    June 27, 2010 at 12:50 am | Reply
  171. Audrey

    Wow CNN this article sucks just like tennis does!!!! SOCCER the best sport ever, when is any other sport going to gather the amount of people that soccer does??? oh yea ...ummm never!!! The passion soccer creates will never be seen in any other sport!!!

    Because you do not know soccer or your country sucks at soccer it does not mean soccer sucks as well!!!!.....and btw...tennis a higher class?? see my friend that's the thing about soccer it does not matter your class, race, culture, language, etc. Just for everyone!!!!

    June 27, 2010 at 1:08 am | Reply
  172. Jason Rodrigues

    Your definitely joking, but heres a response anyway

    1. After England loose to Germany the Vuvuzelas will be heading to Wimbledon.
    2. Sure someone always wins if you wait around for 3 days and 11 hours.
    3. The Golden Era is over your talking about 2 years ago.. Federer is beatable and Nadal will burnout to injury.
    4. Apparently you havent hear of Worldcup qualifiers. 32 consists of only the cream of football.
    5. Its true. Thats because the UK hasent produced any tennis players worth supporting or fighting about

    June 27, 2010 at 7:18 am | Reply
  173. James Harrington

    Don't appease the writer, people. She wants a reaction.

    June 27, 2010 at 1:16 pm | Reply
  174. Lucas from South Africa the host nation.

    There is no way you can compare world cup to a mere wembledon. As a host nation, i believe that about 90 % of South Africans, young or old, as of now are watching the world cup, even those who dont really love soccer. For every world cup match being played in South Africa, stadiums are packed, so as fan parks, restaurants, pubs, shebeens, nightclubs etc. I think even the olympic games, which are also being held every four years, can't outmatch the euphoria and hype of the world cup. This world cup, the first on the African continent, will be the greatest ever world cup hosted in the history of FIFA. GET YOUR FACTS RIGHT.

    June 27, 2010 at 1:20 pm | Reply
  175. lloyd_banton

    The world cup Football need to move into modern time and use technology it is very stupid to have the technology and do not use it, FIFA president Sepp Blatter come from the medieval time so he is out of touch with reality.

    June 27, 2010 at 11:15 pm | Reply
  176. lloyd_banton

    Why have Sepp Blatter as president when he does not listen to no one, from a long time people have been telling Sepp Blatter to use technology wish he refuse to do. FIFA need a new president that understands the need for change.

    June 27, 2010 at 11:18 pm | Reply
  177. efeoghene swg

    An african Team is still standing in the world cup amzing

    June 27, 2010 at 11:48 pm | Reply
  178. efeoghene swg

    i love them both

    June 27, 2010 at 11:51 pm | Reply
  179. alex

    in your next article you should write about how polo is better than hockey

    June 28, 2010 at 8:26 am | Reply
  180. Dr. Cajetan Coelho

    Football brings together poor and rich on the same world stage. In the exercise of worldmaking and worldshaping Jogo Bonito is second to none. All other games and sporting activities are very very good. Best wishes to the sporting stars and their fans.

    June 28, 2010 at 9:06 am | Reply
  181. ishenupdidup

    Why was wimbledon declared a soccer free zone??????
    could it be that if the world cup was shown on the big screens,
    everyone would turn and watch the football!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    June 30, 2010 at 2:57 pm | Reply
  182. toddsaed

    tennis is cheaper than they think, I always say, what do you always say, and the fact of 100 million players, and 1 million tennis courts proves her argument, nobody quoted any actual factual figures.

    July 1, 2010 at 6:49 am | Reply
  183. Annette Hannan Luis

    I love tennis ..I always feel embarrased by the horrible SKIRTS the lineswomen must wear ...dreadfully old fashioned , and even I would say MACHISTA ...a bit like some foreign countries who cover women up ...Grant it her Majesty the Queen is elderly and keeps traditional DRESS as a remembrance of Past Times but for goodness sake on the Tennis courts.... the poor girls/women must feel FREAKISH in a modern tennis world..I also HATE the fact that its the only Grand Slam not available on standard T.V. without having to pay annual fees for a private T.V. company ..Liven up ...and join the world.

    July 2, 2010 at 5:15 pm | Reply
  184. david

    this writer just love to stire pple up.

    July 4, 2010 at 12:37 am | Reply
  185. Lala

    I love tennis and I'm dividing my attention between tennis and football or soccer, if you prefer. Both sports are so different that they can't begin to compare. But, by far, futebol , fútbal, calcio, soccer whatever you want to call it, is the most popular and loved sport in the world et pour cause. One only needs a ball, some kids and a street, or beach or an empty field. Tennis? sneakers, rackets, balls, a coach, and belonging to a club. Is that you definition of civilized? Weird.

    July 4, 2010 at 11:13 am | Reply
  186. TennisGenius

    I agree, wholeheartedly, with this article.

    July 4, 2010 at 6:11 pm | Reply
  187. hudung

    i agree with a number of the reasons you gave, but the one that claims that wimbledon is more international than the world cup is simply ludicrous. which planet do you live on? the world cup has participants from all continents of the world, all! how many Africans compete in wimbledon? and you call it more international simply because more Europeans are participating in it?

    July 5, 2010 at 6:42 pm | Reply
  188. Chirag

    Though Wimbledon is a world class event it was completely out watched this year by the Footbal World Cup..............and thanks to the author for a very funny article !

    July 8, 2010 at 3:42 pm | Reply
  189. Derek

    Why is this article still up. It is a load of total garbage. Compare the size of the audience for World Cup to the size of the audience for Wimbledon, and the numbers speak for themselves. Helen Chandler is clearly an American who resents that there is a great sport out there that her fellow country men suck at! Try watching real football, Helen (and I don't mean the bastardized rugby that you call football), and maybe you too will see why those of us in the rest of the world are passionate about it!

    August 6, 2010 at 6:57 pm | Reply
  190. jasmine

    Wow!.... This is such a discernment
    on the world cup. Well I won't say much
    but what I will tell you is that I appreciate
    tennis and all its ambience. But when it balls down
    down to the world cup, its an experience that's once
    in a lifetime which brings nations of different races
    together. Simply breath taking...., and once in a lifetime!

    August 23, 2010 at 8:03 am | Reply
  191. Nivas Ellis Levoy

    Tennis is much more popular than soccer. Soccer is a stupid game and even boring waiting for 90 min without a goal. In tennis the game is moving. You don't have to wait so long uselessly. The excitement is always there till the last point is scored. Can anybody think of a match like 1980 wim final Borg vs McEnroe in any sport?

    October 4, 2010 at 11:49 am | Reply
  192. buy anabol tablets

    Merci de bonnes choses

    June 8, 2011 at 10:11 pm | Reply
  193. NadalFan

    I love Wimbledon.I can not wait to start.my favorite is Nadal.

    June 12, 2011 at 4:39 pm | Reply

Post a comment


 

CNN welcomes a lively and courteous discussion as long as you follow the Rules of Conduct set forth in our Terms of Service. Comments are not pre-screened before they post. You agree that anything you post may be used, along with your name and profile picture, in accordance with our Privacy Policy and the license you have granted pursuant to our Terms of Service.