Many, many, many, many, many people have expressed their displeasure with the rules of Quidditch. “Bah,” I have always said to myself. “Games don’t always make sense. Games evolve. The other players are important if the golden snitch isn’t caught.”
After having learned about Eton’s The Wall Game, which has been played at Eton for over three hundred years, I no longer feel any need to defend the existence of strange and nonsensical British schoolboy games. The Wall Game even has a method of scoring points which essentially ends the game in one fell swoop: scoring a goal is worth ten points, as opposed to the more common shys (worth one point), and games are generally scoreless ties anyhow. So if you score a goal, you’re going to win.
And the method of scoring goals is not symmetric between the teams. So quit picking on Quidditch.
Instead of picking on Quidditch for being stupidly unrealistic…
Now we have to pick on it for being realistically stupid?
I can live with that.
Yep, that’s fair.
There was a Quidditch thread on rec.games.board about a year ago, with some of the same discussion as what you link to happening in a more civilized tone. A Google search ought to find it.