as you know, even if Charlton were losing 5-0 with two minutes to go seeing us score a goal would be more important to me than seeing England lift the World Cup (as if).
[cite]Posted By: thai malaysia addick[/cite]What percentage of the US population do you think know their country has been drawn to play against England at South Africa 2010? I'd go for 5%.
And all of that 5% will more than likely be women as its a girls game out there.
Ignoring the fact that there will definitely be more Americans who are aware of this draw than English people who are, these arguments about World Series etc are specious. They are so called (not because of newspaper sponsorship, that's an urban myth) because they are above League and Divisional Series and what other word could be applied to them? You couldn't call it the American Series or National Series, for example, as those (in baseball, at least) are the names of the two competing leagues.
There are of course genuine world championships, between competing national (usually amateur) teams, in all of these sports too, and Americans can tell the difference even if pig-ignorant Brits can't.
Incidentally, the UK is ranked 23rd in the world in baseball (Cuba is top, the USA third) and 25th in ice hockey (the USA are 5th). A poor show compared to the Americans' 14th/1st FIFA rankings, and we aren't ranked at all in American football (Japan are ranked top, having won two of the three World Cups to date, and the USA second).
[cite]Posted By: floydandharvey[/cite]
A poor show compared to the Americans' 14th/1st FIFA rankings
I wouldn't put much stall by the FIFA rankings. USA just have to keep battering all the rubbish in the CONCACAF to qualify for each world cup. I have my doubts that they'd qualify if they were a European side.
I have to admit that I love American sports especially Gridiron (American Football). I think if more British understood the rules and sat down and watched a game then they would be glued to the tv. Its a highly entertaining game and unlike football its more of a tactical game when they are always planning the next move (a bit like a game of chess). Football is more spontanious and faster paced with very few stoppages. American football has alot of stoppages and a game can last over 3 hours! I can understand the appeal the Americans have over Gridiron and the fact that they prefer it to Football (soccer). But like i mentioned earlier its only because we was brought with our sports and the Americans was brought up with their sports that very few Americans like Soccer and very few Brits like Gridiron - to each their own.
[cite]Posted By: floydandharvey[/cite]
A poor show compared to the Americans' 14th/1st FIFA rankings
I wouldn't put much stall by the FIFA rankings. USA just have to keep battering all the rubbish in the CONCACAF to qualify for each world cup. I have my doubts that they'd qualify if they were a European side.
You mean the USA side that beat a full strength Spain team 2-0 in the summers confederations cup semi? And then led Brazil 2-0 in the final before losing 3-2? Yes you're right they're rubbish.
I think that in recent (pre Capello) seasons what the England team have lacked is the organisation, never-say-die, team ethic, (insert your own relevant cliche). that the USA team has had in abundance. They are qualities that were previously taken as read as being "English footballing qualities".
Would we say Mexico are a bigger threat in WC competitions than the USA? I would have thought Mexico were better but now i spose they are both about the same level.
I would say the USA are deffinitely better than Mexico. In the past Mexico were better but the USA have come along way and even though Soccer is prob the 5th best sport in USA (After Gridion, Baseball, Basketball and Ice Hockey) they still have alot of good players. The USA are only going to get better as more people in the USA get more interested in the sport.
[cite]Posted By: Cordoban Addick[/cite]I think that in recent (pre Capello) seasons what the England team have lacked is the organisation, never-say-die, team ethic,(insert your own relevant cliche).[/i]
I would say the USA are deffinitely better than Mexico. In the past Mexico were better but the USA have come along way and even though Soccer is prob the 5th best sport in USA (After Gridion, Baseball, Basketball and Ice Hockey) they still have alot of good players. The USA are only going to get better as more people in the USA get more interested in the sport.
I was having a look at their squads on Fifa 10 last night and i thought on paper they were pretty much even but i spose the USA have more resources to build it up to become a big sport. Seeing as it is their fith sport and they are one of the best in their continental division i deffinatly think they will be one to look out for in World Cup football. Not sure they will ever reach the dizzie hights of Brazil though.
[cite]Posted By: floydandharvey[/cite]
A poor show compared to the Americans' 14th/1st FIFA rankings
I wouldn't put much stall by the FIFA rankings. USA just have to keep battering all the rubbish in the CONCACAF to qualify for each world cup. I have my doubts that they'd qualify if they were a European side.
You mean the USA side that beat a full strength Spain team 2-0 in the summers confederations cup semi? And then led Brazil 2-0 in the final before losing 3-2? Yes you're right they're rubbish.
I didn't say the USA are rubbish, I said their ranking is propped up by comfortably beating rubbish teams all the time, and the ease of qualifying for the world cup. I think they're a decent side, but I think it'd be touch and go for them to qualify in a European group. Would you say they were a lot better than someone like Republic of Ireland for example?
Again though CONCAF is not quiet as weaker qualifying continent as you may think. Mexico, Costa Rica, Honduras, El SDalvador, Jamaica, T&T. Not world football powers but i bet the USA dont take them for granted.
[cite]Posted By: Ru1986[/cite]Again though CONCAF is not quiet as weaker qualifying continent as you may think. Mexico, Costa Rica, Honduras, El SDalvador, Jamaica, T&T. Not world football powers but i bet the USA dont take them for granted.
Ok maybe 'rubbish' it too much of a loaded term, but they're certainly weak sides bar Mexico, and qualifying is very straightforward compared to being a European side. 3 out of 6 qualify automatically, and even 4th place gets a play off with a South American team.
My point is that USA's ranking is exaggerated by the ease of qualification. I believe that placed in the UEFA qualifying, they would only occasionally qualify for major tournaments, same as the likes of R.O.I. who are quite a comparable team in terms of quality I would say. Do you honestly think USA are the 14th best team in the world?
[cite]Posted By: Ru1986[/cite]Again though CONCAF is not quiet as weaker qualifying continent as you may think. Mexico, Costa Rica, Honduras, El SDalvador, Jamaica, T&T. Not world football powers but i bet the USA dont take them for granted.
Ok maybe 'rubbish' it too much of a loaded term, but they're certainly weak sides bar Mexico, and qualifying is very straightforward compared to being a European side. 3 out of 6 qualify automatically, and even 4th place gets a play off with a South American team.
My point is that USA's ranking is exaggerated by the ease of qualification. I believe that placed in the UEFA qualifying, they would only occasionally qualify for major tournaments, same as the likes of R.O.I. who are quite a comparable team in terms of quality I would say. Do you honestly think USA are the 14th best team in the world?
Agree maybe rubbish not the word you were looking for. The UEFA qualifying is probly the hardest to get through with the best quality of football as there are only a handful of teams you are guarenteed wins against. Also your are right in that i could easily think of 14 nations i would put ahead of USA although R.O.I would not be one of them.
[cite]Posted By: floydandharvey[/cite]Ignoring the fact that there will definitely be more Americans who are aware of this draw than English people who are, these arguments about World Series etc are specious. They are so called (not because of newspaper sponsorship, that's an urban myth) because they are above League and Divisional Series and what other word could be applied to them? You couldn't call it the American Series or National Series, for example, as those (in baseball, at least) are the names of the two competing leagues.
There are of course genuine world championships, between competing national (usually amateur) teams, in all of these sports too, and Americans can tell the difference even if pig-ignorant Brits can't.
Incidentally, the UK is ranked 23rd in the world in baseball (Cuba is top, the USA third) and 25th in ice hockey (the USA are 5th). A poor show compared to the Americans' 14th/1st FIFA rankings, and we aren't ranked at all in American football (Japan are ranked top, having won two of the three World Cups to date, and the USA second).
[cite]Posted By: floydandharvey[/cite]
A poor show compared to the Americans' 14th/1st FIFA rankings
I wouldn't put much stall by the FIFA rankings. USA just have to keep battering all the rubbish in the CONCACAF to qualify for each world cup. I have my doubts that they'd qualify if they were a European side.
You mean the USA side that beat a full strength Spain team 2-0 in the summers confederations cup semi? And then led Brazil 2-0 in the final before losing 3-2? Yes you're right they're rubbish.
I didn't say the USA are rubbish, I said their ranking is propped up by comfortably beating rubbish teams all the time, and the ease of qualifying for the world cup. I think they're a decent side, but I think it'd be touch and go for them to qualify in a European group. Would you say they were a lot better than someone like Republic of Ireland for example?
Yes. Easily better than ROI. If they were in Europe, they'd probably be top seeds in their group (probably would've been semi-finalists in the last European Championships). They might get a little bonus in the rankings, but I'd say their ranking got more of a bonus from the Confederations Cup than the World Cup qualifying.
As said before, only a certain proportion of the American population will know of this, but no harm there. It's all down to what sports they prefer, and there's nothing wrong with preferring another sport.
It does remind me of the last European Championships. I was visiting family in America at the time, and was trying to watch the matches with my cousin (who likes football), but his dad said to switch the channel to watch baseball because football was too low-scoring and too boring for him. An hour of baseball passed by without the score changing. When it came to a break in play, I switched over to the football and Turkey had just beaten Czech Rep 3-2. Oh well.
Comments
Brazil Bengals
Portugal Eagles
Ivory Coast Vikings
North Korea Saints
I seriously have alot of time on my hands lol
Boring!!!
You know really - you're just trying to show off.
And all of that 5% will more than likely be women as its a girls game out there.
Cory Gibbs, tsk...
You'll be telling me you believe in father Christmas and the Easter bunny next!
There are of course genuine world championships, between competing national (usually amateur) teams, in all of these sports too, and Americans can tell the difference even if pig-ignorant Brits can't.
Incidentally, the UK is ranked 23rd in the world in baseball (Cuba is top, the USA third) and 25th in ice hockey (the USA are 5th). A poor show compared to the Americans' 14th/1st FIFA rankings, and we aren't ranked at all in American football (Japan are ranked top, having won two of the three World Cups to date, and the USA second).
Consider yourselves told.
I wouldn't put much stall by the FIFA rankings. USA just have to keep battering all the rubbish in the CONCACAF to qualify for each world cup. I have my doubts that they'd qualify if they were a European side.
Didn't think Americans did "Draws".
You mean the USA side that beat a full strength Spain team 2-0 in the summers confederations cup semi? And then led Brazil 2-0 in the final before losing 3-2? Yes you're right they're rubbish.
I would say the USA are deffinitely better than Mexico. In the past Mexico were better but the USA have come along way and even though Soccer is prob the 5th best sport in USA (After Gridion, Baseball, Basketball and Ice Hockey) they still have alot of good players. The USA are only going to get better as more people in the USA get more interested in the sport.
And penalty takers
I was having a look at their squads on Fifa 10 last night and i thought on paper they were pretty much even but i spose the USA have more resources to build it up to become a big sport. Seeing as it is their fith sport and they are one of the best in their continental division i deffinatly think they will be one to look out for in World Cup football. Not sure they will ever reach the dizzie hights of Brazil though.
I didn't say the USA are rubbish, I said their ranking is propped up by comfortably beating rubbish teams all the time, and the ease of qualifying for the world cup. I think they're a decent side, but I think it'd be touch and go for them to qualify in a European group. Would you say they were a lot better than someone like Republic of Ireland for example?
Ok maybe 'rubbish' it too much of a loaded term, but they're certainly weak sides bar Mexico, and qualifying is very straightforward compared to being a European side. 3 out of 6 qualify automatically, and even 4th place gets a play off with a South American team.
My point is that USA's ranking is exaggerated by the ease of qualification. I believe that placed in the UEFA qualifying, they would only occasionally qualify for major tournaments, same as the likes of R.O.I. who are quite a comparable team in terms of quality I would say. Do you honestly think USA are the 14th best team in the world?
Agree maybe rubbish not the word you were looking for. The UEFA qualifying is probly the hardest to get through with the best quality of football as there are only a handful of teams you are guarenteed wins against. Also your are right in that i could easily think of 14 nations i would put ahead of USA although R.O.I would not be one of them.
What a helmet.
Consider YOURSELF told sunshine.
Yes. Easily better than ROI. If they were in Europe, they'd probably be top seeds in their group (probably would've been semi-finalists in the last European Championships). They might get a little bonus in the rankings, but I'd say their ranking got more of a bonus from the Confederations Cup than the World Cup qualifying.
As said before, only a certain proportion of the American population will know of this, but no harm there. It's all down to what sports they prefer, and there's nothing wrong with preferring another sport.
It does remind me of the last European Championships. I was visiting family in America at the time, and was trying to watch the matches with my cousin (who likes football), but his dad said to switch the channel to watch baseball because football was too low-scoring and too boring for him. An hour of baseball passed by without the score changing. When it came to a break in play, I switched over to the football and Turkey had just beaten Czech Rep 3-2. Oh well.