Who is next to win All Three World Cups
England won the World Cup in 1966. And the Rugby World Cup in 2003. Followed by Cricket's ODI World Cup in 2019. The three big prizes in world sport, unarguably. (And, as a nice little aside, they did it in red, white and blue order, if you look at the kits they wore in the respective finals).
England thereby became the first - and so far only - nation to win All Three World Cups.
The question is: who will be next?
Australia have won the rugby and cricket world cups, a number of times. But they're a very long way down the list of potential football world cup winners. It's easy to imagine France adding a rugby world cup or South Africa winning a cricket ODI world cup, thereby joining Australia on two - but South Africa are a long way off adding the football World Cup; and France even further from the cricket title. New Zealand have dominated rugby and come fag-paper close to winning the cricket World Cup, but they're light years away from the FIFA's best.
Will India ever be rugby or football giants? Will Brazilians ever pick up a cricket ball in anger?
So who - if anyone - will ever be in a position to join England in the exclusive list of winners of the three titles that really matter? Or are we destined to stay, forever, as the nation atop the world's sporting plateau?
Comments
-
Italy seem to be improving and able to give us a good game in all three but are some distance away at cricket, probably the most likely unless like you said, Australia suddenly produce a golden generation of footballers capable to win the football.
0 -
Not in a thousand years.Chizz said:England won the World Cup in 1966. And the Rugby World Cup in 2003. Followed by Cricket's ODI World Cup in 2019. The three big prizes in world sport, unarguably. (And, as a nice little aside, they did it in red, white and blue order, if you look at the kits they wore in the respective finals).
England thereby became the first - and so far only - nation to win All Three World Cups.
The question is: who will be next?
Australia have won the rugby and cricket world cups, a number of times. But they're a very long way down the list of potential football world cup winners. It's easy to imagine France adding a rugby world cup or South Africa winning a cricket ODI world cup, thereby joining Australia on two - but South Africa are a long way off adding the football World Cup; and France even further from the cricket title. New Zealand have dominated rugby and come fag-paper close to winning the cricket World Cup, but they're light years away from the FIFA's best.
Will India ever be rugby or football giants? Will Brazilians ever pick up a cricket ball in anger?
So who - if anyone - will ever be in a position to join England in the exclusive list of winners of the three titles that really matter? Or are we destined to stay, forever, as the nation atop the world's sporting plateau?
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
Oh do fuck offValleyLocal said:
People often get accused of of saying something racist, when they have actually just been offensive or ignorant etc.Bedsaddick said:
Not in a thousand years.Chizz said:England won the World Cup in 1966. And the Rugby World Cup in 2003. Followed by Cricket's ODI World Cup in 2019. The three big prizes in world sport, unarguably. (And, as a nice little aside, they did it in red, white and blue order, if you look at the kits they wore in the respective finals).
England thereby became the first - and so far only - nation to win All Three World Cups.
The question is: who will be next?
Australia have won the rugby and cricket world cups, a number of times. But they're a very long way down the list of potential football world cup winners. It's easy to imagine France adding a rugby world cup or South Africa winning a cricket ODI world cup, thereby joining Australia on two - but South Africa are a long way off adding the football World Cup; and France even further from the cricket title. New Zealand have dominated rugby and come fag-paper close to winning the cricket World Cup, but they're light years away from the FIFA's best.
Will India ever be rugby or football giants? Will Brazilians ever pick up a cricket ball in anger?
So who - if anyone - will ever be in a position to join England in the exclusive list of winners of the three titles that really matter? Or are we destined to stay, forever, as the nation atop the world's sporting plateau?
But saying India could never win a World Cup in rugby or football could actually be racist. Not saying you intended that. But it's interesting, cos you'd say it's not you being offensive or ignorant, which often leads to acquisations of racism.
Instead you may simply be saying that they haven't got the infrastructure or sporting culture. Or that they are too obsessed with cricket.
However, saying never in a thousand years is slightly on the edge. It's right over the edge if you mean never in a thousands years because they're crap and not built for either football or rugby.
Why don't you think a country of over a billion people, with an economy set to make them a world power and an excellent sporting heritage in cricket can't win the world's most popular game in the next thousand years? Or even win a game in rugby without that much skill needed.
William the Conquerer hadn't even invaded England a thousand years ago!!19 -
This content has been removed.
-
USA, haven't won any of the 3, yet are most likely given that they at least sometimes compete in all 3, and have the infrastructure and sporting "heritage" to do so.
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
The selection of cricket, rugby and football seems biased towards England. The US have already won the three real world championships, NFL, MLB & NBA.6
-
You're an absolute, utter weapon. The intelligence of damp felt, and wit of silage tank runoff.ValleyLocal said:
But it could, couldn't it, Leroy.Leroy Ambrose said:
Oh do fuck offValleyLocal said:
People often get accused of of saying something racist, when they have actually just been offensive or ignorant etc.Bedsaddick said:
Not in a thousand years.Chizz said:England won the World Cup in 1966. And the Rugby World Cup in 2003. Followed by Cricket's ODI World Cup in 2019. The three big prizes in world sport, unarguably. (And, as a nice little aside, they did it in red, white and blue order, if you look at the kits they wore in the respective finals).
England thereby became the first - and so far only - nation to win All Three World Cups.
The question is: who will be next?
Australia have won the rugby and cricket world cups, a number of times. But they're a very long way down the list of potential football world cup winners. It's easy to imagine France adding a rugby world cup or South Africa winning a cricket ODI world cup, thereby joining Australia on two - but South Africa are a long way off adding the football World Cup; and France even further from the cricket title. New Zealand have dominated rugby and come fag-paper close to winning the cricket World Cup, but they're light years away from the FIFA's best.
Will India ever be rugby or football giants? Will Brazilians ever pick up a cricket ball in anger?
So who - if anyone - will ever be in a position to join England in the exclusive list of winners of the three titles that really matter? Or are we destined to stay, forever, as the nation atop the world's sporting plateau?
But saying India could never win a World Cup in rugby or football could actually be racist. Not saying you intended that. But it's interesting, cos you'd say it's not you being offensive or ignorant, which often leads to acquisations of racism.
Instead you may simply be saying that they haven't got the infrastructure or sporting culture. Or that they are too obsessed with cricket.
However, saying never in a thousand years is slightly on the edge. It's right over the edge if you mean never in a thousands years because they're crap and not built for either football or rugby.
Why don't you think a country of over a billion people, with an economy set to make them a world power and an excellent sporting heritage in cricket can't win the world's most popular game in the next thousand years? Or even win a game in rugby without that much skill needed.
William the Conquerer hadn't even invaded England a thousand years ago!!
As in the very definition. That is say 'that race of people could never achieve that, not even in a thousand years'.
However, I don't think it's a racist comment. I was more making the point that often stupid, offensive or ignorant things are accused of being racist. When saying a certain race couldn't do something is actually, erm, racist. Potentially.12 -
Sponsored links:
-
Harsh mate, whats felt and silage ever done to you?Leroy Ambrose said:
You're an absolute, utter weapon. The intelligence of damp felt, and wit of silage tank runoff.ValleyLocal said:
But it could, couldn't it, Leroy.Leroy Ambrose said:
Oh do fuck offValleyLocal said:
People often get accused of of saying something racist, when they have actually just been offensive or ignorant etc.Bedsaddick said:
Not in a thousand years.Chizz said:England won the World Cup in 1966. And the Rugby World Cup in 2003. Followed by Cricket's ODI World Cup in 2019. The three big prizes in world sport, unarguably. (And, as a nice little aside, they did it in red, white and blue order, if you look at the kits they wore in the respective finals).
England thereby became the first - and so far only - nation to win All Three World Cups.
The question is: who will be next?
Australia have won the rugby and cricket world cups, a number of times. But they're a very long way down the list of potential football world cup winners. It's easy to imagine France adding a rugby world cup or South Africa winning a cricket ODI world cup, thereby joining Australia on two - but South Africa are a long way off adding the football World Cup; and France even further from the cricket title. New Zealand have dominated rugby and come fag-paper close to winning the cricket World Cup, but they're light years away from the FIFA's best.
Will India ever be rugby or football giants? Will Brazilians ever pick up a cricket ball in anger?
So who - if anyone - will ever be in a position to join England in the exclusive list of winners of the three titles that really matter? Or are we destined to stay, forever, as the nation atop the world's sporting plateau?
But saying India could never win a World Cup in rugby or football could actually be racist. Not saying you intended that. But it's interesting, cos you'd say it's not you being offensive or ignorant, which often leads to acquisations of racism.
Instead you may simply be saying that they haven't got the infrastructure or sporting culture. Or that they are too obsessed with cricket.
However, saying never in a thousand years is slightly on the edge. It's right over the edge if you mean never in a thousands years because they're crap and not built for either football or rugby.
Why don't you think a country of over a billion people, with an economy set to make them a world power and an excellent sporting heritage in cricket can't win the world's most popular game in the next thousand years? Or even win a game in rugby without that much skill needed.
William the Conquerer hadn't even invaded England a thousand years ago!!
As in the very definition. That is say 'that race of people could never achieve that, not even in a thousand years'.
However, I don't think it's a racist comment. I was more making the point that often stupid, offensive or ignorant things are accused of being racist. When saying a certain race couldn't do something is actually, erm, racist. Potentially.2 -
This content has been removed.
-
I don't think the answers will have changed much since last.time you asked:
https://forum.charltonlife.com/discussion/98484/world-cup-treble?utm_source=community-search&utm_medium=organic-search&utm_term=three+world+cups+football+rugby+cricket1 -
FeltistValleyLocal said:
Bit racist against damp felt there, mate.Leroy Ambrose said:
You're an absolute, utter weapon. The intelligence of damp felt, and wit of silage tank runoff.ValleyLocal said:
But it could, couldn't it, Leroy.Leroy Ambrose said:
Oh do fuck offValleyLocal said:
People often get accused of of saying something racist, when they have actually just been offensive or ignorant etc.Bedsaddick said:
Not in a thousand years.Chizz said:England won the World Cup in 1966. And the Rugby World Cup in 2003. Followed by Cricket's ODI World Cup in 2019. The three big prizes in world sport, unarguably. (And, as a nice little aside, they did it in red, white and blue order, if you look at the kits they wore in the respective finals).
England thereby became the first - and so far only - nation to win All Three World Cups.
The question is: who will be next?
Australia have won the rugby and cricket world cups, a number of times. But they're a very long way down the list of potential football world cup winners. It's easy to imagine France adding a rugby world cup or South Africa winning a cricket ODI world cup, thereby joining Australia on two - but South Africa are a long way off adding the football World Cup; and France even further from the cricket title. New Zealand have dominated rugby and come fag-paper close to winning the cricket World Cup, but they're light years away from the FIFA's best.
Will India ever be rugby or football giants? Will Brazilians ever pick up a cricket ball in anger?
So who - if anyone - will ever be in a position to join England in the exclusive list of winners of the three titles that really matter? Or are we destined to stay, forever, as the nation atop the world's sporting plateau?
But saying India could never win a World Cup in rugby or football could actually be racist. Not saying you intended that. But it's interesting, cos you'd say it's not you being offensive or ignorant, which often leads to acquisations of racism.
Instead you may simply be saying that they haven't got the infrastructure or sporting culture. Or that they are too obsessed with cricket.
However, saying never in a thousand years is slightly on the edge. It's right over the edge if you mean never in a thousands years because they're crap and not built for either football or rugby.
Why don't you think a country of over a billion people, with an economy set to make them a world power and an excellent sporting heritage in cricket can't win the world's most popular game in the next thousand years? Or even win a game in rugby without that much skill needed.
William the Conquerer hadn't even invaded England a thousand years ago!!
As in the very definition. That is say 'that race of people could never achieve that, not even in a thousand years'.
However, I don't think it's a racist comment. I was more making the point that often stupid, offensive or ignorant things are accused of being racist. When saying a certain race couldn't do something is actually, erm, racist. Potentially.0 -
Leroy Ambrose said:
FeltistValleyLocal said:
Bit racist against damp felt there, mate.Leroy Ambrose said:
You're an absolute, utter weapon. The intelligence of damp felt, and wit of silage tank runoff.ValleyLocal said:
But it could, couldn't it, Leroy.Leroy Ambrose said:
Oh do fuck offValleyLocal said:
People often get accused of of saying something racist, when they have actually just been offensive or ignorant etc.Bedsaddick said:
Not in a thousand years.Chizz said:England won the World Cup in 1966. And the Rugby World Cup in 2003. Followed by Cricket's ODI World Cup in 2019. The three big prizes in world sport, unarguably. (And, as a nice little aside, they did it in red, white and blue order, if you look at the kits they wore in the respective finals).
England thereby became the first - and so far only - nation to win All Three World Cups.
The question is: who will be next?
Australia have won the rugby and cricket world cups, a number of times. But they're a very long way down the list of potential football world cup winners. It's easy to imagine France adding a rugby world cup or South Africa winning a cricket ODI world cup, thereby joining Australia on two - but South Africa are a long way off adding the football World Cup; and France even further from the cricket title. New Zealand have dominated rugby and come fag-paper close to winning the cricket World Cup, but they're light years away from the FIFA's best.
Will India ever be rugby or football giants? Will Brazilians ever pick up a cricket ball in anger?
So who - if anyone - will ever be in a position to join England in the exclusive list of winners of the three titles that really matter? Or are we destined to stay, forever, as the nation atop the world's sporting plateau?
But saying India could never win a World Cup in rugby or football could actually be racist. Not saying you intended that. But it's interesting, cos you'd say it's not you being offensive or ignorant, which often leads to acquisations of racism.
Instead you may simply be saying that they haven't got the infrastructure or sporting culture. Or that they are too obsessed with cricket.
However, saying never in a thousand years is slightly on the edge. It's right over the edge if you mean never in a thousands years because they're crap and not built for either football or rugby.
Why don't you think a country of over a billion people, with an economy set to make them a world power and an excellent sporting heritage in cricket can't win the world's most popular game in the next thousand years? Or even win a game in rugby without that much skill needed.
William the Conquerer hadn't even invaded England a thousand years ago!!
As in the very definition. That is say 'that race of people could never achieve that, not even in a thousand years'.
However, I don't think it's a racist comment. I was more making the point that often stupid, offensive or ignorant things are accused of being racist. When saying a certain race couldn't do something is actually, erm, racist. Potentially.Feltist? - never heard of it. You've made that up.Now, dampist on the other hand ....1 -
This one's turning into a much more popcorn demanding thread thoughNorth Lower Neil said:I don't think the answers will have changed much since last.time you asked:
https://forum.charltonlife.com/discussion/98484/world-cup-treble?utm_source=community-search&utm_medium=organic-search&utm_term=three+world+cups+football+rugby+cricket1 -
You’d have to think of all the countries who play all three sports.
Ireland perhaps?0 -
Only one of the three that Ireland would have a chance of winning is the rugby World Cup. No other country will do it. Not in our lifetime anyway.Blackheathen said:You’d have to think of all the countries who play all three sports.
Ireland perhaps?0 -
Need to get to a semifinal, so might struggle.MillwallFan said:
Only one of the three that Ireland would have a chance of winning is the rugby World Cup. No other country will do it. Not in our lifetime anyway.Blackheathen said:You’d have to think of all the countries who play all three sports.
Ireland perhaps?1 -
Maybe Scotl... No.3
-
Sponsored links:
-
Piss off . In what part of that sentence I wrote is there any racism ?ValleyLocal said:
People often get accused of of saying something racist, when they have actually just been offensive or ignorant etc.Bedsaddick said:
Not in a thousand years.Chizz said:England won the World Cup in 1966. And the Rugby World Cup in 2003. Followed by Cricket's ODI World Cup in 2019. The three big prizes in world sport, unarguably. (And, as a nice little aside, they did it in red, white and blue order, if you look at the kits they wore in the respective finals).
England thereby became the first - and so far only - nation to win All Three World Cups.
The question is: who will be next?
Australia have won the rugby and cricket world cups, a number of times. But they're a very long way down the list of potential football world cup winners. It's easy to imagine France adding a rugby world cup or South Africa winning a cricket ODI world cup, thereby joining Australia on two - but South Africa are a long way off adding the football World Cup; and France even further from the cricket title. New Zealand have dominated rugby and come fag-paper close to winning the cricket World Cup, but they're light years away from the FIFA's best.
Will India ever be rugby or football giants? Will Brazilians ever pick up a cricket ball in anger?
So who - if anyone - will ever be in a position to join England in the exclusive list of winners of the three titles that really matter? Or are we destined to stay, forever, as the nation atop the world's sporting plateau?
But saying India could never win a World Cup in rugby or football could actually be racist. Not saying you intended that. But it's interesting, cos you'd say it's not you being offensive or ignorant, which often leads to acquisations of racism.
Instead you may simply be saying that they haven't got the infrastructure or sporting culture. Or that they are too obsessed with cricket.
However, saying never in a thousand years is slightly on the edge. It's right over the edge if you mean never in a thousands years because they're crap and not built for either football or rugby.
Why don't you think a country of over a billion people, with an economy set to make them a world power and an excellent sporting heritage in cricket can't win the world's most popular game in the next thousand years? Or even win a game in rugby without that much skill needed.
William the Conquerer hadn't even invaded England a thousand years ago!!2 -
This content has been removed.
-
Just because it's India, yeah?ValleyLocal said:
The 'never in a thousand years' will India win a football or rugby world cup bit!Bedsaddick said:
Piss off . In what part of that sentence I wrote is there any racism ?ValleyLocal said:
People often get accused of of saying something racist, when they have actually just been offensive or ignorant etc.Bedsaddick said:
Not in a thousand years.Chizz said:England won the World Cup in 1966. And the Rugby World Cup in 2003. Followed by Cricket's ODI World Cup in 2019. The three big prizes in world sport, unarguably. (And, as a nice little aside, they did it in red, white and blue order, if you look at the kits they wore in the respective finals).
England thereby became the first - and so far only - nation to win All Three World Cups.
The question is: who will be next?
Australia have won the rugby and cricket world cups, a number of times. But they're a very long way down the list of potential football world cup winners. It's easy to imagine France adding a rugby world cup or South Africa winning a cricket ODI world cup, thereby joining Australia on two - but South Africa are a long way off adding the football World Cup; and France even further from the cricket title. New Zealand have dominated rugby and come fag-paper close to winning the cricket World Cup, but they're light years away from the FIFA's best.
Will India ever be rugby or football giants? Will Brazilians ever pick up a cricket ball in anger?
So who - if anyone - will ever be in a position to join England in the exclusive list of winners of the three titles that really matter? Or are we destined to stay, forever, as the nation atop the world's sporting plateau?
But saying India could never win a World Cup in rugby or football could actually be racist. Not saying you intended that. But it's interesting, cos you'd say it's not you being offensive or ignorant, which often leads to acquisations of racism.
Instead you may simply be saying that they haven't got the infrastructure or sporting culture. Or that they are too obsessed with cricket.
However, saying never in a thousand years is slightly on the edge. It's right over the edge if you mean never in a thousands years because they're crap and not built for either football or rugby.
Why don't you think a country of over a billion people, with an economy set to make them a world power and an excellent sporting heritage in cricket can't win the world's most popular game in the next thousand years? Or even win a game in rugby without that much skill needed.
William the Conquerer hadn't even invaded England a thousand years ago!!
So if he'd said "never in a thousand years" about, say, Scotland then you'd be fine about that?
I actually think I've twigged your game here. YOU'RE the racist one and you're deliberately trying to provoke racist responses so you can then recruit them for your next march. I mean that COULD be right, couldn't it?5 -
If someone new does win all three, Kanu be playing for them.2
-
Hes just winding you up mate. And you’re biting.Off_it said:
Just because it's India, yeah?ValleyLocal said:
The 'never in a thousand years' will India win a football or rugby world cup bit!Bedsaddick said:
Piss off . In what part of that sentence I wrote is there any racism ?ValleyLocal said:
People often get accused of of saying something racist, when they have actually just been offensive or ignorant etc.Bedsaddick said:
Not in a thousand years.Chizz said:England won the World Cup in 1966. And the Rugby World Cup in 2003. Followed by Cricket's ODI World Cup in 2019. The three big prizes in world sport, unarguably. (And, as a nice little aside, they did it in red, white and blue order, if you look at the kits they wore in the respective finals).
England thereby became the first - and so far only - nation to win All Three World Cups.
The question is: who will be next?
Australia have won the rugby and cricket world cups, a number of times. But they're a very long way down the list of potential football world cup winners. It's easy to imagine France adding a rugby world cup or South Africa winning a cricket ODI world cup, thereby joining Australia on two - but South Africa are a long way off adding the football World Cup; and France even further from the cricket title. New Zealand have dominated rugby and come fag-paper close to winning the cricket World Cup, but they're light years away from the FIFA's best.
Will India ever be rugby or football giants? Will Brazilians ever pick up a cricket ball in anger?
So who - if anyone - will ever be in a position to join England in the exclusive list of winners of the three titles that really matter? Or are we destined to stay, forever, as the nation atop the world's sporting plateau?
But saying India could never win a World Cup in rugby or football could actually be racist. Not saying you intended that. But it's interesting, cos you'd say it's not you being offensive or ignorant, which often leads to acquisations of racism.
Instead you may simply be saying that they haven't got the infrastructure or sporting culture. Or that they are too obsessed with cricket.
However, saying never in a thousand years is slightly on the edge. It's right over the edge if you mean never in a thousands years because they're crap and not built for either football or rugby.
Why don't you think a country of over a billion people, with an economy set to make them a world power and an excellent sporting heritage in cricket can't win the world's most popular game in the next thousand years? Or even win a game in rugby without that much skill needed.
William the Conquerer hadn't even invaded England a thousand years ago!!
So if he'd said "never in a thousand years" about, say, Scotland then you'd be fine about that?
I actually think I've twigged your game here. YOU'RE the racist one and you're deliberately trying to provoke racist responses so you can then recruit them for your next march. I mean that COULD be right, couldn't it?2 -
This content has been removed.
-
Some expert trolling on this thread. Commendable.
Have a feeling a few banned members have managed to make their way back to the site in recent months.6 -
Proper strange behaviour trying to go back to somewhere you don’t really know the people there, and they’ve already told you to fuck off once already.Laddick01 said:Some expert trolling on this thread. Commendable.
Have a feeling a few banned members have managed to make their way back to the site in recent months.
Weird.2 -
I give you South Africa ! not a million miles away in cricket, rugby in the bag, football again not massively behind.
Or is this racist ?0 -
It's all bollocks about 'never in a thousand years' - and the comment was about India, not Indians, and based on the almost complete lack of interest in rugby and football on the sub-continent. That could change, of course, but still highly unlikely that India will ever do the treble - same goes for Lichtenstein!Moreover, does anyone really think that World Cups in football, rugby and cricket will still be being played in a thousand years? I'll give it 100 max, and that's being optimistic.0
