generalgrog wrote:Allright this is it... what soccer/football fans have been waiting for. In Two days the Yanks and Limeys square off in a 234 year old grudge match.
Will it be Rooney and gang? Or Donovan and gang?
I predict USA wins in a supr duper underdog special upset 2-1.
2-1 to England. USA score first, England equalise with a dubious/comical leveller ( it''ll be an own goal or come off of Crouch's shin/similar) and then we sneak a cheeky winner with a few moments to spare.
Were English, we have such grudges against the French, Germans, Japs and pretty much the rest of the world, we cant have a "grudge" match with former colonies
A slight wish to win maybe.. but not a grudge match.
Personally i dont care either way, my missus will whinge at me if England win, but id prefer them to win (slightly) so i still havent made up my mind who i want to win, i think lack of whinging from the Long Haired Colonel is better than my own leaning though.
I'm going for 1-1. I hope it's a boring game, because I'm going to miss it. Wife going into labour that day (12 days overdue, so no choice anymore).
And no we are not naming it after the first goal scorer. No son of mine is being called Wayne (apologies to any Waynes here on Dakka, I'm sure it's a fine name once you get used to it).
Flashman wrote:I'm going for 1-1. I hope it's a boring game, because I'm going to miss it. Wife going into labour that day (12 days overdue, so no choice anymore).
What, so cos your missing it we all have to watch a sucky match?
Flashman wrote:I'm going for 1-1. I hope it's a boring game, because I'm going to miss it. Wife going into labour that day (12 days overdue, so no choice anymore).
And no we are not naming it after the first goal scorer. No son of mine is being called Wayne (apologies to any Waynes here on Dakka, I'm sure it's a fine name once you get used to it).
Nah
like Morathi said England always make hard work of early games in these competitions.
If they win it will be by a single goal.
First matches tend to be a bit cagey, though for those watching I hope it won't be a dull draw.
we cant have a "grudge" match with former colonies
Tell that to the Aussies!
okay, Australia was technically a dominion but it's close enough
The French connection is obvious, because of Tierrys handball that cost Ireland a spot in the world cup. The England connection must be some loyalty to the IRA or something.
Let's be real here for a second. Team USA aren't terrible. But they aren't in the same league as England. They're not even in the same SPORT.
Of course, in the modern game the gulf in class between any given international team isn't as big as it used to be in years gone by - all countries who succesfully qualify for the World Cup are of a pretty high standard and can beat any other team on their day, depending on various factors. Form going into the competition plays a big part, as does team morale/confidence, sheer skill/athleticism, not to mention a healthy dose of luck. Team USA could get lucky and conceivably sneak a draw or a very narrow win. That's not in doubt.
However, England are in good goalscoring form, are confident, have a better manager, better coaches and vastly superior players to the USA team. Although we like to downplay our chances, England are one of the top teams in the world - every match they play is like a cup-final for the other team, because beating England is a pretty big feather in the cap. We've also had the luck recently, and the team have shown that they can grind out results even when we aren't playing well. Look at the Mexico game: England beat them 3-1 without really even trying.
This isn't 'trash-talking' on my part, as I don't really believe in that. It's tacky. That said, England are by far the superior football team - it's just a fact. The USA's best players play for mediocre English Premier League clubs - England's players play for some of the best clubs in the world and we have a world-class manager.
Come on, what would the yanks be saying if it was USA vs. England in Basketball? They'd be talking about how much they're gonna kick our limey arses, and with good reason.
I think Team USA will be lucky to keep the score down to a 2-0 victory to England. Look at Rooney's eyes - he's not messing around this time. That said, I want to see Team USA do well in the competition and I wouldn't begrudge them a win against us - it would be a big achievement for them, so there would be no sour grapes from me.
The latter I reckoned on. Hey ho.
The former I had forgotten about.
not sure which outcome I would prefer.
Maybe England keeping a clean sheet every game but France getting stuffed each match so badly the pub gets drunk dry and is made bankrupt having given away all the beer yup that would work, it ain't gonna happen but one may live in hope.
Let's be real here for a second. Team USA aren't terrible. But they aren't in the same league as England. They're not even in the same SPORT.
Of course, in the modern game the gulf in class between any given international team isn't as big as it used to be in years gone by - all countries who succesfully qualify for the World Cup are of a pretty high standard and can beat any other team on their day, depending on various factors. Form going into the competition plays a big part, as does team morale/confidence, sheer skill/athleticism, not to mention a healthy dose of luck. Team USA could get lucky and conceivably sneak a draw or a very narrow win. That's not in doubt.
However, England are in good goalscoring form, are confident, have a better manager, better coaches and vastly superior players to the USA team. Although we like to downplay our chances, England are one of the top teams in the world - every match they play is like a cup-final for the other team, because beating England is a pretty big feather in the cap. We've also had the luck recently, and the team have shown that they can grind out results even when we aren't playing well. Look at the Mexico game: England beat them 3-1 without really even trying.
This isn't 'trash-talking' on my part, as I don't really believe in that. It's tacky. That said, England are by far the superior football team - it's just a fact. The USA's best players play for mediocre English Premier League clubs - England's players play for some of the best clubs in the world and we have a world-class manager.
Come on, what would the yanks be saying if it was USA vs. England in Basketball? They'd be talking about how much they're gonna kick our limey arses, and with good reason.
I think Team USA will be lucky to keep the score down to a 2-0 victory to England. Look at Rooney's eyes - he's not messing around this time. That said, I want to see Team USA do well in the competition and I wouldn't begrudge them a win against us - it would be a big achievement for them, so there would be no sour grapes from me.
Good luck to our cousins across the pond!
Our soccer team is going to own you guys. Football is a manly sport with men in pads and helmets. Don't know where you guys mixed that one up. Then again you guys drive on the wrong side of the road AND you continually fail to correctly spell simple words like color and flavor.
1. Celtics defense- they must limit Kobe Bryant and Paul Gasol to lower than 40% shooting if they have a shot at winning.
2. Rebounds- the Celtics must outrebound the Lakers. All games in the Finals have so far been decided by who out rebounded the others.
3. Bench- whoever gets the most points off the bench should be the team with the greater advantage, especially since both line ups that start are star studded.
Vladsimpaler, I already discussed the reasons for the differences between america, europe, and foreign european colonies.
Although I always forget that america has a soccer team before the world series and the olympics, I think america is the best and isn't afraid of anything.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Chibi Bodge-Battle wrote:
men in pads and helmets.
Ah yes, Criket lovely cricket
But what's with the owning of people. I thought slavery had been abolished
I was watching the IPL with an indian friend and a pakistani friend of mine. Kept thinking WTF the entire time. That's why I like american football, its direct and to the point.
Vladsimpaler wrote:AND you continually fail to correctly spell simple words like color and flavor.
"Don't lecture me about honour! You can't even spell it!" A classic Flashman retort as he is once again press ganged into a dangerous assignment. On this occassion, it is an American appealing (rather naively) to his sense of duty.
Flashman wrote:@ mattyrm - thank you for those kind words of support, now I hope England lose 6-0 (seriously, enjoy the game mate)
@ general grog - Landon could work, but it's a little too close to Lando for my liking.
Why on Earth wouldn't you want to name your son after Lando?!?!
As for the game, England clearly have the better players and coach, but with it being the first game of the World Cup, etc etc, I would say they are only slight favourites.
I'll be watching the game at a World Cup Fancy Dress BBQ. have to decide whether to go as Japan and wear my Kyudo gear (long robes, basically) or in my American Football gear (I play for a British Senior League team - the Kent Exiles.
Vladsimpaler wrote: Our soccer team is going to own you guys. Football is a manly sport with men in pads and helmets. Don't know where you guys mixed that one up. Then again you guys drive on the wrong side of the road AND you continually fail to correctly spell simple words like color and flavor.
Wow! Our American cousins DO understand sarcasm after all eh?
It depends.
Bunch of guys named Trevor and Hunter and Graham - yea its going to be bad.
However if half the team is named Jesus like the teams that are playing at the local park you Brits are going to be pwoned. If we don't win we'll just shoot the place up as a lesson for next year. Our immigrants kick your immigrants' asses! USA! USA! USA!
Amurica! Our Heinz 57 mutts kicking pureblood butt since 1775
Amurica! Our Heinz 57 mutts kicking pureblood butt since 1775
My dear old thing!
My own lineage is not going to be untypical. With Celtic, Saxon possibly Norse and even a little dash of Indian thrown into the pot, hardly makes us purebred.
p.s. I'm a Man-U fan so I know what Rooney can do, if he keeps his head on.
Well you don't live in Manchester and don't know much about football so you fit the stereotype...
HAHA!!
Well beinag as I'm deprived of decent soccer here in America, the only good soccer I get to watch is coming out of Europe so naturally I'm going to gravitate to the better teams. I like Valencia too from La Liga.
I mean I haven't purchased any Man-U gear or anything,(and don't think I would)
In hockey there used to be a saying about a tie being like "kissing your sister." They have shootouts now in hockey to break ties, so that one's gone extinct.
Of the cliches on that site, these have fairly close American equivalents:
"You can’t win the title in August but you can certainly lose it"
"A game of two halves"
"To be strong on paper"
As the site points out ,"football is a funny old game" has its American equivalent in "that’s why they play the game." An American football-specific version is "any given Sunday in the National Football League," meaning even a bad NFL team has a reasonable chance of upsetting a good team in a particular game.
Edit: So when one of your football goaltenders is having a great game, do they say he's "standing on his head"? That's what they say in hockey.
Or do they say he's "in form"? Can goalies be "in form"? I read a whole article about what it means to be in form, but I wasn't clear if it applied to goaltenders.
Vladsimpaler wrote: Our soccer team is going to own you guys. Football is a manly sport with men in pads and helmets. Don't know where you guys mixed that one up. Then again you guys drive on the wrong side of the road AND you continually fail to correctly spell simple words like color and flavor.
No, rugby is a manly sport where nobody needs to be wrapped up in padding. It's our language, we know how to spell thanks. And I'm pretty pretty sure we'll win tomorow. Hope that clears things up, you seem a little confused
Uk players play for Man United, Chelsea or Arsenal, US national team players play for .... Watford. Ok some do play for Premiership sides and A rated European teams like Milan and Rangers, but its only some. A national team that cannot fill a lineup with players currently in the top division of the national leagues they play for is in for trouble.
US has a decent defense and an excellent goal keeper. I think if they can stick to a solid defensive plan and not get to risky on offense they can come away with a draw.
Soladrin wrote:This world cup will suck, Zidane's not playing :(
feth that mate, i just got home from the pub after the first match, it was really entertaining. Great through ball from the South African for that first goal, i found it a very fun game to watch, they both kinda sucked though.
Now im knacking some bottles before France kick off!
The best football quotation ever is the Bill Shankly one:
"Some people believe football is a matter of life and death, I am very disappointed with that attitude. I can assure you it is much, much more important than that."
Kilkrazy wrote:The best football quotation ever is the Bill Shankly one:
"Some people believe football is a matter of life and death, I am very disappointed with that attitude. I can assure you it is much, much more important than that."
Totally.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Chibi Bodge-Battle wrote:When was the last time an opening game didn't end with a draw?
You mean an England opening game? Because I remember that in 2002 I was rather delighted when Senegal beat France.
The thing that I think is kind of lost here with all the comparison between Englands talent v USA talent is the importance of this game to each team. Sure England has better players, but if England beats the USA it's really not that big of deal to the English becuase they are supposed to beat them, and they look down on US soccer as inferior (and rightfully so, for the moment). However if the USA beats England it would be almost.... if not as special as beating a team like Brazil would be.
A win means more to the US, than to the English, and that could be just enough edge to get the win. Look at what South Africa did vs Mexico....no one thinks South Africa has any chance of getting out of their group, and they almost beat Mexico, who are a decent team.
I think I have worked out what will happen. The England and US teams will kck the ball around until eventually one of the England team manages to get his act together stop preening and get the goal in the net. after they have all jumped up and down slid down the corner posts etc they will notice the US team making a phone call.
Team USA will then call in an their airstrike and order a precision drop of 50 footballs in the opposite goal to arrive a while later, however this forgetting the ends change at half time. So they will require a repeat heavier strike of a further strike of 100 balls arriving late in the seciond half, most of which will go in but some will miss and hit England players as per usual. This may be followed up with a final drop of 100 balls in injury time.
Orlanth wrote:I think I have worked out what will happen. The England and US teams will kck the ball around until eventually one of the England team manages to get his act together stop preening and get the goal in the net. after they have all jumped up and down slid down the corner posts etc they will notice the US team making a phone call.
Team USA will then call in an airstrike and precision drop 50 footballs in the opposite goal a while later, however forgetting the ends change at half time. So they will follow up with a further two larger airstrikes of 100 balls each, most of which will go in but some will miss and hit England players as per usual.
US wins approx 200-51. With some stoppage for injury time.
Like I said earlier
we have better songs than you!
You Yanks just don't know how to do football chants
A former British comrade told a tell of a game between the Uk and Germany. The crowd chant was "those who won the war Stand UP!" (they would all of course stand up). Excellent.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
WarOne wrote:
Frazzled wrote:
I bow to your wisdom and epic Picture Wu Shu
But it is I who learned from the master that I should thank:
halonachos wrote:The reason why americans will be upset with a draw is because there is no emotion in america for a draw. We either win or lose in america.
If you win, you celebrate, if you lose you get angry, if you tie you... you... hell if I know.
That's why we get angry, we don't know how to react to a tie.
No one ties in America. What do think the A stands for, FRANCE?
halonachos wrote:That's true Frazz, which is why every single sport invented in america lacks the ability to tie.
Football, basketball, baseball; no ties, only overtime.
Don't forget competitive foursquare. Have you ever seen four elementary school girls play fours quare? I've seen them make professional football players pee themselves they are so mean. Makes me proud to be am American.
And now for no reason in particular:
Automatically Appended Next Post:
gorgon wrote:*Psst* Hey Donovan McNabb...NFL games can end in ties.
Yes, it is interesting to contemplate how Americans, who are normally so individualistic, can dedicate themselves to the collective in team based sports.
Kilkrazy wrote:Yes, it is interesting to contemplate how Americans, who are normally so individualistic, can dedicate themselves to the collective in team based sports.
A former British comrade told a tell of a game between the Uk and Germany. The crowd chant was "those who won the war Stand UP!" (they would all of course stand up). Excellent.
The main chant for playing Germans is: 'two World Wars and one World Cup'.
England should, going by the players they have, walk it.
And I really can't see any grudge match quality in an england vs usa football game. At least not in these sense that Germany, Argentina and Scotland are.
Kilkrazy wrote:Yes, it is interesting to contemplate how Americans, who are normally so individualistic, can dedicate themselves to the collective in team based sports.
For the Greater Good!
You miss the point Frazzie. He means commies are taking over, via sport, and you ain't thunk it yet.
Kilkrazy wrote:Yes, it is interesting to contemplate how Americans, who are normally so individualistic, can dedicate themselves to the collective in team based sports.
Personally I don't think we do the team thing that well. We tolerate it. Our national pastime (baseball) is pretty individualistic when you get right down to it. Our failures in international basketball to countries playing better "team" ball are well-documented. Football's our most "team" sport, but look at all the prima donnas there, especially at receiver. Hockey is actually the most "team" sport of the four majors here, but that sport truly belongs to the Canadians and not us.
The one that always gets me is our tendency to drop batons, make lane violations, etc. in international track relay events. Baton handoffs are NOT hard. High school athletes can do them routinely. But our guys are usually focused on their individual events and don't put in enough practice time. So it's a comedy of errors despite having the overall best talent out there. Track's not a big deal here, but I think the phenomenon is very telling.
generalgrog wrote:The thing that I think is kind of lost here with all the comparison between Englands talent v USA talent is the importance of this game to each team. Sure England has better players, but if England beats the USA it's really not that big of deal to the English becuase they are supposed to beat them, and they look down on US soccer as inferior (and rightfully so, for the moment). However if the USA beats England it would be almost.... if not as special as beating a team like Brazil would be.
A win means more to the US, than to the English, and that could be just enough edge to get the win. Look at what South Africa did vs Mexico....no one thinks South Africa has any chance of getting out of their group, and they almost beat Mexico, who are a decent team.
GG
I agree with you here - this is the set of circumstances under which America could win the match: if England they're going to walk it and get too complacent, and USA have the greater motivation. The Team USA players and coaching staff should have been talking down their chances in the media, really going to town, saying stuff like 'we expect that we will struggle - we're hoping for a draw'. That's just basic mind-gaming. That type of strategy doesn't strike me as a particularly 'American' thing to do, though.
JohnHwangDD wrote:Thank goodness it'll only be a soccer loss, rather than something exciting like hockey or basketball...
mattyrm wrote:Haha! Two girls games?
reds8n wrote:Yeah, women's sports are never as important.
Huh? I can understand you poms not knowing about American basketball, but are there no Canadians on the board to educate you limeys about ice hockey?
*sigh*
Clue time: soccer is a little kids game. Nobody cares.
You come back when you lot are going to start playing grownup mens games like real football, basketball, or hockey - games that require a full-grown man just to take a hit from another man.
____
smiling Assassin wrote:What about when you lose to us at rowing?
Like soccer, one wonders whether any Americans even care. It's like we lost a darts or pool. Nobody cares. ____
Orlanth wrote:
mattyrm wrote:
JohnHwangDD wrote:England 3 - US 0
Thank goodness it'll only be a soccer loss, rather than something exciting like hockey or basketball...
Haha! Two girls games?
More sarcasm! You guys crack me up!
Oddly enough the US womens football team is amongst the best in the world.
Eh. The US girls soccer team is nothing but a bunch of cheaters.
Normally I'd say: "The World Cup, you say? Why, 'tis the sport of the Neanderthal!" Buuut since it's England vs USA.... oooh a bit of my national pride has been briefly kindled..
C'MON ENGERLAND!
*paints face like a barbarian and runs nude down the street waving about a St. Georges flag*
JohnHwangDD wrote:You come back when you lot are going to start playing grownup mens games like real football, basketball, or hockey - games that require a full-grown man just to take a hit from another man.
Not a grownup mens' sport?
Oh and...
?
600% tougher but actually safer than American Football.
[Don't worry chaps, I got the picture from the Telegraph website.]
@JohnHwangDD-Clue time: soccer is a little kids game. Nobody cares. You can't say that! FOOTBALL WHICH YOU CALL SOCCER IS THE "WORLD GAME" Don't you find all Americans (most of them)Patriotic? No I can't Say that they will call in an airstrike on my location. Well I have no need to be patriotic because I am South African. 1-1 Against Mexico YAY! I was expecting a 2-0 loss. Well as for my prediction. I think England will win slightly but anything could happen.
JohnHwangDD wrote:You come back when you lot are going to start playing grownup mens games like real football, basketball, or hockey - games that require a full-grown man just to take a hit from another man.
Not a grownup mens' sport?
Oh and...
?
600% tougher but actually safer than American Football.
sA
Your average Football Defensive lineman would toss a rugby player around like he was a little child. American footballers wear padding and neck braces and helmets due to the severity of hits. A rugby player getting hit by someone like Pat Williams from the Mn Vikings would curl up and cry like a girly man.
So Jonn is right. Rugby is not even close to real football, ie American football. It's also not as glamorous. We have much cooler looking uniforms. Purple and gold baby. Yeah!!!
Watching South Korea and Greece right now and I'm going to take a peak at the US v. England later today too. I have no idea who'll win because I don't know enough about the sport. I do think it's much more interesting and exciting than some of the nay-sayers give it credit for.
It is only the USA where footie is considered a childrens' game.
It is a HUGE sport for kids right up through high school and college/university. When I was a boy everyone I knew played soccer either through a league or just in the neighborhood.
Fateweaver wrote:Your average Football Defensive lineman would toss a rugby player around like he was a little child. American footballers wear padding and neck braces and helmets due to the severity of hits. A rugby player getting hit by someone like Pat Williams from the Mn Vikings would curl up and cry like a girly man.
So Jonn is right. Rugby is not even close to real football, ie American football. It's also not as glamorous. We have much cooler looking uniforms. Purple and gold baby. Yeah!!!
Are you trying to tell me this unathletic butter ball is a paragon of American butch Football? Says a lot.
Chabal would crush him. Well, not crush. If you ground up the killer element in both of those guys to bake a cake, Chabal's would be the best. He's wild.
JohnHwangDD wrote:You come back when you lot are going to start playing grownup mens games like real football, basketball, or hockey - games that require a full-grown man just to take a hit from another man.
(rowing)
Not a grownup mens' sport?
Oh and...
(rugby)
600% tougher but actually safer than American Football.
Both of those sports are playable by a guy my size, and I'm only 6-foot, 180#. None of us are going to go toe-to-toe against a pro football lineman - those guys are about 300#, wicked explosive, and they hit like a freight train. You go ahead and put one of your "world class" rowing or rugby guys in front of a OG, and that lineman is gonna hurt someone. Bad.
Oh yeah, re your pictures, just line your rugby guy up on the line... that butterball will take his head off. American football isn't some ballet of movement where guys run for minutes at a time. American football is played seconds at a time, and the half-second after the whistle blows is all it takes for him to jump up and sledgehammer the guy in front of him into the ground.
JohnHwangDD wrote:Both of those sports are playable by a guy my size, and I'm only 6-foot, 180#. None of us are going to go toe-to-toe against a pro football lineman - those guys are about 300#, wicked explosive, and they hit like a freight train. You go ahead and put one of your "world class" rowing or rugby guys in front of a OG, and that lineman is gonna hurt someone. Bad.
Perfectly playable, but are you world class at either?
You've clearly never met a member of the GB rowing team or a professional Rugby player They may not weigh as much but both sports require as much explosive force as American football, rowing probably more. Considering the weight that some of the American footballers harbour in their bellies, it's not that impressive.
I never claimed to be world class - just of similar size. But there's no way on earth that those guys can be as big as an OG or DT. They're cardio-based, so they can't carry as much weight and still be effective.
American linemen are very much like Sumo wrestlers - huge and explosive, but only for several seconds at a time. That's why you never see one of them run a ball in for a score. They're too heavy for that.
But stand in front of him, and let him hit you, and that's a whole different thing.
JohnHwangDD wrote:I never claimed to be world class. But there's no way on earth that those guys can be as big as an OG or DT. They're cardio-based, so they can't carry as much weight and still be effective.
American linemen are very much like Sumo wrestlers - huge and explosive, but only for several seconds at a time. That's why you never see one of them run a ball in for a score. They're too heavy for that.
But stand in front of him, and let him hit you, and that's a whole different thing.
Ahh I see what you're getting at better now.
Definately don't want to be hit by one of those. They look ridiculous but I guess it fills their role fine on the pitch.
John is right. Defensive Linemen and even Offensive Linemen aren't built for long distance sprinting. Some RB's and LB's and Receivers are on the plus side of 230 but most of the faster ball carriers are lighter than me or close (I'm 245). Rugby players may be as strong (don't let buttergut fool you, he could probably pick any one of us up without so much as even straining his muscles) but his job is to knock your head off within the first couple of yards and a good lineman or tight end or safety will do that.
I've seen videos of some rugby hits and while they look painful (mostly due to no padding as such) the way AF plays if the players didn't wear padding there'd be a lot more deaths and or serious injuries as a result. From what I gather the men line up on the ball in what looks like a large group hug and push back and forth trying to get the ball loose, when it does come loose eventually it looks like a cross between soccer and american football (guys throwing it away or kicking it away to another person). In AF those guys line up 2 feet away and try to break the other person in half (within the rules of course) to try to keep him from hitting the guy with the ball.
So I still don't see rugby being more manly due to no protective clothing. If anything the pads and helmets help to further strengthen the argument players in AF hit a lot harder than in rugby. Even with padding lots of players have had their careers (and even lives) ended due to bad hits, illegal hits or hard hits. One sport focuses on a big group shove to free the ball and then from there it's all about trying to intercept the ball and or maybe tackle someone. The other has 300 plus pound men trying to pound one another or someone lighter (poor receiver) into the ground until he drops the ball or is ruled down and thus the line up across from eachother begins anew.
Hey Heacy
I gather you think that It will be 1-0 to England
Could we drop the macho stuff about which is tougher now please.
Ultimately they are different games and while a bit of light hearted banter was fun it is starting to get tedious.
The issue is parochial.
We like rugger you like gridiron, everyone's a winner
But ... sheesh, you'll be tellin' me 40K is better than WHFB next
Automatically Appended Next Post: Hextaple
A juicy geometric fruit
nice word Fateweaver
Automatically Appended Next Post: A juicy geometric fruit that is cursed, even
Yeah the pads don't make a difference to the "manly/not manly" argument anyway which is stupid.
Was boxing less manly before gloves? Certainly not, but more people die because of boxing these days than in the bare knuckle days for that express reason - you can hit much harder and not feel it. If both sides have pads, neither side feels it.
Get off the intanetz and down the pub like any normal person. If you don't you may not have sufficient levels of alcahol in you to remember the works to ENG-ER-LAND, ENG-ER-LAND, ENG-ER-LAND, ENG-ER-LAND......ad infanitum
smiling Assassin wrote:Yeah the pads don't make a difference to the "manly/not manly" argument anyway which is stupid.
Was boxing less manly before gloves? Certainly not, but more people die because of boxing these days than in the bare knuckle days for that express reason - you can hit much harder and not feel it. If both sides have pads, neither side feels it.
sA
Thats the problem. The hits a lot of times dont hurt bad but still cause severe damage over time so that you dont realize it.
Terrible defense by USA at first.... Howard almost taken out early (that would've sucked) and then... luckiest goal in the history of the world cup (well.. maybe) wow.... what a game, and its only the first half.
well it was a tie which I predicted though I figured no goals were gonna be scored... but still a tie for the US is a defeat for England!! this is where I gloat a little bit. But it was a good game all round, Howard was excellent, Rooney didn't get enough touches in my opinion. Green will forever be remembered as the guy that gave up a goal that a school yard boy WOULDN'T give up.
Chibi Bodge-Battle wrote:Gidiron players didn't always wear armour. afaik They wear the padding to prevent damage from the helmets.
They didn't wear pads at first and there were so many deaths that the President (Teddy Roosevelt) had to step in and demand rules changes. That's when things like the neutral zone, etc. were created and pads started being worn, IIRC. Unlike rugby, American football is based around high-speed collisons. Rugby is a rough, tough sport, but you don't get situations where 245 lb. linebackers that can run like sprinters get yards of acceleration before throwing themselves straight into your chest. Different sport with different physical demands.
Kudos to the U.S. team. We got lucky, but our guys did a great job holding England to one goal.
I said elsewhere that the tackling is of a different nature. Some of the hits in rugger are fierce but the body positions are totally different to Gridiron.
Anyways I listened to the game on the radio. Engerland as expected failed to play to their full potential. It may have been a lucky goal but no less than USA deserved for their first half efforts, and sounded by far the better team.
England had some good chances second half. USA clearly have a problem with the back 4 so will get punished by a team who can actually finish.
Yeah we dominated second half, the first was poor. USA had a few chances, not many outstanding ones though, and England just fethed up the good ones we had - a couple of beautiful shots from outside of the box. Rooney's header was also heroic
generalgrog wrote:Warone your posts are getting tiresome...IT WASN'T FUNNY AT FIRST... AND IT ISN'T FUNNY NOW.
Please stop spamming the soccer threads with your nonsense.
Alright. I apologize for annoying you.
I do not apologize for belittling the sport of soccer as a significant pass time in America.
The fact that I have heard very little of soccer related news here except on ESPN has been quite satisfying. Not one person I talked to today seemed inclined to want to discuss soccer. Rather, it was I who tried forcing a subject about their thoughts of U.S.'s match with England. Most were not even aware America was playing an international soccer sport today. I elicited more responses to baseball than soccer.
My sampling was based upon people walking into the store today and conversing with them about the weather, sports action, and identifying people who are interested in sports. Of those I solicited about sports news today, asking about the U.S.-England match were suprised to find out from me there was a match going on.
I do not feel like I owe soccer and America's involvemnt in soccer an apology, but I will apologize to you generalgrog for making your experience less than enjoyable in this thread.
That being said, Mets will be playing later today against the hapless Orioles at 7:05pm EST.
Not true! Cubans, Japanese and Canadians also play baseball. The Japanese are very excited when one of their players gets into the US League.
No-one else cares though, however it should be noted that none of the US major home sports (ice hockey, baseball, American football and basketball) have a major international profile anyway.
Soladrin wrote:Only Americans care about baseball though. So I guess the feelings mutual
I do not denigrate the sport of soccer abroad. Specifically, I am skepitcal [okay- very skeptical (read: fanatically do not believe)] of its popularity in America. Soccer comes in a FAR distant next to last place here in America as soccer has not done a good job of integrating itself into the American landscape or the public mind.
generalgrog wrote:Warone your posts are getting tiresome...IT WASN'T FUNNY AT FIRST... AND IT ISN'T FUNNY NOW.
Please stop spamming the soccer threads with your nonsense.
Alright. I apologize for annoying you.
I do not apologize for belittling the sport of soccer as a significant pass time in America.
The fact that I have heard very little of soccer related news here except on ESPN has been quite satisfying. Not one person I talked to today seemed inclined to want to discuss soccer. Rather, it was I who tried forcing a subject about their thoughts of U.S.'s match with England. Most were not even aware America was playing an international soccer sport today. I elicited more responses to baseball than soccer.
My sampling was based upon people walking into the store today and conversing with them about the weather, sports action, and identifying people who are interested in sports. Of those I solicited about sports news today, asking about the U.S.-England match were suprised to find out from me there was a match going on.
I do not feel like I owe soccer and America's involvemnt in soccer an apology, but I will apologize to you generalgrog for making your experience less than enjoyable in this thread.
That being said, Mets will be playing later today against the hapless Orioles at 7:05pm EST.
No, you're trying to belittle the thread.
Just because you aren't interested doesn't mean that hundreds of millions of other people aren't either.
smiling Assassin wrote:
No, you're trying to belittle the thread.
Just because you aren't interested doesn't mean that hundreds of millions of other people aren't either.
sA
Well, I have to agree with you by extension that since I am belittling America's interest in soccer the thread has gotten some of my backhand as well. I do not doubt there are hundreds of millions of people out there that have an interest in soccer. I am skeptical of the extent that soccer has infested America. It is simply not as popular as some of the more entrenched franchise sports in the United States.
That's the thing. Baseball and football and basketball are as engrained into the US as much as soccer is in Europe. Hockey isn't as big in US I don't think as the first 3 but it's probably bigger in the colder states where, well, the populace can associate with it better. Hockey is huge in Mn, I know that.
Obviously the Americans who play soccer professionally care a lot about soccer but it's not belittling to say that "nobody cares". Sure SOMEONE cares over in this country but "nobody cares" is a blanket statement saying "not enough care to make it worth talking abot".
It's like the Dakka attitude that "90% of us think GW charges too much for their miniatures so that means that 90% of the WORLD player thinks GW charges too much for their stuff". Blanket statements are fun.
Fateweaver wrote:Obviously the Americans who play soccer professionally care a lot about soccer but it's not belittling to say that "nobody cares". Sure SOMEONE cares over in this country but "nobody cares" is a blanket statement saying "not enough care to make it worth talking abot".
Well, I wish I could throw some statistics in with my argument...
Hmm...so we shall get some opinions in there about the popularity of sports via a ranking system from here:
GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A!
Automatically Appended Next Post: GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A! GO U.S.A!
But the point is Generalgrog, an American, was interested enough to start a thread on Dakka which enjoys a multinational membership, and mostly from counties that do follow Association Football passionately.
If I kept jumping into an American Football discussion saying that no one else cares, then it would be frowned upon and rightly so.
Topic title:
USA vs England .... World Cup.
and not:
American Football is the Jock Strap of the Universe.
JohnHwangDD wrote:You come back when you lot are going to start playing grownup mens games like real football, basketball, or hockey - games that require a full-grown man just to take a hit from another man.
Not a grownup mens' sport?
Oh and...
?
600% tougher but actually safer than American Football.
sA
Your average Football Defensive lineman would toss a rugby player around like he was a little child. American footballers wear padding and neck braces and helmets due to the severity of hits. A rugby player getting hit by someone like Pat Williams from the Mn Vikings would curl up and cry like a girly man.
So Jonn is right. Rugby is not even close to real football, ie American football. It's also not as glamorous. We have much cooler looking uniforms. Purple and gold baby. Yeah!!!
Incorrect. If a rugby player were hit by a US lineman going football speed he'd be going to the hospital. There's a reason for the pads.
Oh, and why were we playing english football when we should've been playing american soccer?
No idea mate
I thought both teams were playing Associaction Football (that's how we got the word soccer, to distinguish it from Rugby Football) in accordance with FIFA rules?
Well okay, USA were playing soccer. England seemed to be playing silly ers
Oh and we use the metric system because of EU membership.
So it ain't really our metric system, as attested to the fact that Warhammer uses inches. It isn't to appeal to the American market.
Though it helps.
You guys don't drive on the right side of the road, you drive on the wrong side
Youth soccer in USA is vastly becoming the NUMBER ONE youth sport in our country, i think only baseball has it out numbered but if trends keep going its not gonna be for very long.
That's because many americans think its an "elitist" sport. They see all of the european countries playing it and decided that they want to be like them.
"It's not called 'soccer' its, called football." they say, yeah, I know what they call it in europe and I prefer our football to theirs.
Oh, and the best football colors are GREEN and GOLD!
I think the English bird is the best out of them 4, so we dont suck at EVERYTHING.
Im glad to see i was right anyway, i like saying i told you so.
England are spank. Heskey is a donkey, the keeper was incompetent and almost the entire team were garbage.
The result in of no consequence anyway, because as soon as England meet one of the top 5 teams they will get beaten convincingly, so its of no odds if they finish 1st or 2nd in the group anyway, neither team will win it.
Im not THAT into football, so maybe its just me, but if your not going to win the thing, what does it matter when you go out of the tourney anyway?!
And finally, its the USA, so its no big deal anyway, the missus is a yank, and there isnt much emnity between the nations despite what you might think reading dakka!
We played terribly. The second half was just typical English football - you run it right into the box, shoot too late, then get fethed over. Oh wait, that's just Arsenal football We also had too many randomers playing when we had people like Walcott who can make play and he was left at home.
Ehh, Matty, it's just a matter of pride because the Yanks beat us at our own game. We have a complex by which we always believe that even though statistically we are way away from the actual competition we still have a chance because we're going to magically beat all of the good teams. This happens in every popular sport - Andy Murray? It's our underdog complex.
The eye-tye is a close second, ill concede that. The German and the American arent even that tidy by any standards, ive been out with better lookers than that meself, but then i have to beat the women back with a gakky stick.
Henners91 wrote:So this match is another UK-USA standoff to go on the draw pile?
Wasn't as good as that tie :(
IIRC it wasnt White at the time. The Preidential Palace had to be whitewashed because the buildings shell had beemn given a new decor.
Ahh good times.
That's just a myth... All that survived from the first building were elements of the southern wall, which were white anyway
halonachos wrote:Doesn't matter, after all, we did beat you twice.
Twice? I'm only aware of two conflicts between the US and UK, one of which ended quite horribly for us (and justly so) and the other which gave the Canadians this fabulous song:
They are all Barbie dolls
the nationality is irrelevant
Sorry halonochas
Logic? Really?
I am Amerikan
Amerika is da bestest.
I like Amerikan football coz it iz Amerikan
Therefore Amerikan fuzzball is da bestest!
Look I have no probs with you liking your national sport more than Association Football. Good on yer!
But this is a thread about soccer, or babes, or burning the Whitehouse
Like the song.
Like thr spoof headline.
Like the Italian girl.
The rest are great too but dont like the face of the Yank. I wont go as far as to say 'bag job' but its getting there.
Couldnt care less about the score. England 'team' is a bunch of prima donnas. It will be humiliting if they dont get out of group, but if they fall in the second round I'm ok with that. They dont deserve better.
Fateweaver wrote: From what I gather the men line up on the ball in what looks like a large group hug and push back and forth trying to get the ball loose
That's easy to say if you've never been in a scrum or ruck before. "group hug" is about as far from an accurate description as you can get.
Fateweaver wrote: Hockey isn't as big in US I don't think as the first 3 but it's probably bigger in the colder states where, well, the populace can associate with it better. Hockey is huge in Mn, I know that.
It's like the Dakka attitude that "90% of us think GW charges too much for their miniatures so that means that 90% of the WORLD player thinks GW charges too much for their stuff". Blanket statements are fun.
How, I admitted I don't think Hockey is as big as football or baseball or bball. The former is me admitting not knowing, the latter is dakka KNOWING that they make up the world player base (or thinking they do).
The good looking ladies that have been plastered on this post.... which I am NOT complaining about.... because they are sexy. Are from the Sports Illustrated Swim Suit issue, and the clothing is air brushed on.... as in its paint. so they are actually naked.
Back to soccer (futbol),
Solvania is winning the group! Downside to the tie in the long run is it gave the two "lower" teams an opportunity to get some points and move ahead of the group, and thats what happened.
Thoughts on can USA and/or England make up the points difference and get out of group?? or has the tie handicapped both teams and we will see an unknown team move on to the group of 16??
I thought that it helps England and the USA as I was under the impression that Slovenia were rated the weakest team in the group.
England and the USA should, in theory beat Slovenia.
My prediction is still that USA will lead the group, England second. Which will probably mean that we get Germany next round! YIKES
On a side issue, The Algerian keeper also made a gaff.
The balls being used have been used since January by Germany who are sponsered by Adidas, who just so happen to make the balls.
They have an advantage over the other nations as they have had time to get used to the ball. Certainly showed in the 4-0 win over Aussie.
They are the weakest teams in the Group, but what happends if our goal keepers gak it up, and they come out with another draw? Slovenia still is winning lol.
England and USA still have to play from behind Slovenia, and playing catch up is never good. at least IMHO
Take heed of thy Avatar hcordes old thing Tha'll be reet lad as they say in these here parts!
I reckon your midfield and forward line will be too good for Slovenia. So a win puts you on 4 points to Slovenia's 3
Assuming England don't lose to Slovenia that should mean a draw should be good enough for you against Algeria.
The pressure is more on England on Friday.
(Just don't pin your hopes on England though )
playing behind in the standing always makes me nervous, because there is less wiggle room to make errors, we have to come out and win, no ifs ands or butts about it.
If we draw, or heaven forbid loose...... we still have to play from behind.
hcordes wrote:The good looking ladies that have been plastered on this post.... which I am NOT complaining about.... because they are sexy. Are from the Sports Illustrated Swim Suit issue, and the clothing is air brushed on.... as in its paint. so they are actually naked.
Back to soccer (futbol),
Solvania is winning the group! Downside to the tie in the long run is it gave the two "lower" teams an opportunity to get some points and move ahead of the group, and thats what happened.
Thoughts on can USA and/or England make up the points difference and get out of group?? or has the tie handicapped both teams and we will see an unknown team move on to the group of 16??
this may need its own thread.
I think that England and the USA will slap both Slovenia and Algeria. We'll end up with the same amount of points on the board and it will come down to goal-difference for the top spot. I fancy England to score more goals, but then I WOULD say that, wouldn't I?
Hmm
Firstly I doubt if Green is a moron.
Secondly the Algerian goalie did the same thing which helps us both as suggested.
Thirdly and more pertinently to the point I was trying to make, is that England seem to have a habit of making life difficult by dropping points in the first match, then scraping through to the next stage.
It is too easy to blame Green because it was such a glaring error.
There were 13 outfield players that were equally culpable for the draw. eg If the strikers had taken their chances then the keeping error would be seen as a minor blip.
The fact is, if you wanna win the fether, your gonna have to beat the best teams, so who cares if you come first or second in the group anyway? Seems pretty irrelevant to me. If England or the USA win the cup ill eat hay with a donkey, so you lot arguing about it seems pretty pointless, neither team will reach the final, and second place is the first loser! :-)
Who's arguing?
Most of us are agreeing that England are gakk. We can still take an interest.
Second place means meeting Germany next round so instant bye-byes. At least there is a slim chance of progressing one round more if you can avoid that.
Algeria won't be push overs but if the players decide to be a team for once England should get a result from the Algeria game John.
On paper.
In theory.
With luck
and a fair wind...
The only thing we are any good at is drinking, fighting, dealing with inclement weather and whinging. Lets get all this sporting nonsense out of our systems right now. :-)
Nope
no good at drinking or fighting
Whinging I can manage and am ok on the inclement weather which is just as well living in South Yorks.
Still, 2 out of four ain't bad
In any case, you forgot cream teas. We do a lovely cream tea in England.
Chibi Bodge-Battle wrote:Nope
no good at drinking or fighting
Whinging I can manage and am ok on the inclement weather which is just as well living in South Yorks.
Still, 2 out of four ain't bad
In any case, you forgot cream teas. We do a lovely cream tea in England.
Its alright mate, i can drink and fight like ten men so ill cover you on this one.
(seriously, enjoy the game mate)
ers 
