Seconds After USA Scored Against Eng Today [Pic]

Submitted by: fancylad 7 years ago in Games

There"s nothing you or your silly, outdated faux-hawk can do Becks. [Who else is watching? Thoughts?]
There are 318 comments:
Male 368
ENTIRE THREAD IS EUROPE!
0
Reply
Male 660
Scottish Independence was popular on both sides of the border. You complained about the Gov. having no mandate to govern with one mp, Labour have used thier Scottish Mp`s to run England into the ground. Yes the industries were cut back but they were on there way out anyway they would have just been subsidised by the Gov. Also notice that it was all the Socttish and Northern banks which needed bailing out Abbey Barclays didn`t get Gov. support.

The real reason independence hasn`t happened Labour the people you keep voting in, wont allow it as they`d never win an election again. So they went round the devolution route. Why you get subsidised by english tax payer to get free elderly care no tuition fee`s no prescription costs..... (list goes on) yet your politicians still vote to lap it on the english
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]Yeah. It COULDN`T have been a well struck ball that Green misjudged. [/quote]

He played well to get into a position to take a shot at all, but he had neither the time, space nor angle to make a good shot.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]...on another unrelated point...i always thought becks was at the cuttin` edge of fashion?...didnt this haircut go out with `popped` collars?...its a 6yr olds haircut on a 35 yr old man...[/quote]

The cutting edge of fashion is whatever anyone with enough relevant power says it is. It`s not as though fashion has any real basis. No doubt you`ve seen some of the truly bizarre clothes in fashion shows.
0
Reply
Male 877
...on another unrelated point...i always thought becks was at the cuttin` edge of fashion?...didnt this haircut go out with `popped` collars?...its a 6yr olds haircut on a 35 yr old man...
0
Reply
Male 877
Angilion
Male, 40-49, Europe
3046 Posts Monday, June 14, 2010 8:01:47 PM
Please let me spell it out for you...


Please allow me to return the favour:

When you quote someone asking a question and place text after that quote as if it was an answer to the question, expect people to point out that it isn`t. Your "answer" was completely unrelated to the question you were claiming to be answering unless you were arguing that Africa, America and the Caribbean were colonies of Scotland and Scotland was a colony of England.

well whatever about my puncuation you got the point...i only have a second level education, sorry for any confusion...not looking to win debates on here just pointing out a fact that Englands wealth isnt all Englands doing...

apoligies and best of luck in the world cup...
0
Reply
Male 12,365
Even cats watching the game were amazed by the goalie`s mistake:

Cat is amazed by what they see...
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]Please let me spell it out for you... [/quote]

Please allow me to return the favour:

When you quote someone asking a question and place text after that quote as if it was an answer to the question, expect people to point out that it isn`t. Your "answer" was completely unrelated to the question you were claiming to be answering unless you were arguing that Africa, America and the Caribbean were colonies of Scotland and Scotland was a colony of England.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]That question is laughable- If your knowledge of history is so weak, or you can`t be bothered to do a little reading, then you are clearly out of your depth in an adult debate. [/quote]

A nice line in insults, but do you have a point?

Nice editing job to make it look like I was refering to all Scottish people when in fact I explicitly stated Scottish nationalists.

[quote]Seriously doubt you could spot anyone trying to blur historical facts- though do enlighten me as to which ones you are talking about.[/quote]

Oh come on. There are people who think *Braveheart* is historical. That`s how far the revisionism has gone. The messiness of the reality has been widely replaced by a simple idea of scumbag English invading Scotland and violently abusing the Scots just because they can and they`re scumbags.

In reality, there were Scots on both sides, one war started with a Scottish invasion of England, many of the nobility were related, etc
0
Reply
Male 10,338
@suparmon:

Yeah. It COULDN`T have been a well struck ball that Green misjudged.
0
Reply
Male 16
Angilion
Why did England accept Scotland`s request to join the union anyway? ... I`m sick of their blathering, their propaganda and their historical revisionism.

That question is laughable- If your knowledge of history is so weak, or you can`t be bothered to do a little reading, then you are clearly out of your depth in an adult debate.

Seriously doubt you could spot anyone trying to blur historical facts- though do enlighten me as to which ones you are talking about.
0
Reply
Female 87
Stupid yanks.
They were just too bad to score their own goal, so we felt bad and put one in for them :)
0
Reply
Female 13
Becks was the very best part of Green`s megafail.
0
Reply
Female 3,828
LOL awesome.
0
Reply
Male 877
scotchbot
Female, 18-29, Europe
121 Posts Monday, June 14, 2010 3:01:35 AM
drat the scots, hating england and supporting the americans, give em there independence if they want it, itd be hilarious


Not all of us are anti-English, theres alot of us that are indifferent to the US, England, France ,Germany etc...We could care less about what team wins the world cup...I would only support my own country regardless of who`s playing who...

0
Reply
Male 877
Angilion
Male, 40-49, Europe
3034 Posts Monday, June 14, 2010 2:03:28 AM
Angilion
Male, 40-49, Europe
3034 PostsScotland was not and is not an English colony.
If you want to bring up a completely unrelated point, feel free. Just don`t pretend it`s an answer to another question, or else you`re obviously wrong.

Please let me spell it out for you...
Firstly I never said Scotland was a colony
Secondly it was you that said England supported the Scotts financially and maybe they should go it alone if they get theyre independence.I was merely pointing that Englands wealth isnt all Englands...It came from sugar tobacco slavery and colonies all over the world...im sure you`ll agree.
So when you say ,see how well the Scotts do without Englands financial support I was just letting you know that Englands wealth wasnt all created by the English but off the backs of `subjects`.
0
Reply
Female 171
drat the scots, hating england and supporting the americans, give em there independence if they want it, itd be hilarious
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]i was talking about English colonies...but you knew that already...i rest my case you got the point already...cheers![/quote]

Scotland was not and is not an English colony.

If you want to bring up a completely unrelated point, feel free. Just don`t pretend it`s an answer to another question, or else you`re obviously wrong.
0
Reply
Male 877
Angilion
Male, 40-49, Europe
3033 Posts Sunday, June 13, 2010 4:48:30 PM
hahmmm...sugar from the caribbean tobacco from america and tea from its indian colonies


I am quite sure that the Caribbean, America and India were not part of Scotland in 1707.



i was talking about English colonies...but you knew that already...i rest my case you got the point already...cheers!
0
Reply
Female 497
He looks like he`s about to turn green and grow two feet and smash things.
0
Reply
Male 10,338
You`re right Angillion. Wrong word.

I think USA winning would skyrocket the popularity in this country immediately.

I would say, it would get so popular, so fast, that we could pay the top world players enough to come play MLS, and in about 5 world cups from now, it would be a rarity that the US ever loses a match.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]Let me ask some of my Non American compatriots a question.[/quote]

Isn`t a compatriot someone from the same country?

[quote]Will you hate us more if the US actually screws up and wins the cup, or will it be the feel good hit of the summer?[/quote]

I don`t hate you anyway. Only someone bigoted to the point of insanity hates everyone from an entire country. Even a small country, let alone one as big as the USA.

I`d be kind of pleased if the USA won, simply because they`re not a first rank team, but I`d prefer them to lose to England in the final, having played well.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]So what even if US wins we still couldn`t give a f*ck about soccer[/quote]

If the USA did win, many people there would start to care about football. Maybe they`d even start calling it football. Winning the world cup in a sport that other countries play in a big way would attract a lot of attention inside the USA, plus there`s the "underdogs who won" thing.
0
Reply
Female 2,352
So what even if US wins we still couldn`t give a f*ck about soccer.
0
Reply
Male 10,338
Let me ask some of my Non American compatriots a question.

Will you hate us more if the US actually screws up and wins the cup, or will it be the feel good hit of the summer?
0
Reply
Female 467
i hate him hes ugly
england sucks
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]hahmmm...sugar from the caribbean tobacco from america and tea from its indian colonies[/quote]

I am quite sure that the Caribbean, America and India were not part of Scotland in 1707.
0
Reply
Male 877
Angilion
Male, 40-49, Europe
3025 Posts Sunday, June 13, 2010 3:54:58 PM
Why did England accept Scotland`s request to join the union anyway? Scotland got shiploads of English money to resurrect their dead economy
before the whole country went bankrupt and England got...what did England get from Scotland in 1707?

hahmmm...sugar from the caribbean tobacco from america and tea from its indian colonies...alot derived from the backs of slave labour....im not having a pop just letting you know that your monetery wealth didnt `just happen`...it came about through oppression of other peoples...

0
Reply
Male 877
Angilion
Male, 40-49, Europe
3025 Posts Sunday, June 13, 2010 3:54:58 PM
Why did England accept Scotland`s request to join the union anyway? Scotland got shiploads of English money to resurrect their dead economy before the whole country went bankrupt and England got...what did England get from Scotland in 1707?

Scotland wouldn`t be independent now anyway - they`d just be part of the EU.

I`d like to see the Scottish nationalists go it alone, maybe on an island off the coast. Properly alone, i.e. without being propped up via the EU (where they would still be getting money from England). I`m sick of their blathering, their propaganda and their historical revisionism.

...remembering that it was the corupt elites the set the wheels in motion...as happened in ALL countries including yours
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]oh david james would never of made that mistake..[/quote]

My mum wouldn`t have made that mistake!
0
Reply
Male 12,365
Why did England accept Scotland`s request to join the union anyway? Scotland got shiploads of English money to resurrect their dead economy before the whole country went bankrupt and England got...what did England get from Scotland in 1707?

Scotland wouldn`t be independent now anyway - they`d just be part of the EU.

I`d like to see the Scottish nationalists go it alone, maybe on an island off the coast. Properly alone, i.e. without being propped up via the EU (where they would still be getting money from England). I`m sick of their blathering, their propaganda and their historical revisionism.
0
Reply
Male 877
duncstar
Male, 18-29, Europe
218 Posts Sunday, June 13, 2010 3:29:05 PM
I wouldn`t mind if the Scots did get independence, I`m rather fed up of the fact that they all seem to think they`ll be better off without the UK though.

PS, YNWA Aseirinn!

thanks for the `YNWA` sentiment but when my country is free from the EU we will `WA`...but thankyou all the same...


0
Reply
Male 877
duncstar
Male, 18-29, Europe
218 Posts Sunday, June 13, 2010 3:29:05 PM
I wouldn`t mind if the Scots did get independence, I`m rather fed up of the fact that they all seem to think they`ll be better off without the UK though.

PS, YNWA Aseirinn!




they may be a little poorer financially but theyd hold theyre heads higher...as would we (the Irish) if we departed from the EU
0
Reply
Male 237
I wouldn`t mind if the Scots did get independence, I`m rather fed up of the fact that they all seem to think they`ll be better off without the UK though.

PS, YNWA Aseirinn!
0
Reply
Male 877
hamster1980
Male, 18-29, Europe
11 Posts Sunday, June 13, 2010 2:10:36 PM
duncstar Ah-ah-ah-ah...sloooow down there Jock, don`t mention oil, because .. blah blah irrelevant bollocks
You don`t read too well for someone who is trying to come off as smart.


seems we are the scuffling classes while the elites and the aristocracy are laughing in theyre sleeves...hopefully the republic of Scotland, England and wales will be enshrined in this century...

"Someone said to me `To you football is a matter of life or death!` and I said `Listen, it`s more important than that`

Bill Shankly 2 September 1913 – 29 September 1981
0
Reply
Female 2,027
oh david james would never of made that mistake..
0
Reply
Male 16
duncstar Ah-ah-ah-ah...sloooow down there Jock, don`t mention oil, because .. blah blah irrelevant bollocks
You don`t read too well for someone who is trying to come off as smart.
1) I never specifically mentioned oil - though when we had a larger reserve of it during the last referendum in the 70s the government made sure it didn`t proceed by adding ridiculous stipulations on voter turnout. 2) Our major industries - coal, shipbuilding, steel etc. were destroyed by the tories in the 80s-they can`t get a seat here now, they have no right to govern. 3) flippant wankers banding about national stereotypes like you underline why a lot of people don`t identify with the union. The average English person hardly knows that Scotland exists let alone knows how the country was run into the ground. 4) If you are `supporting` us then you`d be better off as an independent England - maybe you should be campaigning for that instead of being casually racist.
0
Reply
Male 877
duncstar
Male, 18-29, Europe
217 Posts Sunday, June 13, 2010 1:18:21 PM
Seriously? Still going for independence are ya? You do realise that you`ll be f*cked without English support?!

Ah-ah-ah-ah...sloooow down there Jock, don`t mention oil, because according to international law, anything discovered, developed, built, found, taken away or left in situ in the territory whilst it was a part of another territory, (ie. the oil that was discovered off Scottish waters whilst Scotland was a part of the UK), will still belong to the mother territory. Therefore, IF scotland were to get independence, the remaining countries in the UK would get the benefits that come from the oil off the Scottish shore.
if you indeed dislike the scotts as your comments inferred why not let them go and disolve `the union`.if i were English thats all I would be English.I happen to be Irish and thats all i am, Irish with no malice toward either...
0
Reply
Male 237
Seriously? Still going for independence are ya? You do realise that you`ll be f*cked without English support?!

Ah-ah-ah-ah...sloooow down there Jock, don`t mention oil, because according to international law, anything discovered, developed, built, found, taken away or left in situ in the territory whilst it was a part of another territory, (ie. the oil that was discovered off Scottish waters whilst Scotland was a part of the UK), will still belong to the mother territory. Therefore, IF scotland were to get independence, the remaining countries in the UK would get the benefits that come from the oil off the Scottish shore.

So there you `orrible Irn-Bru addicts.
0
Reply
Male 877
hamster1980
Male, 18-29, Europe
10 Posts Sunday, June 13, 2010 12:32:52 PM
aseirinn
calm down chief...have a referendum, vote snp, campaign for national soverighty...have you done any of these?...

Hilarious- The parties at Holyrood have successfully blocked a referendum for a long time- even when the national cause was at its most popular around `96. Oh and as James VI of Scotland acceded to the throne of England it`s really about time you guys campaigned for independence from us - After all, most of our resources have been bled dry and the `UK Government` has one seat in Scotland, not exactly a mandate to rule.


youre barkin` up the wrong tree here chief...as for the James VI monarchy card it matters not a jot `his s h i t e smells the same as mine`...not everyone is against the Scotts...from your cousins
across in Ireland...glad to hear that you are in fact scottish, not European nor brittish...

Is mise le meas...


0
Reply
Male 49
lol i hate football
0
Reply
Male 16
aseirinn
calm down chief...have a referendum, vote snp, campaign for national soverighty...have you done any of these?...

Hilarious- The parties at Holyrood have successfully blocked a referendum for a long time- even when the national cause was at its most popular around `96. Oh and as James VI of Scotland acceded to the throne of England it`s really about time you guys campaigned for independence from us - After all, most of our resources have been bled dry and the `UK Government` has one seat in Scotland, not exactly a mandate to rule.
0
Reply
Male 25,417
nice!
0
Reply
Male 877
Xric
Male, 18-29, Europe
7 Posts Sunday, June 13, 2010 11:01:05 AM
Thanks USA :D I was at a Snow Patrol gig last night in Glasgow, and the place was filled with USA flags and everyone was chanting "USA, USA!" :D
F*ck You England :D


calm down chief...have a referendum, vote snp, campaign for national soverighty...have you done any of these?...
0
Reply
Male 22
Thanks USA :D I was at a Snow Patrol gig last night in Glasgow, and the place was filled with USA flags and everyone was chanting "USA, USA!" :D
F*ck You England :D
0
Reply
Male 877
davymid
Male, 18-29, Europe
7052 Posts Sunday, June 13, 2010 9:02:48 AM
aseirinn, your British brother here is also politely asking you to play nice.


point taken (not out of fear though)...ive apoligised for being a knob, incidently im not british...
0
Reply
Male 877
peloos12
Male, 18-29, Eastern US
3435 Posts Sunday, June 13, 2010 8:57:27 AM
Not necessarily winding me up but definitely peculiar and spammish. I didn`t know if you were being douchetastic or just having computer problems. Glad you`re stopping.


sorry ,sir...best of luck in the world cup...`Football` or `soccer` I hope the US does well...
0
Reply
Male 10,338
Let me ask some of my Non American compatriots a question.

Will you hate us more if the US actually screws up and wins the cup, or will it be the feel good hit of the summer?
0
Reply
Male 5
The laugh that went up in the pub when his face appeared was probably heard miles away.

Scotland was cheering the USA on last night, its more USA flags than I`ve ever seen in person in the one area.
0
Reply
Male 3,755
By "witty" I mean stolen joke and moldy phrase.
0
Reply
Male 12,138
aseirinn, your British brother here is also politely asking you to play nice.
0
Reply
Male 3,819
Fancy sure did know what he was doing with this post...
0
Reply
Male 716
Green you tit!
0
Reply
Male 3,819
Not necessarily winding me up but definitely peculiar and spammish. I didn`t know if you were being douchetastic or just having computer problems. Glad you`re stopping.
0
Reply
Male 90
"We invented it, we get to name it. It`s called Football because you use your feet."

Now explain cricket.
0
Reply
Female 160
Why are people getting so touchy? Chill out y`all. Ok, some people like American football and some people like soccer/European football. Some people like basketball, some like swimming. I enjoy watching the figure skating myself in the Winter Olympics. Anyway what I`m trying to say is that it doesn`t matter if someone likes something else more, them liking said thing doesn`t affect you at all.

And as far as the name debate goes, I have to side with the rest of the world. I mean, America, really? (our) football came AFTER European football. Technically, we`re wrong for switching it up. But in the long run, DOES IT MATTER? To save on confusion maybe it would be beneficial to change the name but due to it`s solid standing in American culture, pigskin football is going to remain pigskin football. Soccer will stay soccer, and it will be football in England.

the end.
0
Reply
Male 877
does beckham pluck his eyebrows?
0
Reply
Male 877
peloos12
Male, 18-29, Eastern US
3430 Posts Sunday, June 13, 2010 8:19:03 AM
Hey aseirinn... any reason why you`re doing nothing but repeating yourself and parroting others?


na, just bored, cooking dinner...., nothing on telly etc...seems to be winding you up though...im off, ok one more time then...


99.99% of the world calls it football, we know it as football you know it as football, nomads in the sahara know it as football, ...if america has a game called `football` and they want to differenciate between both theyre not gonna change the name of theyre own ,are they?...so let them call it what they wish, symantics!...i love your swearing in upper case, it made me read it twice...best of luck to the US team...
0
Reply
Male 3,819
Hey aseirinn... any reason why you`re doing nothing but repeating yourself and parroting others?
0
Reply
Male 3,819
"As for elephant in room and genetics debate going on. the interesting thing I have found is when you say the genetic make up of African`s and descendants mean they are better at sports. Obvious they are there is never a problem. But when James Watson applied same thinking to ability to take information in and general intellect easier and thought processes his Career was ruined. There genetics debate is interesting as people don`t have a problem with it when you talk about positive traits but if you move to more negative traits then people have a problem.

FYI before i`m branded anything. I don`t prescribe that in blanket stereotyping, there can be a general ability or lack of, but can be overcome with work for those that don`t have it."

No, that`s a fantastic point.
0
Reply
Male 2,159
It wasn`t a goal, it was a F*ck-up. Fabio, don`t use Rob Green until he`s learnt to catch.

Oh, and the argument you`re all having is the most predictable one in the world. We invented it, we get to name it. It`s called Football because you use your feet. Not pick it up and run into people. That`s - largely - just rugby (a variation of football as it happens), only Americans play it with helmets. Pussies.

0
Reply
Male 587
America football is WAY better then SOCCER! more exciting and more action. Not just people running around a field like a bunch of chickens with their heads cut off. Soccer is only so popular cause it can be CHEAPLY played.
0
Reply
Male 877
Max_Normal
Male, 30-39, Europe
397 Posts Sunday, June 13, 2010 7:47:48 AM
.....identified by the name "Soccer" but generically is "Football".


.....identified by the name `soccer` but wound up by the name `football`.
0
Reply
Male 500
.....identified by the name "Soccer" but generically is "Football".
0
Reply
Male 500
Sorry I have to throw a bone to the Americans on this one. All Europeans know it anyway but are just winding you up.

Most sports involving a field, one or more goals and a ball (but excluding those needing a stick to hit the ball like hockey or lacrosse) started off being called football. This includes rugby, which has the full title "rugby football". Many of the various early types of football rules allowed the picking-up of the ball to run with it (and you might note that you can kick the ball forward in rugby football - that later evolved into American football, but not pass it forward by hand). One particular set of rules became standardised by the an organisation called the football association. In this set of rules it was illegal to pick the ball up. This was known as "Association football", which was then shortened to "Soccer".

By it`s heritage, American football really is football,and European football follows the set of rules i
0
Reply
Female 614
phestizio, you don`t have to keep writing idk. we know you don`t know. even without your admitting it. here`s some crayons.
0
Reply
Female 354
@poy...Nice try with the translator.
0
Reply
Male 877
Sunday, June 13, 2010 6:32:18 AM
lpycb42
Female, 18-29, Eastern US
69 Posts Sunday, June 13, 2010 6:01:46 AM
IT`S CALLED FU-CKING FOOTBALL! EVERYBODY IN THE WORLD KNOWS IT`S FU-CKING FOOTBALL NOT FU-CKING SOCCER YOU FU-CKING IDIOTS.

Seriously.


calm down my dear, you`ll give yerself a herina...

99.99% of the world calls it football, we know it as football you know it as football, nomads in the sahara know it as football, ...if america has a game called `football` and they want to differenciate between both theyre not gonna change the name of theyre own ,are they?...so let them call it what they wish, symantics!...i love your swearing in upper case, it made me read it twice...best of luck to the US team...
0
Reply
Male 877
"no...football is all about finesse, american footballs all about brawn"
0
Reply
Male 59
there was a document i saw from the 50`s that said something to the effect of "we have mapped the human g-Nome we will use this to our advantage"
it was some top secret thing though so idk maybe the army had it and created AIDS because they r evil idk
0
Reply
Male 90
Football isnt called "Football" in every country but America, morons:
Croatia: nogomet
Russia: фytбо
Italy: calcio
Polish: piłka nożna
0
Reply
Female 477
he`s so fu%#ing hot.
0
Reply
Male 660
Oh and James Watson was a pioneer on mapping out DNA
0
Reply
Male 660
@peloos it just annoy`s the world when we hear it called soccer, When it`s universally known as football.

As for elephant in room and genetics debate going on. the interesting thing I have found is when you say the genetic make up of African`s and descendants mean they are better at sports. Obvious they are there is never a problem. But when James Watson applied same thinking to ability to take information in and general intellect easier and thought processes his Career was ruined. There genetics debate is interesting as people don`t have a problem with it when you talk about positive traits but if you move to more negative traits then people have a problem.

FYI before i`m branded anything. I don`t prescribe that in blanket stereotyping, there can be a general ability or lack of, but can be overcome with work for those that don`t have it.
0
Reply
Male 34
The despair , the anger.... it`s brilliant
0
Reply
Male 3,819
0
Reply
Male 3,819
"no...football is all about finesse, american footballs all about brawn"

And finesse isn`t athleticism? It has nothing to do with muscle tone or conditioning?

And actually, the examples in my argument are all finesse players. Being a point guard in basketball, a NFL cornerback, runningback or wide receiver can be nothing but finesse.

A sport is a sport.
0
Reply
Female 171
im a massive football fan, and even though we didnt win yesterday i like how it hasnt been as nasty as it is often when we play other countries. i like that we get n with the yanks and its all just friendly banter.
if we drew to germany for example, the atmosphere here this morning would be very different.
0
Reply
Male 7,378
"football(soccer) is way more interesting than American football."
-------------
Never see a zero zero tie in American football.
0
Reply
Male 684
peloos12 "This isn`t about racism, it`s obvious genetics -- different races have different ones. "

a recent discovery in anthropology leads us to believe that all non Africans have traces of Neanderthal DNA, but not Africans themselves. There are alight genetic differences in the races, its backed by empirical evidence. denying it would be retarded, how it changes your view on racism is up to you. my thought is that your genetics give your potential, how you use it is based more on the culture you adopt. Judging someone on their genetics is unfair, judging someone on their choices is not so much. And as far as Africans tending to be better at physical activity, ill point out that MOST OF THE EVIDENCE I HAVE READ says that they have up to 20% higher testosterone levels than whites and Asians.And since it is linked to building muscles and physical activities, well you do the math.

I was going to post a link on the neanderthal dna thing, but you can google it
0
Reply
Male 2,893
football(soccer) is way more interesting than American football.
0
Reply
Male 877
lpycb42
Female, 18-29, Eastern US
69 Posts Sunday, June 13, 2010 6:01:46 AM
IT`S CALLED FU-CKING FOOTBALL! EVERYBODY IN THE WORLD KNOWS IT`S FU-CKING FOOTBALL NOT FU-CKING SOCCER YOU FU-CKING IDIOTS.

Seriously.


calm down my dear, you`ll give yerself a herina...

99.99% of the world calls it football, we know it as football you know it as football, nomads in the sahara know it as football, ...if america has a game called `football` and they want to differenciate between both theyre not gonna change the name of theyre own ,are they?...so let them call it what they wish, symantics!...i love your swearing in upper case, it made me read it twice...best of luck to the US team...
0
Reply
Male 782
Oh joy, the heated football vs American football debate. Both arguments suck. One thing that is certain though, both sports are better with beer. Beer debate, GO!
0
Reply
Male 364
I dont know why there`s always a debate about which sports are best. There`s no debate.

American Football - Popular in America
Aussie Rules - Popular in Australia
Ice Hockey - Popular in Canada
Baseball - Popular in USA and Japan
Football (aka soccer)- Popular in every country in the world.
0
Reply
Male 10
0
Reply
Male 877
peloos12
Male, 18-29, Eastern US
3425 Posts Sunday, June 13, 2010 5:28:02 AM
Could it be translated to soccer, given the chance? We`ll probably never know but I don`t see why not.

no...football is all about finesse, american footballs all about brawn
0
Reply
Male 3,819
jayme -- My point more than anything is that it`s the name that was given and there`s no way to change it. I`m just sick of people acting like I`m some sort of idiot for calling a sport by it`s official name. It made sense at the time it was named but even if it never made sense, there`s nothing we can do about it.

Besides, Monday Night American Rugby just doesn`t have the same ring to it...
0
Reply
Male 239
Despite being English, when I saw Beckham`s face after that goal, we all lol`d
0
Reply
Male 660
@skellon American football and Rugby don`t compare

@Peloos "soccer" is hundreds of years old and has had the name football for centuries. And what`s illogical about naming a sport where it was created.... But saying because American Football you used to kick the ball therefore its football doesn`t stack up as much....
0
Reply
Female 84
IT`S CALLED FU-CKING FOOTBALL! EVERYBODY IN THE WORLD KNOWS IT`S FU-CKING FOOTBALL NOT FU-CKING SOCCER YOU FU-CKING IDIOTS.

Seriously.
0
Reply
Male 3,819
"Oh btw for the Americans:

Soccer = Football
Football = American Rugby

The ball hardly touches the players feet in American Rugby so it`s silly to call it FOOTball."

No, it`s not silly to call it football. It`s called football. It`s not just some stupid nickname we have for it, it`s the actual name of the sport and has been for over 100 years. Why do they call it rugby? They hardly play it in the city of Rugby. American football used to feature a lot of foot to ball contact just as much as rugby had it`s roots in the town of Rugby. Seem just as nonsensical as each other to me... oh wait that`s right, it`s just a name.
0
Reply
Male 38
Oh btw for the Americans:

Soccer = Football
Football = American Rugby

The ball hardly touches the players feet in American Rugby so it`s silly to call it FOOTball.
0
Reply
Male 3,819
Could it be translated to soccer, given the chance? We`ll probably never know but I don`t see why not.
0
Reply
Male 3,819
Davy`s point about black people is the elephant in the room that I`ve been hesitant to mention but potentially my strongest argument. Thanks for breaking the ice on that one.

This isn`t about racism, it`s obvious genetics -- different races have different ones. People get chastised for saying this, but after watching American sports for so long, I`m absolutely convinced of it. There is a REASON the best wide receievers, runningbacks and basketball players are all black. They are blessed with superior muscle build over everybody else, no different than the way they`re wired with tons of melanin or curly hair. It`s just the way they are -- and we have tons of them.

You combine that with the second most important point I made -- the fantastic strength training and conditioning we have and THAT is the reason we have LeBron James and Antonio Cromartie, some of the most absolute FREAK athlete`s you`ll ever see in your life. That`s our advantage.
0
Reply
Male 40
It was a horrible goal. The goalkeeper must have had money on the game.
0
Reply
Male 182
USA USA USA #1

We didn`t invented football!

We made it ours!
0
Reply
Female 305
soccer = fairies. hockey = real men.
0
Reply
Male 877
...remember the lead up to the world cup, america had no time for football, now they get a draw and are all fanatics of the beautiful game...if the win one they`ll claim they invented the game...
0
Reply
Male 139
Getting a bit heated on this one...

auburnjunky is right - geography does play a role. However, not just in the way he describes. Climate and topography also make huge differences to the way the athletes can perform. For example, teams playing Aussie Rules Football tend to find it harder (and hence, used to lose more) when playing in more humid areas, such as in Brisbane, as compared to their home in lower humidity areas. Also, a dry heat can affect players in a similar way - they aren`t used to it. In a similar way, the atmospheric oxygen levels of the mountains of Nepal (for instance), make it very difficult for players from oxygen-rich environments to breathe and compete at the same level.

All of these things cause the players to tire more easily. Tired players mean that there are many more errors made.
0
Reply
Male 10,338
@sprinks:

It`s all about geography.

If there were more people of african decent up in the major hockey areas, (don`t cite Detroit, or NYC, I`ll make that point in a minute) they might be more inclined to play it. Who knows if they could have a role in it as they do other sports, like US Football, or Basketball etc.

A lot of it has to do with culture as well. Don`t see many rap videos with black guys playing street hockey. (or soccer for that matter.)
0
Reply
Male 1,929
I saw him looking like that at the time. Absolutely furious lol
0
Reply
Male 76
He`s just thinking about:"Im sleeping with posh-spice...WHAT HAVE I DONE!!!!!!!! "
0
Reply
Male 2,306
I dunno if 200 years of selection processes would have led to much shifts...not even on a interspecies level. But if you look at Hockey it`s all white people. There goes your thesis.
0
Reply
Female 387
England should`ve won but the USA had a good goalie. Our goalie totally redeemed himself with some brilliant second-half saves. Anyway, the other teams in our group are Algeria and Slovenia, so I reckon we will all be okay. England and USA to go through to the final 16 I reckon.
0
Reply
Female 3,696
hockey?

dominates....except for Canada !n_n
0
Reply
Male 129
the goal the us scored was so retarded (on the part of the goaly)
0
Reply
Male 3,755
"The only way USA could be better than
Brasil, Argentina or any good team, would
be if you had only latin people on your
team."

iceblack, wait ten years and we probably will.
0
Reply
Male 3,755
It`s cool and I see what you`re saying. It pretty much does come down to resources. If African countries had millions to spend (waste?) on athletics, they would be dominate as well. They probably deserve more credit.
0
Reply
Male 36
What team sports do the US compete with other countries? I agree that the US does dominate domestic "games" - baseball, basketball, but these are games that are not competed on a global basis
0
Reply
Male 12,138
Interesting subject smash. It could just be a matter of resources. What I mean is, in sports that require no specialised facilities/equipment etc, the Africans do dominate. Take long-distance running for example. The Kenyans and Ethiopians have that all sewn up. But when you start getting into things like football (soccer) you need a certain amount of kit... not much, but some. And the Africans may be a surprise yet in this world cup, thinking here of Ghana and Nigeria (although they got beaten today). When you start getting into sports like American Football (which I love more than `soccer` by the way, meant sincerely), you simply can`t be a kid in the african ghetto playing that on the street. That takes equipment and facilities.

And sorry for my churlish "no sh*t" post below. Didn`t mean to take a dig, it was snide of me. Handshake?
0
Reply
Male 551
@Smash

Because of what I said
0
Reply
Male 3,755
Yet, if that were difference, why doesn`t Africa dominate?
0
Reply
Male 3,755
You are right. I was just talking with my buddy yesterday about how hardly any black people are here naturally.
0
Reply
Male 12,138
vv Interesting that you mention ethnic diversity, I was having a conversation about this to a friend of mine just the other evening.

Many of the top American athletes are of African stock. Looking here at the NBA, the NFL (though curiously QBs and Offensive Line are an exception that I don`t really understand), or your top Olympians. Mainly african-americans, from casual observation (not much Asian blood in there, Tiger Woods being the obvious exception).

One could make the case that America`s domination of world sports is a throwback to the days of slavery, where the strongest, the fittest, the very best negroes were taken from Africa to work on American plantations, while the weak were left behind as they had less value as commodities. Those genes and those bloodlines permeate through to the present day.

Re-reading this before I post it, I ain`t trolling or trying to make any underlying snide comment. Just an interesting genuine convo I had recently.
0
Reply
Male 551
PS: Smash

You are the PERFECT example of the
USA-ass#%/# everybody hates

No wonder why every nation and non-american
person hates your country. Even when there
are nice people
0
Reply
Male 2,748
sad i didnt get to watch the game :(
0
Reply
Male 551
The only way USA could be better than
Brasil, Argentina or any good team, would
be if you had only latin people on your
team

USA is better at many many sports and
olympic games, but that`s because you
can actually make a living out of it
over there

Any olympic competitor over here has
to have a job to survive. So yeah, USA
is better a lot of the times, but you
gotta take the context
0
Reply
Male 3,755
Well, we have 300 million people, a diverse population, money, resources, and a complete arrogance to want to be the best at everything that matters to us. Soccer isn`t one of them.

Sad but true.
0
Reply
Male 3,755
"smash - which sports do you colonials dominate in?"

Coaching.
0
Reply
Male 12,138
Lemme get this straight smash, the only reason that the USA is not up there with the Brazils, the Argentinas, the Italys of the football world is because you couldn`t be arsed? Aren`t they lucky!

What an outstanding display of American arrogance. Bravo!
0
Reply
Male 328
I don`t really care about soccer and I don`t consider myself American but Smash speaks the truth.
0
Reply
Male 36
smash - which sports do you colonials dominate in?
0
Reply
Male 3,755
Make that quadrennial.
0
Reply
Male 253
First
0
Reply
Male 3,755
I agree Edgarska. We would be a perennial contender for the World Cup, but not always the best.
0
Reply
Male 230
damn smash, now i understand how you got 3455 posts...well let it all out bro.
0
Reply
Female 697
I like faux-hawks
0
Reply
Male 191
I was just waiting for an expression in his face but he was still...
0
Reply
Male 1,045
no m,atter how much football the U.S. played,we wouldn`t be the best, only better.
0
Reply
Male 3,755
Must say though, Davy. The fact you thought it was so obvious means you are one of the few who actually understands it.
0
Reply
Male 3,755
By "witty" I mean stolen joke and moldy phrase.
0
Reply
Male 3,755
I kinda had a feeling that my well thought out and solid argument would be met with some "witty" and sarcastic comeback.
0
Reply
Male 3,755
If you`re gonna be that way...

If the U.S. played more soccer we would dominate like we do every other sport we care about. We weould be as good, if not better, than England.
0
Reply
Male 12,138
Lemme get this straight smash... your point is that if the US played more football they`d be better at it?



In other news, if my grandmother had a set of balls she`d be my grandfather.
0
Reply
Male 5,194
>>And learn your history Russia saved the world in WW2

Lol!
0
Reply
Male 3,755
davy, I`m not saying take ANY great athlete and you can make them a great soccer player. I`m just saying that the interest in soccer in the U.S. is so low, that the best talent does not play soccer. If soccer were more popular and more people played, a larger percentage of our best athletes would play soccer. Therefore, we we would be much better. At this point, I do not think even a tiny fraction, if any at all, of our truly elite athletes plays soccer.
0
Reply
Male 3,755
"Man, arguing about sports sure turns people into gibbering retards pretty quickly."

This, folks, is what we call the peanut gallery.
0
Reply
Male 12,138
I don`t agree smash. Who`s to say that a 6`7 point guard, or a 300lb offensive lineman, or a fast pitcher, or for that matter Tiger Woods would make good football players?
0
Reply
Male 3,755
End of statement:

Basically, our best athletes don`t play soccer. So, congrats England, you tied the United States` benchwarmers.
0
Reply
Male 3,755
>>>"Almighty, I think you`re better at arguing my point than I am."

<<<"That paragraph is the opposite of your point.

Your point: "If our basketball players became footballers, they would be awesome."

My point: "They might be OK, they would not be awesome."

Learn to read."

"But he will never be better than a professional footballer, because he has focused on basketball instead of football."

Almighty, you never understood my argument in the first place so you probably shouldn`t have even responded. I`m saying that had the best athletes in the U.S. focused their entire life on soccer instead of another sport, we would be much better at soccer. Not better than anyone in particular, just world class.

I`m not saying that we could just throw our best athletes together and win.

The actual main point of my argument was that America`s best athletes don`
0
Reply
Male 3,755
"Smash your arguments tend to be you just disagreeing with people dismissing their points. Not actually putting reasons behind it."

jayme, I wasn`t dismissing their points, just saying that their arguments seemed to enforce mine.
0
Reply
Male 2,422
Man, arguing about sports sure turns people into gibbering retards pretty quickly.
0
Reply
Male 3,255
@ScottSerious

"who is that?"
David Beckham.

"what is this?"
Someone who likes England being mad because America scored a soccer goal against England.

"why should i care?"
Because laughing at something funny is better than acting pretentious and douchy.

:)
0
Reply
Male 1,149
fauxhawk.. really man? lol
0
Reply
Male 660
@Sprinkz Union carbide you still aint taken responsibility or cleaned that mess up, we`re the world drat ups yeh....
0
Reply
Male 15,832
"FFFFFFF
FFFFFFF
FFFFFF
FFFUU
UUUU
UUUU
UUUU
UUUU
UUUU-"
0
Reply
Male 138
Americans and British... Both think they are the best in the world... The French also irritate us "rest of the world", but you guys all come from the same place, mother non-nice individualland. Viva Mars! I heard it has water...
0
Reply
Male 2,306
@SuperSmash: If Americans give a poo about nearly anything we dominate it. We have so much ethic diversity it`s like we got the best of every part of the world. Brains, brawn, speed, etc.
0
Reply
Male 2,306
But anyway, drat Britain, and your god damn oil. Niggas can`t even keep their poo on LOCK. Causing massive disasters since the inception of that god-forsaken country of merchants, thieves, and imperialists.
0
Reply
Male 2,306
Americans believe they actually `fought` in WWII and WWI...they were janitors at best.
0
Reply
Female 1,441
Also my dad thinks that it was a set up and Green was paid to miss that shot or something. He refuses to believe that such a mistake could genuinely be made.
0
Reply
Male 1,678
"how we saved Britain in WWI and WWII"
Is there a reward for must retarded post of the day? Really though, is this what is taught in American schools or is this just a "special" person?
0
Reply
Female 1,441
I can`t imagine how pissed England must be, and rightly so. I was thrilled that it was a draw but there`s no way it would have happened if not for that accident.

But I don`t think that England played all that well. It was an entertaining match though.
0
Reply
Male 67
@ Colby123 Actually, England is definitely respect worthy. And I want to point something out about World War Two. England stood on her own for about a full year against the greatest military force in the world (at the time). She was never invaded, never destroyed, and weathered out that phase of the war better than most other nations could hope to.
I really doubt that America could have done that during World War Two, and thus, England deserves hella respect.
/rant
0
Reply
Male 1,452
that`s David Beckham guise, its not that hard to notice
0
Reply
Male 660
Colby our general ate your Presidents dinner in the white house before burning it in the war of 1812, But fighting a war across the ocean with French helping you was expensive and wasn`t really worth it so we left it. then you tried getting Canada still under control and were kicked back by a much smaller force then the US had.

And learn your history Russia saved the world in WW2 Britian was only in the war (could have easily done a treaty with ze germans who didn`t really mind us and were surprised we declared war) Because no one else at the time would stand up to the Reich. But it was American Philosophy wait for everyone to kill each other then jump in at last minute and claim all the glory.

But this is about football not the past.....
0
Reply
Male 20
jrc is just mad because the USA beats England in everything, remember American Revolution, war of 1812, how we saved Britain in WWI and WWII. he`s just pissed because his country has nothing else to brag about except how good they are at soccer which we are just as good at because we proved that today
0
Reply
Male 90
Yeah who is he?
0
Reply
Male 3,842
[quote]you guys only drew because we made a mistake.[/quote]

Yeah, England`s mistake was not having a decent goalkeeper in the entire country. Our worst goalkeeper (Marcus Hahnemann) is better than your best (Robert Green)
0
Reply
Male 1,678
Can we all take a leaf out of James Cordons book and ignore the froggy French twats please? They cheated their way there in place of the greatest nation on earth, and they aren`t very good anyway. Feck `le c*nt` and fech France, mon Ireland!!!
Ps the usa and england have as much chance as us of winning it, and we ain`t there, so stop ur pointless arguing
0
Reply
Male 5,314
who is that? what is this? why should i care?
0
Reply
Male 660
Smash your arguments tend to be you just disagreeing with people dismissing their points. Not actually putting reasons behind it.

Robert Green is a fairly unknown player who was being given a cap and experience against a weaker team. He dropped the ball as it were.

But saying if you tried and trained you`d win isn`t really an argument. And has been said the sports which more of the world generally play Rugby instead of American Football, Soccer, Cricket etc It`s pointless arguing that your favoured sportsman will cross over and be of same calibre they wont as has been said skills are similar but not the same.
0
Reply
Male 3,819
I`m glad you signed up just to make that thought-provoking and insightful post, jrc.
0
Reply
Male 3
you guys only drew because we made a mistake. USA sucks douche
0
Reply
Male 698
who is he?
0
Reply
Male 88
whos mad ? hes mad xD
0
Reply
Male 3,819
(and I`m not being totally serious about that last post so save the torches... though Larry Fitz would actually be a f*cking sick goalie)
0
Reply
Male 3,819
I`m going to start a petition to teach Mario Williams, Nicklas Lidstrom, Rajon Rondo, Deron Williams, Kobe Bryant, Dwyane Wade, Sidney Crosby, Jonathan Toews, Brian Moorman, and Daniel Sepulveda how to play soccer.

Our goalie?

Larry Fitzgerald.

Good luck.
0
Reply
Male 4,290
[quote]Almighty, I think you`re better at arguing my point than I am.[/quote]
That paragraph is the opposite of your point.

Your point: "If our basketball players became footballers, they would be awesome."
My point: "They might be OK, they would not be awesome."

Learn to read.
0
Reply
Male 3,755
"A professional basketball player might be a fairly good footballer, because they have some skills in common, like general fitness or good balance. But he will never be better than a professional footballer, because he has focused on basketball instead of football."

Almighty, I think you`re better at arguing my point than I am.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
Cracked has nailed football in this handy chart:

What to do after a football match

Football was often outlawed in the countries of Britain in the past because of its association with violence or because it was itself violent (medieval football could be more like a brawl with a ball involved somewhere).
0
Reply
Male 4,290
OK, one last post.

[quote]Almightybob, you are totally missing the point. The point is that your best athletes chose soccer and can`t beat our soccer team made up of athletes that aren`t our best. [/quote]

1) Not mine. I`m Scottish, not English.
2) Not all our best athletes choose football. That`s ridiculous. They choose what they`re good at. Arguably the best British athlete in history, 5-consecutive-Olympic-gold-medallist Sir Steve Redgrave, was a rower. They`re England`s best footballers, not England`s best athletes.
3) They`re your best football players (I assume). With the amount of people you have to choose from and the amount of money you have available to spend on training, you should be able to easily crush a nation with ~20% of your population numbers to choose its team from. And you couldn`t even beat them?
0
Reply
Male 3,755
peloos, you are right. England should have won and is better than us at soccer. But just the fact that we are consistently competitive is bad enough. We are a minor league team playing the Red Sox. They should demolish us everytime. That leads me to believe that if we devoted ourselves to soccer and funneled all of our best athletes into it, we would be a world power in one generation.
0
Reply
Male 3,755
"Hand-eye coordination is different to foot-eye coordination, and all American sports focus on the former over the latter. They`re very different skills SuperSmash, I really don`t get why you`re trying to argue this."

"Okay. And if our athletes decided to focus on a different sport from the one they do, no doubt they could excel in that too. It`s a fairly nonsensical argument."

Can you believe these two statements are from the same person. They seem to contradict slightly don`t they, AlmightyBob?
0
Reply
Male 4,290
Anyway, at the end of the day I`m still happy England dropped points, so yay :D Good job USA.

Bedtime now. Later folks.
0
Reply
Male 2,056
aw man, already?
0
Reply
Male 3,819
"Almightybob, you are totally missing the point. The point is that your best athletes chose soccer and can`t beat our soccer team made up of athletes that aren`t our best."

You gotta be real though Smash... you know 4 out of 5 times they would.
0
Reply
Male 3,755
"Okay. And if our athletes decided to focus on a different sport from the one they do, no doubt they could excel in that too. It`s a fairly nonsensical argument."

That`s not an argument, that`s my point.

Almightybob, you are totally missing the point. The point is that your best athletes chose soccer and can`t beat our soccer team made up of athletes that aren`t our best.
0
Reply
Male 7
USA!!! USA!!! USA!!!
0
Reply
Male 3,819
"I don`t know quite how passionately people take sports like baseball or basketball in America, but I would be very surprised if people (on the whole) are quite as passionate as the English are about football."

No trust me, I do know. I will give you guys and most other countries that. Your love for the sport really is unmatched. American football isn`t too far behind though (on a whole, people go absolutely batsh*t over it -- baseball, basketball and hockey? no) and personally I would probably be literally sick/depressed if they announced the NFL was being abolished tomorrow.
0
Reply
Male 4,290
[quote]the most unattractive pic i`ve ever seen of the man[/quote]

Ah, you must have missed the sarong over there, it was before he moved:

0
Reply
Male 3,819
it`s apparent with our sports, sometimes you find some perfect matches.
0
Reply
Male 3,819
"Judging them against what? Your 3 dominating sports are (conveniently?) ones that almost nobody else in the world plays. So how can you judge the international standard of your athletes if they never face up to international games? All you can judge them against is each other. "

This isn`t about their actual ability to shoot a basketball, hit a baseball or catch a football. What I`m going by is our insane training programs we have over here. The guys they churn out are 6`7 and 350 pounds and can run 20 miles per hour (not saying that would translate to soccer at all because obviously it wouldn`t), jump 4 feet in the air or (something that can translate a little) kick an American football 70 yards with perfect aim.

The point is we build these guys like machines starting in junior high school, all you have to do is program them. Not saying athletics is all that matter, the know-how is actually way more important but as (cont.)
0
Reply
Male 81
the most unattractive pic i`ve ever seen of the man
0
Reply
Male 4,290
[quote]Bob, I think what smash is trying to say is that if those basketball players would instead focus on soccer, we have enough athletes to dominate the sport. But because Lebron and Wade decide to play basketball, we don`t have our best athletes playing soccer.[/quote]

Okay. And if our athletes decided to focus on a different sport from the one they do, no doubt they could excel in that too. It`s a fairly nonsensical argument.

It`s like two villages, one of whom are farmers, the other of whom are beekeepers. The farmers say "Man, our farmers are SO GOOD, if they were beekeepers instead they`d be WAY better beekeepers than you! They`re just SUCH GOOD FARMERS!"
The beekeepers could say the exact same thing.
And it would all be empty rhetoric.
0
Reply
Male 1,237
"Hand-eye coordination is different to foot-eye coordination, and all American sports focus on the former over the latter. They`re very different skills SuperSmash, I really don`t get why you`re trying to argue this.

You say that there comes a time when athletes have to choose their sport. Why is that? Because to get to a professional level in a sport, you have to focus all your energies on that sport, learning the techniques and skills particular to it . . ."

+1 ! there are about 10 posts from along the lines of `oh, we weren`t really trying` . . . okay, good! well um, "try" next time I guess? It`s like when a kid doesn`t win a race at school!! I fail to see the point of these posts about some hypothetical mass conversion of NBA players who would almost DEFINITELY be incredible at football..
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]Bob, I think what smash is trying to say is that if those basketball players would instead focus on soccer, we have enough athletes to dominate the sport. But because Lebron and Wade decide to play basketball, we don`t have our best athletes playing soccer[/quote]

To an extent, but athletes aren`t an entirely blank slate onto which any sport can be written. There`s a degree of natural talent involved that will matter, especially at the high end.
0
Reply
Male 639
@peloos12, seriously mate, I don`t think you realise quite how big football is in England.

I don`t know quite how passionately people take sports like baseball or basketball in America, but I would be very surprised if people (on the whole) are quite as passionate as the English are about football.
0
Reply
Male 3,819
I agree with what Smash and Prime are saying but I don`t necessarily think LeBron would be amazing at soccer or anything else for that matter. But some other kid would be. There are probably tons of people out there who, had they been interested enough in soccer, could be our Wayne Rooney and what have you. It`s the old "the next Michael Jordan is out there somewhere" thing. It`s just a matter of them actually playing. If basketball never got popular in the US, what would Michael Jordan be right now?
0
Reply
Male 4,290
[quote]And judging by some the athletes we have in our 3 dominating sports, the rest of the world would want nothing to do with us if soccer/football was actually popular over here.[/quote]
Judging them against what? Your 3 dominating sports are (conveniently?) ones that almost nobody else in the world plays. So how can you judge the international standard of your athletes if they never face up to international games? All you can judge them against is each other.

The one truly international game Americans do enjoy is golf. And yes, you produce some great golfers. With far more people to find naturally gifted golfers from, and far more money than most countries to invest in training and facilities for said golfers, it`s only to be expected.
0
Reply
Male 1,222
Hahaha Green was dressed in green
0
Reply
Male 7,933
Bob, I think what smash is trying to say is that if those basketball players would instead focus on soccer, we have enough athletes to dominate the sport. But because Lebron and Wade decide to play basketball, we don`t have our best athletes playing soccer
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]I don`t know what it`s like over there for baseball but I highly doubt it`s anything to shake a stick at (aha).[/quote]

I`ve never seen anyone here play baseball. I`ve never heard of a baseball match happening here. I`ve never seen a baseball pitch here.

It used to be traditional for schoolgirls here to play rounders. Maybe it still is, I don`t know. Rounders is the forerunner of baseball. Roughly, baseball is scaled-up rounders (faster pitching, bigger bat, that sort of thing).
0
Reply
Male 3,819
And judging by some the athletes we have in our 3 dominating sports, the rest of the world would want nothing to do with us if soccer/football was actually popular over here.
0
Reply
Male 3,819
Ennnh. I`m probably pushing it with the America/Canada hockey thing. I can`t really think of a better analogy, but England literally doesn`t play baseball almost at all and America does have some soccer in it`s blood, there`s just not enough interest in it for kids to stick with it, and the more athletic kids are usually enticed to play other sports.
0
Reply
Male 34
WE coulda got 3 points outta that if Rob green hadnt made a schoolboy error, you got lucky USA, very lucky
0
Reply
Male 3,819
The gap between America and England isn`t as wide as people are making it out to be. It may not dominate this country *professionally* but it`s still a top-5 sport in terms of high school and college participation.

I don`t know what it`s like over there for baseball but I highly doubt it`s anything to shake a stick at (aha).

A much more reasonable analogy to today`s draw would be something along the lines of America vs. Canada in hockey.
0
Reply
Male 4,290
Hand-eye coordination is different to foot-eye coordination, and all American sports focus on the former over the latter. They`re very different skills SuperSmash, I really don`t get why you`re trying to argue this.

You say that there comes a time when athletes have to choose their sport. Why is that? Because to get to a professional level in a sport, you have to focus all your energies on that sport, learning the techniques and skills particular to it.

A professional basketball player might be a fairly good footballer, because they have some skills in common, like general fitness or good balance. But he will never be better than a professional footballer, because he has focused on basketball instead of football.
0
Reply
Male 3,755
"Well no they couldn`t. Tall football players are weird and generally not that good. I still have no idea how Crouch is so good, because he`s such a lanky bastard."

Remember, I`m talking about best athletes. I`m not including someone who excels at a sport based mainly on their size. The best athletes in the NBA aren`t the tallest. Even so, I have no doubts that a 6`8" LeBron could easily excel at soccer.
0
Reply
Male 4,290
[quote]I still have no idea how Crouch is so good[/quote]
Clue: he`s not.
0
Reply
Male 3,755
Almost every great athlete, at some point, has to choose which sport to focus on. Allen Iverson was an all-state QB. LeBron was an all-state WR. Tim Duncan was a swimmer. Hakeem Olajuwon played handball and soccer, but swithced to basketball. Steve Nash played soccer and switched to basketball.
0
Reply
Male 4,290
[quote]That, I think, is the key point on which we disagree.[/quote]
That the Picts aren`t Irish, or that they conquered the Gaels?

For the first: The Picts were a collection of Celts-slash-descendants of the Caledonii. Definitely not Irish. If you`re going down that road, then Scotland is best considered Germanic since the Celts originated from that area. Still not Irish.

For the second: The Gaels of Dal Riada were repeatedly and brutally crushed during the reign of the Pictish king Oengus 1. Then his descendant, the Pictish king Caunstantin, again conquered them and put his son on the throne of Dal Riada. There`s not really much question of who conquered who there.
0
Reply
Male 103
Well no they couldn`t. Tall football players are weird and generally not that good. I still have no idea how Crouch is so good, because he`s such a lanky bastard.
0
Reply
Male 3,755
"`We have better athletes than our soccer players playing 3rd-string for a semi-pro basketball team.`
Yes i hear those skills are transferable you drating idiot."

First of all, thanks for the personal attack and second, they are transferable. I`ve actually played football, soccer, basketball, and baseball and most people who are really good at one are also really good at all the others. Not saying I am one, but I witnessed that the best athletes can be good at any sport.
0
Reply
Male 3,755
"It`s not just about athleticism. There are specific skills for football - an outstanding basketball player can`t simply choose to be an oustanding football player instead."

Yes, he could. If by football you mean soccer. If by football you mean football, then they still could if they had the size.

LeBron, Kobe, D-Wade, Adrian Petersen, DeSean Jackson, Steve Smith, Chris Paul, Reggie Bush, Charles Woodson, Chris Johnson, and Wes Welker would make a pretty good 11-man team.
0
Reply
Male 496
* which is why england is so much better at football than the USA. Like the American football clubs in the UK will never be anywhere near as good as the US cos we don`t have the grassroots.
0
Reply
Female 4
"We have better athletes than our soccer players playing 3rd-string for a semi-pro basketball team."
Yes i hear those skills are transferable you drating idiot.
0
Reply
Male 103
You guys aren`t making it to quarters anyway. Last 16, first in group C (which`ll be England) has to go against 2nd of group D (either Serbia or Ghana, and 2nd of group C (probably USA) will have to face the first team of group D (Germany)
0
Reply
Male 496
@ Supersmash

Country size has nothing to do with it. Australia kicks everyones ass at every sport except football (soccer football, not "lol lets wear some pads" football). They have a population of 30 million, by comparison chinas population grows by more than that each year. Australia can field the athletes as well, but like the US they don`t have the old firm behind them. You can`t buy years of experience which is why the european leagues are the best in the world, and why the UK premier league is the toughest of them all. People want to play for them, and they have fantastic grass roots training. Look at our team, every one of them plays for an english club. Gerrard - liverpool captain, home grown talent. Lampard - Chelsea homegrown talent, cole - homegrown, crouch - homegrown, beckham - homegrown, milner - homegrown, carragher - homegrown. The whole bloody squad is made up of people that have never played a match for a club outside of england
0
Reply
Male 38
I laughed.

Not at the picture though.
0
Reply
Male 3,755
Thanks almightybob, you`re right, we would be really good if we cared. The fact that we can`t get 11 players to compete with the rest of the world just shows how little we care. Yet, England can`t beat us. Pitiful.

P.S. I knew the population argument would pop up, but I didn`t feel like countering it at the time.
0
Reply
Male 4,290
[quote]Lol, let`s face it. Other teams` errors is the only way we can have a chance at winning![/quote]
I wouldn`t say that. Your midfield played very well indeed, and that striker Altidore has some pace. The defence needs some work but you guys played fairly well overall.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]Can you imagine if we actually cared enough about soccer to have our best athletes playing? We would be a top-ranked team in the world, no question about it.[/quote]

With ~300 million people and a boatload of money, you certainly should be. If the current USA team continues to play well, it will raise the profile of football in the USA, so it could happen.

It`s not just about athleticism. There are specific skills for football - an outstanding basketball player can`t simply choose to be an oustanding football player instead.
0
Reply
Male 743
It`s buddy coming back to haunt us. I wonder if anyone remembers buddy?
0
Reply
Male 2,229
Love the history debate mixed with the sports argument-banter; makes for an interesting read.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]Secondly, they were reconquered by the unarguably un-Irish Picts.[/quote]

That, I think, is the key point on which we disagree.
0
Reply
Female 1,545
I think the US team isn`t necessarily proud of that goal, but considering we were preparing to get demolished, we`ll take it.

Lol, let`s face it. Other teams` errors is the only way we can have a chance at winning! (Italy/USA World Cup 2004 anyone?)
0
Reply
Male 103
Nah that`s just how England rolls. poo first game make it through in first place during the group stages, then fail in the quarters. Luckily this year it seems as though we won`t have to go against any of our big rivals in the quarters.
0
Reply
Male 4,290
[quote]Can you imagine if we actually cared enough about soccer to have our best athletes playing? We would be a top-ranked team in the world, no question about it.[/quote]
Yeah, you could probably find a good 11 players out of 307 million people if you really tried. Or maybe the third most populous country in the world should be able to do that anyway?
0
Reply
Male 3,755
Basically, athletically-wise, England brought out the best they have to offer and couldn`t even beat our benchwarmers.
0
Reply
Male 3,755
The best thing about this all is that our best athletes don`t even play soccer. Those are about our fourth-tier athletes. We have better athletes than our soccer players playing 3rd-string for a semi-pro basketball team.

Can you imagine if we actually cared enough about soccer to have our best athletes playing? We would be a top-ranked team in the world, no question about it.
0
Reply
Male 249
to be fair we`re off out in quarters on penalties we might as well have an embarassment on our first game
0
Reply
Male 4,290
OK, timeline.

An Irish tribe, who we will call the Gaels although they may not have been known as that at the time, take over west of Scotland and form Dal Riada.
Bede names them Scotti.
The Picts conquer the Gaels/Scotti.
They then go on to dominate the rest of what is now Scotland.
Then the whole group of Picts/Gaels/Breytons become known as the Scots.

So firstly, they were named Scotti AFTER they took over the West of Scotland, so Bede arguably named the ones living here Scotti too.
Secondly, they were reconquered by the unarguably un-Irish Picts. The Irish/Scotti did not take over Scotland, the Caledonii/Picts did.

So yeah, Scotland is not Irish.
0
Reply
Male 931
I watched this and i think ive witnessed the birth of a meme.
Also, scotland congratulates you americans today :D
0
Reply
Male 3,755
"England = Europe for some americans I guess."

No, just on IAB where the vast majority of those labeled from Europe are from English speaking countries and only one of those countries just participated in a World Cup game against the United States.

Nice attempt, but try harder next time
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]I did some checking, and I found what you`re referring to. Saint Bede used the term Scotti to refer to the Gaelic tribe who inhabited the northeast of Ireland. But that tribe was part of the Gaels of Dal Riada that I mentioned before. They didn`t go on to conquer the Picts - they WERE the same Gaels who were (forcibly) merged with the Picts. [/quote]

Bede was writing afterwards - the conquest (from Ireland to northern Britain) happened well before Bede`s time, forming the kingdom of Dal Riada (Dalriada, Dalriata, etc).

There may well have been some relationships between the Picts and the Irish, but that wouldn`t have stopped conflict any more than it did between Scotland and England centuries later.
0
Reply
Male 34
Don`t you hate it when reading the comments turns into a history lesson?
0
Reply
Female 109
I am so madly in love with this man. I could stare at him alllllll day.

I also couldn`t be more happy with the turnout for the USA/England match. My two favorite countries in the world! <3
0
Reply
Male 4,290
[quote]What does answer the question is that Scotland is called Scotland after the Roman term for raiders from Ireland.[/quote]
I did some checking, and I found what you`re referring to. Saint Bede used the term Scotti to refer to the Gaelic tribe who inhabited the northeast of Ireland. But that tribe was part of the Gaels of Dal Riada that I mentioned before. They didn`t go on to conquer the Picts - they WERE the same Gaels who were (forcibly) merged with the Picts.

As to why they became known as the Scots - probably because of this perception of the Scotti that Bede named them. You might as well ask why they stopped being called the Caledonii and became the Picts. There`s not really much distinction, just a name change over time.
0
Reply
Male 4,290
[quote]My point was that the Picts were stated in early Roman times to be in all of what is now Scotland and the northern part of what is now England, i.e. not just in the Highlands, i.e. the northern part of what is now Scotland. [/quote]
Just because the Romans never conquered as far north as the Picts` home territory of the Highlands doesn`t mean they never met the Picts. They probably encountered them and named them long before the Picts began expanding south and west.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]Angilion there is point in history where all use of term Pict`s just stops and is replaced by Scottish references . [/quote]

Yes, I know. That`s one of the things that makes it look like an external takeover.

[quote]But sorry to say AlmisghtBob right mate look it up[/quote]

Damn, and there was me just making it all up from my imagination and hoping it was right. I had no idea that I could look things up. What a novel approach to history. I would never have thought of that if you hadn`t ordered me to do it. Thank you ever so much. You have opened my mind to wondrous enlightenment.
0
Reply
Male 103
He makes a point USA has absolutely no chance of winning the tournament. If you don`t get knocked out in the last 16 you`re sure as hell out in the quarters. Because that`s when you have to go against teams like Portugal, Argentina, France, Brasil etc.
0
Reply
Male 75
""don`t expect to win the tournament, USA, you were lucky, you nation of fat religous freaks"

Sucks that you guys can`t even beat a country of fat, religious freaks. I guess God was on our side this time. He`s got the world in his fat, greasy American hands."

England = Europe for some americans I guess.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]The Romans referred to them as "picti" - painted - which is where the name Picts comes from. We don`t know what the Picts called themselves, because they never wrote it down.[/quote]

Yes, I know. My point (hence the text I quoted from you) was that the Picts were stated in early Roman times to be in all of what is now Scotland and the northern part of what is now England, i.e. not just in the Highlands, i.e. the northern part of what is now Scotland.

[quote]Because eventually the Pictish influence grew so much and encompassed such a variety of peoples that they were no longer identifiably Pictish, but rather an amalgalm of Pics, Gaels and Brythons that became known as the Scots.[/quote]

Which doesn`t answer the question "Scotland is called Scotland because...?"

What does answer the question is that Scotland is called Scotland after the Roman term for raiders from Ireland.
0
Reply
Male 103
@Smagboy1
First off it was the final in 1966.
And second we aren`t bitching about that one the Germans are. We won that one :D. Now the 1986 World Cup is a whole different story. But there we do have fair grounds to bitch.
0
Reply
Male 660
Angilion there is point in history where all use of term Pict`s just stops and is replaced by Scottish references .

But sorry to say AlmisghtBob right mate look it up
0
Reply
Female 3,001
that was a humiliating game to watch :(
0
Reply
Male 4,290
[quote]So why did the Romans use the term (and it is their term) to describe the people north of the border of the Roman province, a border which is now inside England?[/quote]
The Romans referred to them as "picti" - painted - which is where the name Picts comes from. We don`t know what the Picts called themselves, because they never wrote it down.

[quote]Scotland is called Scotland because...?[/quote]
Because eventually the Pictish influence grew so much and encompassed such a variety of peoples that they were no longer identifiably Pictish, but rather an amalgalm of Pics, Gaels and Brythons that became known as the Scots.
0
Reply
Female 395
@MildCorma; couldn`t agree more. it doesn`t seem like jamie76 knows what defence is either.
0
Reply
Female 612
Pardon, I meant "tie" in that last paragraph. I think that`s how it ended, judging by the comments, but, as an American, I don`t care enough to check.
0
Reply
Female 612
I don`t think you guys get how little Americans watch/play soccer (and, therefore, how big a feat this was). It`s a sport for little kids to play, here. Yeah, we have teams in high school, but no one knows or cares how they do. The new soccer team in Seattle is pretty popular, but that`s just because it`s new and doesn`t suck as much as our other teams. Futbol might be a worldwide sport, but it is by no means one we care about. It`s like the Olympics- we pay attention every four years and then ignore the sport the rest of the time.

Saying it`s not a pretty big thing for our team to win against a nation that is good at the sport and actually cares about it is bs.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]The Picts, who lived in what we would now call the Highlands[/quote]

So why did the Romans use the term (and it is their term) to describe the people north of the border of the Roman province, a border which is now inside England?

Scotland is called Scotland because...?
0
Reply
Male 496
@jamie76

Did you watch the same match I did? Check the stats - you had 1 serious attempt on goal that was saved compared to our 4. You had no defense, we outplayed you so often and yet got so unlucky. We were the better team. If you lost by barely missing a shot off the post then we lost because green let a weak "shot" in, shaun wright phillips punted it at your keeper, heskey put his boot through it but was unlucky, and rooney had his shots deflected by luck. should have been 4-1 to england, 4-2 if you had scored your only other goalscoring chance and 4-1 again if green had actually picked the ball up. You can`t win the world cup by getting lucky every time, so i wish you all the best when algeria beat you next week, lol.
0
Reply
Male 497
lol Dempsey XD
0
Reply
Male 4,290
[quote]US defense murdered your offense.[/quote]
I agree with most of your post, but that`s just not true. USA`s defence made some basic tactical blunders, and you man-marking was VERY sloppy. There were several bad lapses where key players weren`t picked up, particularly in the second half - notably Rooney`s header and Wright-Phillip`s clear run on goal.

The fact that England weren`t able to capitalise doesn`t mean you defended well. Your midfield did very well and managed to shut down a lot of the play, and you had excellent pace up-front, but your defence was lacking.
0
Reply
Male 541
@primetimekin:

I actually would have said it was the other way around. USA weren`t doing anything special in the first half. It wasn`t till the second half that they were really making use of possession and getting some really good chances in there. I mean, England fans can say we got lucky, but there were a number of times they were let off the hook as well.
0
Reply
Male 4,290
Um... I dunno where you got your history Angilion, but that`s not right.

The Picts, who lived in what we would now call the Highlands, conquered the Gaels, who lived in both Western Scotland and part of Northern Ireland (at the time it was called Dal Riada). Then that Pictish influence grew and eventually became the Kingdom of Alba.

Bagpipes and whisky are associated with both countries probably because Dal Riada spread across both lands.
0
Reply
Male 2,345
Aquaeous...where to start with your post...

Baseball is played by millions around the world. In Japan it is RELIGION, and in the south America is is as well...many NBL players are from different countries around the world. the US happens to be the best at it and the analogy that the US tying with England is the same as England tying as baseball with the US is a good one.

you europeans are as ignorant about baseball as you claim americans are about soccer.
0
Reply
Male 2,345
England, you can STFU now about how great you and your three kitties are...USA lost by barely missing a shot off the post but otherwise outplayed your silly walking team pretty well. US defense murdered your offense.
0
Reply
Male 7,933
"Beckham`s expression summed it up brilliantly. Green made an absolute howler of a mistake in a game which England dominated throughout but failed to capitalise. "

england didn`t dominate through out. USA was clearly the dominant team in the first half, England didn`t really show up until the second half.
0
Reply
Male 4,290
There were several points when USA looked very threatening and England were completely outpaced at the back.

Green will no doubt be cannibalised by the press tomorrow, which is frankly unfair since he pulled off an outstanding reaction save in the second half which really bailed England out.

England drew because they couldn`t follow through on several key goalscoring opportunities (see: Heskey`s 1-on-1, Wright-Phillips` very weak attempt towards the end). Those were far worse than Green`s fumble IMO.
0
Reply
Male 425
"Good show by the USA team. Drawing with England at football is like England drawing with the USA in baseball. Hmm...can you have a draw in baseball?"

Well... no, it`s not really the same at all is it? Football is a worldwide sport and, as I understand it, of growing popularity to play (but not to watch necessarily). Whereas baseball is practically solely played by Americans.

I think the game can be summarised in two points:

1) We drew because the English keeper, Green, messed up a very simple save.

2) We didn`t win because Howard, the US keeper, had a fantastic game. Made some very crucial saves, without which it could have been 3/4 goals to England.
0
Reply
Male 7,933
"Steven Gerrard "we`re totally behind Rob Green"

Well in hindsight that would be a good place to stay "


And Altidore had 2 really close goals. It could have been 3-1 if it were not for a few inches
0
Reply
Male 12,365
I suggest you look at where the Scots came from.

You also might like to consider whisky and bagpipes and why they`re so strongly associated with both Ireland and Scotland.

It`s because the Scotti took them with them when they sailed from Ireland, took over the land of the Picts and renamed it after themselves.

If anyone still thinks I lack knowledge of Scottish history, feel free to check for yourself. It`s just that my knowledge goes back further and isn`t filtered through Scottish nationalism.
0
Reply
Male 3,301
*cue dramatic chipmunk tune*
0
Reply
Male 425
Beckham`s expression summed it up brilliantly. Green made an absolute howler of a mistake in a game which England dominated throughout but failed to capitalise.

As always, England were nailbiting to watch :(
0
Reply
Male 541
American living in UK here. I thought both teams played a lot better than the last world cup. Happy with a draw to be honest, both should make it to the finals at least.

And for all the butthurt English saying we got lucky, try looking at it another way: You f***ed up, you made an error, you couldn`t make up for it in the end, and because of that you paid for it. Man up and accept that.
0
Reply
Male 4,290
[quote]** Scotland is Irish.[/quote]
No, silly. Scotland is Scottish. Ireland is Irish.
0
Reply
Male 2,229
Angilion, Your lack of Scottish history is amazing and disturbing. To an Scot to hear or read that the Scots are Irish, is insulting and dumb founding. Scotland is scottish, NOT Irish.

Get right man, geez.
0
Reply
Male 91
"Who the hell cares? Soccer is about as gay as it gets."

Tell that to the millions of fans and the thousands of teams in the whole world. I`m sorry, but only an American would say soccer is gay.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]And could the Brits be any more butthurt?[/quote]

Wrong country.

I`m not bitching at you for not knowing. Small country a few thousand miles away from you with a confusing history - why would you be familiar with it?

UK (United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland): The official country, consisting of the island of Great Britain(*) and a small piece of Ireland.

Great Britain: The big island and surrounding small islands off the coast. Except for the Isle of Mann, which is a crown protectorate of the UK, which means that it is independent except for the fact that it isn`t really. Like the channel islands. Which are just off the coast of France.

Scotland(**): The northern part of GB
Wales: The central western part of GB
England: The rest of GB. Has nearly all the people, cities, etc. Dominates the union because of that.

* There is a lesser Britain. It`s part of France.
** Scotland is Irish.
0
Reply
Male 1,129
panth753 thats cause you are a woman. nuff said
0
Reply
Male 4,290
[quote]Am I the only one that doesn`t give a sh*t about soccer and the world cup?[/quote]
Yes.
[quote]Hmm...can you have a draw in baseball?[/quote]
No, if they`re level after 9 innings they keep going until one team wins.
So Google tells me, anyway.
0
Reply
Male 4,431
Well, maybe now the Brits can quit bitchin` about the finals with Germany in `60 and have something new to bitch about. ;-)
0
Reply
Male 537
Who the hell cares? Soccer is about as gay as it gets.
0
Reply
Male 85
Im welsh so go America!
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]Rubbish draw, USA were let off the hook by a goalie error.[/quote]

Yes, but it still counts just as much.

Good show by the USA team. Drawing with England at football is like England drawing with the USA in baseball. Hmm...can you have a draw in baseball?

Hopefully the England team will learn an important lesson - don`t assume it`s in the bag because the other team isn`t rated all that highly.
0
Reply
Male 14
He must be Indian, cause hes got apachi here and a apachi there.

haha....
0
Reply
Female 9,558
Am I the only one that doesn`t give a sh*t about soccer and the world cup?
0
Reply
Male 749
lol @ Davy. Both Heskey and onions make me cry. ;D

The US were lucky, yes, but we were useless. We have no attacking force (no matter how amazing I think Rooney is :D) and thought that 1 goal would be fine. It`s easy to blame Green, but we have 10 other players that need to get the ball into the other goal. We need better support for Rooney than Heskey and Crouch.

@Fishmanjo

Doctor Who finished before the match started. :|
0
Reply
Male 12,365
The final score is Supersmash 1, xaxxonjolly 0.
0
Reply
Female 2,220
xaxxonjolly - as horrible as that was, I did laugh.

And also, my dad and I BURST out laughing when we saw his face.
0
Reply
Male 1,164
Meh, as long as Canada still rules the world of hockey, I`m happy.
0
Reply
Male 12,138
By the way, to my fellow Brits: Ignore the US at your peril. They have a pretty goddam decent team. What they lack in football pedigree they make up for in fighting spirit and teammanship. Two things that England are sorely lacking.
0
Reply
Male 26
hahaha you are correct marcus2, "davis" is better than anyone alive, now David Beckham on the other hand probably isn`t. That game was very disappointing for England, Goalie needs to be shot.
0
Reply
Male 4,290
[quote]And could the Brits be any more butthurt?[/quote]
Ahem. English, not Brits. I am a Brit, and I`m very pleased :P
0
Reply
Male 10,338
Appreciated Davy.
0
Reply
Male 677
@MEZA what do you mean "maybe one day" ?? Davis beckham is better than any american "soccer" player.
0
Reply
Male 10,338
England fail. I hope they make it out of groups though *snicker*
0
Reply
Male 3,819
"don`t expect to win the tournament, USA, you were lucky, you nation of fat religous freaks"

Everybody in England is atheist of course.
0
Reply
Male 3,819
Christ, I hope the States go on a run, really do. But people need to calm the hell down and keep things in perspective here. 98% of them know nothing about this sport (myself included, but I admit that).

And could the Brits be any more butthurt?

Moral of the story for both countries: it`s one f*cking game
0
Reply
Male 3,755
We were lucky to get that goal, but England shouldn`t have been in a position to where one goal made a difference. If they can`t score two goals, they deserve to lose no matter how we got one.
0
Reply
Male 3,755
"don`t expect to win the tournament, USA, you were lucky, you nation of fat religous freaks"

Sucks that you guys can`t even beat a country of fat, religious freaks. I guess God was on our side this time. He`s got the world in his fat, greasy American hands.
0
Reply
Male 247
USA was lucky. Usually England drat up I guess.
0
Reply
Male 12,138
Epic photo. Crap game though - and Heskey is a f*cking onion.
0
Reply
Male 333
Poor English bastard...maybe one day.
0
Reply
Male 86
don`t expect to win the tournament, USA, you were lucky, you nation of fat religous freaks
0
Reply
Male 109
Didn`t watch... found Doctor Who more interesting :P
0
Reply
Male 251
it`s the face of England`s next most wanted murderer
0
Reply
Male 3,755
In your face England. The Yanks not so E-A-S-Y, huh?

Who cares if it was a tie and the result of a cheap goal? We`re still up based on that whole Revolution thing.
0
Reply
Male 4,680
"And the USA have scored!"

...

*Starts ripping down England world cup merchandise from walls*
0
Reply
Male 1,091
USA was lucky, England had soo many chances...
0
Reply
Male 171
Rubbish draw, USA were let off the hook by a goalie error.
0
Reply
Male 2,199
you know in his head he was thinking, how the hell did u screw up that badly?
0
Reply
Male 233
not opening here....but yeah what a garbage goal hahaha; awful goalkeeping, but a goal is a goal ;P
0
Reply
Male 18
USA was very luck with their goal, no doubt England dominated the match
0
Reply
Male 35
Watching the Green flop helplessly as the ball crossed the line made me feel sick :( I am actually devastated.
0
Reply
Male 80
David Beckhams` evil twin!
0
Reply
Male 1,237
broken link.. england should have won! silly goalkeeper error
0
Reply
Male 233
not opening here....but yeah what a garbage goal hahaha; awful goalkeeping, but a goal is a goal ;P
0
Reply
Female 121
Broken link? :P