World Cup: England V USA
- Thread starter Barry_Blue
- Start date
Bald Dave
Established Member
- Reaction score
- 2
Ian Curtis said:
Rofl bryan, drop it. Football is just more recognized internationally than american rugby. I think the US did a good job at the world cup. Their team is growing better.[/quote:3lttzj0x]
Agreed. Soccer is still leagues behind NFL but its growing its support each year in America!
Ian Curtis
Established Member
- Reaction score
- 4
Bryan said:
Why would I say that? That just dont make no sense.
EasyEd
Established Member
- Reaction score
- 2
optimus prime said:
Cassin’s response is exactly right. People here loved the World Cup, but it definitely had perfect timing...and it was probably more appreciated as an event, than for the game itself. I had a friend who had a pretty funny quote on it "The worst thing about the World Cup is that it's soccer". Anyway, the only sport going on right now is baseball, as well as some golf tournaments here and there. The World Cup was certainly on the center stage and I think people for the most part enjoyed it…but it definitely didn’t do what soccer enthusiasts hoped it would, which is to get American people to watch soccer on a regular basis outside of the World Cup. The New England Revolution, who are the Major League Soccer team in my area, average between 10,000 and 15,000 fans per game, had a game last night, and there were 12,000 people there. This won’t change, because of exactly what Cassin said. Nobody is going to get on board with a local soccer team or follow the sport regularly because there are just too many other sports to get behind. The World Cup has been a great even and I think Americans will probably get into every four years if the US is in it, but that’s really about it….I don’t really see the sport growing too much more from this.
EasyEd
Established Member
- Reaction score
- 2
Dave,
Tell me if my perception of the English team as an outsider is accurate: The English players aren’t as good as they think they are…or certainly not as good as they’re perceived by the general public. They’re more celebrities than they are soccer players (or footballers). They get too much in the way of fame and fortune and everything that comes with it (the money, the WAGs, the glitz and glamour, etc), that they tend to forget what they are fighting for. Is that reasonable? I consider myself a small-time soccer fan, and I know almost everyone on the English side, or have at least heard of them – but when I watch them play, I’m not that impressed. On the opposite hand, I don’t know any of the Germans, or the Dutch players, or some of the South American teams (Chile and Uruguay), but those teams are kicking @ss and taking names. I get the sense that the English players (i.e. Rooney, Gerrard, Lampard, Terry, etc) were probably really good and impressive when they were up-and-comers trying to get to their level of stardom – once that level was achieved, the work ethic and determination went away. Is there some truth in that?
Tell me if my perception of the English team as an outsider is accurate: The English players aren’t as good as they think they are…or certainly not as good as they’re perceived by the general public. They’re more celebrities than they are soccer players (or footballers). They get too much in the way of fame and fortune and everything that comes with it (the money, the WAGs, the glitz and glamour, etc), that they tend to forget what they are fighting for. Is that reasonable? I consider myself a small-time soccer fan, and I know almost everyone on the English side, or have at least heard of them – but when I watch them play, I’m not that impressed. On the opposite hand, I don’t know any of the Germans, or the Dutch players, or some of the South American teams (Chile and Uruguay), but those teams are kicking @ss and taking names. I get the sense that the English players (i.e. Rooney, Gerrard, Lampard, Terry, etc) were probably really good and impressive when they were up-and-comers trying to get to their level of stardom – once that level was achieved, the work ethic and determination went away. Is there some truth in that?
- Reaction score
- 42
EasyEd said:
Hahahah! That is soooo true! If they could change the rules to make it more exciting (I've suggested in previous posts ways to do that), soccer could probably compete better with the other games that we have available to us here in America.
I was listening to a talk-radio show a couple weeks ago, and one of the callers was describing how he had taken a trip to England in the past, and decided to take in some of the local color by going to a soccer game. He said he was so dreadfully bored by the whole thing, he just gave up and left altogether, about half-way through.
EasyEd said:
Exactly right. Something that happens only every four years on a world scale is big enough to generate a modicum of interest here in the States, even if it's something as slow and tedious as soccer, but I doubt that it will ever hit it big as a serious sport in this country. They've tried to get it going in the past by starting professional soccer leagues, but sooner or later, they've gone belly-up. And how could anybody be surprised by that, considering that soccer has to compete with football for people's discretionary spending?
I find this 'soccer is tedious' stance that so many Americans take to be pretty arrogant. Many American sports could be argued to be tedious....baseball and 'football' go on for hours and the latter stops every few seconds...and as for nascar and all those car racing sports on a perfectly circular track...snoooooze..
Sure, soccer isn't all that fast moving in terms of scorelines, but once you've played it a bit, you can't help but appreciate the way pros move the ball around on the pitch. Also, as the worlds number 1 team sport, the level of talent and skill you'll see at the world cup is higher than you would at a Saints-Giants game or whatever
Sure, soccer isn't all that fast moving in terms of scorelines, but once you've played it a bit, you can't help but appreciate the way pros move the ball around on the pitch. Also, as the worlds number 1 team sport, the level of talent and skill you'll see at the world cup is higher than you would at a Saints-Giants game or whatever
- Reaction score
- 42
FSHGLD said:
If you're so appallingly ignorant of the game of football that you don't even know that it's played one play at a time, you're not even allowed to take part in this discussion. Do you think that when somebody's rushing to score a touchdown and he gets tackled, he should just get up and start running again with the football??
Cassin
Senior Member
- Reaction score
- 78
FSHGLD said:
Sooooooooooooooooo.....you're a hypocrite? hah
People across the pond focus on the wrong things. So many people in America are ok with soccer and are growing to love it. There is proof by ratings and tickets sold. You just obsess over the every shrinking pile of people who don't care for it.
America does not have a captive sports audience like other countries. We have so many sport options so change in taste takes time.
Its like we can't win with the Brits...You get so upset if we don't like football then when we do like it, like me, you get upset on the teams we follow. I love Manchester United but when I mention that I get attacked by being a "glory seeker." Am I supposed to pick a club never shown on TV? How is an American supposed to follow Middlesbrough? Derby County?
I chose United years ago since that was literally the first match I saw on TV and seemed to always show up more and more. I had no idea it was because of Becks ..I had no idea who the club was or why they were shown so much. I just saw them a lot and enjoyed the action. Its like I have to apologize for it. Makes no sense to me...
I was born & raised in Dallas so I also follow the Dallas Cowboys...also one of the most famous global teams (non soccer anyway) and when I see a pic of someone in Japan..Germany or England wearing a Dallas Cowboys piece of clothing I feel pride and I am happy for them...I don't get so upset like you Brits do...again...makes no sense to me.
Boondock
Senior Member
- Reaction score
- 13
I think I've come to the conclusion that while Bryan is the number 1 authority for hair loss on this site, his judgement when it comes to sporting affairs is not so sophisticated.
Obviously, soccer is enjoyed immensely by people in Europe and South America. Despite having exposure to other sports, they choose to play it and to watch it en mass. If someone prefers baseball or American football, they have to therefore conclude that either:
a) American sports are inherently superior and the Europeans and South Americans are simply wrong to think otherwise; or
b) different cultures have different sporting preferences.
It seems fairly obvious that a lot of Americans won't take to soccer. They haven't grown up with it; they don't have any emotional attachement to it (as they do for their native sports); they don't (in some cases) really understand it. That doesn't make it a worse sport anymore than it makes Asians idiotic for preferring rice to potatoes. It's just different strokes for different folks.
What you can say of soccer, however, is that it is offers - more so than any other sport - a truly global competition. How many other sports feature Americans playing Africans and South Americans playing Asians? You don't see that in cricket, rugby, or tennis; and you certainly don't see it in baseball or Nascar. This makes soccer all the more exciting when the world cup comes around.
For the record, I wish you guys would drop some of your prejudices about it. If you get your act together, you could have the best soccer team in the world in 20-30 years. You've got the potential, but there seems to be so much prejudice surrounding the game. I've heard plenty of Americans say "pfft, if people are good at sports they don't play soccer, do they?"
Obviously, soccer is enjoyed immensely by people in Europe and South America. Despite having exposure to other sports, they choose to play it and to watch it en mass. If someone prefers baseball or American football, they have to therefore conclude that either:
a) American sports are inherently superior and the Europeans and South Americans are simply wrong to think otherwise; or
b) different cultures have different sporting preferences.
It seems fairly obvious that a lot of Americans won't take to soccer. They haven't grown up with it; they don't have any emotional attachement to it (as they do for their native sports); they don't (in some cases) really understand it. That doesn't make it a worse sport anymore than it makes Asians idiotic for preferring rice to potatoes. It's just different strokes for different folks.
What you can say of soccer, however, is that it is offers - more so than any other sport - a truly global competition. How many other sports feature Americans playing Africans and South Americans playing Asians? You don't see that in cricket, rugby, or tennis; and you certainly don't see it in baseball or Nascar. This makes soccer all the more exciting when the world cup comes around.
For the record, I wish you guys would drop some of your prejudices about it. If you get your act together, you could have the best soccer team in the world in 20-30 years. You've got the potential, but there seems to be so much prejudice surrounding the game. I've heard plenty of Americans say "pfft, if people are good at sports they don't play soccer, do they?"
Boondock
Senior Member
- Reaction score
- 13
As for England's failings, I would suggest that the players are overrated but that doesn't explain the team's lack of success. The individual players in the team don't quite match Brazil's or Spain's, but they're certainly on a par with Germany and far better than many high performing sides (such as Ghana, Japan, and others).
Some reasons for failure may include:
1. A terrible national psychology when it comes to the game. Players appear to become defeatist and fed up with things very quickly. Compare this to, for example, the American side, who whatever the circumstances kept on fighting.
2. A league which does not give players much of a break, leading to tiredness/poor form in the summer when tournaments come around.
3. A league which is so awash with money that native talent has been crowded out. More so than any other country, club teams import their talent from elsewhere.
4. At the same time, a lack of drive for English players to play elsewhere. How many English players go out to the Spanish leagues, compared to the reverse? Unlike other nations, our players are not exposed to other ways of playing the game.
5. Some poor managerial and strategic decisions. 4-4-2 appeared to be a bad call, as were many of the substitution and team selection decisions.
6. Poor ability to 'gel' as a team and to work as a unit.
7. A vindictive and aggressive domestic media, which slaughters players when they make the slightest mistake.
Some reasons for failure may include:
1. A terrible national psychology when it comes to the game. Players appear to become defeatist and fed up with things very quickly. Compare this to, for example, the American side, who whatever the circumstances kept on fighting.
2. A league which does not give players much of a break, leading to tiredness/poor form in the summer when tournaments come around.
3. A league which is so awash with money that native talent has been crowded out. More so than any other country, club teams import their talent from elsewhere.
4. At the same time, a lack of drive for English players to play elsewhere. How many English players go out to the Spanish leagues, compared to the reverse? Unlike other nations, our players are not exposed to other ways of playing the game.
5. Some poor managerial and strategic decisions. 4-4-2 appeared to be a bad call, as were many of the substitution and team selection decisions.
6. Poor ability to 'gel' as a team and to work as a unit.
7. A vindictive and aggressive domestic media, which slaughters players when they make the slightest mistake.
Boondock
Senior Member
- Reaction score
- 13
Cassin said:
To be fair, the only people who'd be annoyed by your support of MU will be those who support rival teams. Supporters of other top teams (e.g. Arsenal, Chelsea, Liverpool) are forever resentful of how internationalized Man United have become compared to their own teams.
Any United supporter would be overjoyed at your support. I wouldn't take the criticism too seriously.
Cassin
Senior Member
- Reaction score
- 78
The U.S.’s 2-1 loss to Ghana in the World Cup’s round of 16 was the most watched men’s soccer match in American history, according to Walt Disney Co.’s ESPN channel.
The June 26 game, which was shown on the ABC channel, averaged an 8.2 rating, 9.455 million households and 14.9 million viewers, ESPN said yesterday in an e-mailed statement.
Only the 1999 women’s World Cup final between the U.S. and China averaged more households and viewers, with 11.307 million households and 17.975 million viewers. The meeting with Ghana was also the third highest-rated men’s World Cup game, only surpassed by the 9.3 rating of the 1994 match between the U.S. and Brazil, and a 9.5 rating for that year’s final between Italy and Brazil. The 1999 women’s final had an 11.4 rating.
“The U.S.-Ghana match represents increases of 11 percent in ratings and 13 percent in viewership from ABC’s highly anticipated U.S.-England World Cup game on June 12, which ended in a 1-1 draw,†the broadcaster said.
San Diego was the top market for the game against Ghana, with a 15.4 rating. San Diego was the top market for all three previous U.S. matches.
Through 50 games of this year’s World Cup, ESPN, ESPN2 and ABC are averaging a 1.8 U.S. rating, 2,081,000 households, and 2,781,000 viewers. The rating is 48 percent higher than the last World Cup in 2006.
The June 26 game, which was shown on the ABC channel, averaged an 8.2 rating, 9.455 million households and 14.9 million viewers, ESPN said yesterday in an e-mailed statement.
Only the 1999 women’s World Cup final between the U.S. and China averaged more households and viewers, with 11.307 million households and 17.975 million viewers. The meeting with Ghana was also the third highest-rated men’s World Cup game, only surpassed by the 9.3 rating of the 1994 match between the U.S. and Brazil, and a 9.5 rating for that year’s final between Italy and Brazil. The 1999 women’s final had an 11.4 rating.
“The U.S.-Ghana match represents increases of 11 percent in ratings and 13 percent in viewership from ABC’s highly anticipated U.S.-England World Cup game on June 12, which ended in a 1-1 draw,†the broadcaster said.
San Diego was the top market for the game against Ghana, with a 15.4 rating. San Diego was the top market for all three previous U.S. matches.
Through 50 games of this year’s World Cup, ESPN, ESPN2 and ABC are averaging a 1.8 U.S. rating, 2,081,000 households, and 2,781,000 viewers. The rating is 48 percent higher than the last World Cup in 2006.
EasyEd
Established Member
- Reaction score
- 2
As for the ongoing debate about Americans hating soccer – I must say that I absolutely love soccer and have the highest respect and regard for the game. To me, there is no greater event in sports than the World Cup, and I was born and raised in the US and played football (American football) and basketball my entire life.
Now…for anyone outside of the US, it’s impossible for you to understand why a lot of our sports fans don’t fully embrace soccer. You would only understand it if you were American. There are just too many other sports here to follow year round. The best of the best play basketball, football, and baseball right here in our country year round, so there isn’t a lot of time to embrace soccer as well.
That having been said, I will say this – everyone outside of the US is lucky that our top athletes don’t grow up playing soccer – every nation would be in trouble if they did. You wouldn’t want to go up against these guys if they played soccer their whole lives:
Now…for anyone outside of the US, it’s impossible for you to understand why a lot of our sports fans don’t fully embrace soccer. You would only understand it if you were American. There are just too many other sports here to follow year round. The best of the best play basketball, football, and baseball right here in our country year round, so there isn’t a lot of time to embrace soccer as well.
That having been said, I will say this – everyone outside of the US is lucky that our top athletes don’t grow up playing soccer – every nation would be in trouble if they did. You wouldn’t want to go up against these guys if they played soccer their whole lives:
Bald Dave
Established Member
- Reaction score
- 2
EasyEd said:
You are right on the mark Easyed! The England players get paid too much money (some are getting £150,000 per week!), they drive around in expensive cars, live in a big mansion with a golddigger wife (WAG) and basically don't give a flying f*ck if they win the World Cup or not! They are arrogent (Wayne Rooney doesn't even sing the national anthem and complains when the fans who has spent thousands to watch England's sh*t perfromance start booing him). They basically get paid too much money to care about England winning.
The team have just landed back home and they are gonna go on a nice holiday with the wags before going back to "work" and "earning" £150,000 after their shambolic performance at the World Cup. Its the fans I feel sorry for as they've spent thousands of pounds in flights, hotels, tickets etc to watch that sh*t. I think the least the players could do is to reimburse each fan their cost of ticket when they played Germany but the players probably need every penny so they can buy a new Bentley :jackit:
Im glad the USA did well though and I think next time Im gonna support the USA instead of that garbage (England).
EasyEd said:
Not in my opinion
The footballers in the English team are some of the best in the world with a few being arguably _the_ best in the world.
This is evident in the performances they put out for their clubs in the English Premier League, which is generally exceptional throughout the season.
However when these players come together to play for England, they seem completely unable to play together. No one really knows what the reason for this is. Some ideas are:
- The media pressure is so high that they can't relax (British media is brutal)
- They have very little time off after the end of their own league to recover and are over-tired for the world cup
- They never play together other than for England so they don't know each others game intimately. The '6th sense' they have with their club mates isn't there.
On paper they're probably the best team in the world. In reality they're one of the worst...
Ian Curtis
Established Member
- Reaction score
- 4
f*** this sh*t, Spain deserved to win. Go Brazil!