The Ultimate Football/Soccer Thread (2010/2011 Season)

[Starblaydia]

And, depending, the US could be the best team in the group. Not likely, but still. A man can dream, right?

England are

Should be "is," not "are."

Since the team, for the purposes of what is being discussed here, acts as a single unit, it is a singular entity for the purposes of subject-verb agreement. It doesn't matter that it's made up of multiple people.

...ooooookay. From now on, you must always say the Colts is the best team. K?

You wouldn't say "Bluth Corporation are a genius and an overall awesome person"

No, no I wouldn't.

[Vonners]

And, depending, the US could be the best team in the group. Not likely, but still. A man can dream, right?

England are the best team in the group. Whether the best team has the most points and highest goal difference after three matches, however, is yet to be seen

Are they? Seems to me that man for man USA were the better team...given relative values between the two teams...

Better given relative values?

Wait. They're worse... so they're better?

England was the team with more skill coming in. USA tied so the USA played a better game.

that and the cot of the players...hell...Ashley Cole alone would probably pay for the whole USA squad let alone Gerrard and Rooney...

[United Dependencies]

I suspect subterfuge. The obviously-superior England team threw the match to allow the US to stay in the running a bit longer. There's probably a shady deal involving illegal shares of ad revenue out there somewhere.

Maybe it was a deal to keep us from saying British Petroleum too often,

I think you might be on to something.

[Valanora]

It was a fair result given the run of play. England couldn't find the touch in the final third while the USA mucked up their best chance and yet got a gift from Green. All in all, a point a piece is fair and is not disastrous for the two favorites of the group to move on from this match and win their next two and advance as expected.


... What could muck this whole thing up is if Slovenia or Algeria manage to get a multiple goal victory...

[Starblaydia]

It was a fair result given the run of play. England couldn't find the touch in the final third while the USA mucked up their best chance and yet got a gift from Green. All in all, a point a piece is fair and is not disastrous for the two favorites of the group to move on from this match and win their next two and advance as expected.

Probably about fair. England could, and should, have scored a hatful.

[Christmahanikwanzikah]

It was a fair result given the run of play. England couldn't find the touch in the final third while the USA mucked up their best chance and yet got a gift from Green. All in all, a point a piece is fair and is not disastrous for the two favorites of the group to move on from this match and win their next two and advance as expected.


... What could muck this whole thing up is if Slovenia or Algeria manage to get a multiple goal victory...

Eh, sort of. Slovenia and Algeria won't play each other again, meaning that either of the two will have to play either the U.S. or England to win any points.

If England and America take care of business like they ought to, they'll advance onwards.

What I'm wondering is how the average American that watches this will respond to a tie with a soccer powerhouse.

[Holy Paradise]

I will definitely take the tie with the Three Lions. We got lucky on that one (Although England got lucky when Altidore's shot bounced off the post.) Solid match.

[Christmahanikwanzikah]

I will definitely take the tie with the Three Lions. We got lucky on that one (Although England got lucky when Altidore's shot bounced off the post.) Solid match.

Seriously, yes.

I swear that post moved.

[Holy Paradise]

I will definitely take the tie with the Three Lions. We got lucky on that one (Although England got lucky when Altidore's shot bounced off the post.) Solid match.

Seriously, yes.

I swear that post moved.

I watched the game at this fraternity rush party, and when that shot hit the post, the collective sigh was massive.

Of course, the softie goal produced some great cheering.

[Holy Paradise]

Oh, and to all England fans browsing, let me just say I have become a fan of the beautiful game since watching that match, it was incredibly exciting.

[Valanora]

It was a fair result given the run of play. England couldn't find the touch in the final third while the USA mucked up their best chance and yet got a gift from Green. All in all, a point a piece is fair and is not disastrous for the two favorites of the group to move on from this match and win their next two and advance as expected.


... What could muck this whole thing up is if Slovenia or Algeria manage to get a multiple goal victory...

Eh, sort of. Slovenia and Algeria won't play each other again, meaning that either of the two will have to play either the U.S. or England to win any points.

If England and America take care of business like they ought to, they'll advance onwards.

What I'm wondering is how the average American that watches this will respond to a tie with a soccer powerhouse.

Oh I know they wont play each other again, I'm not you're run of the mill yank when it comes to footy. I'm just saying that if either manage to win by multiple goals, it makes the margin of error for both the USA and England shrink to minuscule. Both sides should have no problem winning both of their games that are left but as the first two days have shown, what should happen does not always play out that way.

As for the average American, they are probably either disgusted that the match ended in a draw or thinking we can win the World Cup now.

[Christmahanikwanzikah]

It was a fair result given the run of play. England couldn't find the touch in the final third while the USA mucked up their best chance and yet got a gift from Green. All in all, a point a piece is fair and is not disastrous for the two favorites of the group to move on from this match and win their next two and advance as expected.


... What could muck this whole thing up is if Slovenia or Algeria manage to get a multiple goal victory...

Eh, sort of. Slovenia and Algeria won't play each other again, meaning that either of the two will have to play either the U.S. or England to win any points.

If England and America take care of business like they ought to, they'll advance onwards.

What I'm wondering is how the average American that watches this will respond to a tie with a soccer powerhouse.

Oh I know they wont play each other again, I'm not you're run of the mill yank when it comes to footy. I'm just saying that if either manage to win by multiple goals, it makes the margin of error for both the USA and England shrink to minuscule. Both sides should have no problem winning both of their games that are left but as the first two days have shown, what should happen does not always play out that way.

As for the average American, they are probably either disgusted that the match ended in a draw or thinking we can win the World Cup now.

I'm just wondering now what'll become of London if Algeria plays England to a tie, or, more impossibly, a win.

[Holy Paradise]

I'm just wondering now what'll become of London if Algeria plays England to a tie, or, more impossibly, a win.

Mass chaos, calls for Capello's head, calls for Green's head, and that's the best case scenario.

[Valanora]

*snip*

I'm just wondering now what'll become of London if Algeria plays England to a tie, or, more impossibly, a win.

I don't think any of the 23 would ever be allowed to step back in England without tons of security if that happens.

[Western cuba]

Wow this thread shouldn't be called the World Cup thread it should instead be called the Ultimate Group C Blog.

[Londim]

*snip*

I'm just wondering now what'll become of London if Algeria plays England to a tie, or, more impossibly, a win.

I don't think any of the 23 would ever be allowed to step back in England without tons of security if that happens.

It's like McLaren when he failed to get England into Euro 2008. He high-tailed it to the Netherlands. My friends and I joked that if he ever tried to get through customs, the customs officer would put him on the first plane/train back out the country.

Anyway, regarding the 1-1 draw I have to give my respect to the USA. Provided some pretty tense moments, like Altidore's shot, and showed us where we're don't have strength, goalkeeper. I wish James had started in goal and due to Green's unlucky drop James will probably start next match. Heskey played rather well and the little pass to Gerrard to set up the goal was pure class. Rooney was pretty quiet throughout. Aaron Lennon seemed to put the most effort in and, apart from Howard, was probably the best player on the pitch.

[United Dependencies]

Wow this thread shouldn't be called the World Cup thread it should instead be called the Ultimate Group C Blog.

Well considering where most of our members are from.

Since you asked though: I think the republic of Korea posted a decent win over Greece. I liked one of the breakaway goals.

[Western cuba]

That besides the Argentina goal is probably one of the few things on Espn for the World Cup that I watched that wasn't related the USA-England game.

[Daistallia 2104]

And, depending, the US could be the best team in the group. Not likely, but still. A man can dream, right?

England are

Should be "is," not "are."

Since the team, for the purposes of what is being discussed here, acts as a single unit, it is a singular entity for the purposes of subject-verb agreement. It doesn't matter that it's made up of multiple people.

...ooooookay. From now on, you must always say the Colts is the best team. K?

In AmE, England is and the Colts are, while in BrE England are.

The names of sports teams, on the other hand, are treated as plurals, regardless of the form of that name. We would write that "The Yankees have signed a new third baseman" and "The Yankees are a great organization" (even if we're Red Sox fans) and that "For two years in a row, the Utah Jazz have attempted to draft a big man." When we refer to a team by the city in which it resides, however, we use the singular, as in "Dallas has attempted to secure the services of two assistant coaches that Green Bay hopes to keep." (This is decidedly not a British practice. In the UK, the city or country names by which British newspapers refer to soccer teams, for example, are used as plurals — a practice that seems odd and inconsistent to American ears: "A minute's silence will precede the game at Le Stadium today, when Toulouse play Munster, and tomorrow at Lansdowne Road, when Leinster attempt to reach their first European final by beating Perpignan" [report in the online London Times].)
In a rare dictum-making mood, William Safire (in No Uncertain Terms, 2003) declares that pluralized names like Packers and Yankees should take plural verbs (obviously), but that team names like the Jazz, the Heat, the Lightning, the Connecticut Sun should take singular verbs. This dictum seems to prevail in Safire's own New York Times: "The [Miami] Heat, typical of its resilience at home, was far from through. " But just about everywhere else in the world of sports reporting, this is not the case. Even in the Times, an AP report asserts that "The Heat, down 2-0 in the East Conference semifinal series, have won 16 straight home games." The Boston Globe says that "the [New England] Revolution are reestablishing their reputation for resourcefulness and spirited play." and "the Heat were in it in the first half." The Hartford Courant writes that "When the Connecticut Sun play an exhibition game tonight in Houston, coach Mike Thibault will have two more players." Finally, NBA Media Ventures writes that "The Utah Jazz were expected to follow the rebuilding mode… ." [All quotations are from May 10th and 20th, 2004, online sources.)

http://grammar.ccc.commnet.edu/grammar/plurals.htm

Whether the team is considered singular or plural depends upon the context of the sentence. If the team is considered as a unit (the Miami Heat plays in Miami Auditorium) it is considered a collective noun and used as singular. The New York Yanks is the best baseball team in NYC.

When the team is dealt with as individuals, they are considered plural. The Lakers board the plane at 5:30 pm. Cleveland has been in the NFL since 1953. The Indian players are on the field for practice an hour before game time.

http://en.allexperts.com/q/General-Writ ... -teams.htm

You wouldn't say "Bluth Corporation are a genius and an overall awesome person"

No, no I wouldn't.

[Sdaeriji]

Not to dogpile on English fans more, but you all knew going in that if one player was going to fuck you prison-rape style, it was going to be Green.

[Nadkor]

Well, he did make more mistakes leading to a goal in the Premier League this season than any other player.

Why he is first choice for any team, let alone England at the World Cup, is baffling.

[Christmahanikwanzikah]

Well, he did make more mistakes leading to a goal in the Premier League this season than any other player.

Why he is first choice for any team, let alone England at the World Cup, is baffling.

Wasn't there a question about who England was going to field for their 1st man? Who would've been the better option (other than, at this point, saying "All of them." for obvious reasons ) ?

[Sdaeriji]

Well, he did make more mistakes leading to a goal in the Premier League this season than any other player.

Why he is first choice for any team, let alone England at the World Cup, is baffling.

Wasn't there a question about who England was going to field for their 1st man? Who would've been the better option (other than, at this point, saying "All of them." for obvious reasons ) ?

Based on that goal? Maybe a bag of oranges.

[Christmahanikwanzikah]

Well, he did make more mistakes leading to a goal in the Premier League this season than any other player.

Why he is first choice for any team, let alone England at the World Cup, is baffling.

Wasn't there a question about who England was going to field for their 1st man? Who would've been the better option (other than, at this point, saying "All of them." for obvious reasons ) ?

Based on that goal? Maybe a bag of oranges.

Wouldn't have stopped Altidore's shot, though.

[Sdaeriji]

Well, he did make more mistakes leading to a goal in the Premier League this season than any other player.

Why he is first choice for any team, let alone England at the World Cup, is baffling.

Wasn't there a question about who England was going to field for their 1st man? Who would've been the better option (other than, at this point, saying "All of them." for obvious reasons ) ?

Based on that goal? Maybe a bag of oranges.

Wouldn't have stopped Altidore's shot, though.

So, what you're saying is that the result would've been the same 1-1 draw if England had gone with a bag of oranges in net?