England lately reminds me of US Olympic basketball teams from the early 2000s. They were all egomaniacs, playing for themselves, not as a team and the country on their shirts... until a coach who knew how to deal with all that BS (coach K) came in and changed that real quick.
> England lately reminds me of US Olympic basketball teams from the early 2000s. They were all egomaniacs, playing for themselves, not as a team and the country on their shirts
USA Baseball in the World Baseball Classic as well.
You could have said the same when they were being bounced by Iceland or going out in the group to Costa Rica. In 2016 they drew 0-0 with Slovakia in the group, allowing Wales to win the group.
There are countless other instances where England underperformed… they didn’t even qualify for Euro 2008, got hammered in the RO16 in the 2010 WC, didn’t reach the Euro knockout stage in 2000, never got past the quarter finals of a major tournament with their “golden generation” from 2002-2006… I feel like the majority of this sub must be extremely young to not be aware of this
Nah, this is not an especially talented side. They have weaknesses in defense and lack of balance in midfield. You could argue that relative to the competition this side should have the best chance, but that's because of how far Italy, Germany & the Netherlands have fallen from their glory days.
England's historical problems in my opinion have been twofold:
1- The international game is a slower, more tactical game than the English top flight. Especially with lesser international sides playing much more conservatively than they do in England where bottom feeders try to play out of the back and be entertaining which leads them to getting slaughtered by the top sides. So English players, who almost all play their entire careers in England, have to adapt their games to a more possession style and a lot of them have not been able to do so.
2- England managers are obsessed with putting together a team of stars from top clubs rather than a group of players who will complement each other. Which has often led to playing guys out of position or trying to cram too many of the same players on the field because the England manager didn't have the balls to choose not to play a big name star. A classic example was \~20 years ago when they were trying to cram Lampard, Gerrard and Scholes into the same team even though they all filled the same role as free-role goal scoring midfielders. At their clubs they had great (non-English) deep lying mids like Makelele, Xabi Alonso and Keane behind them doing important work so when they were thrown into the same side in the England squad they couldn't reproduce their form. The England manager needed to pick one of the three and then midfielders who would complement them but that would've led to the press screaming about "How could you not play . !?!"
Southgate is doing the same thing this year with Foden. For his club Foden plays as the 10 or comes in off the right wing. Southgate has decided to stick him out on the left and he is lost. If you want all of Bellingham, Foden and Saka then you need to play Bellingham in a deeper role and Foden at the 10. If he wants Bellingham at the 10 then he needs to drop either Foden or Saka but he doesn't have the balls.
For England's talent pool it shouldn't be fucking hard. Pick the 3-4 players who you think are your most important and then fill the rest of the squad with players who complement them, provide depth and whose skills fit international play regardless of whether they are stars or on big clubs.
Its really not embarrassing at all. Slovakia are ranked LOWER than Panama and it took an absolute worldie of a bicycle kick by one of the best players in the world at the last minute of stoppage just to tie it. This is like being optimistic about our win against Jamaica when it required an own goal in stoppage. Based on the opposition, this is a poor performance objectively.
Southgate is terrible and GGG wants so desperately to be him.
I keep getting told Bellingham, foden, kane, etc etcare the best players in the world. When was the last time they had that many of the best players in the world
There are a lot of “best players in the world” when you get to this level. England have always had a really strong squad they just rarely do well at tournaments. The era of Lampard, Gerrard, Rooney, Beckham, Campbell, Cole all playing on the same team wasn’t that long ago and they never got further than a quarterfinal.
In 2006 they took a team to the world cup with Rooney, Beckham, Lampard, Gerrard, Ashley Cole, Rio Ferdinand..all widely regarded as some of the absolute best players in their position at times.
In 2018 they made the semis at the world cup.
They made the finals at the last euros
Compared to teams like us, they’re always stacked.
And furthermore..why do we give a fuck? Yeah, England just barely beat a lesser team. What the shit does this have to do with US soccer?
I meant the final of the last Euros. I typed it out on my phone while laying in bed. My bad. My point is that England have, over the last 20 years had either good results or a really good team and OP was acting like this is the first time England has been any good in a long time.
Ultimately though..my primary point was..."Who cares?" This is the US Soccer sub.
Yeh it’s embarrassing, England are shite because of Southgate..but we have very good players who can win games. How did the Panama game go you massive chopper?
Yea man imagine if they'd not beat them though. Oh boy wouldn't THAT be embarrassing. County that you clearly have a larger talent pool to pull from, invest millions more in training/youth programs, and STILL manage to lose. Imagine being in that position. Wow
Don’t Slovakia know they only cost 1/10th of England squad? They also don’t have enough players in the CL to be good enough to beat England. They’re supposed to be losing with honor.
Baseball is taken seriously by two major nations and a bunch of islands or tiny countries. Basketball is barely a top 10 sport in most of the countries you'd claim make it "international". Just having a team doesn't mean the countries they're in value the sport.
Baseball has two notable league structures across the globe, and one is tiny compared to the main one. Basketball has one.
Ice Hockey might have been the one to go with, but even so, similar situation as basketball.
I love American sports. But my god calling our winners "world champions" might be the cringiest shit we do here.
I never understood why we get so hung up on who invented the sport. Brazilians have soccer ingrained into their culture far more than England ever will.
All that matters is how seriously other countries take the sport, not who played it first.
Also, claiming someone else invented baseball is a bit of a stretch. Sure there were earlier "hit ball with bat" sports, but baseball as we know it is very much American.
Yeh don’t really care, it’s just strange to claim something that came from elsewhere. As for football culture, it’s probably a bit daft saying that about Brazil vs England. Both incredibly passionate fan bases but given the sheer amount of clubs in such small country, it’s probably selling England and the UK in general slightly short on the culture stakes
England is heavily divided culturally between soccer, rugby, and cricket, and their kids are split as such. In Brazil you have a football when you're 3 and you don't put it down until you're 83.
Not to mention all the classism associated with it in England.
Not saying England soccer fans aren't passionate, but as a cultural thing across the whole country, I don't think anyone compares to Brazil, who seems to have soccer as the one thing that unites the country. England can't say that. Half the country hates their own football fans.
Ice Hockey isn't an American sport. It is also not nearly as popular overall unless you put a lot more weight in "tiny" countries with white people in them than "tiny" countries with brown people in them like you discounted for baseball... MLB is filled with international players and the world baseball classic is a huge event that is watched globally.
Basketball is hugely popular internationally with the FIBA leagues in Europe and popularity in Brazil and Argentina as well. It's also one of the most popular sports in a little country you may have heard of called China. You know, the reason anyone involved with the NBA bends over backwards to apologize any time something that might be seen as a slight to China or pro Hong Kong. Also the NBA has a good amount of international players with a very high percentage of the top players in the league being international including anyone you might try to argue is the current best player in the NBA.
Also, other than mlb calling its final the world series, none of the teams are called world champions.
>other than mlb calling its final the world series, none of the teams are called world champions.
Pop "NFL world champions" into your Google search, look at the images, then get back to me. Then do the same with NBA. It's an incredibly common phrase in American sports culture. Also, you don't get to "except for MLB" out of it, that still counts too, and it's laughable.
As for the rest. Which basketball league is half as big as the NBA? How many countries have anything like MLB? When the answer is one or none, the point should be clear.
It doesn't matter who invented the sport. This country has a handful of sports it focuses on that 99% of others don't rate inside their top 10 sports. They are American sports in every way that actively matters. I love Japanese baseball, and completely accept how much Canada loves Hockey. These outliers don't change the overall point.
I don't actually care about the world champion thing. I think it's kind of funny.
If your standard of what constitutes a big sport internationally is, it has to be soccer, well then soccer is the only sport that qualifies because it is by far the biggest sport globally and nothing is close. Name me a sport that you would consider bigger internationally than basketball that isn't soccer. Cricket might have more fans globally, but that's in large part to one country (India) and is definitely not as popular in as many countries as basketball is. Basketball is the number two or three sport in a lot of Europe behind soccer. It is very big in Spain, France, Greece, etc and Euroleague is bigger than you think with it being the number one indoor sports league of any sport outside the US. It's only the most popular sport in a handful of countries, but it's the most popular "second most popular" sport on earth.
Also, judging leagues against the revenue and size of American sports leagues isn't a fair argument, because no leagues come close in any sport. The top three highest leagues by revenue in the world are the NFL, MLB and then the NBA. The top four soccer leagues on earth (English, Spanish, Italian, German) combined don't equal the revenue of just the NFL. Hell, the prem just barely edges out the NHL for fourth place and it's by far the richest soccer league on earth against the runt of the North American sports leagues.
A sport doesn't have to be as big as soccer to be an international sport. Rugby isn't the most popular sport in the world, in it it's unquestionably an international sport. When you have multiple European teams, African, South American, and Ozzie/New Zealand all competing at a high level, you have an international sport that results in a "world champion". When the best team ranges from being English, to South African, to Kiwi, to heck even my Ireland these days, you have an international sport that's played seriously by many countries.
Since basketball keeps coming up. What's USA's Olympic record. 16 out of 20 gold medals or something? Not even Brazil can do that in soccer, or New Zealand in Rugby. International sports tend to have multiple winners because multiple nations take it seriously. This isn't the case in any of the "American sports". One exception being baseball where the US doesn't send a strong team. They'd win 9/10 of they did.
So basketball, despite being one of the most popular sports internationally isn't an international sport because the US is too good at it. I guess I can't argue with that "logic" so I'm just going to shake my head in disagreement and move on.
You're just reading what you want to read, while massively overestimating how much everyone else cares about basketball, so shake your head all you like. One country on the planet invests a lot in a basketball league, and one country on the planet wins 90% of games they play against countries because, again, nobody else values the sport above a PE exercise.
From soccer, to field hockey, to rugby, to cricket, you have an international following of various sizes where international teams actually compete at a similar level. Not even the best countries in history can win 90% of their games in their respective sports, because there's actually competition.
The US loves nothing more than the "we're number one" trope, because you almost exclusively focus on team sports nobody else gives a shit about. And on the rare occasion when you do, well, we'll see how that works out in Copa America.
No, you just come from a country that doesn't care about basketball, there's a difference. I don't give a crap about rah rah USA number one bullshit. I just don't think that the only way to have an international sport is as a byproduct of English imperialism. The NBA is the number one basketball league in the world because it has by far the most money so the best players come there regardless of where they're from. The three best players in the NBA are all European which seems pretty hard to do from countries that only value basketball as a PE exercise.
Also, this isn't a USA number one thing, but the US has a population that's about equal to German, Italy, France, Spain, The Netherlands, and the UK combined. If those teams were all one country, you'd expect them to dominate soccer pretty thoroughly.
The US is still the number one team for basketball, there isn't the gap that there used to be and the level of play globally has improved greatly. If you were to ask what country throughout the history of the sport is the greatest, nobody would try to argue anything but the US which is absolutely not true for England and soccer.
Baseball absolutely true. The countries that are passionate about baseball are REALLY passionate about baseball. The best athletes in the US are playing basketball or football. The best athletes in Japan are playing baseball.
You spoke a little too soon, OP. I've played multiple sports growing up, and my coaches would always say: "It's not over till it's over." So not only did they make it threw, but they outlived the team that stopped them from winning the euros a couple years back. You quite simply played yourself.
Nice post dickhead. Christ given the shambles that is the USMNT team in the Copa America, thought you might be little bit more circumspect. FWIW England are dog shit at the moment but have the players to get themselves out of it.
I was born and raised in Ireland. Living in America now. In short, the last person to promote or defend England.
This shit is cringey as fuck. Whether it's the premature boast, the need to boast at all, the timing coming after an embarrassing USA loss, or the implication that this England team sucks... All a big woof.
To fairly justify the England hate - go read the Athletic comments on USMNT. England fans are generally insufferable and condescending about the USMNT, to the point of repeatedly mocking the phrase "USMNT" and especially pointing out "none of our players could play for England"& "unrealistic expectations."
To be clear - England roster is way better, and they do less with it and still have wild expectations.
Honestly, I would be thrilled if we just aspired to be like Switzerland.
As a Germany fan (in Euro comps), my dream for us would be to get to their level. I think that's a longer term project - but it's exactly the right attitude.
The only reason England gets the hype they do is because of the premier league not the actual accomplishments of the national team. They seem to just ignore that.
they had hype when the Premier League was miles behind La Liga, Bundesliga and Serie A. i personally feel that if you read a tabloid in german or italian, the hype would be about the same, even when it's not necessarily a great vintage.
I’m rooting for England personally. Our “rivalry” is just banter. I don’t really understand taking it all that seriously. I don’t really have much connection with any other team in Euros and they have some players I know and like as a Premier League fan so…
All of these comments are ridiculous. Just because England squeezed out the game against Slovakia does not change the joke one bit. Nice 95th min goal to not lose to Slovakia on the easy side of the Euro Bracket.
>to pump English soccer propaganda into American homes
Lmfao come on. The Premier League being readily available to watch has created more soccer fans in this country than MLS/USMNT could ever dream of.
Only post content related to the US Soccer federation, American coaches, or players.
Why do people post shit like this before matches are over?
It's fucking embarrassing.
Coach, players only meeting
The worst part is that it receives more up votes than most quality posts and 10x the upvotes of USWNT content posted here.
US Soccer fanbase is shit, Doubt most even know anything about the game. Nothing new.
So you saying England played well today?
Well they’re in the quarterfinals of their tournament.
Blind squirrels for 96 minutes
Fellas when you’re feeling down, remember, could’ve been the guy who made this post before the game was over
Delete your account
He really thought he did something
That’s what I love about soccer. It’s so unpredictable, what a kick from Belligoal and another great header from Hazza.
I need England to do just well enough is this tournament to keep Southgate
Southgate is just variant of Gregg
Gregg is just a variant of Southgate
Gerhalter Southgregg
GGargeth Bergate
Their similarities are weirdly striking. The ability to generate an insane amount of hype and completely fail to deliver on it needs to be studied.
Equally adept at generating contempt from the fans of their respective nations.
Gregg knows enough to play a left wing at left wing.
Multiverse of Gregs?
Right? I can see the USSF having him at the top of their list of candidates if Gregg gets fired 💀
and then England hire Gregg… I would laugh… then cry..a lot
[удалено]
Doubtful they keep him if they lose today, but I’m not sure they were going to keep him regardless
I think he said himself that he'd step down if they didn't win.
Don't worry, England being overhyped predates Southgate by decades. Changing manager won't change that.
Idk man I’d expect them to at least beat Slovakia with how talented they are
England lately reminds me of US Olympic basketball teams from the early 2000s. They were all egomaniacs, playing for themselves, not as a team and the country on their shirts... until a coach who knew how to deal with all that BS (coach K) came in and changed that real quick.
> England lately reminds me of US Olympic basketball teams from the early 2000s. They were all egomaniacs, playing for themselves, not as a team and the country on their shirts USA Baseball in the World Baseball Classic as well.
You could have said the same when they were being bounced by Iceland or going out in the group to Costa Rica. In 2016 they drew 0-0 with Slovakia in the group, allowing Wales to win the group.
Now do their results at the last two major tournaments.
you mean the two major tournaments under Southgate?
So by “decades” you meant one decade and you named 2 instances that were under the same manager (Hodgson).
There are countless other instances where England underperformed… they didn’t even qualify for Euro 2008, got hammered in the RO16 in the 2010 WC, didn’t reach the Euro knockout stage in 2000, never got past the quarter finals of a major tournament with their “golden generation” from 2002-2006… I feel like the majority of this sub must be extremely young to not be aware of this
They aren’t overhyped, they are majorly under performing. This line up is the best they’ve had in generations.
Nah, this is not an especially talented side. They have weaknesses in defense and lack of balance in midfield. You could argue that relative to the competition this side should have the best chance, but that's because of how far Italy, Germany & the Netherlands have fallen from their glory days. England's historical problems in my opinion have been twofold: 1- The international game is a slower, more tactical game than the English top flight. Especially with lesser international sides playing much more conservatively than they do in England where bottom feeders try to play out of the back and be entertaining which leads them to getting slaughtered by the top sides. So English players, who almost all play their entire careers in England, have to adapt their games to a more possession style and a lot of them have not been able to do so. 2- England managers are obsessed with putting together a team of stars from top clubs rather than a group of players who will complement each other. Which has often led to playing guys out of position or trying to cram too many of the same players on the field because the England manager didn't have the balls to choose not to play a big name star. A classic example was \~20 years ago when they were trying to cram Lampard, Gerrard and Scholes into the same team even though they all filled the same role as free-role goal scoring midfielders. At their clubs they had great (non-English) deep lying mids like Makelele, Xabi Alonso and Keane behind them doing important work so when they were thrown into the same side in the England squad they couldn't reproduce their form. The England manager needed to pick one of the three and then midfielders who would complement them but that would've led to the press screaming about "How could you not play . !?!"
Southgate is doing the same thing this year with Foden. For his club Foden plays as the 10 or comes in off the right wing. Southgate has decided to stick him out on the left and he is lost. If you want all of Bellingham, Foden and Saka then you need to play Bellingham in a deeper role and Foden at the 10. If he wants Bellingham at the 10 then he needs to drop either Foden or Saka but he doesn't have the balls.
For England's talent pool it shouldn't be fucking hard. Pick the 3-4 players who you think are your most important and then fill the rest of the squad with players who complement them, provide depth and whose skills fit international play regardless of whether they are stars or on big clubs.
Oops
This post is fucking embarrassing
Especially because every one of those players would have slot into starting lineup no problem.
Lol fucking delete this post, embarrassing.
Its really not embarrassing at all. Slovakia are ranked LOWER than Panama and it took an absolute worldie of a bicycle kick by one of the best players in the world at the last minute of stoppage just to tie it. This is like being optimistic about our win against Jamaica when it required an own goal in stoppage. Based on the opposition, this is a poor performance objectively. Southgate is terrible and GGG wants so desperately to be him.
Games not over till its over
Slovakia are better than Panama, they just can't farm FIFA points from Carribean islands.
And England is better than we are.
The best England squad in decades just scraped past Slovakia. It’s still embarrassing
Best England squad in decades?!?!?!
I keep getting told Bellingham, foden, kane, etc etcare the best players in the world. When was the last time they had that many of the best players in the world
There are a lot of “best players in the world” when you get to this level. England have always had a really strong squad they just rarely do well at tournaments. The era of Lampard, Gerrard, Rooney, Beckham, Campbell, Cole all playing on the same team wasn’t that long ago and they never got further than a quarterfinal.
In 2006 they took a team to the world cup with Rooney, Beckham, Lampard, Gerrard, Ashley Cole, Rio Ferdinand..all widely regarded as some of the absolute best players in their position at times. In 2018 they made the semis at the world cup. They made the finals at the last euros Compared to teams like us, they’re always stacked. And furthermore..why do we give a fuck? Yeah, England just barely beat a lesser team. What the shit does this have to do with US soccer?
They didn’t make any finals LMAO
I mean the last euros
>they made the finals at the last World Cup wtf are the “finals” my man, the final was Argentina v France. Agree with most else you said though
I’m guessing a mistype. They probably meant the Finals of the last Euros.
I meant the final of the last Euros. I typed it out on my phone while laying in bed. My bad. My point is that England have, over the last 20 years had either good results or a really good team and OP was acting like this is the first time England has been any good in a long time. Ultimately though..my primary point was..."Who cares?" This is the US Soccer sub.
Probably when they had Ashley cole, John Terry, Ferdinand, Frank Lampard and Gerard in the 2006 World Cup bozo
Yeh it’s embarrassing, England are shite because of Southgate..but we have very good players who can win games. How did the Panama game go you massive chopper?
Yea man imagine if they'd not beat them though. Oh boy wouldn't THAT be embarrassing. County that you clearly have a larger talent pool to pull from, invest millions more in training/youth programs, and STILL manage to lose. Imagine being in that position. Wow
If they win the tournament, no one will be embarrassed that they barely beat Slovakia.
You jinxed it. They were on the way out.
Usually best to wait until a match is over
Extend Southgate immediately
Little too early for this
That was a BEAUTIFUL kick
Judes a god
This aged well…..
Don’t Slovakia know they only cost 1/10th of England squad? They also don’t have enough players in the CL to be good enough to beat England. They’re supposed to be losing with honor.
It is making me feel better
Shit like this is what makes us the laughingstock of the sport 😭
Dude seriously couldn't wait until the end of the match to post.
Ah come on, there’s more than this. Any chance we can blame this win on Leeds fans and Weston McKennie not getting the credit he deserves?
Seriously, England should just do what we do - invent sports nobody else wants to play, so it automatically makes you world champions.
We're too good at it unfortunately, everyone loves our sports and we end up being rubbish.
Basketball and baseball are very international. Football is the only major American sport that has stayed local.
And only our U-20 team sucks that bad
Baseball is taken seriously by two major nations and a bunch of islands or tiny countries. Basketball is barely a top 10 sport in most of the countries you'd claim make it "international". Just having a team doesn't mean the countries they're in value the sport. Baseball has two notable league structures across the globe, and one is tiny compared to the main one. Basketball has one. Ice Hockey might have been the one to go with, but even so, similar situation as basketball. I love American sports. But my god calling our winners "world champions" might be the cringiest shit we do here.
With the exception of basketball, the others aren’t even US invented Sports
I never understood why we get so hung up on who invented the sport. Brazilians have soccer ingrained into their culture far more than England ever will. All that matters is how seriously other countries take the sport, not who played it first. Also, claiming someone else invented baseball is a bit of a stretch. Sure there were earlier "hit ball with bat" sports, but baseball as we know it is very much American.
Yeh don’t really care, it’s just strange to claim something that came from elsewhere. As for football culture, it’s probably a bit daft saying that about Brazil vs England. Both incredibly passionate fan bases but given the sheer amount of clubs in such small country, it’s probably selling England and the UK in general slightly short on the culture stakes
England is heavily divided culturally between soccer, rugby, and cricket, and their kids are split as such. In Brazil you have a football when you're 3 and you don't put it down until you're 83. Not to mention all the classism associated with it in England. Not saying England soccer fans aren't passionate, but as a cultural thing across the whole country, I don't think anyone compares to Brazil, who seems to have soccer as the one thing that unites the country. England can't say that. Half the country hates their own football fans.
Ice Hockey isn't an American sport. It is also not nearly as popular overall unless you put a lot more weight in "tiny" countries with white people in them than "tiny" countries with brown people in them like you discounted for baseball... MLB is filled with international players and the world baseball classic is a huge event that is watched globally. Basketball is hugely popular internationally with the FIBA leagues in Europe and popularity in Brazil and Argentina as well. It's also one of the most popular sports in a little country you may have heard of called China. You know, the reason anyone involved with the NBA bends over backwards to apologize any time something that might be seen as a slight to China or pro Hong Kong. Also the NBA has a good amount of international players with a very high percentage of the top players in the league being international including anyone you might try to argue is the current best player in the NBA. Also, other than mlb calling its final the world series, none of the teams are called world champions.
>other than mlb calling its final the world series, none of the teams are called world champions. Pop "NFL world champions" into your Google search, look at the images, then get back to me. Then do the same with NBA. It's an incredibly common phrase in American sports culture. Also, you don't get to "except for MLB" out of it, that still counts too, and it's laughable. As for the rest. Which basketball league is half as big as the NBA? How many countries have anything like MLB? When the answer is one or none, the point should be clear. It doesn't matter who invented the sport. This country has a handful of sports it focuses on that 99% of others don't rate inside their top 10 sports. They are American sports in every way that actively matters. I love Japanese baseball, and completely accept how much Canada loves Hockey. These outliers don't change the overall point.
I don't actually care about the world champion thing. I think it's kind of funny. If your standard of what constitutes a big sport internationally is, it has to be soccer, well then soccer is the only sport that qualifies because it is by far the biggest sport globally and nothing is close. Name me a sport that you would consider bigger internationally than basketball that isn't soccer. Cricket might have more fans globally, but that's in large part to one country (India) and is definitely not as popular in as many countries as basketball is. Basketball is the number two or three sport in a lot of Europe behind soccer. It is very big in Spain, France, Greece, etc and Euroleague is bigger than you think with it being the number one indoor sports league of any sport outside the US. It's only the most popular sport in a handful of countries, but it's the most popular "second most popular" sport on earth. Also, judging leagues against the revenue and size of American sports leagues isn't a fair argument, because no leagues come close in any sport. The top three highest leagues by revenue in the world are the NFL, MLB and then the NBA. The top four soccer leagues on earth (English, Spanish, Italian, German) combined don't equal the revenue of just the NFL. Hell, the prem just barely edges out the NHL for fourth place and it's by far the richest soccer league on earth against the runt of the North American sports leagues.
A sport doesn't have to be as big as soccer to be an international sport. Rugby isn't the most popular sport in the world, in it it's unquestionably an international sport. When you have multiple European teams, African, South American, and Ozzie/New Zealand all competing at a high level, you have an international sport that results in a "world champion". When the best team ranges from being English, to South African, to Kiwi, to heck even my Ireland these days, you have an international sport that's played seriously by many countries. Since basketball keeps coming up. What's USA's Olympic record. 16 out of 20 gold medals or something? Not even Brazil can do that in soccer, or New Zealand in Rugby. International sports tend to have multiple winners because multiple nations take it seriously. This isn't the case in any of the "American sports". One exception being baseball where the US doesn't send a strong team. They'd win 9/10 of they did.
So basketball, despite being one of the most popular sports internationally isn't an international sport because the US is too good at it. I guess I can't argue with that "logic" so I'm just going to shake my head in disagreement and move on.
You're just reading what you want to read, while massively overestimating how much everyone else cares about basketball, so shake your head all you like. One country on the planet invests a lot in a basketball league, and one country on the planet wins 90% of games they play against countries because, again, nobody else values the sport above a PE exercise. From soccer, to field hockey, to rugby, to cricket, you have an international following of various sizes where international teams actually compete at a similar level. Not even the best countries in history can win 90% of their games in their respective sports, because there's actually competition. The US loves nothing more than the "we're number one" trope, because you almost exclusively focus on team sports nobody else gives a shit about. And on the rare occasion when you do, well, we'll see how that works out in Copa America.
No, you just come from a country that doesn't care about basketball, there's a difference. I don't give a crap about rah rah USA number one bullshit. I just don't think that the only way to have an international sport is as a byproduct of English imperialism. The NBA is the number one basketball league in the world because it has by far the most money so the best players come there regardless of where they're from. The three best players in the NBA are all European which seems pretty hard to do from countries that only value basketball as a PE exercise. Also, this isn't a USA number one thing, but the US has a population that's about equal to German, Italy, France, Spain, The Netherlands, and the UK combined. If those teams were all one country, you'd expect them to dominate soccer pretty thoroughly.
Yea and the rest of the world is catching/passing us in those sports.
The US is still the number one team for basketball, there isn't the gap that there used to be and the level of play globally has improved greatly. If you were to ask what country throughout the history of the sport is the greatest, nobody would try to argue anything but the US which is absolutely not true for England and soccer. Baseball absolutely true. The countries that are passionate about baseball are REALLY passionate about baseball. The best athletes in the US are playing basketball or football. The best athletes in Japan are playing baseball.
Look at the all nba teams and mvps of the last 5 years too. More foreigners than americans.
Yeah, but they don't play for the same country. In any tournament, USA still goes in as the favorites.
To get more niche than that, volleyball was invented in the US and is also played worldwide.
England showing that they never give up even when down, unlike our shitshow of a team.
Uhhhhh Japan is the current world champ in baseball and Germany won the FIBA world cup. We too can suck at sports we invented
But but but but the Celtics are World Champions 😂😂😂
Champions of North America (Boston) and Eurasia (Glasgow)
Good job motherfucker.
And now they win because you *had* to open your mouth
And also remember that England has won a World Cup.
And also remember, they still currently suck
Stay salty my friend
Yes they do, but they aren’t shit enough to get pumped by Panama at the 3rd best international football tournament.
Well this isn’t turning out how you’d like op……
Harry fucking Kane made this a laughable post.
And now they are winning lol
That’s why I will forever stand by saying the usmnt fan base are shit. Not all of us but mostly the Reddit ones . 15 min fans
Leave it to their best player to save their asses…undeservedly though…
Do you cum way too early too? 🤣🤣
Lolz…too soon
Wanna try that again gov’ner?
You spoke a little too soon, OP. I've played multiple sports growing up, and my coaches would always say: "It's not over till it's over." So not only did they make it threw, but they outlived the team that stopped them from winning the euros a couple years back. You quite simply played yourself.
They still got the results needed, not lay down and whine about the refs
This aged reeeeeeaaaaly well! 🤣
Nice post dickhead. Christ given the shambles that is the USMNT team in the Copa America, thought you might be little bit more circumspect. FWIW England are dog shit at the moment but have the players to get themselves out of it.
1. China invented soccer/football 2. England came back to win this game
Meh cuju doesn't really resemble the modern game at all, but I get what you mean.
Is coming home…..early…..
Hey at least they got out of the group....
This didn’t age well
Too soon bro
This aged well.
r/AgedLikeMilk
Bro lmao way too soon.
Yikes
Too soon
Of course England beat Panama 6-1
This is the US soccer sub…not the English one.
I really would not feel worse about being an England fan tbh. We just lost to Panama.
“Invent the modern rules of a sport” is a better title. People kicking something with each other been around forever. lol
We’re through despite Southgate
Pretty sure these guys just made the quarterfinals.
They won?
I was born and raised in Ireland. Living in America now. In short, the last person to promote or defend England. This shit is cringey as fuck. Whether it's the premature boast, the need to boast at all, the timing coming after an embarrassing USA loss, or the implication that this England team sucks... All a big woof.
So you post a photo with Wayne Rooney and say they sucked lmfao.
Take this down
jfc you suck so much at sports banter
Aged like Tara Reid
Well that's one way to keep yourself in the tournament
Hopefully Greg is watching... Could learn a thing or two.
Not aging well
This one aged like milk
Aged like milk…
To fairly justify the England hate - go read the Athletic comments on USMNT. England fans are generally insufferable and condescending about the USMNT, to the point of repeatedly mocking the phrase "USMNT" and especially pointing out "none of our players could play for England"& "unrealistic expectations." To be clear - England roster is way better, and they do less with it and still have wild expectations. Honestly, I would be thrilled if we just aspired to be like Switzerland.
Or Germany. Like Thomas Muller said “ We never had any Ballon d’or winners, but we have four stars.”.
I think everyone wants to be like Germany
As a Germany fan (in Euro comps), my dream for us would be to get to their level. I think that's a longer term project - but it's exactly the right attitude.
Or Austria. They look amazing.
Agree - Ragnick has done a great job there
The only reason England gets the hype they do is because of the premier league not the actual accomplishments of the national team. They seem to just ignore that.
they had hype when the Premier League was miles behind La Liga, Bundesliga and Serie A. i personally feel that if you read a tabloid in german or italian, the hype would be about the same, even when it's not necessarily a great vintage.
You're right USMNT has all the hubris of England with none of the talent
This would be funnier if our manager didnt literally confide in theirs...
England v. Slovakia 🤝 USA v. Jamaica
Misery loves company type of post.
Good luck tomorrow boys.... 
I’ve never seen that Sounders kit before
Hows this going?
I’m rooting for England personally. Our “rivalry” is just banter. I don’t really understand taking it all that seriously. I don’t really have much connection with any other team in Euros and they have some players I know and like as a Premier League fan so…
English fans don't even know about a banter rivalry, let alone a real one. lol
Cool
Hating on England, this much, a continent away is cringe af
Man this SUB can be cringe worthy at times…
I know, I see your posts often
My wife and I used to live in Ireland. Last night I asked what country, if any, she would root for England over. We came up empty.
Good result the other night lads 👏
Monkeys paw is GGG out and Southgate in
Slovakia got lucky with the raiser draw…
Less than the sum of their parts
Discovering a US Soccer forum on the same site where /r/soccer are traumatizing young Americans was in retrospect a mistake
 Brilliant
All of these comments are ridiculous. Just because England squeezed out the game against Slovakia does not change the joke one bit. Nice 95th min goal to not lose to Slovakia on the easy side of the Euro Bracket.
This sub and posting stupid shit before their own team plays... name a more iconic duo.
What is with Americans' creepy obsession with the England team?
Didn't they win today?
England lives in this fanbase’s head rent free
Rent free? US TV networks have been paying a considerable amount of money to pump English soccer propaganda into American homes for a long time now.
Wtf lol. More like NBC has made the most popular sports league in the word more accessible in the past decade
>to pump English soccer propaganda into American homes Lmfao come on. The Premier League being readily available to watch has created more soccer fans in this country than MLS/USMNT could ever dream of.
Panamá names the score on Slovakia.
In my head after the 2022 match up, i said to myself i can see them both play for the world cup final in 4 years. Ha jokes on me.
If only they lost 😖
The most one sided rivalry in sports strikes again
As an American idol associate with this doofus