NationStates Jolt Archive

What team do you think is the best soccer team in the world?

Who is going to win the 2006 World Cup?

Got tickets?

Germany...No question, they will win and yes I have tickets to the WC 2006. :)

Why, dear god why, do you have scotland up there but not ireland?

wait....nevermind

Why, dear god why, do you have scotland up there but not ireland?

I wanted to put Ireland but only 10 options. Sorry
The Ireland team is great!

Portugal

er...quite obviously Northern Ireland :cool:

er...quite obviously Northern Ireland :cool:

hahahahahaha.... ohhhh, you crack me up

er...quite obviously Northern Ireland :cool:

Sure now, both you and I know that the only thing that really matters is seeing the England team being ritually humiliated again.

Portugal

Obviamente, Portugal :D

No football fans, ha?

Any of the top thirty or so club sides from around the world, are better than any national team.
As for the best, well it is between: Chelsea, Barcelona, Bayern, AC Milan, Juve, Real Madrid, Man U at the moment in Europe. The champions league will sort some of this out. Santos, Boca, River Plate, Corinthians, Cruz Azul in Latin America. Africa and Asia I have no idea.

National sides. Brazil is not what it was last time around, but there is still time. I have to vote for England really (being English).

Sweden? The Netherlands would have been better.

Belgium did pretty well for him self. The country who entered WC most in one row (but we'll soon going to loose that reccord :( ). And the Queen supports us. :p

There is absolutely BA chance of Scotland even qualifying for 2006 so I'm routing for * vs England (where * represents a wildcard nation playing against England) :D

Judging by track record, I would most definitly have to say Brazil.

Sweden? The Netherlands would have been better.

Belgium did pretty well for him self. The country who entered WK most in one row (but we'll soon going to loose that reccord :( ). And the Queen supports us. :p

There are a fair few good Belgian youngsters around. I reckon you might get somewhere in Euro '08. But for the World Cup 2006, it'll be England. Forty years. Its destiny.

Sure now, both you and I know that the only thing that really matters is seeing the England team being ritually humiliated again.
in Windsor Park

There is absolutely BA chance of Scotland even qualifying for 2006 so I'm routing for * vs England (where * represents a wildcard nation playing against England) :D

"I'm not biased-I'll support whoever's playing England"

Yeah, Scotland won't qualify. We suck. Oh well.

Sheffield United!

Oh, national team? Erm.. say England. They're defiantely up there.

Germany...No question, they will win and yes I have tickets to the WC 2006. :)

Germany was whiped by England plenty of times previously and were very lucky to get to the finals of 2002.

Germany was whiped by England plenty of times previously and were very lucky to get to the finals of 2002.

TWWAOWC...

Germany :fluffle:

Lol, how did Scotland get on there?

England have a great squad of players but unfortunately a dumb captain and a manager who thinks he is god's gift and yet is an absolute idiot also.

Germany was whiped by England plenty of times previously and were very lucky to get to the finals of 2002.

I eagerly await the edifying cultural spectacle of England fans, after having been thrashed by the Germans once again, laying waste to yet another European city while attempting to console themselves with the chant of "Two World Wars and One World Cup".

I'm going to say Ireland will win. (if I keep saying it and ignoreing everyone else its sure to come true!) :p

TWWAOWC...

.

I eagerly await the edifying cultural spectacle of England fans, after having been thrashed by the Germans once again, laying waste to yet another European city while attempting to console themselves with the chant of "Two World Wars and One World Cup".

An idiot's generalisation.

An idiot's generalisation.

What exactly did I generalise?

I agree with you, Bodies. They do that at any international event they go to. (The fans, that is.)

Maybe you generalized over the chants? :-)

They do that at any international event they go to. (The fans, that is.)

No, I never said they did it every time, but they have done it at least once in the past.

No, I never said they did it every time, but they have done it at least once in the past.

I can't remember the last time they didn't do it, to be honest. Of course, I'm not always right...

I eagerly await the edifying cultural spectacle of England fans, after having been thrashed by the Germans once again, laying waste to yet another European city while attempting to console themselves with the chant of "Two World Wars and One World Cup".

What did you generalise? I dunno perhaps about England fans? If we were all to generalise we would say that all Spanish fans are racist, all Turkish fans stab rivals and Italians throw things at referees but if someone said that they would be dismissed as racist. The fact is that anti-Englishness like anti-Americanism is tolerated outrageously at the moment. I have not met a single person who supports England, has been to games and wears the shirt who doesnt think that hooliganism is a disgrace. Take your prejudice elsewhere. I support Scotland, Ireland and Wales in sport and no that doesnt mean you should support us if you do not want to but it means I am entitled to say do not tar us all with the same brush you moronic cretin.
I have been to 5 or 6 games including 2 away ones and have never seen trouble, not saying there wasn't any but I haven't seen it.

What did you generalise? I dunno perhaps about England fans?

Are you denying that it has happened in the past?


If we were all to generalise we would say that all Spanish fans are racist, all Turkish fans stab rivals and Italians throw things at referees but if someone said that they would be dismissed as racist. The fact is that anti-Englishness like anti- Americanism is tolerated outrageously at the moment.

Point out to me where I said 'all England fans are such-and-such', would you, darling?

Take your prejudice elsewhere. I support Scotland, Ireland and Wales in sport and no that doesnt mean you should support us if you do not wnat to but do not tar us all with the same brush you moronic cretin.


'Idiotic', 'moronic': thanks.

Are you denying that it has happened in the past?

No it has happened and those involved are an utter disgrace but I find it offensive for you to even infer that even a majority of England fans behave like that.

What did you generalise? I dunno perhaps about England fans? If we were all to generalise we would say that all Spanish fans are racist, all Turkish fans stab rivals and Italians throw things at referees but if someone said that they would be dismissed as racist. The fact is that anti-Englishness like anti-Americanism is tolerated outrageously at the moment. I have not met a single person who supports England, has been to games and wears the shirt who doesnt think that hooliganism is a disgrace. Take your prejudice elsewhere. I support Scotland, Ireland and Wales in sport and no that doesnt mean you should support us if you do not want to but it means I am entitled to say do not tar us all with the same brush you moronic cretin.
I have been to 5 or 6 games including 2 away ones and have never seen trouble, not saying there wasn't any but I haven't seen it.
he just said "England fans" which isnt a generalisation

they are fans of England

now, if he had said "all England fans" then that would be a different matter entirely

No, I never said they did it every time, but they have done it at least once in the past.

I'd ask you politely to apologise. How dare you assume that because I make a joke that has gone around England for years, I am one of the ape-ish thugs that, according to you, make up the entire fan base of the English national team.

Because it was done once, it'll obviously happen again right? So in that case, America will nuke Japan, Japan will invade China, Russia will declare war on Japan and get their ass whooped, and some funny little Austrian house-painter will take power in Germany. I mean, it all happened once before didn't it?

No it has happened and those involved are an utter disgrace but I find it offensive for you to even infer that even a majority of England fans behave like that.

I infered nothing. When someone makes a statement they may be implying something, but it is the audience that infers from it.

Where did I imply that a majority behave in this manner?

I'd ask you politely to apologise. How dare you assume that because I make a joke that has gone around England for years, I am one of the ape-ish thugs that, according to you, make up the entire fan base of the English national team.

Because it was done once, it'll obviously happen again right? So in that case, America will nuke Japan, Japan will invade China, Russia will declare war on Japan and get their ass whooped, and some funny little Austrian house-painter will take power in Germany. I mean, it all happened once before didn't it?

Absolutely.

I'd ask you politely to apologise. How dare you assume that because I make a joke that has gone around England for years, I am one of the ape-ish thugs that, according to you, make up the entire fan base of the English national team.

Point out to me where I did this, would you?

Because it was done once, it'll obviously happen again right? So in that case, America will nuke Japan, Japan will invade China, Russia will declare war on Japan and get their ass whooped, and some funny little Austrian house-painter will take power in Germany. I mean, it all happened once before didn't it?

Did I say that it would happen again? I seem to have said that I 'await' it, which is a very different thing.

I'd ask you politely to apologise. How dare you assume that because I make a joke that has gone around England for years, I am one of the ape-ish thugs that, according to you, make up the entire fan base of the English national team.


ill point you in the direction of this post (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=8260105&postcount=35)

Did I say that it would happen again? I seem to have said that I 'await' it, which is avery different thing.

Well you did imply that England's fans are hooligans. I would argue that those involved in hooliganism are not real 'fans'. Will you accept that anglophobia is out of order.

In the same way that there is little difference between "England Fans" and 'all England fans', there isn't much between saying it will happen again and saying you await it happening again.

Perhaps the phrase "some England fans" would have been more appropriate. As would rephrasing the other part to something more in tune with what you actually meant.

As for basically calling me a football hooligan, thanks a lot for that.

Well you did imply that England's fans are hooligans.

There are certainly fans that are hooligans.

I would argue that those involved in hooliganism are not real 'fans'.

Seems to me to be something of a 'no true Scotsman' argument.

Will you accept that anglophobia is out of order.

Fear of english-people?

ill point you in the direction of this post (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=8260105&postcount=35)

*points*

http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=8260199&postcount=42

The first section covers my answer to that post, I believe.

There are certainly fans that are hooligans.



Seems to me to be something of a 'no true Scotsman' argument.



Fear of english-people?

Stop being a cleverdick.

1) Yes there are supposed "England" fans who are little more than hooligans.

2) Not fear of English people, anti-Englishness. It is base racism.

*points*

http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=8260199&postcount=42

The first section covers my answer to that post, I believe.
theres still a big difference between "England fans" and "all england fans"

"England fans were last night involved in a riot"
"All England fans were last night involved in a riot"

see?

And a huge difference between that and the truth:

"England fans were last night involved in a riot"
"All England fans were last night involved in a riot"
"Some England fans were last night involved in a riot"

See?

USA all the way!

In the same way that there is little difference between "England Fans" and 'all England fans', there isn't much between saying it will happen again and saying you await it happening again.

If I say 'NationStates users argue about football on the General Forum' am I saying 'All NationStates users argue about football on the General Forum'?

Perhaps the phrase "some England fans" would have been more appropriate.

The 'some' is implicit: if a commentator says 'There'll be dancing in the streets of England tonight' does he mean in all the streets of England there will be dancing?


As would rephrasing the other part to something more in tune with what you actually meant.

Which part?


As for basically calling me a football hooligan, thanks a lot for that.

Point out to me where I did that, would you?

2) Not fear of English people, anti-Englishness. It is base racism.

Since when were the English a race?

I eagerly await the edifying cultural spectacle of England fans, after having been thrashed by the Germans once again, laying waste to yet another European city while attempting to console themselves with the chant of "Two World Wars and One World Cup".

Followed shortly (it's a real shame someone posted between the two isn't it? Must have ruined your plan to make the relationship more obvious) by this post:

http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=8259878&postcount=26

To me, that implies that anyone saying TWWAOWC is going to lay waste to a European city. Then you quote me saying it completely out of context. I've never even hit anyone else, and always condemned football violence. So being related to the mindless bunch of apes by someone who has never even spoken to me before is somewhat insulting.

Stop trying to worm your way out of it and admit that your phraseology could have been far better planned. Unless of course, it was your intention to post potential flamebait on the forums?

Followed shortly (it's a real shame someone posted between the two isn't it? Must have ruined your plan to make the relationship more obvious) by this post:

http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=8259878&postcount=26

To me, that implies that anyone saying TWWAOWC is going to lay waste to a European city.


No, at the time I made my post I had seen your post but not realised what the letters stood for. I did so after I made my post - the dot was made to concede that you had got there before me when I realised that you had made the joke first. I'm not a great one for using smileys. If you thought I was actually saying 'look! here is an example of one of these people!' by posting that dot then I apologise for the confusion. Further to this, I had asumed, wrongly, that you were Scottish, on the basis of your screen-name.

Then you quote me saying it completely out of context. I've never even hit anyone else, and always condemned football violence. So being related to the mindless bunch of apes by someone who has never even spoken to me before is somewhat insulting.

Relating you to the less savoury elements was not the intention.

Stop trying to worm your way out of it and admit that your phraseology could have been far better planned. Unless of course, it was your intention to post potential flamebait on the forums?

Does the fact that I described it as an 'edifying spectacle', which it clearly is not, not indicate something about the sarcastic nature of the post? As to whether the phraseology could have been better planned - it was certainly not my intention to create such a shitstorm, nor to cause as much umbrage as yourself and Syawla have taken.

Not all England fans are hooligans but I think it's okay to say 'English football hooligans' but not 'all English fans are hooligans'.
Man, all I know is that if they try to attack us Germany fans again i'll give them a good beating. ;) I'll get some pepper spray or something.
You can say that the English are a race as in Anglo-Saxons.

You can say that the English are a race as in Anglo-Saxons.

The Anglo-Saxons themselves were never a race, at best a people, and those that try and equate the Anglo-Saxon with the 'true' English have a pretty bad reputation in the UK due their other racist tendencies.

The Anglo-Saxons themselves were never a race, at best a people, and those that try and equate the Anglo-Saxon with the 'true' English have a pretty bad reputation in the UK due their other racist tendencies.
Anglo's were one race and the Saxons another and they mixed and formed a new race- Anglo-Saxon and that is a race.
You are talking about nationality as in all who are from England are English no matter what the race of the people from there is. Another issue!
Lets get back to topic.

Anglo's were one race and the Saxons another and they mixed and formed a new race- Anglo-Saxon and that is a race.

Exactly how are you defining race here? The Angles were a group of tribes, as were the Saxons: they were not a separate race from those that surrounded them, nor were the people that arose from them in the British Isles.

You are talking about nationality as in all who are from England are English no matter what the race of the people from there is. Another issue!

Ah, yes, but I am being accused of 'racism' in my comments, and so it remains on topic.

Well Argentina are the world number ones, so obviously they're the best at the moment. However, seeing as Germany have drawn with both Argentina and Brazil recently, I'd have to say they're favourites to win in 2006.

Any of the top thirty or so club sides from around the world, are better than any national team.
As for the best, well it is between: Chelsea, Barcelona, Bayern, AC Milan, Juve, Real Madrid, Man U at the moment in Europe. The champions league will sort some of this out. Santos, Boca, River Plate, Corinthians, Cruz Azul in Latin America. Africa and Asia I have no idea.

National sides. Brazil is not what it was last time around, but there is still time. I have to vote for England really (being English).

Real Madrid of the clubs (and yes the clubs a far better than the countries), also it depends on what you mean by best. if you mean overall best national team, Brazil. if you mean best scoring offense, that is typically Spain. if you mean best defense, that is typically Italy or Germany (Germany usually for the keeper). if you mean best counter attack, then United States. As for me personally i have to say that the most entertaining soccer is Spain.



and anyone saying that any team other than brazil is the greatest national team is a fool. five world cups do not lie.

five world cups do not lie.*




* - at the apparently very real risk of offending someone else - and one world war.

Well Argentina are the world number ones, so obviously they're the best at the moment. However, seeing as Germany have drawn with both Argentina and Brazil recently, I'd have to say they're favourites to win in 2006.

Fifa Co**-**la World Ranking
1 Brazil 840
2 France 789
3 Argentina 783
4 Czech Republic 776
5 Spain 764
6 Mexico 755
6 Netherlands 755
8 England 749
9 Portugal 745
10 Italy 738

source: fifa (http://www.fifa.com/en/mens/statistics/index.html)

No Argentina are not even no. 2. (Where is Germany? 17th)

Exactly how are you defining race here? The Angles were a group of tribes, as were the Saxons: they were not a separate race from those that surrounded them, nor were the people that arose from them in the British Isles.


As I understand it there are two types of people 'race if you will' on Britain the Celts (Scotland and Wales) and the Anglo-Saxons (England).
That's all. I don't mean race in the fullest meaning of the word when talking about the A-S.

and anyone saying that any team other than brazil is the greatest national team is a fool. five world cups do not lie.

No they are not. Which team won the first world cup? Football teams change with time. Chelsea were a second division side (Championship or whatever it is called now) Brazil, right at the moment can not even beat Bolivia. Not the best team they have ever had. They may win again, then again, I seriously hope, despite living in Brazil, that they do not. Currently they are FIFAs no. 1 only because they won the last world cup. They do not deserve the position.

As I understand it there are two types of people 'race if you will' on Britain the Celts (Scotland and Wales) and the Anglo-Saxons (England).

There are also the Picts - some define them as Celts, but this is far from universal or widely agreed upon.

That's all. I don't mean race in the fullest meaning of the word when talking about the A-S.

Fair enough, but I'm sure you'll agree that talking about racism in the context of anti-English/Anglo-Saxon people doesn't make a great deal of sense.

Fair enough, but I'm sure you'll agree that talking about racism in the context of anti-English/Anglo-Saxon people doesn't make a great deal of sense.

Agreed!

england will win, and the best club football (or soccer) side is Norwich city!

Why, dear god why, do you have scotland up there but not ireland?
Yeah... oh well, hindsight is 20/20. Brazil has got to be the best, but I am still a huge fan of the USA (I know, I know, soccer fans in the US? Who would've thought?). I'm surprised this thread is doing aswell as it is. When I did one for the best domestic league people just kept saying NFL, NFL! Then it degenerated into one of those American Football v. Association Football things, before dying out after 3 pages.

Any of the top thirty or so club sides from around the world, are better than any national team.
As for the best, well it is between: Chelsea, Barcelona, Bayern, AC Milan, Juve, Real Madrid, Man U at the moment in Europe. The champions league will sort some of this out. Santos, Boca, River Plate, Corinthians, Cruz Azul in Latin America. Africa and Asia I have no idea.

National sides. Brazil is not what it was last time around, but there is still time. I have to vote for England really (being English).

I can't wait for the Champions League again... only 1 day away! GO ARSENAL! Too bad the only game they'll be showing in the US is Man U v. Milan. But that will probably be the most exciting fixture, in my oponion anyway.

I can't wait for the Champions League again... only 1 day away! GO ARSENAL! Too bad the only game they'll be showing in the US is Man U v. Milan. But that will probably be the most exciting fixture, in my oponion anyway.

Move to Brazil, we are getting all eight via ESPN International and ESPN Brazil. The best one has to be Chelsea vs Barca this time. But I'm biased as I am a Chelsea fan. Good luck to the other three English teams as well though.

Well Argentina are the world number ones, so obviously they're the best at the moment. However, seeing as Germany have drawn with both Argentina and Brazil recently, I'd have to say they're favourites to win in 2006.
Argentina aren't number 1, boy! Brazil is first in this month's FIFA rankins, followed by France, with Argentina coming in third and the Czech Rep. fourth. And I know see why this thread has persisted so much longer than most soccer threads. It's becuase it's nothing more than a stupid argument about the behavior of Englans fans! Stop arguing! You'll never convince each other.

Argentina!!!
At least I like to watch them play.
Just beautiful football (soccer).
Their defence is something to be amazed.
So well controlized (Don't even know if that's a word)
To bad no Batistuta :(
Italy also has a good team... But funny how they never
can make it work???
Germany... well people often say their matches are boring.
So not true. Best teamplay in the world. I get good vibs watching them play

Football (soccer) is the greatest game ever invented
King of sports and sport for the kings. :fluffle:

Their defence is something to be amazed.
So well controlized (Don't even know if that's a word)


Their defence is something amazing
So well controlled.

I disagree, but living in Brazil I have to, or I would be instantly expelled from the country.

(The only rivalry anything like England - Scotland, is Brazil - Argentina)

Real Madrid of the clubs (and yes the clubs a far better than the countries)
If Real Madrid were to play Argentina...all my money is on Argentina.

I say Argentina would win 9 out of 10 games Vs Real Madrid.

heck even Brazil would win 7 out of 10 vs Real.

Their defence is something amazing
So well controlled.

I disagree, but living in Brazil I have to, or I would be instantly expelled from the country.

(The only rivalry anything like England - Scotland, is Brazil - Argentina)


Yeah, you have to disagree. But in real life I'm right :p

Argentina aren't number 1, boy! Brazil is first in this month's FIFA rankins,....
did he said FIFA rankings?
WOUHAHAHAHAHA...AWwww....

that was good...

FIFA has less Credibility than FOXnews.

heck even Brazil would win 7 out of 10 vs Real.

lol

If Real Madrid were to play Argentina...all my money is on Argentina.

I say Argentina would win 9 out of 10 games Vs Real Madrid.

heck even Brazil would win 7 out of 10 vs Real.

Against Argentina, only Solari I think would be a problem.

However against Brazil, hum no Ronaldo, No Roberto Carlos (maybe a good thing), Not so powerful after all. But all the same, a demn sight better than the last team Brazil sent into battle. 0-0 vs Germany, come on.

England or Brazil...this one's tough...

England or Brazil...this one's tough...

How about for me, an Englishman living in Brazil. Stop whingeing and choose England. (Brazil are not good at the moment)

Against Argentina, only Solari I think would be a problem.
.
Argentina does not need Solari...Real probably can do without him....Whats the Problem?

BTW who do you think will win the Solari Lottery...

Manchester or Barcelona?

Argentina does not need Solari...Real probably can do without him....Whats the Problem?

BTW who do you think will win the Solari Lottery...

Manchester or Barcelona?
Definetly Manchester.

Argentina does not need Solari...Real probably can do without him....Whats the Problem?

BTW who do you think will win the Solari Lottery...

Manchester or Barcelona?

What do you mean by win here. Get Solari, or make the other team pay way too much for him?