USA TIES ENGLAND!!!!

Recommended Videos

Ekit

New member
Oct 19, 2009
1,183
0
0
I thought USA hade better teamwork than England and USA's goalkeeper is amazing. And I think Argentina will beat Spain in the finale.
 

YouCallMeNighthawk

New member
Mar 8, 2010
722
0
0
England was on top the whole game, USA did have a few good chance though. Got extremely lucky with their goal though, Green should be dropped from the team and get david james back in there.
 

oden636

New member
Jun 15, 2009
168
0
0
Being english im fuming at our goalie, ok so it could happen to anyone but i had a 1 - 0 to england bet at the bookies and he fumbles the ball and my money. Hate mail already sent to Mr. rob greens house =P
 

YouBecame

New member
May 2, 2010
480
0
0
I had money on 2-1 England.
In lieu of winning, Greens howler was a disappointment. He's a good keeper, apparently.

edit: Can we swap green for Howard? He was immense.

Ben Legend said:
It was an akward first match with england only conceding a goal due to Green. But I can guarantee you he won't be making that mistake again.

But seriously, why did we have Heskey on for the whole match? He can't score. We should have had crouch on from the start or at least half-time.
1) That's because Green probably won't get played again this tournament.
2) I agree. Heskey wasted so many opportunities. To be fair to him though, I don't think he's been played all season.
 

meowman

New member
Jan 25, 2010
155
0
0
England played poorly, and Robert Green just massively cocked up - no funny bounce or anything, he just failed. All the papers are really beating him up today.

My favourite bit was the CNN coverage afterwards. The announcer said that he would talk to a fan of both teams.
CNN Announcer - "First, let's talk to the English fan. What did you think of this?"
"England Fan" - (In thick American accent) Well, we had a great gameplan out there, and we played a good game, but the Americans brought a great game too. It was really great to watch this level of soccer."

NOTE TO CNN: If you're going to fake an English opinion, WE CALL IT FOOTBALL. Was really funny to watch though. I can't imagine how they kept straight faces.

BTW I am a Scot, so this was about the best result for me. As a Scot I'm glad that England didn't win, and as a Brit I'm glad they didn't lose.
 

Low Key

New member
May 7, 2009
2,503
0
0
Oh yeah, I forgot there was soccer today. I was too busy watching baseball. Good for them I guess. Still not sure how America has a decent team, but damn, it must suck to tie them considering how most Americans don't care about the sport. To clarify, that's not a slight against the English as a whole, just your team.

On a side note, what's up with soccer and ties anyways? Ties are boring as fuck. Play till there is a winner, especially in a tournament to decide the best of the best.

EDIT: Okay, I just watched the highlights on youtube. 7 minutes of somewhat exciting gameplay and a very lol-worthy fuck up by England's goalie. I have to imagine the other 83 minutes took place somewhere around midfield, which is why I think soccer is a snorefest. Just saying.
 

Littlee300

New member
Oct 26, 2009
1,742
0
0
Kinguendo said:
rt052192 said:
Hellyeah the US tied England and as an American I am pumped. Granted the goal was a major fluke, but the US played well enough. For all of those who watched the match on ABC the British announcer was a biased, arrogant ass. Take that!
No, he was going by the facts (and facts have the annoying tendancy of being biased toward the truth)... England are a better team. You said it yourself... the only goal you got was because of major fluke and America was playing well. So America was playing well and England was playing poorly, you only got a goal from a fluke... and America didnt win. So how was the announcer being arrogant? He was doing his job by making the assumptions he made, he couldnt have expected that goal to go in... you cant predict luck, so minusing the luck factor from the game it would have ended 1-0 to England. He did his job to the best of his ability, dont get pissy because he didnt side with your team and couldnt see how luck was on your side for this match.
Seriously? Someone whining, when the opposing team does better by saying "it was luck!" It is so annoying...
 

Valksy

New member
Nov 5, 2009
1,279
0
0
I thought that the USA team had some players with some really decent skill and footwork but in the latter stages of the game seemed to run out of ideas - playing long high balls and hoping isn't a great tactic (England do this too and it always makes me furious). If the USA plays that well again and maybe tightens up the passing game and not the kick and hope game then they should do well in the group.
 

Delusibeta

Reachin' out...
Mar 7, 2010
2,594
0
0
Honestly? England should go for second in their group, to postpone meeting with Brazil, and hope Brazil get cheated out beaten by the French scumbags in the knock-out stages again.

Why yes, I am from Ireland. How could you tell?
 

Lost In The Void

When in doubt, curl up and cry
Aug 27, 2008
10,128
0
0
Can't say I expected it. Then again I can never really get into soccer/football, so I don't know what I'm going to watch until the hockey season kicks up again
 

Olikunmissile

New member
Jul 16, 2008
1,095
0
0
USA only scored because Green fumbled the ball. When it came to you guys making proper strikes you failed. Hardly enough of a reason to get excited.
 

Chipperz

New member
Apr 27, 2009
2,593
0
0
Eclectic Dreck said:
LewsTherin said:
And maybe the U.S. will qualify for the rugby world cup next year, and join the ranks of countries who play real sports ;)
While I respect the notion that Rugby is somehow the more manly sport because the players don't have the good sense to put on armor, in my view that seems to inherently limit what can happen in the game. Bravado aside, without all those silly pads one could not expect to regularly deliver and recive the sort of impacts that are common in the NFL without burning through the talent pool at an alarming rate.

That said, Rugby IS more entertaining than soccer simply because at least blood is drawn and nobody stops the game on account of a tantrum unless there is an obvious shattered bone or ruptured organ.
Thing is, that's the beauty of Rugby - the tackles may not be as visually impressive (most of the time), but there's an undeniable element of brutality and manliness in just taking an injury and keeping on playing. Personally, I'm a massive fan of Rugby 7's - it's a stripped down version of Rugby that relies on speed and maneuverability rather than the solid, unmoving defence and working the scrum.

spectrenihlus said:
Honestly I don't understand soccer (football for you annoying non Americans =P) you play one and a half hours for 1 point? Talk about a snooze fest. That's just my opinion.
Meh, at least the game keeps going for 45 minutes before a break. I don't know how Americans can watch their own national sports without wanting to kill themselves, just to have something to do while they watch nothing happening for half the game.

Basically, it's not the size of your score, it's how you get it.
 

Zwilorg

New member
Sep 11, 2008
119
0
0
Portuguese on this side...and damn... i thought england would own USA but those " USA bastards" have a way of doing things that i cant follow....

they make the other team play bad or something... they dont play nice football neither do they have clear goals shots but they or win or tie on this final world cup group stage... they did the same on World Cup 2002 against portugal the final score was 2-3 if i am not in error


but anyway!

the game was +- not worthy of a world cup but we are still on the beggining of this great trip ;)

ENJOY!!!!
 

wooty

Vi Britannia
Aug 1, 2009
4,252
0
0
ROBERT GREEEEEEN!!!!!!!!!

Mind you, cant be worse than the goal Algeria's keeper just let in, all the keepers seem to be blaming and hating the ball, they say its "too round", now theres an excuse.

OT: Didnt catch the match myself, I was in Yo! sushi with a bottle of sake and a few mates, knew the match would be dismal
 

GundamSentinel

The leading man, who else?
Aug 23, 2009
4,448
0
0
This says very little about the American qualities, but much much more about the state of the English team. I had such high hopes for them, but the chemistry just isn't there. Such a shame, as the English usually play very interesting football.
 

Phoenix Arrow

New member
Sep 3, 2008
1,377
0
0
ChromeAlchemist said:
The England V USA match is something every Brit assumed we'd win with ease. And aside from that tragedy of a mistake, fair play to you, your defence was solid as hell.
Not really. America have a great little team, they beat Spain and almost Brazil in the Confederations Cup last year. I guess a lot of people who don't know all that much about football all crawl out of the woodwork for the World Cup which is understandable since it's everywhere. This lead to people expecting us to win what was a tough draw. The other two teams in Englands group are total gash though.
I wouldn't say the US defence were that great really, England had most of the ball but didn't place their shots, they would have won handily if Zamora was playing instead of Heskey.
 

Wicky_42

New member
Sep 15, 2008
2,468
0
0
That was an atrocious game, and an atrocious goal. England played better throughout, though still pretty poorly :/