In football (that is real football) England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland all have their own representative football team. It is the same in the Commonwealth Games with the addition of teams from Jersey, Guernsey, Isle of Man all separate not UK.
Nope, people from England, Scotland, Wales and Norn Iron are glaring at YOU right now for not knowing that the UK does not have a representative football team!
"Except on the Olympics, maybe? Don't they do that under the UK banner?"
Yes, but not for football. Except at 2012 when they were hosts but that caused all sorts of ructions around team selection as Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland didn't want their players selected.
Has anyone actually looked any of this up before holding forth with their incorrect responses? The name Great Britain is used for the Olympics, not the United Kingdom.
Team GB has competed in the mens football more than once and been captained by a Welshman. In fact, we won the Gold medal three times as Great Britain.
And, OscarMeow: all sorts of problems with this statement: a) you have no idea about the history and culture if you can say this: b) I hope you’re not American, because that’s really not a place acting like one country at the moment and c) please don’t tell other countries what to do, that’s our ancestors’ schtick and should probably be avoided.
"Has anyone actually looked any of this up before holding forth with their incorrect responses"
The full name of Team GB is "Great Britain and Northern Ireland Olympic Team", therefore saying it's a UK team is largely accurate (although places like the Channel Islands can also represent Team GB), the nickname is just inaccurate.
American Football is called American because they're the only ones playing it lol. A few countries might have teams, but they are amateur compared to the US.... it's the reason why it isn't an Olympic sport.
ColOmbia. No, I'm not Colombian, but I've traveled there extensively, and nothing will annoy Colombians more than this. Maybe aside from narco jokes. And no, they don't love Pablo.
Ummm...you got a bit of a problem here. All the answers were displayed in the boxes before even beginning the quiz. Makes it pretty easy. :) Might want to fix that.
Belgium has a population smaller than the LA metro and plays right at the top of the competition, and the US with 330 million people, a robust soccer development program, and a bunch of ringers from other countries can't scrape together 20 guys to put together a competitive team. Come on, man.
It's rather disappointing how bad America's men's soccer team is given how good it could be. I'm not sure why it is that way, but personally, I've always chalked it up to a lack of interest in the sport in America, especially among men.
Our women's team, on the other hand, is pretty amazing!
It really is impressive how much the USMNT team sucks.
And contrary to disciplines like handball (I think you Mericans call that ''European'' handball), where America is also inept, football has been played in the US for a long time and there's much money in it too.
@jmellor13 already mentioned Belgium, but think that even Croatia (11th place in 2021) is way ahead of the United States with a population as little as that of L.A. - not the metropolitan area, but the city itself!
Our best athletes play basketball, football, baseball, hockey, lacrosse, track and field, and then maybe soccer after that. I played soccer, but I just like other sports more
I have heard this explanation many times, but we should still be able to find 20 guys who both have the athletic ability to compete and a preference for soccer. Also, if you look at the build of the average soccer player, he's not fit for basketball or American football. Most of them would have to be baseball players. Soccer is more popular than lacrosse and track and field, and it might be less popular than hockey as a spectator sport, but certainly not among participants. I was a hockey player, and it's a real pain. The demands for equipment, travel, and access to ice time are prohibitive for many people. Our development programs for soccer are much better than those for hockey, lacrosse, and track and field too. Soccer should really be on par with tennis, and it lags way behind. I just don't get it.
The 'best athletes' are just the best in those sports because they are their chosen sports. Are you suggesting that Michael Phelps would have been a top footballer if he hadn't decided on swimming instead?
Still, I can't figure out how FIFA manages to but Belgium so up here since they have never won anything, and with such a disaster this WC. As well, how can you put Brazil on top of France and Argentina, since they were WC finalists and provided one of the most beautiful game I have ever seen, while the brazilian Selecao can't even make it to the semi-finals, where Morocco stood
We the French know that very well, as we narrowly beat them in 2018 thanks to our soldier Umtiti. They had (and still somewhat have) a golden generation : De Bruyne, Lukaku, Hazard, Courtois...
Their thrashing in 2022 against Morocco, a real rising team on the world scene, somewhat put a blow on them.
Nonetheless they had some renewal since, with Doku, Openda, Trossard, De Ketelaere, Vanaken, etc. They sure are strong.
Courtois; Meunier, Kompany, Alderweireld, Vertonghen; Witsel, Dembele; Mertens, De Bruyne, Hazard; Lukaku. Some starting XI circa 2018 Plus the likes of Chadli, Vermaelen, Carrasco, Fellaini, Batshuayi in the squad
Belgium's and FIFA's bromance needs to be studied. I mean Belgium is ok but they haven't been anwhere near the Top 3 teams worldwide for at least 6 years now. Somehow, FIFA manages to rank them in top 10 every year 🤔
It uses a modified Elo ranking, very similar to what's used for chess.
It looks at your current ranking relative to the adversary to calculate the expected result (chances to win), then depending on the difference between that and the actual results it transfer points from one team to the other. The only arbitrary part is giving more weight to official competitions but every team follows the same formula (which is public, anyone can calculate it).
Belgium got a high ranking as they had strong results. In 2018 they only got eliminated in the semi-finals after a very tight match vs France, and it was arguably the hardest match France fought (though you can make a strong argument that Argentina was harder to beat). Belgium was in the top tier of that world cup.
Welsh, Scottish, and Northern Irish people are all glaring at you right now.
Yes, but not for football. Except at 2012 when they were hosts but that caused all sorts of ructions around team selection as Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland didn't want their players selected.
Team GB has competed in the mens football more than once and been captained by a Welshman. In fact, we won the Gold medal three times as Great Britain.
And, OscarMeow: all sorts of problems with this statement: a) you have no idea about the history and culture if you can say this: b) I hope you’re not American, because that’s really not a place acting like one country at the moment and c) please don’t tell other countries what to do, that’s our ancestors’ schtick and should probably be avoided.
The full name of Team GB is "Great Britain and Northern Ireland Olympic Team", therefore saying it's a UK team is largely accurate (although places like the Channel Islands can also represent Team GB), the nickname is just inaccurate.
Drop that hundo!
I bet you also think baseball is only playing in America
It's that simple really.
..5/5 on the razor's edge
Our women's team, on the other hand, is pretty amazing!
And contrary to disciplines like handball (I think you Mericans call that ''European'' handball), where America is also inept, football has been played in the US for a long time and there's much money in it too.
@jmellor13 already mentioned Belgium, but think that even Croatia (11th place in 2021) is way ahead of the United States with a population as little as that of L.A. - not the metropolitan area, but the city itself!
Somehow forgot Germany lmao
like me
1. Argentina
2. France
3. Brazil
4. Belgium
5. England
6. Netherlands
7. Croatia
8. Italy
9. Portugal
10. Spain
Their thrashing in 2022 against Morocco, a real rising team on the world scene, somewhat put a blow on them.
Nonetheless they had some renewal since, with Doku, Openda, Trossard, De Ketelaere, Vanaken, etc. They sure are strong.
It looks at your current ranking relative to the adversary to calculate the expected result (chances to win), then depending on the difference between that and the actual results it transfer points from one team to the other. The only arbitrary part is giving more weight to official competitions but every team follows the same formula (which is public, anyone can calculate it).
Belgium got a high ranking as they had strong results. In 2018 they only got eliminated in the semi-finals after a very tight match vs France, and it was arguably the hardest match France fought (though you can make a strong argument that Argentina was harder to beat). Belgium was in the top tier of that world cup.