Look, you can *believe* that the Womens' World Cup should be equal with the Mens'. You should. But in terms of international viewership, media attention, star players, historical importance and knowledge, and national recognition and acknowledgment, the Mens' WC unfortunately heavily outclasses the Womens'. I'm all for the MLS growing bigger and entering the Big Four, but right now, despite it being a perfectly good league, it doesn't have enough recognition.
Yeah, even as a man, I prefer my state (Nebraska's) women sports and the USA women soccer team. I don't even like soccer, and they're still entertaining. The Nebraska men have ruined my childhood and I only watch them when I'm having a good day. Then after I watch those games for absolutely no reason, I end up having a bad day. BECAUSE WE LOST TO FREAKING MICHIGAN BY 2 POINTS! sorry, but what i'm saying is that the women sports that I've seen generally do better than the men.
Being Swedish I was just randomly guessing European countries since I couldn't come up with any others, and I was SO surprised when I typed in Sweden and got it right. I would have never expected us to be this high.
Yes. They had a pretty tough group to be fair, with them, Mexico, Germany and South Korea in the group. In the round of 16, they beat Switzerland in a boring 1-0 with a 66 minute deflected shot from Emil Fosberg. They lost to England in the quarters so thanks to the Swedish national team for getting my national team into the semi-finals :)
@schnuederlue the order isn't incorrect. The teams aren't ranked anything to do with number of trophies, if that was the case then Uruguay would be above England and Spain. It's just ranked by the overall number of games they have won or drawn in the competition - 3 points given per every win and 1 point per draw. Netherlands have finished runners up 3 times, and reached the last 4 a further two occasions, so there's a lot of games won there despite never lifting the cup.
Well. Germany is almost first, now that's kind of awkward.But I mean, we always had a great team...Almost every single world cup. I guess most nations go through a phase where they're suddenly not that good anymore. We should drop some old players like Müller, Özil or Khedira and form a new generation. Tobias Werner, Leon Goretzka or Julian Brand were all good this world cup. Especially Werner seems to be a talent. Maybe 2022 or 2026 we'll be back in business.
I have actually been to the "Casque de diamant" (the diamond helmet), which is the "French Superbowl". Tickets are free, and you don't need to pre-book them. That year it was played at one of the smaller stadiums in Paris, and still, only one small section of the stands were open (opposite of TV cameras - apparently, you could watch it on France's numer 12 or 13 sports channel), and even then, they were half-empty. At half-time, some 15-year old cheerleaders came to throw a few handful of Haribo's into the stands. The game ended 10-0, with like five completed passes total, and a victory for the Thonon-les-Bains Black Panthers against the La Courneuve Flash (yes - this is even more hilarious when you know that Thonon-les-Bains is a thermal baths resort on lake Geneva, aka. the whitest place on Earth). So, to answer your question: clearly almost nobody cares about American football in France!
Also remain the most dominant squad in the world in soccer/football in history, and would be at or near the top of this quiz, if you don't assume that half the population of Earth doesn't count due to their gender.
I'm all for taking women's sports seriously in their own right. Absolutely. But no, they shouldn't be held equally with men's sports in all-time achievements lists like you seem to be suggesting. I mean, the USWNT lost to a boys' junior high team (just an MLS farm club too, not a national level U-15 team). It's very different levels of competition. You don't list college football national championships next to Super Bowls in the same category. And if you wanted to list women's world cup tables, that would rightfully be its own separate quiz.
Source, in case anyone accuses me of pulling this anecdote out of my rear: https://usatodayhss.com/2017/the-fc-dallas-u-15-academy-team-beat-the-u-s-women-s-national-team-5-2
Also, why are you only going to bat for women's teams? What about all the U-17/U-15? Shouldn't their world cups count too? People who are under the age of 17 don't count as humans, is that what you're saying? ;)
gandalf: you're always a hypocrite, whether its convenient or not. So in a way, you are consistent.
So am I (consistent)... in that I believe women are people and female athletes should count especially when the quiz doesn't even specify that it's about men's athletics (as it didn't, when I made these comments originally). If, in your mind, that makes me some kind of radical feminist... well... that says a lot more about you than it says about me.
I am not, and never have been, a jingoist, a biased partisan, or even a patriot. That's you, projecting again. My ego could not possibly be more detached from any particular country's performance in athletic events, and I hold those who feel differently in fairly abject contempt. I was as happy to see Japan's women's team beat America's in the World Cup final as I was to see my niece's volleyball team win their elementary school championship. I feel good for those girls, but it doesn't affect me personally who wins.
Koult: you and I both know that that's quite a bit different. The subject of the quiz is about titles earned at the World Cup. Originally there was no caveat specifying it was only about the men's world cup. I commented to 1. draw attention to this obvious sexism, as there are adult human able-bodied professional athletes winning world cup titles not included on this quiz, and 2. highlight the achievements of some female athletes.
The fact that some people have such a huge problem with this is pretty sad. So is trying to suggest that treating female athletics the same as male is equivalent to treating children as the same as professional athletes.
I have less of a problem with the quiz as it exists now, with the simple addition of a caveat, than some people commenting here apparently have with the existence of women's sports. I'd describe in more detail what this says about some of the commenters, but my remarks would be censored if I did I'm sure.
and.... just to drive this point home (that gandalf is, as always, and very obviously, projecting)... the first comment I made on this quiz above (one of only two short comments, originally) isn't even about the USA... but about Sweden. I don't have Swedish citizenship. Don't have any Swedish ancestors I'm aware of. I've never lived in Sweden. I don't even particularly like Sweden. .... but I still think that their female athletes should be acknowledged.
You never, ever do this... but would you like to perhaps take this opportunity to acknowledge that you are obviously wrong, gandalf? It's pretty definitive, in this case.
I have to agree with kalbahamut's comment on women's soccer and their inclusion. One can argue skill level but it's just as entertaining. As someone who grew up watching hockey in the 70s and 80s, I cringe at the behaviour of male soccer players. Despite Messi and the Argentine sheer talent, the propensity to fall as soon as they were touched in the box (first penalty in the final) or whine and complain for every call. Not to mention the poor sportsmanship in the Dutch game. I'd rather watch a US-Canada women's game; very rarely will you see a dive or begging and pleading with the ref. Despite an intense North American rivalry, no one kicks the ball at the opposing teams bench because they didn't like what was said at a press conference. I did enjoy watching the Canadian men play Mexico in Edmonton in below zero temperatures with snow on the sidelines. Very distinct home field advantage.
I didn't actually say anything about the quiz being wrong or arguing that women should be included.
I made 2 comments. The first one, responding to someone saying that Sweden "snuck on" the rankings, merely pointed out that Sweden would be ranked higher if they included women, as Sweden's women's team has been very successful. The 2nd comment, in response to a joke aimed at America's relative lack of success in (non-American) football, pointed out that America's women's team is the most successful in history, of any gender.
I'm fine with there being a quiz about male athletics. I take issue with quizzes that treat male athletics as if they are the automatic default and that women's athletics don't count. That's all.
That said I do think the quiz would be better if it included women. But I understand disagreeing with that POV.
Doesn't that say more about (the lack of) quality of preference among US soccer viewers?
Netherlands never won but is before Uruguay who has won twice.
Source, in case anyone accuses me of pulling this anecdote out of my rear: https://usatodayhss.com/2017/the-fc-dallas-u-15-academy-team-beat-the-u-s-women-s-national-team-5-2
So am I (consistent)... in that I believe women are people and female athletes should count especially when the quiz doesn't even specify that it's about men's athletics (as it didn't, when I made these comments originally). If, in your mind, that makes me some kind of radical feminist... well... that says a lot more about you than it says about me.
I am not, and never have been, a jingoist, a biased partisan, or even a patriot. That's you, projecting again. My ego could not possibly be more detached from any particular country's performance in athletic events, and I hold those who feel differently in fairly abject contempt. I was as happy to see Japan's women's team beat America's in the World Cup final as I was to see my niece's volleyball team win their elementary school championship. I feel good for those girls, but it doesn't affect me personally who wins.
The fact that some people have such a huge problem with this is pretty sad. So is trying to suggest that treating female athletics the same as male is equivalent to treating children as the same as professional athletes.
I have less of a problem with the quiz as it exists now, with the simple addition of a caveat, than some people commenting here apparently have with the existence of women's sports. I'd describe in more detail what this says about some of the commenters, but my remarks would be censored if I did I'm sure.
You never, ever do this... but would you like to perhaps take this opportunity to acknowledge that you are obviously wrong, gandalf? It's pretty definitive, in this case.
I made 2 comments. The first one, responding to someone saying that Sweden "snuck on" the rankings, merely pointed out that Sweden would be ranked higher if they included women, as Sweden's women's team has been very successful. The 2nd comment, in response to a joke aimed at America's relative lack of success in (non-American) football, pointed out that America's women's team is the most successful in history, of any gender.
I'm fine with there being a quiz about male athletics. I take issue with quizzes that treat male athletics as if they are the automatic default and that women's athletics don't count. That's all.
That said I do think the quiz would be better if it included women. But I understand disagreeing with that POV.