Holland has performed far better than England in the Euros which might be a big part of the reason why Holland is perceived to be more impressive than England. A further reason is all the Dutch stars who went to Milan, Barcelona and other massive clubs around Europe which gives the impression that they're producing lots of quality. So your example might not be the best since its not just World Cup results that influence the public's view on a national team.
It's a statement of infantility and ignorance as Holland performs as Holland sets it's own goals to achieve. For a talented nation of merely 16 million people one can envy such prowess.
Yes its excellent the level of footballers produce for such a small population but there is a point in the post. Holland are Big Bottlers, you looked set to win the Euros just gone but again you bottled it.
LOL at America putting themselves top! BBCR5 had a big discussion earlier about the medal table and our own performance and they were all basically laughing at America now deciding that it is all medals that count just so they can claim to be top. There was a former U.S female sprinter on there who basically said it was more than a little stupid to try and create your own table just so you can claim you are winning.
So a man climbs Mount Everest once but never again. Another man gets within 50 metres of the peak numerous occasions but never quite makes the top of Everest and you would call this man more succesful? Holland have never been world champions, England have. Until the Dutch can emulate England in the world cup they havent achieved what England have. The Dutch won the Euros fair enough which is why i said the two countries are similar neither being better. You enter competitions to win, anything else is Failure.
It really doesn't matter people. The country who 'wins' the medal count doesn't get anything of significance besides a sense of pride rolleyes. I'm American and I could care less if we're behind the Chinese.
Maybe I am missing something but do you realise that 'I could care less' means you really do actually care?
I'm not into bashing America (generally) but they seem to be losing their way in international sport a bit. I can only think of Basketball and Swimming where they are dominant (I don't count golf). They use to rule the roost in Cycling(Lance Armstrong), Tennis, Athletics, Gymnastics and Boxing plus they've made little headway in football. I still regard them as the worlds strongest sports nation by far, but they're definantly slipping for now.
USA today showing the table for the 2004 Olympics. China beats Russia into second place, despite Russia having many more medals in total than China.
Nit-picky aren't you? Let me put it this way...I don't give a shit whether or not the US leads the medal count and neither should any other American because it has no tangible significance.
maybe USA Today decided to post the medal count with gold medals being the first thing. Not that it would've mattered in 2004. Most US Media outlets get the medal count from the Associated Press, who have been using the most medals won order since they started doing it.
that's seriously what the AP has been doing since they started posting medal counts.... you probably like the gold medal's first one because it puts GB in 3rd place
I like it that way because that is how every country has always done it......that is until America found they were not top and so just made one up. GB in 3rd place is some achievement though that means very little, even here. People only really talk of the gold medalists themselves, it is also seen as our best ever games (most golds ever)
or America (most of the media outlets) have been doing it that way since medal counts were started. GB has been doing great this time around. Good platform for 2012!
Yup, pretty much: http://sports.espn.go.com/oly/summer08/fanguide/history?year=2004&type=medals http://sports.espn.go.com/oly/summer08/medals
None taken, and I'm sure none of the people from those countries would take offense either. But 5 million proud people of Togo are VERY appreciative of the Bronze medal. The same goes for Australia and Canada. But just because things like these don't hit the World Mainstream Media hard, or because ONLY 5 million people care about it, doesn't make it unimportant. Although it's the main point, by solely focusing on the Gold, you're selling yourself short on the Olympic experience.
Here in the land of the kangaroos, quite a lot of people are suprised that we are getting beat by the brits in the gold medal count. The question a lot of people are asking is why Great Britain represented at all in the games? During the olympics, Englad, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland form one nation. Theories bandied around include history, parliments etc. Does anyone really know or is a way for the British to get more medals. They do not compete together as Great Britain in the football, rugby, commonwealth games, golf, cricket etc. So it is rather puzzling. Also regarding the medal questions, who cares? A more true reflection is gold medals per capita but that will not please a lot of people so I think the gold medal table would have to do.