USA v. England: Who will win?

[james_smith99]

you mean that little tournament where they got beaten by a lesser france and whacked in the quarter-finals by portugal? yes, i heard some mention of it. by specifying euro04, you are indirectly aiding my argument. had england been slightly better prepared, had they taken their friendlies a bit more seriously, could they have found that little something extra (like a decent beckham penalty!) to push them past portugal?
i think the idea that england don't take their friendlies seriously is a convenient excuse for the teams generally poor overall record. the only time the big international countries play anyone half decent is usually twice (home and away) in a qualifying group, then in the latter stages of the big tournaments and then the friendlies. people say svens got a good record but the only results that really stand out are the 5-1 against a poor german team (still great to talk about it though!) and 1-0 against argentina where the penalty was about our only shot on goal.

worst of all is that is that as an england fan i don't really expect us to win tournaments but i do expect us to be great losers, carried off the field on our shields and all that. well, hes taken that away and now we are boring and negative and we still lose.

i'd agree with those that think englands players for this game are still good enough to win. but with our manager you have a chance because we wont try and win the game....it just seems to be a happy coincidence if that happens. if the US put out a motivated team i think you could win by the odd goal. a decent crowd, players that are up for it, huge performances from the star players.....and it could be another meaningless victory against a depleted england side - come on, everyone knows we don't try in friendlies!!!!

[james_smith99]

the excitement is clearly building...........

http://football.guardian.co.uk/News_Story/0,1563,1492368,00.html

(...congratulations to the Benet girls team by the way)

[willieboy]

England are going to struggle and it is not going to be for any lack of heart or not taking the game seriously. These guys are just no going to come together as a team. Sven will also most likely use a bunch of subs, so all in all I feel we will never get anything going.
I have been to Soldier field a few times this season to watch the dreadful Chicago Fire and the playing surface is pretty bad. This will also hurt us if we decide to play our usual passing game.
Seeing Peter Crouch in an England shirt is going to send shivers down my spine - and not the good kind.

[james_smith99]

if sven uses loads of subs its all down to him - theres no way he can blame it on the clubs like he usually does. i don't think peter crouch is the worst player to wear an england shirt - i for example have a cupboard full and am even worse than him - but you're right, its hard to be inspired!!

[Bayern1963]

Maybe you should let Brazil in on that info

Not necessary...most of their good players play in european leagues!!! They know where it really counts...

[GoodDead]

the excitement is clearly building...........

http://football.guardian.co.uk/News_Story/0,1563,1492368,00.html

(...congratulations to the Benet girls team by the way)

Wow, I guess there downplaying the whole thing because they know they're gonna lose to a "C" team. I can't blame them why mention anything that makes the US look weak? Is this game even on tv? probably not and they're won't be any mention of the game on TV when the US loses either.

[wrenmj]

They drew and Portugal advanced on pks. Some whacking. There's no evidence to suggest that taking friendlies more seriously would make any difference - plenty of competitive qualification matches for that. Personally, I'd rather see England try out new players in friendlies than in games that actually mean something. If they showed up with their first team for these two games, they'd be faced with minimal -or zero - opportunity for new players to be tried out before next year's finals.

they lost, they did not advance, the did not pass go and collect $200...say it however you want...i call that getting whacked.

and are you mad? no evidence to suggest that taking friendlies more seriously, etc? why not just show up at qualifiers with little training, roll the ball out and see what happens? there may be no evidence as you say because there may be no evidence of teams ACTUALLY taking friendlies seriously in the first place! but you'll never convince me that a full first side, playing at full pace, against quality or even mid-level competition has no benefit. that's bollix.

[Prawn Sandwich]

they lost, they did not advance, the did not pass go and collect $200...say it however you want...i call that getting whacked.

and are you mad? no evidence to suggest that taking friendlies more seriously, etc? why not just show up at qualifiers with little training, roll the ball out and see what happens? there may be no evidence as you say because there may be no evidence of teams ACTUALLY taking friendlies seriously in the first place! but you'll never convince me that a full first side, playing at full pace, against quality or even mid-level competition has no benefit. that's bollix.
So did the US get "whacked" by Germany in '02?

Brasil seem to take friendlies about as seriously as England, hell they seem to take WC qualifying with the same gusto - remind me again how this impacts Brasils WC fortunes....

[wrenmj]

So did the US get "whacked" by Germany in '02?

Brasil seem to take friendlies about as seriously as England, hell they seem to take WC qualifying with the same gusto - remind me again how this impacts Brasils WC fortunes....

what's w/the definition of a whacking? yes. they (we) got beaten. they lost. they got whacked. are you guys using a different dictionary in the uk or something?

and not that brazil has anything to do w/a usa v england thread but the obvious answer is..."england ain't brazil". selecao's two cups and a runner-up in the last three wc's speak for themselves and on that record they can train drunk and in diapers for all i care. they've gotten results where england has not and i would argue that england has had the talent to do much better than they have, wouldn't you?

[Prawn Sandwich]

what's w/the definition of a whacking? yes. they (we) got beaten. they lost. they got whacked. are you guys using a different dictionary in the uk or something?

and not that brazil has anything to do w/a usa v england thread but the obvious answer is..."england ain't brazil". selecao's two cups and a runner-up in the last three wc's speak for themselves and on that record they can train drunk and in diapers for all i care. they've gotten results where england has not and i would argue that england has had the talent to do much better than they have, wouldn't you?
Fair enough - the term "whacked" seemed a tad, how shall we say, exuberant for simply losing. I'd have thought it more appropriate to a WC game like Poland v US ;) :D

Whilst Brasil has the un-nerving ability to look like a bunch of dis-jointed poseurs right up until the point that the competition becomes serious, it still points to an example of where a team can succeed despite ignoring the potential benefits of taking friendlies seriously - exception to the rule maybe? I'm not so sure....

As to whether England should have done better? Yes, they probably should have at least got to a final between '66 and now. Bear in mind though that we've also had our fair share of crap teams as well - any NT where a player like Carlton Palmer can regularly secure a starting spot deserves everything it gets....

If you also look at how we have gone out when we've had decent teams then it's a tad more understandable - Maradona's hand of God, Ronaldinho's free kick, the Germans and their bloody efficient technique, Mexican police etc. All excuses to be sure but there is some justification behind them. Next summer could be different though - if we can keep injury free (apart from Beckham - please god let him break a toe in the opening game ;) ), J Cole can secure the left midfield spot and Lampard/Gerrard work out a way of playing together in the centre then we have more than a fair shot at going all the way (although the slight problem of a terrifyingly talented Brasil side still awaits).....

[wrenmj]

Fair enough - the term "whacked" seemed a tad, how shall we say, exuberant for simply losing. I'd have thought it more appropriate to a WC game like Poland v US ;) :D

Whilst Brasil has the un-nerving ability to look like a bunch of dis-jointed poseurs right up until the point that the competition becomes serious, it still points to an example of where a team can succeed despite ignoring the potential benefits of taking friendlies seriously - exception to the rule maybe? I'm not so sure....

As to whether England should have done better? Yes, they probably should have at least got to a final between '66 and now. Bear in mind though that we've also had our fair share of crap teams as well - any NT where a player like Carlton Palmer can regularly secure a starting spot deserves everything it gets....

If you also look at how we have gone out when we've had decent teams then it's a tad more understandable - Maradona's hand of God, Ronaldinho's free kick, the Germans and their bloody efficient technique, Mexican police etc. All excuses to be sure but there is some justification behind them. Next summer could be different though - if we can keep injury free (apart from Beckham - please god let him break a toe in the opening game ;) ), J Cole can secure the left midfield spot and Lampard/Gerrard work out a way of playing together in the centre then we have more than a fair shot at going all the way (although the slight problem of a terrifyingly talented Brasil side still awaits).....

i'm laughing too hard at the carlton palmer refernce to come up w/anything substantive. i should say in retrospect that if shilton gets a massive 4 or 5 inches off the ground, then Hand of God never happens. ;)

with you all the way on beckham, england has far more effective solutions at mid than that lame dvd hocking wanker.

[Scarecrow]

Who will be at the game? Perhaps we can set up a time and place to meet at half or before the match starts.

[united_dawg]

While the US is playing a second tier England squad, I don't think that they'll pull it off although I'd like to see a MLS roster beat a squad of EPL players

[hawk_claw]

While the US is playing a second tier England squad, I don't think that they'll pull it off although I'd like to see a MLS roster beat a squad of EPL players

a lot of US players do play in europe....

[Saeyddthe]

It may not be a great game, but it will be an interesting one...

I've got plenty of beer, and I'll have one for each of you...
I even plan on opening a bottle of Budweiser at kickoff, as a sort of patriotic salute. I may not be able to choke it down, but I think it's the thought that counts in this instance...;)

[ItaliaUruguay1990]

alrite the US will never beat England unless England is really drunk, high, or drugged, or just dont feel like playing. No offense to any US citizen, but the US sucks at soccer...

[bbsbt]

the excitement is clearly building...........

http://football.guardian.co.uk/News_Story/0,1563,1492368,00.html

(...congratulations to the Benet girls team by the way)
LOL... the entire article is about England's lack of interest for this match. It's funny how the author is so concerned with getting the point across that he is not concerned. ;)

[Pyro]

alrite the US will never beat England unless England is really drunk, high, or drugged, or just dont feel like playing. No offense to any US citizen, but the US sucks at soccer...

I hope this is sarcastic. If not. I'd feel compelled to point out that 1/2 the Italian backline gave up 3 goals in 6 minutes this week. :p

[rooney9]

States to beat a poor England line up... 2-1

[ossieend]

Rooney!!! what's this, a Rams takeover? Hey, I almost agree on the score but I think we'll just about scrape a 2-2 draw. BTW do you ever get on the MLS boards? I'm afraid I'm getting addicted to MLS and have even become a Revs'. fan'.
Come on ewe Rams