This in response to someone stating that the US's WC record is only marginally better than Scotland has about as much use and relevance as you breaking into a conversation about body building between 2 meatheads, with your theory of relativity. Yes you best get your coat.
Being in a generous mood, I'll ascribe [at first] your tweedling through the dum and the dee to an overgenerous supply of Frosty brews. It has much relevance, muchacho. The person stated that it was silly for the US to think of being able to match up with England when the US' record is only marginally better than Scotlands. So you, and your kith and kin, were reminded just how well Scotland has matched up with England over the years. Thus if our record is only marginally better than Scotlands, and Scotland has been able to bring sodomy and the lash to the English rummies, then it just kinda, yer know, sort of, in some " gee willikers ain't it relevant?" way blows your assertion-- that it is silly for the US to think of being able to match up with England [based on a comparison with Scotland] -- to such a fine mess of smithereens that not even Br'er Rabbit would stick his paw in that tarry patch. Rheumy and rummy ye be, and no coat can help thee.
If ye.. I mean, you, would concentrate more on the posts written instead of working out to put yourself across in a seriously out of date vocabulary, then you would realise what was actually posted : Originally Posted by sinner78 http://www.planetworldcup.com/NATIONS/maraton.html Team USA's record is only marginally better than scotland. If you click on the link you'll notice that Scotland the brave have a poor record in the World cup akin to that of your 'thanks for the culture and education England, nation'. Where you find the need to post, for the most part Eng v Scot friendly encounters into this only you know. Your theorys are on the level of someone who is really more suited to understanding number crunching than the actual game of football.
Oh, the vocabulary is not "dated", it just assumes a reader who does not find the act of reading a mortal challenge to his peace of mind. In this regard your post, quoted above, is exactly what we have come to expect from the local collection of Capello Boys. I do admire your ability to never let mere facts stand in the way of a good delusion Now, to stick to a level of gab well within your comfort zone, Death to Frosty's England
Didnt see the poll till now. I would have voted USA. But todays upset draw would have made my prediction look stupid.
The US looked like championship side trying to survive against a sluggish Prem side, the final result after some gutsy play from the US, a draw. This is what makes football the greatest game on the planet. Like it or not England would still smash the crap out of the US over most games played.
LOL@England fans acting just like Mexico fans after every result we get off of them. Winning soccer isn't always pretty soccer.
Thanks for marking my words and congrats for your tie...do not forget that there are more games to be played at the WC...
You're team looked like steamed dog-crap and you're gonna come on here and talk smack, really? Whatsamattawitchu you-a Sonnofabitch!!!!!!!!!!!!! But seriously, choke yourself.
Average ages: pos. Eng US gk .30 ...31 df .29 ...30 mf .27 ...26 fw .28 ...22 I'd say, England = players in their prime.