baron-pierreIV Posted July 22, 2005 Report Share Posted July 22, 2005 The US is #6. Why should I listen to you - a non-cat, so a dog? FIFA says so and that's good enough for me. #6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
This Is Not The Cat Posted July 22, 2005 Report Share Posted July 22, 2005 The US is #6. Why should I listen to you - a non-cat, so a dog? FIFA says so and that's good enough for me. #6 Why are you yelling? Ok...here ya go.... U-S-A....U-S-A...U-S-A... happy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suit U Sir !!! Posted July 22, 2005 Report Share Posted July 22, 2005 your 2018 hypothesis (which was too muddled, I really didn't pay too much attention to it) doesn't really hold water. Ok i'll simplify what I tried to get across in my last post. What is more acceptable to the international community? Option 1- USA hosts 2016 olympics, and 2018 World cup (despite the fact that the USA just hosted the world cup very recently in 1994) Option 2- England hosts the 2012 olympics, and the 2018 world cup (remembering that Engalnd last hosted in 1966) I think the majority of people (including FIFA members) would go for option 2. America cannot expect to host the world cup every 20/24 years, using the excuse that "it's North America's turn to host." N.America only has 3 countries which can host the world cup- USA/ Mexico/ Canada. Europe has ~50 countries in total, out of which ~20 can host the world cup. That's why Europe will host every 12 years at least. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikel Posted July 22, 2005 Report Share Posted July 22, 2005 your 2018 hypothesis (which was too muddled, I really didn't pay too much attention to it) doesn't really hold water. Ok i'll simplify what I tried to get across in my last post. What is more acceptable to the international community? Option 1- USA hosts 2016 olympics, and 2018 World cup (despite the fact that the USA just hosted the world cup very recently in 1994) Option 2- England hosts the 2012 olympics, and the 2018 world cup (remembering that Engalnd last hosted in 1966) I think the majority of people (including FIFA members) would go for option 2. America cannot expect to host the world cup every 20/24 years, using the excuse that "it's North America's turn to host." N.America only has 3 countries which can host the world cup- USA/ Mexico/ Canada. Europe has ~50 countries in total, out of which ~20 can host the world cup. That's why Europe will host every 12 years at least. I totally agree with you, Suit. Is more than probable that England will host the WC in 2018. And this ranking is pure rubbish... THE USA THE #6?? It makes me laugh, and laugh, and laugh.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suit U Sir !!! Posted July 22, 2005 Report Share Posted July 22, 2005 Suit-U (where did u get such a weird name?) It was a catchphrase in a British comedy show, called: "The Fast Show." The British members of this forum may remember the show, it was screened in the 1990's. The catchprase was actually: Suit's You Sir! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rei Posted July 22, 2005 Report Share Posted July 22, 2005 Not according to FIFA. USA is #6!! :unclesam: Who cares what the rest of you say -- you're not FIFA; you're no experts. :unclesam: some days ago you told me you would become a good editor.. but telling things which are utter nonsense or take every soccer list for the reality is not the better way to go ahead.. this list is out! it considers only matches scores.. the person who has no idea of soccerworld is you :sleepy: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arwebb Posted July 22, 2005 Report Share Posted July 22, 2005 Not according to FIFA. USA is #6!! :unclesam: Who cares what the rest of you say -- you're not FIFA; you're no experts. :unclesam: FIFA aren't experts either. That's the problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blur2005 Posted July 23, 2005 Report Share Posted July 23, 2005 As an American, I am pleased to see the United States ranked so high on the FIFA rankings. On the other hand, I believe we are overrated. Not severely overrated, but we're not 6th in the world. We were better placed at 10, which is where we were before this latest ranking. I know Portugal, Germany, Spain and especially Italy should not be behind us. However, those who argue France should be...well. They've been sucking it up, and are actually at risk of not making it to the World Cup, if they continue to be mediocre. Again, the U.S., and even Mexico, are overrated, but FIFA always is screwy on rankings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arwebb Posted July 24, 2005 Report Share Posted July 24, 2005 As a rule, host nations tend to drop before finals. Having said that, I haven't been impressed with the German team for several years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faster Posted July 24, 2005 Report Share Posted July 24, 2005 As a rule, host nations tend to drop before finals. Having said that, I haven't been impressed with the German team for several years. they are certainly better than a lot of the teams out there and should be able to beat pretty much everybody in the top 20 expect maybe Brazil and Argentina. I think the fact that so many under estimate the Germans, is going to blow up in a lot of teams faces, prime candidates include the Czechs, England, and Netherlands. Germany has some good young talent and good keeper and a better than average defence, i would think they should easily get into the round of 8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NYCD 2012 Posted July 24, 2005 Report Share Posted July 24, 2005 It is difficult to say which countries are the best in football? Were Turkey and South Korea the 3rd and 4rd best team in the world in 2002? Is US the 6th best team now? I think we all know the answers for that.But there are the rules of the game. A team could be better than other, but if in the 92'+ the bad team scores, the good is out. End of the game, end of the discussion. Now, of course US should have more points because CONCACAF is the only place in the world with national matches. Europe is in holidays and Southamerica only plays Copamérica and the Qualifying matches for 2006 WC. Anyway, congratz to US. Chile was 6th in 1998 and now we are 80th? 90th? :laugh: Chlie is now #72 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arwebb Posted July 24, 2005 Report Share Posted July 24, 2005 As a rule, host nations tend to drop before finals. Having said that, I haven't been impressed with the German team for several years. they are certainly better than a lot of the teams out there and should be able to beat pretty much everybody in the top 20 expect maybe Brazil and Argentina. I think the fact that so many under estimate the Germans, is going to blow up in a lot of teams faces, prime candidates include the Czechs, England, and Netherlands. Germany has some good young talent and good keeper and a better than average defence, i would think they should easily get into the round of 8 In order to do that they will have had to improve massively from their abysmal performances in Euro 2004. What I have seen thus far suggests they haven't improved enough. Home advantage will help to a point, but it won't help them that much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faster Posted July 24, 2005 Report Share Posted July 24, 2005 they are fielding a team that has a different look than in 2004, they have gotten rid of a lot of the old guys and have a few new ones, and a coach that is not afriad in take on Kahn. There are at least 5 principle players on the German side now that weren't there in 2004, and don't forget, horrible 2000, amazing 2002 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob2012 Posted July 25, 2005 Report Share Posted July 25, 2005 I know you can only beat who's out there and Germany certainly did that, but their route to the World Cup final was one of the easiest I've ever seen. When they met quality in the final they were soundly beaten. Germany have a lot to prove and I don't think they'll set the world alight next year. I was going to say I'd like to be proven wrong, but in truth I wouldn't. :: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guardian Posted July 25, 2005 Report Share Posted July 25, 2005 Now that the USA has just won the CONCACAF's Gold Cup tournament, it will be interesting on how many points it will get this time around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arwebb Posted July 25, 2005 Report Share Posted July 25, 2005 horrible 2000, amazing 2002 And the best draw of anyone in the tournament. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westfale Posted July 25, 2005 Report Share Posted July 25, 2005 @ arwebb and Rob: You are both not fair to the German Team at WC 2002. But you are right in saying, that they won´t make any impression at the WC next year. My pre-tournament favourites: Brazil, Argentina, Netherlands and England Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arwebb Posted July 25, 2005 Report Share Posted July 25, 2005 Saudi Arabia, Ireland and Cameroon in the group. Paraguay in the second round, USA in the quarter-final and Korea in the semi-final. I watched all of Germany's games in that tournament with the exception of Cameroon. The only team that really tested them en route to the final were Ireland, who should have beaten them. Sure, you can only beat what's put in front of you, but there were numerous teams in that tournament who, given that draw, would have made the final. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.