Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: OT: Women's World Cup 2015

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion >> RE: OT: Women's World Cup 2015 Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: OT: Women's World Cup 2015 - 7/6/2015 6:58:53 PM   
Zorch

 

Posts: 7857
Joined: 3/7/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

Sadly, no one stripped down to a sports bra. Maybe next time.

See post #7116 in the Australian Beauties thread.

(in reply to Curtis Lemay)
Post #: 31
RE: OT: Women's World Cup 2015 - 7/6/2015 8:47:04 PM   
RichMunn

 

Posts: 65
Joined: 5/14/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

quote:

ORIGINAL: RichMunn


quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

quote:

ORIGINAL: aaatoysandmore

But what about that BRITISH goalie? Whad she do now?
warspite1

Amazing

Half the time when people should be talking about Britain they refer to England. When they should be talking about England they refer to Britain!!! Why is this so difficult to understand?*

If your reference is to the fact that the England goalkeeper was born in the US, then I'm not sure why this is a "". There are agreed international rules around who can play for whom depending upon other family for example (as in this case) or in the case of some sports there are "transfer mechanisms" too. If you think the English football team - and Karen Bardsley in particular - is special have a look at how many of the US's 600 athletes for the Olympic Games 2012 were born overseas - more than 40 I believe.



*By the way and for the avoidance of doubt, this is a light-hearted remark..... well mostly anyway.. perhaps a tinsiest bit of frustration too



No, what happens is that is an English athlete wins a gold medal at, say, the Olympics, he or she is referred to as English, but if a Scottish, Welsh or Northern Irish athlete does so the English press refers to them as "British". Just look at "British" Andy Murray!

Anyway the Ashes starts in Cardiff this week - that is in Wales by the way, where England and Wales will be playing Australia.

Rich


warspite1



This rubbish old chestnut again

I watch plenty of sport and believe me, this is just so sad. Motor racing: You think for example David Coulthard or Sir JYS were never, indeed are never, referred to as Scotsmen? You think Andy Murray is never referred to as a Scotman? Eddie Irvine was never an Ulsterman when winning Grand Prix?

When English, Northern Irish, Scots or Welsh play a sport representing their individual countries (e.g. Commonwealth Games), they are referred to in those terms. When they represent the United Kingdom/Great Britain (e.g. the Olympic Games) then they are referred to mostly by that denomination but sometimes by the country of their birth. The Welsh lass Nicole Cooke for example. How many times was she referred to as Welsh on her way to Gold in Beijing even though she was representing Team GB? Plenty - so what? She is Welsh - and British.

To call David Coulthard or Andy Murray British when winning Wimbledon or a Grand Prix is perfectly acceptable.... because they are. So is calling them Scots - because they are - and which they are referred to as frequently. Do some journalists get it wrong? Possibly.. but to suggest the entire English press corps are waging some kind of colonial campaign to beat down the Celts is just pathetic. Do Scots journalists or Welsh journalists at the Olympics ever refer to their athletes by their individual nationality - even when winning Gold for Great Britain and NI? No of course not - its only the Fascist English press that get it wrong isn't it?

quote:

Anyway the Ashes starts in Cardiff this week - that is in Wales by the way, where England and Wales will be playing Australia.


No idea why you are getting snotty with me - you clearly have a short memory re the European Championship thread . You obviously weren't around when the Scots referendum thread was current. Perhaps if you were you would know you picked on the wrong guy if you want to accuse someone of English bias


Hey I really like you. I didn't intend to be "snotty" with you.

Seem to have touched a nerve though.

It's not an old chestnut if you live in Wales, believe me.

How many "national" newspapers published the fact that if England had not scored a late equaliser against Slovenia, Wales would have been ahead of them in the world rankings? Wales against Belgium was a big match in its group; Slovenia against England was a dead rubber. How many pages did each get?

How many pages does the Times devote to English rugby as opposed to Welsh, Irish or Scottish? "National" newspaper indeed. England win a game and they are going to win the rugby world cup, 6 pager every time.

Sorry if I offended you Warspite. I was originally commenting on your comment about "English" or "British". There are alternative possibilities within "British". You wouldn't know it sometimes though.

Rich


(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 32
RE: OT: Women's World Cup 2015 - 7/7/2015 5:48:27 AM   
warspite1


Posts: 42515
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: RichMunn


quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

quote:

ORIGINAL: RichMunn


quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

quote:

ORIGINAL: aaatoysandmore

But what about that BRITISH goalie? Whad she do now?
warspite1

Amazing

Half the time when people should be talking about Britain they refer to England. When they should be talking about England they refer to Britain!!! Why is this so difficult to understand?*

If your reference is to the fact that the England goalkeeper was born in the US, then I'm not sure why this is a "". There are agreed international rules around who can play for whom depending upon other family for example (as in this case) or in the case of some sports there are "transfer mechanisms" too. If you think the English football team - and Karen Bardsley in particular - is special have a look at how many of the US's 600 athletes for the Olympic Games 2012 were born overseas - more than 40 I believe.



*By the way and for the avoidance of doubt, this is a light-hearted remark..... well mostly anyway.. perhaps a tinsiest bit of frustration too



No, what happens is that is an English athlete wins a gold medal at, say, the Olympics, he or she is referred to as English, but if a Scottish, Welsh or Northern Irish athlete does so the English press refers to them as "British". Just look at "British" Andy Murray!

Anyway the Ashes starts in Cardiff this week - that is in Wales by the way, where England and Wales will be playing Australia.

Rich


warspite1



This rubbish old chestnut again

I watch plenty of sport and believe me, this is just so sad. Motor racing: You think for example David Coulthard or Sir JYS were never, indeed are never, referred to as Scotsmen? You think Andy Murray is never referred to as a Scotman? Eddie Irvine was never an Ulsterman when winning Grand Prix?

When English, Northern Irish, Scots or Welsh play a sport representing their individual countries (e.g. Commonwealth Games), they are referred to in those terms. When they represent the United Kingdom/Great Britain (e.g. the Olympic Games) then they are referred to mostly by that denomination but sometimes by the country of their birth. The Welsh lass Nicole Cooke for example. How many times was she referred to as Welsh on her way to Gold in Beijing even though she was representing Team GB? Plenty - so what? She is Welsh - and British.

To call David Coulthard or Andy Murray British when winning Wimbledon or a Grand Prix is perfectly acceptable.... because they are. So is calling them Scots - because they are - and which they are referred to as frequently. Do some journalists get it wrong? Possibly.. but to suggest the entire English press corps are waging some kind of colonial campaign to beat down the Celts is just pathetic. Do Scots journalists or Welsh journalists at the Olympics ever refer to their athletes by their individual nationality - even when winning Gold for Great Britain and NI? No of course not - its only the Fascist English press that get it wrong isn't it?

quote:

Anyway the Ashes starts in Cardiff this week - that is in Wales by the way, where England and Wales will be playing Australia.


No idea why you are getting snotty with me - you clearly have a short memory re the European Championship thread . You obviously weren't around when the Scots referendum thread was current. Perhaps if you were you would know you picked on the wrong guy if you want to accuse someone of English bias


Hey I really like you. I didn't intend to be "snotty" with you.

Seem to have touched a nerve though.

It's not an old chestnut if you live in Wales, believe me.

How many "national" newspapers published the fact that if England had not scored a late equaliser against Slovenia, Wales would have been ahead of them in the world rankings? Wales against Belgium was a big match in its group; Slovenia against England was a dead rubber. How many pages did each get?

How many pages does the Times devote to English rugby as opposed to Welsh, Irish or Scottish? "National" newspaper indeed. England win a game and they are going to win the rugby world cup, 6 pager every time.

Sorry if I offended you Warspite. I was originally commenting on your comment about "English" or "British". There are alternative possibilities within "British". You wouldn't know it sometimes though.

Rich


warspite1

Yes this touched a nerve - sorry if I went off on one.

A few things though:

1. I guess the problem the national papers have is the audience size and their need to sell papers. If you have two games happening at the same time e.g. England and Wales - both are EC qualifiers but one is a bigger game - but the bigger game caters for a smaller audience (i.e. the actual populations of England vs Wales). I know the Welsh game got plenty of coverage - although I did not compare newspaper columns to the England game. I will look out for this in the autumn as the qualifying process comes to its fascinating (and hopefully successful) conclusion for Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. One thing on that though - aren't national papers regional anymore? I thought editions of papers used to be tailored (T.V pages and sports) for different parts of the country? Maybe they don't do that anymore?

2. Re the England and Britain thing I was not suggesting that there are the only two alternatives. This was a light-hearted dig at aaatoysandmore. It is common for our overseas friends to still talk of England (like we are still in the Elizabethan times (Queen Elizabeth I not II ) - when they really mean Britain or the UK. But then this poster compounds the error by referring to Britain when he would have actually been right to say England

The ironic thing about your post - and the reason for my reaction - is that such mix ups over the country name riles me not only because it is factually incorrect, BUT in support of my fellow Britons who are very much part of the UK and are seemingly ignored by reference to England when discussing the UK.




_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805



(in reply to RichMunn)
Post #: 33
RE: OT: Women's World Cup 2015 - 7/7/2015 8:50:30 AM   
RichMunn

 

Posts: 65
Joined: 5/14/2008
Status: offline

Thanks Warspite -

I always enjoy your posts on any topic, and (almost!) always agree with your approach.

Looking forward to 4 days of the Ashes in my home city.

Rich

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 34
RE: OT: Women's World Cup 2015 - 7/7/2015 10:57:32 AM   
aniketos


Posts: 13
Joined: 6/12/2015
Status: offline
The first 20 minutes of the game was a complete joke. Considering the US played like absolute crap in the last 30-20 mins. of the game it's a wonder why Japan didn't score more since the US couldn't hold on to the ball for more than a few seconds. It was literally, Japan gets the ball, they move it down the field, somehow the US stops them only to kick right back into Japan's possession. If England didn't bungle the hell outta their game against Japan, I suspect the final would have been a helluva lot more fun to watch (and considering England beat Germany in the consolation game, they could have made a serious bid for the trophy in the final). Overall, Japan is a terrible team that couldn't capitalize on the terrible play by the US team and score more goals let alone put together a semblance of a defense in the first 20 minutes. Essentially, two mediocre teams played in the final and one got stupidly lucky. Granted, I'm very happy our team won but jesus was that a pain to watch. Nigeria vs Sweden and France vs Germany are two of the best games in the tournament as far as I'm concerned (I have yet to watch Germany vs England), despite the score of the game, it was quite the mediocre match.

Lastly, Japan's first goal should have never happened. The defender left her feet in the box and let the Japanese player turn and casually blast the ball into the back of the net. Atrocious defending. I was taught that as a defender, you never leave your feat unless you're 110% sure you can get the ball or you are committing a foul. The defender on that play really screwed up. I hope in the future, she learns from that mistake because a much better team will absolutely punish the US for stuff like that.

(in reply to RichMunn)
Post #: 35
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2]
All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion >> RE: OT: Women's World Cup 2015 Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.141