Spike

It's a movie where a holocaust victim has to choose which of her children is gassed and which is forced into hard labour.

dis iz a sympathy comment lol

Nothing is more sexay than the holocaust.

Down in the South and in Texas it's an obsession. In Atlanta they love the University of Georgia football team more than the NFL Atlanta Falcons. But the thing about America is that the World Cup would sell out in a snap. Like that awful Kevin Costner baseball film: "Build it and they will come".

Says the guy whose country was about an inch away from being communist last century.

We could definitely pull it off and everyone would love to have it but I don't think we are the best option. I just don't like the idea of Australia doing a Brazil and building stadia that we won't use.

China is as communist as the USA. Don't buy into to American media bullshit.

Australia can not handle the World Cup. It just can't okay. We do not have the stadiums nor the infrasture to handle such an influx of tourism. We currently have 5 stadiums over 50,000 with football being played at only four of them. Not to mention the five stadiums are used during the typical rugby league, rugby union and AFL seasons (stadiums are shared between many teams over different sports). Brisbane; Australia's third largest city only has one stadium, Perth and Darwin are so isolated from the rest of the country it is pointless having matches there. It would be far too expensive to travel and while they are larger than a lot of cities and towns are far too small to handle a decent crowd. The entire World Cup would be hosted in Adelaide, Melbourne, Sydney and Brisbane. Not to mention the A-League season is relegated to the summer months due to the three most popular sports in Australia already being played during winter (league, union and AFL). If you have ever felt the Aussie heat during summer, you would know it would be suicide to have it during the summer months. So either hold it during the summer and A-League season or cancel/post-pone Australia's three most popular sports for a month or somehow work around them. While no matter how much I would enjoy singing songs to cheer Australia on in Lang Park, it isn't feasible.

So? America has a massive population with an incredibly high Latin American population. I was in America for the World Cup and the amount of people sporting their supporter gear was phenomenal, I must have see half of the populaiton of Colombia, 1/3 of Mexico and dozens of Brazilians. I would even vouch to say that football is equally if not more popular than hockey. Hockey is America's bastard sport. The only reason it's alive is due to Canadiens and to a lesser extent Scandiavians and Eastern Europeans. Outside of hotspots like Chicago, Detroit and New England (Boston and New York in particular) hockey is barely even a thing, it's as if it doesn't exist. The MLS is expanding and at a hell of a faster rate than the NHL.

Clever.

Poverty is a very vague term. I think in this context it is refering to low income families and households. I bet they still have basics like food access, clean water, bathing facilities, loos and some sort of heating fixtures.

More than a quater of Londoners live in poverty. I don't know if the number has changed too much since then. http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-24517391

Commit suicide? Cut that bullshit out.

It was all me. I bought a hat or some shit like that.

Well no fucking shit. Stan Collymore only beats women.

You are dreaming mate. I'm forever blowing bubbles.

Ivanovic strikes me as the type of captain that just screams at his players and gets all red-faced. So that is a no.

I explicitly said that if you want to continue your conversation with myself or other staff members that you should do so via PM, if not I will have to warn you for pushing this even further off topic.

You do realise posts like this only heighten your chances of being banned? I doubt the admins (the people that ban users) have enough time to be constantly dealing with discontent users like yourself. They put enough hours into running this site and improving it behind the scenes. You have an amazingly negative repuatation on this forum, so chillout, relax and stop being so abrasive and belligerent. You can't change your environement but you can adapt to it. You don't need to do anything I suggest but I recommend you do otherwise you will have to make an account on a different forum one of these days. Anyway that is all to be said on this topic. If you have anything else to say contact myself or another staff member.

The Guardia also reports this as true: http://www.theguardian.com/football/2009/may/11/manchester-united-foreign-team Gianluca Vialla was the first manager to field a starting XI in the premier league with no Englishmen.

I said starting XI. First club to field an all-foreign starting XI: Chelsea (v Southampton), December 26, 1999. Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-337865/English-footballs-trailblazing-foreigners.html#ixzz3IgPJEk63

No it was Chelsea.

Chelsea was the first team to have an all-foreign starting XI in the Premier League.

I don't trust Ivan at CB. He has played there probably less than ten times in the last four years.