Pride_Of_The_Midlands

What have (the) MLS said about the Premier League potentially playing games in America?

I would turn down any club in the world to play for Aston Villa.

Australia got less points at this World Cup than England.

Australia would love to have a team of players who only play in the Premier League.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OMkVSSFLGiU

As Hugo says, we actually beat the world champions Italy in 1934 at Highbury. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Highbury We probably would have won the World Cup in the 1930s if we had entered.

We have a better World Cup record than Spain. And you wouldn't dare say that USA are as good as Spain.

Remind me how many times they have got to the quarter-finals compared to England?

You cannot compare it to club football. When was the last time Forest were in the Champions League? When was the last time England were in the World Cup?

The main flaw in your argument is that you believe that "more success" equals "better players It doesn't. USA over-performed. England under-performed. England > USA

Stop deluding yourself that USA have better players than England. That's clearly not the case. There is genuinely not one American player who would get into the England team. Of course they did better than us but they also did better than Portugal, Spain and Italy and we all know that their players aren't as good as the Portuguese, Spanish or Italian players.

True. We may not be on Germany or Brazil's level but we are not on Switzerland's level either.

They have more passionate national team fans. The atmosphere at Wembley is shocking.

USA and Australia have more passionate home support than England. And they both had good travelling support in Brazil.

That was only for 1950 and 1954.

England have failed to qualify for 3 World Cups. Spain have failed to qualify for 4 World Cups. France have failed to qualify for 5 World Cups. Holland have failed to qualify for 7 World Cups. Portugal have failed to qualify for 13 World Cups.

Yes they did but we actually have a better World Cup record than Spain. Spain couldn't even reach the quarter-finals in when they hosted it. But I would have classed Spain as a heavyweight before their golden era of 2008-2012.

Could say the same for Spain. They only have 1 World Cup and have twice got to the semi-finals - same as us.

I think if you win the World Cup you are automatically heavyweight. Are you saying you need to have won both the World Cup and the Euros?

And yet we have been to more World Cups than Uruguay and the same amount as France and Spain.

Because we are one of only 8 nations to have won the World Cup. Yeah it was on home soil but Uruguay, Italy, Argentina and France also won their first World Cup at home. Holland are a heavyweight and they have never won the World Cup. Hungary have never won anything and they are now an average nation who never qualify for tournaments. We have underachieved but that's mostly because we are bad at penalty shoot-outs. We are probably the lightest of the heavyweights but a heavyweight nonetheless.

They are. We are superior to the USA in every position. We have always been a heavyweight nation and still are - just we are at the lower end of the heavyweights.

I would be backing England. We very rarely lose to "smaller" teams. We normally only lose to the big heavyweight nations.

Just because they did better than us at this World Cup, doesn't mean that our players aren't better than theirs.

I don't see what's so funny. It's the simple truth.