Originally Posted by mae

According to your rules maybe.

According to the common understanding of the English language and basic logic. "Most" is a relative term, the absolute value is irrelevant, only that it is bigger than all the rest. Given that the football world cup has more teams participating, and more people watching the finals than any other sporting event on earth, it is entirely reasonable to consider football the most popular sport in the world. Even if it were not, it is hardly unreasonable to call a competition the "world cup" if participation is open to any country which will abide by the rules of the game. Cricket has a world cup, so does rugby union and rugby league, and both ice and field hockey.

Originally Posted by T.Q

Wow, you really are just bugnuts crazy, aren't you?

Yes, the usual personal attacks when you can't argue with the points raised.

Grow up.

Funny according to FIFA, only 32 countries are fielding a team in the world cup in South Africa.

FIFA.com - 2010 FIFA World Cup South Africa? teams


It appears some people would go to any lengths to win an argument even claiming falsely the majority of the countries in the world are fielding a team when only a small minority do.

161 countries do not field a team, a mere 32 countries do.

Clearly it is not a world sport.

PS: I can hardly wait for the personal attacks to start now that the claim of majority of countries has been exposed as false.

Originally Posted by mae

Funny according to FIFA, only 32 countries are fielding a team in the world cup in South Africa.

FIFA.com - 2010 FIFA World Cup South Africa? teams


It appears some people would go to any lengths to win an argument even claiming falsely the majority of the countries in the world are fielding a team when only a small minority do.

161 countries do not field a team, a mere 32 countries do.

Clearly it is not a world sport.

That's the finals tournament. Are you being deliberately obtuse? There are qualifying rounds that eliminate many teams before the finals competition. You will notice, therefore, that neither Scotland, Wales nor Northern Ireland are involved in the finals competition, though you can be assured that they participated vigorously in the qualifying rounds.
2010 FIFA World Cup qualification - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
204 teams entered the most recent qualification competitions.

Do China & India over 2 billion people field a team?

Originally Posted by mae

Do China & India over 2 billion people field a team?

Yes. India was knocked out in the first round of qualifying in Asia, by Lebanon. China came last in their group in round 3, behind Iraq, Qatar and Australia. Even North Korea has a team, and indeed their team made it the the finals.

FIFA actually has more members than the UN.

Originally Posted by mae

Funny according to FIFA, only 32 countries are fielding a team in the world cup in South Africa.

FIFA.com - 2010 FIFA World Cup South Africa? teams


It appears some people would go to any lengths to win an argument even claiming falsely the majority of the countries in the world are fielding a team when only a small minority do.

161 countries do not field a team, a mere 32 countries do.

Clearly it is not a world sport.

PS: I can hardly wait for the personal attacks to start now that the claim of majority of countries has been exposed as false.

Mae, stop being so damn argumentative. Read up on the world cup. As I said before, 204 countries fielded a team to participate in the preliminary rounds. 32 teams made it to the finals in S.A.

As to the World Series, oh never mind. Why do I even bother to explain the obvious. Some times it's easier to talk to a brick wall.

How is the weather up north? If it's still cold, keep it.

Have a nice weekend

Originally Posted by 99%BEEF

It is hardly "unfair" just more of an anomaly due to, well you are right, it is because we invented the modern game but we do also have an interesting political situation. I think the Scots and the Welsh certainly consider themselves a nation. Murry (the tennis player) seems to begrudgingly accept that he is representing Britain and not just Scotland when he plays. As an Englishman I still get a little confused how 4 countries add up to equal 1 country but it does (I wish we could rename them states).

Anyway I am sure it will help to ease the sting to your acute sense of fairness to realise that it does in fact act as a disadvantage to the national team. The smaller nations have produced some incredible players i.e. Best, Giggs, and 1970's Scotland. A British team my have had great success.

I agree, when Yugoslavia split, it affected all sports, not only football. So it is a blessing and a curse also.

Originally Posted by 99%BEEF

Also I think it is a shame that Argentina have chosen Madonna as their manager. With a more astute manager I would certainly have rated their chances.

The Argies worship Maradonna although he is a cheat and a drug addict and a loud mouth bully. His appointment is the result of the cult of personality not of excellence.
Maybe Leo Messi can win the Cup for the Ches. (We call the Argies Ches in Chile).

A football fanatic friend of mine (Turkish) reckons Messi is the best player in the world. He has done very well with Barcelona.

Originally Posted by 99%BEEF

Still I don't think you really care about football and are just looking for a reason to accuse Europeans of being arrogant, please could you start your own thread to grind that axe.

Truer words have never been spoken (or typed)

Originally Posted by T.Q

Mae, you're the one arguing it can't be the "world" cup because it's euro-centric. Then, when it's shown that the majority of countries in the world field a team, you argue that it can't be the "world" cup because it's not popular in the US and some other countries.

It's pretty obvious that you don't actually have an argument-at least not one that makes any kind of sense.

Pretty obvious indeed.

Originally Posted by Baron

How is the weather up north? If it's still cold, keep it.

Have a nice weekend

We have warm wonderful weather, I heard you guys down South are kind of chilly at the moment.


PS: I heard gasbag is releasing more of that stuff so .......
And I really meant it when I said enjoy the world cup.

Originally Posted by Jo Bennett

Yes. India was knocked out in the first round of qualifying in Asia, by Lebanon. China came last in their group in round 3, behind Iraq, Qatar and Australia. Even North Korea has a team, and indeed their team made it the the finals.

FIFA actually has more members than the UN.

So I presume since the USA fielded a team and even qualified, soccer must as popular here as in Europe and South America?

But gee none of the major networks are even showing the world cup, gosh they must be so dumb to waste all those advertising dollars especially since they always broadcast American football and baseball religiously, I wonder why they ignore the world cup But then again in the vast majority of those 204 countries that fielded a team, the world cup would go barely noticed.

Originally Posted by mae

So I presume since the USA fielded a team and even qualified, soccer must as popular here as in Europe and South America?

But gee none of the major networks are even showing the world cup, gosh they must be so dumb to waste all those advertising dollars especially since they always broadcast American football and baseball religiously, I wonder why they ignore the world cup But then again in the vast majority of those 204 countries that fielded a team, the world cup would go barely noticed.

Why are you arguing with a point nobody on here has made? Nobody claimed football was universally popular, nor that it was the most popular sport in all countries.

As it happens, you're wrong. 10 matches from the world cup finals are being shown live on ABC. Is that not considered a major network any more? USA v England is being shown live on ABC at 2:30pm Eastern Time on 12th June. Spanish channels are showing a lot more matches free to air.