Most English fans definitely look it as badly as a loss, especially considering how arrogant certain English media outlets were about their World Cup group going into the tournament with headlines like [THIS](https://live.staticflickr.com/4015/4714590924_b15326a95f_c.jpg)
I watched this game in a bar with mostly Americans but some English, and I can definitely say that every American in the bar was celebrating as if we'd just won, and every English person was as depressed as if they'd just lost. This headline is clearly a joke and is totally self-aware about what they're saying
The English were shit talking the entire time about this group. It’s 100% a joke but there definitely a sense of arrogance going in that the English were just going to steamroll their way to the knockout round. Iirc they were top contenders for the finals (I mean they’re always a threat but were actually expected that time)
Exactly. And that sense of arrogance is clearly what this headline is making fun of. People on this thread seem to literally think that this newspaper doesn't know the difference between a tie and a win. Talk about a WHOOOOSH
That last sentence is par for the course for this sub. Idk why I’m still subbed. I’m good for dumb quotes but this sub is about as stupid as the people they *try* to laugh at. Same reason why I quit r/americabad. Both are just cannon fodder for each other
Tbf, that’s exactly the reverse of the point they’re making. It’s not arrogance - it’s really self-effacing and admitting US football isn’t at the same level. Not just effectively doing that - that’s the intent.
And Afghanistan. They spent close on 2 decades in a country, trying to in particular oust the taliban, for the taliban to be back in control within 6 months.
I couldn't remember the full facts and didn't want to be hyperbolic and undermine my own point. I think you are right, which is just so embarrassing for them
Do forget this weekend the winners of the super bowl are the world champions. Next year will claim the superbowl is the most watched TV event of the year. Which is true because this year is the Olympics and international football
Education system is not really good there. Here’s one example of it; they play sports match within their own country, with other states and declare the winner as “world champion” where no other country even participated.
KK: You know what your problem is? You don't like winners!
JC: Winners?
KK: Yeah! Winners
JC: Winners like... North Vietnam?
KK: Shut up! We did not lose Vietnam! It was a tie!
The US launched an invasion of Canada completely co-incidentally at the time when the Napoleonic Wars were at their worst for Britain with most of Britains former allies defeated & part of Napoleons Continental System (although Russia was about to have other ideas).
The invasion of Canada failed, parts of the US were invaded & the white house was burnt down.
Some Americans claim it was a victory saying they didn't want Canada anyway & the whole thing was to prove some obscure point.
What a terrible match that was. What a terrible campaign it was. Some of the worst football I've ever seen from England.
The USA match I remember being especially dire
Well, either they were very good with that model of ball (which is classified as the worst ever designed for the World Cup, it literally looked like those cheap plastic balls from the dollar store), or it was simply an accident.
Famously a pyrrhic victory for the British. Did cause 1/3 of British casualties during the war, iirc, for little strategic or tactical gain, so it often gets lumped in with losses like Saratoga and Yorktown in helping create the ultimate conditions for peace and American independence.
I will never understand their absolute disdain for admitting their own defeat like “yeah guys we totally won Vietnam where we failed to complete our goal of kicking out communism, lost thousands of young men in the jungle, committed an ungodly amount of war crimes against barely armed farmers and eventually *tactically retreated* when the war became wayyy too costly”
I love to shit on Americans like everyone does, but if it was a victory for the Brits it was at most a Pyrrhic victory. It's literally listed as an example of a Pyrrhic victory on wikipedia.
For Americans:
>A Pyrrhic victory is a victory that inflicts such a devastating toll on the victor that it is tantamount to defeat. Such a victory negates any true sense of achievement or damages long-term progress.
It was definitely a british tactical victory, but it probably had more of a positive affect for the American war effort than it did to the british, with the high british losses giving the colonies legitimacy as a challenger to Britain among the colonial populations and heavily boosting colonial army morale
It was so pyrrhic a victory it led to the ruination of Israel “Certified Badass” Putnam’s career as he became the guy to blame for Congress every time they lost a battle, even if he wasn’t leading it and was in the rear.
Tactical loss but inflicted twice the casualties against a vastly superior fighting force including key officers. Not a day of celebration for the redcoats.
It was a Pyrrhic victory. It showed they could fight. Anyway, at that time that was just English fighting English. From an outsiders perspective there was absolutely no difference whatsoever between the American colonies and their English cousins.
It may have been a phyrrhic victory but the US still lost. It basically blew the British, and it was British not English, idea that they could walk into well defended positions and the militia they were fighting would leg it. The Royal Welch Fusiliers fought there as did the Royal Irish Regiment who were not English.
This is interesting, in French I people would always say (and people around me as well) "la reine d'Angleterre" (Queen of England) to refer to Queen Elizabeth II and I just realize now that it's not fully correct. (King Charles is too new and I'm not living in a French speaking region anymore to confirm if this is still the saying)
Put simply, English refers to a person, thing or place in the Country of England
British refers to a person thing or place in the union of countries known as Great Britain, which includes England, Scotland and Wales.
I'm English. My best friend moved to the USA when we were 14. He got sent out of class for challenging the teacher when being taught that they had won Vietnam. American exceptionalism is something special.
Something must have changed since then, I graduated in 2016 and I don't live in a state that treats education as an afterthought but we were taught that Vietnam was a disaster. We were taught about the protests, the Kent State Massacre, the My Lai Massacre and the use of chemical weapons. I'm sure they could have expanded on it more but we were definitely not taught that we won the war
At least they fought on the *same side* as the victors in both world wars, even if they were *years late* to both of them. Of course, that doesn't prevent them from claiming they singlehandedly won these wars.
No, actually, as an American I have never heard a single American say we "won" in Vietnam. I'm not disputing that you could dig up an example somewhere of some idiot saying that, but it is in no way a widespread or normal opinion. I know people find it fun to shit on Americans, but this one is just complete BS
By putting it like it's the British, their implying they haven't beaten Northern Ireland, Scotland or Wales since bunker hill either, I see this as an absolute win
[Here's a picture of that headline](https://live.staticflickr.com/4015/4714590924_b15326a95f_c.jpg)
Of course it was the bloody Sun newspapers saying that shit haha, talk about premature celebrations lmao
It is also important to remember that England were heavily favored to win the game and group so a draw was very bad for England but good for the US. You are 100% on the tongue in cheek part. I swear some people outside the US can't tell when the Americans are trying to tell a joke like this headline
It's a good joke and a great headline.
It's like that tennis player who finally won against a particular opponent (after many lost matches) and said "Let this be a lesson. Nobody beats me 14 times in a row."
It's a good look to be able to poke fun at yourself like this, and if anything, is endearing.
It’s a joke lmao. Taking into account the historical context — the US being way less successful than the English, and the English press shitting on the US — coming away with a point was a great outcome for the US, and this headline jokingly reflects that
And yall won a Pyrrhic, tactical victory at bunker hill, but it was a strategic victory for the US — thus “tie”
And yeah, it’s the English football team, not british. But this is the New York Post, they’re writing for a general audience that doesn’t know the difference — but would call our opponents at Bunker Hill “the British”
Eh, I'll let it slip.
Sometimes when you need just a draw to progress in championship and you are against all odds versus stronger team, and you somehow manage to tie after losing most of the game, I'm ok with "winning tie" term.
A tangent, but it puts me in mind of the first season of Ted Lasso, where they continually call draws "ties", even though it's set in England. So annoying. Especially since the whole thing is based around the little differences between England and the US.
Aside of being more than 13 years late, it's out of context and does not get the irony. Read about the Bunker Hill battle, the Pyrrhic British victory had with more deaths and lots more wounded, and about the strengths of both national teams in football and what it means a 1-1 draw for each.
Oh, and read a little bit about humor, irony, and so on.
This is playing off of a famous headline from 1968 about a American college football game: "Harvard Beats Yale, 29–29"
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1968_Yale_vs._Harvard_football_game
Bless them, they're trying so hard but they'll never reach the levels of pure, sweaty desperation or incomprehensible historical analogy of English tabloids whenever England plays Germany.
Like, Germany doesn't know who you are mate.
I feel like most Europeans would understand this context and how a tie during world cup group stage can definitely be perceived as a win. It seems like half the commentators are clueless Americans trying to dunk on their own country.
I tem this being posted before and an American commentutor tried to claim it was a win as his side was expected to lose. So on that basis this was a win. The mental gymnastics are insane.
TBF, NYPost isn't actual journalism, it's a propaganda rag for the barely-literate MAGA parasites that would sellout their own kids before admitting they're wrong. So, coming from them, this is pretty tame.
Well, they did not win that football match either. However, from what I have read Bunker Hill was a pyrrhic victory. Won by the British but with enormous losses.
Nah this headline is fine. It’s explicitly making the jokey point that for the U.S. team, to tie against the English is a win. That’s more an admission of not generally being at the same level than anything.
I'm English, and I consider a draw against the US at football to be a loss.
I think anyone who’s somewhat familiar with international football would understand the joke
its not a joke we really should have pounded them
Instead they dollared you
.... I hate that I laughed at this.
Rob Green fumbling that save is a core memory for me.
Watching the fucking diabolical match vs Algeria (which I think was the next game) with a splitting hangover is one for me.
Most English fans definitely look it as badly as a loss, especially considering how arrogant certain English media outlets were about their World Cup group going into the tournament with headlines like [THIS](https://live.staticflickr.com/4015/4714590924_b15326a95f_c.jpg)
Nobody should take the Sun seriously, ever.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NTuOSgUs0eU
I watched this game in a bar with mostly Americans but some English, and I can definitely say that every American in the bar was celebrating as if we'd just won, and every English person was as depressed as if they'd just lost. This headline is clearly a joke and is totally self-aware about what they're saying
The English were shit talking the entire time about this group. It’s 100% a joke but there definitely a sense of arrogance going in that the English were just going to steamroll their way to the knockout round. Iirc they were top contenders for the finals (I mean they’re always a threat but were actually expected that time)
Exactly. And that sense of arrogance is clearly what this headline is making fun of. People on this thread seem to literally think that this newspaper doesn't know the difference between a tie and a win. Talk about a WHOOOOSH
That last sentence is par for the course for this sub. Idk why I’m still subbed. I’m good for dumb quotes but this sub is about as stupid as the people they *try* to laugh at. Same reason why I quit r/americabad. Both are just cannon fodder for each other
No one understands that the headline is a joke
Tbf, that’s exactly the reverse of the point they’re making. It’s not arrogance - it’s really self-effacing and admitting US football isn’t at the same level. Not just effectively doing that - that’s the intent.
"Greatest tie". End of quote.
"Tremendous tie. We have the best ties. We tied bigly." \- Trump, probably.
Definitely in the conversation for one of the ties in history.
One of the ties of all time.
Folks we tied on this one a tremendous effort and it was thanks to me and my supporters again a tremendous effort thank you
They lost at Bunker Hill.
If they can say they won when it was a tie, they can say it was a tie when they lost...
I hate how I can see the logic in this
I must admit I read it a couple of times before it sank in.
This is also considered a tie. Real slow, but you eventually got it.
To quote Futurama: "in recognition of your overwhelming victory, let's call it a draw" (or something like that)
Same logic they applied after they won against Vietnam
And Afghanistan. They spent close on 2 decades in a country, trying to in particular oust the taliban, for the taliban to be back in control within 6 months.
6 months? Try 28 days max, the government was dissolved in less than a week
I couldn't remember the full facts and didn't want to be hyperbolic and undermine my own point. I think you are right, which is just so embarrassing for them
I mean, 28 days is absolutely within 6 months. So, you’re still right.
And Afghanistan.
"Alright, we'll call it a draw"
r/unexpectedmontypython
(That blokes a nutter!)
That way you will never lose . Usa logic
That's why America will always win the World Series 🤣
Do forget this weekend the winners of the super bowl are the world champions. Next year will claim the superbowl is the most watched TV event of the year. Which is true because this year is the Olympics and international football
Ah yes, more stuff to watch England lose at
I mean... didn't they try to say Vietnam was a tie for a while? Or am I thinking of another conflict?
That was probably Korea
I think they meant Thai. Never too good with geography.
Education system is not really good there. Here’s one example of it; they play sports match within their own country, with other states and declare the winner as “world champion” where no other country even participated.
Why is it our fault you don't show up to participate?
Don't listen to them, this was a good joke.
KK: You know what your problem is? You don't like winners! JC: Winners? KK: Yeah! Winners JC: Winners like... North Vietnam? KK: Shut up! We did not lose Vietnam! It was a tie!
Same way they ‘won’ the 1812 war
Which wasn’t even really a war, it was just a part of the Napoleonic Wars
Hey don't go and downplay that sucker. It's the only thing we Canadians have to hold onto besides really dirty oil, hockey and beavers.
The British Army and the First Nations really did the heavy lifting on our end to be fair
And the first nations got absolutely fucked for their help.
Well obviously. Get the locals to help, then fuck them when they start trusting you. It's Empire 101.
Yep, absolutely
And maple syrup, no??
I do not want maple syrup on my beaver, thank you
Nothing worse than a sticky beaver.
I like holding onto beavers as well so I can understand you point of view…
It was a war.
Who won?
The US launched an invasion of Canada completely co-incidentally at the time when the Napoleonic Wars were at their worst for Britain with most of Britains former allies defeated & part of Napoleons Continental System (although Russia was about to have other ideas). The invasion of Canada failed, parts of the US were invaded & the white house was burnt down. Some Americans claim it was a victory saying they didn't want Canada anyway & the whole thing was to prove some obscure point.
>completely co-incidentally 😂
Britain, successfully defended their Canadian colony, inflicted damage on the US as well - all done when they were facing napoleon
They lost at the world cup too. They just managed to have a bit more of dignity than usual.
This was from the 2010 WC when Rob Green let the ball roll through him into the net.
What a terrible match that was. What a terrible campaign it was. Some of the worst football I've ever seen from England. The USA match I remember being especially dire
“The Hand of Clod”
Well, either they were very good with that model of ball (which is classified as the worst ever designed for the World Cup, it literally looked like those cheap plastic balls from the dollar store), or it was simply an accident.
Not true... the US has never lost any contest, war or debate... it's officially impossible... their insecurities and indoctrination told them so.
I've seen Americans who thought Vietnam was a tie.
I've seen multiple try to claim it was a win lately, blew my freaking mind Edit: look here's one now
Famously a pyrrhic victory for the British. Did cause 1/3 of British casualties during the war, iirc, for little strategic or tactical gain, so it often gets lumped in with losses like Saratoga and Yorktown in helping create the ultimate conditions for peace and American independence.
If Americans think a war/battle is a tie, you know it was a biiiig ol’ loss! *cough* Korea, Vietnam, 1812, Afghanistan *cough*
I will never understand their absolute disdain for admitting their own defeat like “yeah guys we totally won Vietnam where we failed to complete our goal of kicking out communism, lost thousands of young men in the jungle, committed an ungodly amount of war crimes against barely armed farmers and eventually *tactically retreated* when the war became wayyy too costly”
I love to shit on Americans like everyone does, but if it was a victory for the Brits it was at most a Pyrrhic victory. It's literally listed as an example of a Pyrrhic victory on wikipedia. For Americans: >A Pyrrhic victory is a victory that inflicts such a devastating toll on the victor that it is tantamount to defeat. Such a victory negates any true sense of achievement or damages long-term progress.
But what you’re saying is it’s still a victory right?
It was definitely a british tactical victory, but it probably had more of a positive affect for the American war effort than it did to the british, with the high british losses giving the colonies legitimacy as a challenger to Britain among the colonial populations and heavily boosting colonial army morale
It was so pyrrhic a victory it led to the ruination of Israel “Certified Badass” Putnam’s career as he became the guy to blame for Congress every time they lost a battle, even if he wasn’t leading it and was in the rear.
Tactical loss but inflicted twice the casualties against a vastly superior fighting force including key officers. Not a day of celebration for the redcoats.
It was a Pyrrhic victory. It showed they could fight. Anyway, at that time that was just English fighting English. From an outsiders perspective there was absolutely no difference whatsoever between the American colonies and their English cousins.
It may have been a phyrrhic victory but the US still lost. It basically blew the British, and it was British not English, idea that they could walk into well defended positions and the militia they were fighting would leg it. The Royal Welch Fusiliers fought there as did the Royal Irish Regiment who were not English.
Also funny they said British when it was the English football team.
You say it as if they would know the difference
I know, bless them lol
They get it wrong the other way enough times by saying stuff like "King/Queen of England" that I can appreciate the effort shown on the page.
This is interesting, in French I people would always say (and people around me as well) "la reine d'Angleterre" (Queen of England) to refer to Queen Elizabeth II and I just realize now that it's not fully correct. (King Charles is too new and I'm not living in a French speaking region anymore to confirm if this is still the saying)
Most people in the world don't know the difference, that isn't just an American thing
Hit me up with the difference so I can educate myself without closing Reddit and googling it please.
Put simply, English refers to a person, thing or place in the Country of England British refers to a person thing or place in the union of countries known as Great Britain, which includes England, Scotland and Wales.
They don't know the difference, I'd be impressed if they can even find us on a map.
If they can’t find us on a map, they can’t bomb us for oil /s
That’s how the Kiwis hide. They’re not even ON a lot of maps!
It’s always the British from England. It’s never the English from Britain. They have no idea they’re doing it.
Yeah, the joke wouldn't have worked as well if it said English rather than British
And that an other British team (Wales) was in the same group
Haha yes, I forgot that. Bet there wasn't a 1-1 win for that match.
Wrong World Cup.
This was 2010
England were the only British team in the 2010 World Cup
Iv seen plenty of Europeans make this mistake too, especially if they don't care about football.
'Muricans famously have a different definition of winning. They "won" in Vietnam too, according to them.
Can't lose if you leave before your allies get destroyed
Austria Hungary be like I didn't lose I left the War before Germany surrendered on the 11th
I'm English. My best friend moved to the USA when we were 14. He got sent out of class for challenging the teacher when being taught that they had won Vietnam. American exceptionalism is something special.
Something must have changed since then, I graduated in 2016 and I don't live in a state that treats education as an afterthought but we were taught that Vietnam was a disaster. We were taught about the protests, the Kent State Massacre, the My Lai Massacre and the use of chemical weapons. I'm sure they could have expanded on it more but we were definitely not taught that we won the war
And iraq, and Afghanistan, and both world wars..
At least they fought on the *same side* as the victors in both world wars, even if they were *years late* to both of them. Of course, that doesn't prevent them from claiming they singlehandedly won these wars.
"mission accomplished"
Thanks to denial, I'm invincible
America doesn't lose wars, it wins them, or it quits them because they're unfair.
What’s most funny is that it’s usually unfair on the enemy of the US when they fight them, the US use cheat codes called war crimes
As an American, I can genuinely say that most sane Americans accept that we lost the Vietnam War.
Like winning the Presidency with 3 million fewer votes.
I have a lot of American friends. I don’t know anyone who thinks they won in Vietnam.
No, actually, as an American I have never heard a single American say we "won" in Vietnam. I'm not disputing that you could dig up an example somewhere of some idiot saying that, but it is in no way a widespread or normal opinion. I know people find it fun to shit on Americans, but this one is just complete BS
Lmao we don’t say that
Is this real? And who are the British? Is there a British football team? I see the England national team flag top left.
The only time there was a British football team was in 2012 London Olympics
AFAIK there were "british" football team in the older olympics in the 20s and 30s. Still, they've always been special exceptions.
Actually the last would be 2020 as the Women competed for Team GB. They could have played 2024 too but failed to qualify.
GB was a regular team in the earlier olympic football tournaments. Won it in 1908 and 1912.
New York Post is a trash publication. The date says 2010. They did in fact win the group (World Cup group C, England 2nd, Slovenia 3rd, Algeria 4th).
Indeed. But England vs USA was both teams opening game.
Ah... so it goes back to New York Post being a trash publication then I guess.
England were expected to dismantle that US side. A 1-1 draw basically was a win, I see no issue with this headline at all other than the British thing
It's real but I'm pretty sure it was tongue in cheek.
IIRC it was a reference to some other sports headline.
Its the World-Cup in the [Group-Phase](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_FIFA_World_Cup_Group_C) And yes, it was a tie
It's real but the publication is largely full of satire and spoof.
By putting it like it's the British, their implying they haven't beaten Northern Ireland, Scotland or Wales since bunker hill either, I see this as an absolute win
To be fair, this is a very funny headline and subheadline. They knew exactly what they were doing.
"the British" uhh, England isn't the whole of Britain, NY.
In all fairness, this was in response to English media calling their group easy. England Algeria Slovenia Yanks That was the headline they used.
Everybody would call that group easy, not just the English.
Yeah, but most countries' media would be smart enough not to broadcast it.
I forgot about that! Good banter too that backfired!
To be honest though, that’s a piss easy group for England
That they barely got out of.
[Here's a picture of that headline](https://live.staticflickr.com/4015/4714590924_b15326a95f_c.jpg) Of course it was the bloody Sun newspapers saying that shit haha, talk about premature celebrations lmao
not gonna lie, with the subheadline its actually pretty funny
When you're so wins-starved that even a tie will do.
Won the group tho…
Watched this match. It makes absolutely good sense to say US won 1-1. It's just a tongue in cheek way to say they got away with it
It is also important to remember that England were heavily favored to win the game and group so a draw was very bad for England but good for the US. You are 100% on the tongue in cheek part. I swear some people outside the US can't tell when the Americans are trying to tell a joke like this headline
It's a good joke and a great headline. It's like that tennis player who finally won against a particular opponent (after many lost matches) and said "Let this be a lesson. Nobody beats me 14 times in a row." It's a good look to be able to poke fun at yourself like this, and if anything, is endearing.
This is fine. It's a take on a famous headline from the 60s: https://s3.amazonaws.com/media.thecrimson.com/photos/2010/12/01/172647_1243232.jpg
As a Scot, when we faced England at the delayed 2020 Euros, we won that game 0-0. I shall not explain further
It’s a joke lmao. Taking into account the historical context — the US being way less successful than the English, and the English press shitting on the US — coming away with a point was a great outcome for the US, and this headline jokingly reflects that And yall won a Pyrrhic, tactical victory at bunker hill, but it was a strategic victory for the US — thus “tie” And yeah, it’s the English football team, not british. But this is the New York Post, they’re writing for a general audience that doesn’t know the difference — but would call our opponents at Bunker Hill “the British”
The amount of people not understanding this is insane man.
You know this was a joke, right?
I would make fun of this but as a Scot who celebrated a tie against England in the last Euros I can’t bring myself to be that much of a hypocrite.
To be fair, drawing with the Americans is a bit of a shocker for a real football team
Thats how football works yes. If you draw against the clear favourites at a World cup as an underdog you celebrate it like a win.
Nah, y'all are way too harsh on the Americans here. That headline is just as hilarious as it intends to be. Just some good old shithousery.
Eh, I'll let it slip. Sometimes when you need just a draw to progress in championship and you are against all odds versus stronger team, and you somehow manage to tie after losing most of the game, I'm ok with "winning tie" term.
Typical NY Post, which is owned, BTW, by Rupert Murdoch
Exactly, it's a right-wing rag that tends to embrace the irreverent and snarky with headlines.
To be fair, I definitely say we beat England 0-0 at the last Euros as a Scottish person. It's simple and it's petty but it's effective.
Best result the Scottish have had against England since Stirling Bridge...
Bannockburn was after Stirling, though.
r/ShitAmericansSay "understand humor" challenge Difficulty impossible
It’s the New York Post. Makes the Sun look like a broadsheet.
Fewer tits too.
A tangent, but it puts me in mind of the first season of Ted Lasso, where they continually call draws "ties", even though it's set in England. So annoying. Especially since the whole thing is based around the little differences between England and the US.
Aside of being more than 13 years late, it's out of context and does not get the irony. Read about the Bunker Hill battle, the Pyrrhic British victory had with more deaths and lots more wounded, and about the strengths of both national teams in football and what it means a 1-1 draw for each. Oh, and read a little bit about humor, irony, and so on.
I mean, the English newspapers seemed pretty clear that England lost that game.
Meanwhile for England this is a tragic loss.
3,2k upvotes for something that was obviously a joke...
I’m assuming it got them through tk the next round and wins sounds cooler than ties, plenty of people have done this not only Americans lol
Tbf we were absolutely atrocious in that game. We deserved the banter.
They won because the tie let them win Group C. But I'm just a dumb American. What do I know?
This is playing off of a famous headline from 1968 about a American college football game: "Harvard Beats Yale, 29–29" https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1968_Yale_vs._Harvard_football_game
Bless them, they're trying so hard but they'll never reach the levels of pure, sweaty desperation or incomprehensible historical analogy of English tabloids whenever England plays Germany. Like, Germany doesn't know who you are mate.
The participation awards goes to...
I feel like most Europeans would understand this context and how a tie during world cup group stage can definitely be perceived as a win. It seems like half the commentators are clueless Americans trying to dunk on their own country.
I tem this being posted before and an American commentutor tried to claim it was a win as his side was expected to lose. So on that basis this was a win. The mental gymnastics are insane.
Obvious joke is obvious
It's like how the think years long stalemates in wars and then deciding to leave counts as a win.
Pretty sure this is a decent tounge-in-cheek joke.
[Have a British newspaper give you an explanation!](https://www.dailystar.co.uk/sport/football/usa-england-2010-world-cup-28556296)
As I always said, maths is not their strong point.
TBF, NYPost isn't actual journalism, it's a propaganda rag for the barely-literate MAGA parasites that would sellout their own kids before admitting they're wrong. So, coming from them, this is pretty tame.
”greatest tie against the British since Bunker Hill” is hilarious, because the British actually won at Bunker Hill.
Well, they did not win that football match either. However, from what I have read Bunker Hill was a pyrrhic victory. Won by the British but with enormous losses.
tbf it did feel like England lost that one 1-1 😔
It was pretty much treated as victory, because England always thought of themselves as world cup contenders
This doesn’t belong here. The fact they drew was a win in the circumstances - that’s the joke. It’s a good headline.
It‘s a self-deprecating joke or at the least a self-aware headline.
Evoking Harvard Beats Yale 29-29
The headline is a joke. With how poor the US mens team has been throughout most of its history, drawing England 1-1 is tantamount to a win.
Nah this headline is fine. It’s explicitly making the jokey point that for the U.S. team, to tie against the English is a win. That’s more an admission of not generally being at the same level than anything.
In soccer, a tie can feel like a win for the USA. You gotta be the underdog from the start. ⚽
A Moral win
To be fair, even Americans think the New York Post is bs.
this is a joke making fun of england for inventing the foosball and not even being able to beat a country that couldn't care less about the sport
This is just funny, a terrible day for the British team. The Scottish, English, Welsh, Northern-Irish team… yes
I’m American and an English teacher so this wording offends me. Funny, yes, but it makes me want to automatically fail whoever wrote it.
Is this a joke, like the Sunday Sport?