I'm curious. In British high schools are the soccer players regarded the same way that American Football players are regarded? (ie. the QB jock that dates the cheerleader and is super cool, I don't know what the soccer player equivalent is)
I went to private school which was too posh to play football (seen as too "common" by middle-class toffs). We played rugby instead.
Obviously yes, all the big rugby lads got girls.
But really if you're good at any sport you get chicks. Cricket players, hockey players, they all got more chicks than I did.
Schools don't have sports teams, senpai, cheerleaders aren't a thing either. I should also point out that only chavs seriously play football here, middle-class mums (including mine) didn't want me to associate with plebs and minorities and so made me play field hockey, which I despised.
Not even slightly. People might be aware that they are possibly really good at football but it doesn't mean anything other than them being picked first the most during football in PE honestly.
Every good player goes to a special academy for his sport and girls really don't care about sports too much, they still like a jacked guy and they will be impressed if you're good at a sport but it isn't like they will cream their pants if you win a game. The structure for having school stars just isn't there like it's in America.
>School level team sport isn't really considered important, it's more just a thing that happens.
This. I played for my school and I'd have loved it if it was like America - everyone coming to watch your games, people knowing your results etc. In actuality no one gave a shit, even most of the people playing.
Fuck, that's the dream. I played for an academy when I was younger and I always imagined playing football against average Americans would be like playing against a bunch of retards.
>So the rugby players are equivalent to American football jocks?
In a way I guess. Rugby players are obviously pretty big, especially at the 16-18 age range (called Sixth Form for us, instead of last two years of high school for you).
But yeah anyone who played sport got more girls obviously, so I imagine if I had gone to a school that played football instead of rugby then the football players would have been there to get girls
there's some striker in the mls who got released from a club because of injury, went for the free degree and ended up completely dominating at college level and getting a professional deal. he still scores loads of goals now i think
damn you made me remember Heartbreak high, pretty good show that one
white high schools are jocks cheerleaders shit like that. black high schools are a fight for survival, at my HS they beat up and robbed the teacher who oversaw the school store while he was transferring money to the safe or w/e and then got mad when they shut down the school store for a few weeks. they also had to take the doors off most of the stalls in the bathrooms because niggas were smoking or fucking in them, if you wanted privacy you had to use the handicaps bathrooms.
Question: Why do brits call the upper class, "middle class"?
Is it related to the reason you call underwear, "pants"?
Is it all just some sort of jokey bants you and your "lads" are pulling over on us dumb yanks while eating your toast sandwiches and ignoring your dentist appointments?
You don't have to be a 6ft+ Chad to play soccer. You can look like a mong and be built like a reed and still be good, it's more about skill than "pure" athleticism, for lack of a better phrase. Everyone plays it as well, even people who are shit. It's not something only for the elite
because people who train a certain sport don't train it at school but at a club, which has nothing to do with school.
I was playing football in my local football club which had absolutely nothing to do with my school and it's like that basically in whole europe.
After age of 16 or maybe sooner if you are good you get picked up by a bigger club and start going to ''academies'' and camps around the country and basically don't give a shit about a school.
You are only coming to school to take tests and thats it.
Upper class refers to very wealthy people, e.g. landed gentry, and people with titles like Earls and Dukes.
For some of the people that went to my private school you might use the term "upper middle class" - people whose parents were doctors / lawyers etc., who had lots of money and a big house in the country.
But some rich people are working class, e.g. if they're a car dealer, or run a building / plumbing company., etc. Class signifies where you come from and the sort of people you associate with rather than how much money you have really.
>Is it related to the reason you call underwear, "pants"?
No, pants are called pants because that's what they are - pants.
>ignoring your dentist appointments
American teeth are worse than ours, look it up.
There's two types of footballer in schools:
1. the fairly good chav who hangs around with all the slags, other chavs and is probably a bully who everyone but his 6/7 friends hate
2. the quiet, fairly awkward one who is great at football but isn't really charismatic enough to be noticed by most people
Pretty much yeah. Still annoys me how so many people even in this country don't know what a public school actually is, and they'll either refer to comps as public schools (although usually only if they're foreign), or they think all private schools are public schools, which of course isn't the case. Only a very select group of very elite schools are public schools. But I'm sure you know that already.
Also not EVERYONE who goes to public school is upper class. At uni I knew someone who went to Westminster School (public school) who was obviously very rich but I'm pretty sure he didn't come from gentry (ergo not upper class).
E.g. Ched Evans and Paul Scholes respectively
You guys switch around "public" and "private" schools too. Ridiculous. Where did it all go so wrong.
Yeah I bet your teeth are actually healthier despite probably being less perpendicular to the horizon.
Don't private schools prefer to be called 'independent schools' now anyway? I'm sure that's the one near me calls itself. Had a look around it too but parents would never had been able to afford it, even if I got a bursary. Out of interest how much did you pay?
Public schools come from when schooling was very limited to certain people eg those becoming monks or priests and so were 'public' in the sense they were open to anyone regardless. Those schools are hundreds of years old and would have been around when Columbus was discovering america existed. Private schools are just any schools that charge a fee
>You guys switch around "public" and "private" schools too. Ridiculous
What you call public schools are called state schools here. Private school means the same as it does in the US. Public school refers to very old schools that were established by the Crown (which is why they are called public despite being fee-paying)
>Don't private schools prefer to be called 'independent schools' now anyway?
Yup they do. But private schools is still technically correct I think. A lot of people don't know what an independent school is necessarily but they do know what a private school is.
>Out of interest how much did you pay?
Well obviously it was my parents but basically, too much. Around £10k a year per pupil (and me and my bro went). Not expensive as some really elite private schools but still a fucking hefty sum.
One of my good friends was on a full scholarship so didn't pay anything, he only lived with his mum and they definitely couldn't afford it otherwise. I don't really know what the circumstances of him coming to the school were. Maybe the school he was at before thought he was bright and said "why don't you try the entrance exam for the private school, and if you're good enough they might offer you something". There was another girl who I think was also on a full scholarship so I think maybe they had a quota of 2 or 3 full scholarships per year that they gave to kids who couldn't afford it. I dunno.
>Those schools are hundreds of years old and would have been around when Columbus was discovering america existed.
Many of them are much older than that, dating from like the 12th century
I went to school with Luke Shaw, professional footballer, regarded as a bit of a prodigy at left full back but had a horrible double leg break earlier this year. When he was 8, he was scouted at a football game we played in by Southampton, and living in Surrey (about 2 hour drive from Southampton which is long in Britain) going to school for him in the later years became more and more difficult because of his commitment to the sport, but he still got all the girls despite licking his hands and having a huge ass head. So no, they're not really the same, if someone is good enough at football in England they will probably miss education entirely now. It's a bit different for other Sports since there is a huge power gap between popularity for other sports other than football in Britain, but chances are the 'star' guy at the school, will never be at school.
i didn't read all of the thread so i am sorry fi this was answered
how would the average joe in the uk or europe go about playing soccer if he wasn't good enough to be picked up by a professional side? can you join a recreational league with a few friends or do you need to be to receive an offer from a non-league club?
obviously there's just pick up games but i'm wondering about something more organized.
Most that aren't picked up by professional sides will probably go to non-league sides to try and pick up a career and pray they're the next Jamie Vardy
Remember we have 24 tiers of football to play in
He bagged chicks
He was successful with the ladies
He got a few blozzas (probably)
He experienced few problems when pursuing sexual relationships with females
>can you join a recreational league with a few friends
Of course. My mate used to play 5 a side with pub mates. It was at, and was organised by, the local Goals (football centre where they have 5 a side and 7 a side pitches). Their team was quite good. There were loads of teams that took part. His team got promoted a couple of times I think.
>do you need to be to receive an offer from a non-league club?
If you're good enough you can go that route but you've got to be pretty good. Most non-league clubs are semi-professional - that is they pay you to play, but it's not enough to live on so everyone has a day job too.
There is Sunday league though too which is in between those two things. Proper 11 a side football. But yeah it's strictly amateur, you don't have semi-pro teams playing sunday league. Just small local teams and pub teams really.
literally used to lick the sweat off his hands after playing footy, I was only proper good friends with him up until year 6 but he didn't stop then...
basically got laid a lot, every girl was after his dick knowing he'd be rich soon. desu I was the same
To be honest I went to a comprehensive and never really came across anything else until uni. I still don't really know which is which and how they are different
>used to lick the sweat off his hands after playing footy
This is really funny
while this may be technically true, surely you will admit that Harrow, Eton, etc are "for" the upper classes more than "for" anyone else.
they are, in fact, vital institutions in the creation and propagation of that class -- to a much, much greater degree than even schools like Exeter or St Paul's here in the states (schools who imitate the English model but aren't quite as critical to what is still a somewhat less hereditary upper class).
You yuros missed out - if you wanted you could have easily gotten a scholarship to a shitty Division 2 school (DII schools recruit foreign players HEAVILY, lots of times I'd scrimmage against d2 schools made up of entirely foreigners)
you could have gone to a shitty d2 school for essentially free, partied for 4 years, then when the school shat out your crappy degree you could just go back to yurop. This is 100% what I would have done if I were a yuro soccer player
Youth teams are club affiliated rather than school teams.
U21s matches get a little bit of attention but unless you're a parent of one of the players, it's considered a bit creepy to go watch any younger age range matches.
Oh yeah, can't deny that but then again there will always be exceptions knocking about. A kid who went to my old school recently turned down a full scolarship to Eton and is now at Harvard
That's the weirdest shit I've ever heard, then again he does look like a bit of autist.
Just today I read something about him and had to remind myself...
>30 million British Pounds Sterling
State = state-funded
Private / Independent = fee-paying
Public = one of a group of about 10 very elite private schools, originally defined in the Public Schools Act a long time ago
You mean, go to university in America on a football (soccer) scholarship? That would still require spending money on moving over there and then living there. In this country we get a government loan for university, both for fees and living costs.
>surely you will admit that Harrow, Eton, etc are "for" the upper classes more than "for" anyone else.
They are traditionally dominated by the upper classes, but anybody with enough money can get in.
>recently turned down a full scolarship to Eton and is now at Harvard
That doesn't make any sense because Eton is a school and Harvard is a university.
Most people that want to be professional football players don't care about going to college, if their footballing career doesn't come to fruition they end up getting a job as a plumber or an electrician, which to be fair, you can make a lot of money doing.
Again it's sort of a class thing where even if you have a degree you aren't going to make it into the finance or insurance world if you have an air of common about you.
>Why do brits call the upper class, "middle class"?
cause brits love their neo-feudalism and pseudo castes
In north america, we generally just divide people into classes based on wealth, if you're rich you're treated with pretty much the same respect as anybody else that rich would get, regardless of whether you're an athlete, lawyer, etc.
In britain, they're still hanging on to old hereditary forms of keeping power. Landed gentry (i.e. people with titles or land at one point granted to them by the king) are a class above the regular rabble, so even if you're a business magnate worth 40 billion USD, you're not a part of the nobility and are still a class below. though, the queen would likely knight you and grant you a title if you were indeed that big
I actually find it pretty fucking funny that the brits keep up their royal social club into the 21st century, what the fuck did Cromwell fight for
I would be fucking cheesed if some fuckface douchebag thought he was better than me because his great great great great ad infinitum grandfather sucked the some inbred german's dick once
but that's old world I guess. You can hate that douchebag as much as you want, and he can fuck you over and laugh at you and spit in your face, and still, throughout your entire lives he's going to be better regarded and more valued than you. He's gonna steal your ideas and pass them off as his own, he;s gonna screw you over with his dad's connections, and he's gonna fuck your wife and daughter too, and it's all okay because you're nothing and he's a noble
I mean I'm sure only the really fucking retarded upper class kids are like that, but like, imagine growing up with an heir in the medieval ages.
I got accepted onto one of these scholarship things two years back, was 18
Didnt take it becuase i had trials for english teams at the same time
Im now 20, and the company says i can do the USA thing still before i turn 22
>In britain, they're still hanging on to old hereditary forms of keeping power. Landed gentry (i.e. people with titles or land at one point granted to them by the king) are a class above the regular rabble, so even if you're a business magnate worth 40 billion USD, you're not a part of the nobility and are still a class below. though, the queen would likely knight you and grant you a title if you were indeed that big
You have no idea what the fuck you're talking about, and it's quite sad.
All of what you said is wrong.
Let me show you a video of the "fucking Fulfords". The guy is basically landed gentry, he's got a big estate handed down through generations, but his life is in chaos and his house is in disrepair because nobody gives a shit whether you're landed gentry anymore. Basically he needed to sort his life out but never did because he thinks being landed gentry means something still, when it doesn't. They made this TV show about him because it's hilarious.
And here we can see the plebby colonial who believes that money = everything. No amount of money in the world can change your mannerisms, your etiquette etc. A wheeler dealer like Alan Sugar will always be a working class blagger from East London no matter how much money he makes.
In fact most upper class people aren't going to try and fuck you over because they tend not to be in the world of business, their wealth is in their land and the tenants who live on it, and they do generally care quite dearly about them.
It was a bit over dramatized at the end, and I'm sure it's an exaggeration of current brit affairs, but is this really completely inaccurate throughout the ages? I'd say what I wrote would work for at least everything prior to the 20th century, but I'm acutely aware of my own ignorance. Honestly just curious, I thought I knew.
that show is exactly how I imagine the decay of the contemporary nobility
mannerisms and etiquette are things that are taught and learned. Alan Sugar never had the opportunity to learn because he wasn't born gentry, and it's fucking retarded to think he's worth less than any posh haughty lord because just because he didn't have a chance to learn the royal social club's creed of conduct
money =/= everything, but money earned and worked for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> inherited social status
Don't do it, I had a similar chance to go to the USA to play college soccer but I looked into it further and honestly it would be a big waste of time because the education I would get there would be useless back home. And out of all places why would you want to go to the USA to play soccer?
>I'd say what I wrote would work for at least everything prior to the 20th century
Yeah it probably was but what you said doesn't apply to today, and hasn't for decades and perhaps a century or two.
The reason we Brits identify the landed gentry, and the upper classes, is because they're a distinct thing, and they still exist to some extent. It doesn't mean we "bow down" to them like you seem to suggest. They are not better regarded in society or any shit like that. Nobody gives a fuck about them. Their power has dwindled greatly, because of course nowadays the primary source of power in society is wealth - in Britain or any other country. The most powerful people in Britain are people like Sir Richard Branson, Rupert Murdoch (an aussie but he owns so much of the British media, just like he does the yanks' media and that from his home country), Phillip Green (owner of Topshop and other retail stores), etc. As for the landed gentry the only person I could name was that Fulford guy cos he was on TV, I don't know anyone else.
Then again there is one way in which they still exist and have power. David Cameron for example is from a very well-heeled family and I think he descends from some form of aristocracy. And I know that his wife is even more posh. Wikipedia says that Charles II is her 8th great grandfather. So yeah. As I said members of the upper classes and those descended from the landed gentry do still exist, but you're wrong to think that the majority of Brits think they're above us - nothing could be further from the truth. Especially when there are so many self-made millionaires and billionaires in Britain who are just as, and in many cases more, powerful than those descended from aristocracy.
why would you be? american highschool football can be summed up in three statements:
>crush your enemies
>see them driven before you
>commandeering of their women
flopping, whining, stupid ball 'skills', "bouncin' balls off yall's heads" getting carted off the field with a bruise etc etc t's just a fruity little game. every divegrasser is a virgin until he gets some sort of money or fame.
A good friend of mine is a Brit who played in one of those football academies. I think it was for Tottenham, or some other London team. Anyways, he is actually very smart, and probably smarter than he is good at playing football. He took a scholarship from my school and is a junior majoring in Marketing, and a "football star" at my school, which basically means he has one of the better looking girlfriends on the team. He has told me before that he wouldn't make it in a actual league, so he decided to focus on his schooling.
>It doesn't mean we "bow down" to them like you seem to suggest.
my bad, didn't really want to suggest that happens today, I did kind of over dramatize it admittedly. But it was like that in medieval times, no? fucking ken follet
>They are not better regarded in society or any shit like that. Nobody gives a fuck about them.
I was sure they were given some sort of distinct respect, even these days, but I guess not
>Then again there is one way in which they still exist and have power. David Cameron for example is from a very well-heeled family
but that was my point, a man trying to get into politics, for example, is going to have a much easier time of it if he's backed up by some sort of noble lineage.
>but you're wrong to think that the majority of Brits think they're above us - nothing could be further from the truth. Especially when there are so many self-made millionaires and billionaires in Britain who are just as, and in many cases more, powerful than those descended from aristocracy.
fuck I really did spin it the wrong way, this is pretty much what I thought. I thought you guys placed more emphasis on it though.
There's just absolutely no equivalent in the new world. I'm pretty sure one of the main reasons america was formed was to cast away the (admittedly very injust) aristocratic society rampant in europe.
My understanding is this; a 16th century extremely wealthy, powerful man in the newly made americas could cockslap you in the face, but he would be tried as a man equal to you, even if you were a lowly urchin (he would probably get away with it even today, but the principle stands, at least for the sake of argument). A British lord, however, in the same age, could piss on your face on Trafalgar Square and no one would do anything about it, the courts would probably throw you out for being a dirt street urchin without even hearing your case, and the surrounding nobility might even laugh with the lord at your misery.
Of course, both societies have today swayed toward moderation; america is more aristocratic than it was when it was formed, while the proletariat is on much more equal footing with the nobility in britain
>Don't forget that they can't even afford
I don't think this is true Nigel
>who is paul singer
you must have stopped reading the news ten years ago mate
on your side here btw. singer is a piece of shit that'll burn in the very deepest pit of hell. i hope his faggot son catches aids
My school refused to have a football team whilst I was there, they never said why but I'm assuming they deemed it plebeian (I went to a grammar school).
Also, the school itself fucking idolised the rugby team (though the pupils didn't give a shit), which led to never-ending updates on their progress and when a group of 4 guys were caught dealing in school, the three of them on the rugby team just got a week of after-schools whilst the 4th guy (not on the rugby team) was expelled. It was complete bullshit.
Was also quite annoyed by the fact that the rugby team was lauded despite being shit, whilst the hockey team (which was actually good and regularly competed in the national finals), was completely ignored.
Also, if any Americans want an insight into British school life, the Inbetweeners is a pretty much perfect portrayal.
Most of the problems you address (it's easier to get into politics if you have noble lineage) are not problems of aristocracy, they are problem of wealth inequality.
That's why in America most politicians come from good schools and wealthy backgrounds. a) Their wealthy backgrounds pay for their schools and b) Their wealthy backgrounds secure them connections, which are valuable in politics.
One might even argue that since American college costs so much and the free ones are absolute shit, it's a lot more biased than the British aristocracy.
Actually I lie. A few jamaican blacks guys were very good and are now pro footballers. One of them was Raheem Sterling. True story, he went to my school and was in the year above.
No. The ones getting all the pussy are the ones that are successful. My H.S years were split between everyone creaming their pants for the football players the first couple of years because they went to the regional finals (got shit on both years) then there was the wrestling team that did pretty well during my 3rd year ll focus was on them. Most of the good wreslter were seniors though so when i came back for my final year no one gave a shit about wrestling. During that final year all the girls were getting wet for the divegrass players since they won valley champion. (i think, they won a big award essentially) Hell some babies were made because of that championship. So all in all the bitches and all the attention will shift towards whatever is successful, in my experience at least.
Remember playing back in high school and not getting any action. In fact, the guys that did nothing saw all the action. Had a friend like that, he even managed to get with a girl I'd liked for 3 years.
America was formed because a bunch of puritans thought religious prosecution wasn't going far enough and they wanted more extreme religious laws, and where regarded as a bit too extreme for even the 16th century
pertinent article here.
>Afobe was spotted by Arsenal at six. Lingard has been at United since he was seven, Borthwick-Jackson a year younger. This is now standard. There are stories of some academies refusing to look at eight year olds because they will have “picked up bad habits”. Joe Willock, an Arsenal scholar, joined when he was four after being spotted juggling a ball on the touchline
the difference is that these kids never play for their school team for fear of injury once they are picked up by a club. high school handegg players have a legitimate chance of turning pro. while actually playing for their school.
also at least when I was at school in london, no one watched the games. certainly no girls. most of the team were just keenos as well. no advantage with chicks other than the fact that being in the team tended to mean you were white, athletic and had decent social skills.
just being decent looking and/or tall and well dressed is enough to get fanny in high school, being in the school sports teams will make little difference. Also being in the sports teams has zero effect on your 'cool' factor at high school in Britain.
Don't try and reason with him, he obviously thinks we are living in the 16th fucking century.
I disagree and I don't know why everyone in this thread is saying stuff like this. At my school the sporty lads definitely got the girls.
What type of school did you go to and which sports team?
The thing is that over here we don't have the whole "school spirit" thing that American highs have and unless you're at a private, fee paying school then the school usually doesn't care about the sports teams either. IT means that girls aren't purely going to be impressed by you being on the school team. The ones on the team are usually more likely to be pulling but its not BECAUSE they're on the team, its that if they're on the team it means they're fairly fit/extroverted/popular to begin with. Their chances wouldn't decrease if they didn't make the team.
yep which is entirely my point, girls in british high schools want chad types or edgy rebels, being on the sports team at school will be a consequence of being a chad but the girls will want them regardless of their sports status
>What type of school did you go to
>which sports team?
Our winter sport was rugby so obviously big rugby lads got girls, but I remember even the hockey players and cricket players were laddy and therefore got chicks.
>The thing is that over here we don't have the whole "school spirit" thing that American highs have
Inter-school sports were still very important though (unless they're not as important in a comp? I don't know)
>unless you're at a private, fee paying school then the school usually doesn't care about the sports teams either.
Ah right well there you go, I don't know. Never went to state school. Our school cared A LOT about sports, and the schools we played did too. Yes obviously we didn't have cheerleaders but the school's sport achievements were still very important.
Well your school sounds completely different to my school. In my school, guys on sports teams definitely were looked up to by chicks. And "edgy rebels" might get "edgy" girls but no-one else.