<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: A Football Team is? Or a Football Team Are?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.theoffside.com/world-football/a-football-team-is-or-a-football-team-are.html/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.theoffside.com/world-football/a-football-team-is-or-a-football-team-are.html</link>
	<description>League Football, Soccer News and Views from Around the World</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 Feb 2012 08:57:06 -0700</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Tim</title>
		<link>http://www.theoffside.com/world-football/a-football-team-is-or-a-football-team-are.html/comment-page-1#comment-150008</link>
		<dc:creator>Tim</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 Sep 2009 17:32:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theoffside.com/world-football/a-football-team-is-or-a-football-team-are.html#comment-150008</guid>
		<description>really interesting question and one we have discussed too - we decided on &quot;is&quot; for most instances, as we believe it to be more grammatically correct, however &quot;are&quot; seems to be used far more often in the UK. force of habit maybe?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>really interesting question and one we have discussed too &#8211; we decided on &#8220;is&#8221; for most instances, as we believe it to be more grammatically correct, however &#8220;are&#8221; seems to be used far more often in the UK. force of habit maybe?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: sscouser</title>
		<link>http://www.theoffside.com/world-football/a-football-team-is-or-a-football-team-are.html/comment-page-1#comment-149976</link>
		<dc:creator>sscouser</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Sep 2009 21:26:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theoffside.com/world-football/a-football-team-is-or-a-football-team-are.html#comment-149976</guid>
		<description>There &quot;are&quot; or &quot;is&quot; a few grammatical errors in my comments above?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There &#8220;are&#8221; or &#8220;is&#8221; a few grammatical errors in my comments above?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: sscouser</title>
		<link>http://www.theoffside.com/world-football/a-football-team-is-or-a-football-team-are.html/comment-page-1#comment-149975</link>
		<dc:creator>sscouser</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Sep 2009 21:21:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theoffside.com/world-football/a-football-team-is-or-a-football-team-are.html#comment-149975</guid>
		<description>Sandrahn, I don&#039;t think &quot;it&#039;s just a difference between American and British English&quot;.  

I think it all comes down to the speaker&#039;s &quot;intent&quot;

If the speaker is talking about England (National Team only) then &quot;is&quot; is acceptable.  If the speaker is talking about England (The Team and its fans) then &quot;are&quot; is acceptable.

In the same vein if one is talking about Man U (The Team only)then yes &quot;Man U sucks&quot;.  However, if the speaker is talking about Man U (The Team, The Club, The Fans and that they represent) then yes &quot;Man U suck&quot;.

In the final analysis, just because a famous analysts say it this way or that way doesn&#039;t mean that they are grammatically right.  Some of them dropped English 101.
That&#039;s why sometimes I don&#039;t just get it when some people believe everything the so called &quot;pundits&quot; say.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sandrahn, I don&#8217;t think &#8220;it&#8217;s just a difference between American and British English&#8221;.  </p>
<p>I think it all comes down to the speaker&#8217;s &#8220;intent&#8221;</p>
<p>If the speaker is talking about England (National Team only) then &#8220;is&#8221; is acceptable.  If the speaker is talking about England (The Team and its fans) then &#8220;are&#8221; is acceptable.</p>
<p>In the same vein if one is talking about Man U (The Team only)then yes &#8220;Man U sucks&#8221;.  However, if the speaker is talking about Man U (The Team, The Club, The Fans and that they represent) then yes &#8220;Man U suck&#8221;.</p>
<p>In the final analysis, just because a famous analysts say it this way or that way doesn&#8217;t mean that they are grammatically right.  Some of them dropped English 101.<br />
That&#8217;s why sometimes I don&#8217;t just get it when some people believe everything the so called &#8220;pundits&#8221; say.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: sandrahn</title>
		<link>http://www.theoffside.com/world-football/a-football-team-is-or-a-football-team-are.html/comment-page-1#comment-149974</link>
		<dc:creator>sandrahn</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Sep 2009 20:52:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theoffside.com/world-football/a-football-team-is-or-a-football-team-are.html#comment-149974</guid>
		<description>sscouser, &quot;Man U suck,&quot; definitely.  :-D

Anyway, this is just a difference between American English and British English.

In Britain, sports teams are plural in almost all contexts.  This includes national teams, not just clubs.

So when the British press talk about England as in the national football team, they say &quot;England are winning,&quot; &quot;England are improving under Fabio Capello,&quot; and so on.

It&#039;s not a question or &quot;right&quot; and &quot;wrong,&quot; it&#039;s simply a matter of differences in usage.  Having lived and worked in England and being so accustomed to the British press for so much of my football coverage, I&#039;ve taken on the British use of the plural when referring to sports teams now.  Now it sounds strange for me to hear the American use of the singular.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>sscouser, &#8220;Man U suck,&#8221; definitely.  :-D</p>
<p>Anyway, this is just a difference between American English and British English.</p>
<p>In Britain, sports teams are plural in almost all contexts.  This includes national teams, not just clubs.</p>
<p>So when the British press talk about England as in the national football team, they say &#8220;England are winning,&#8221; &#8220;England are improving under Fabio Capello,&#8221; and so on.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s not a question or &#8220;right&#8221; and &#8220;wrong,&#8221; it&#8217;s simply a matter of differences in usage.  Having lived and worked in England and being so accustomed to the British press for so much of my football coverage, I&#8217;ve taken on the British use of the plural when referring to sports teams now.  Now it sounds strange for me to hear the American use of the singular.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: sscouser</title>
		<link>http://www.theoffside.com/world-football/a-football-team-is-or-a-football-team-are.html/comment-page-1#comment-149972</link>
		<dc:creator>sscouser</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Sep 2009 19:16:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theoffside.com/world-football/a-football-team-is-or-a-football-team-are.html#comment-149972</guid>
		<description>While on the same topic, is it &quot;Man U suck&quot; or &quot;Man U sucks&quot;? :D</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>While on the same topic, is it &#8220;Man U suck&#8221; or &#8220;Man U sucks&#8221;? :D</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: The Gaffer</title>
		<link>http://www.theoffside.com/world-football/a-football-team-is-or-a-football-team-are.html/comment-page-1#comment-149967</link>
		<dc:creator>The Gaffer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Sep 2009 18:08:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theoffside.com/world-football/a-football-team-is-or-a-football-team-are.html#comment-149967</guid>
		<description>Yep, I agree with the above poster. It&#039;s a yank/brit thing. The yanks use the singular (i.e. &quot;Liverpool is...&quot;) while the Brits use the plural (i.e. &quot;Liverpool are...&quot;).

Cheers,
The Gaffer</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yep, I agree with the above poster. It&#8217;s a yank/brit thing. The yanks use the singular (i.e. &#8220;Liverpool is&#8230;&#8221;) while the Brits use the plural (i.e. &#8220;Liverpool are&#8230;&#8221;).</p>
<p>Cheers,<br />
The Gaffer</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chowd Gooner</title>
		<link>http://www.theoffside.com/world-football/a-football-team-is-or-a-football-team-are.html/comment-page-1#comment-149963</link>
		<dc:creator>Chowd Gooner</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Sep 2009 16:47:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theoffside.com/world-football/a-football-team-is-or-a-football-team-are.html#comment-149963</guid>
		<description>This is mostly a Brit/Yank distinction.  Straight from wiki:

In BrE, collective nouns can take either singular (formal agreement) or plural (notional agreement) verb forms, according to whether the emphasis is, respectively, on the body as a whole or on the individual members; compare a committee was appointed... with the committee were unable to agree....[8][9] The term the Government always takes a plural verb in British civil service convention, perhaps to emphasise the principle of collective responsibility[10]. Compare also the following lines of Elvis Costello&#039;s song &quot;Oliver&#039;s Army&quot;: Oliver&#039;s Army are on their way / Oliver&#039;s Army is here to stay. Some of these nouns, for example staff,[11] actually combine with plural verbs most of the time.

In AmE, collective nouns are usually singular in construction: the committee was unable to agree... AmE however may use plural pronouns in agreement with collective nouns: the team take their seats, rather than the team takes its seats. The rule of thumb is that a group acting as a unit is considered singular and a group of &quot;individuals acting separately&quot; is considered plural.[12] However, such a sentence would most likely be recast as the team members take their seats. Despite exceptions such as usage in the New York Times, the names of sports teams are usually treated as plurals even if the form of the name is singular.[13]

The difference occurs for all nouns of multitude, both general terms such as team and company and proper nouns (for example, where a place name is used to refer to a sports team). For instance,

BrE: The Clash are a well-known band; AmE: The Clash is a well-known band.
BrE: Pittsburgh are the champions; AmE: Pittsburgh is the champion.

Proper nouns that are plural in form take a plural verb in both AmE and BrE; for example, The Beatles are a well-known band; The Steelers are the champions.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is mostly a Brit/Yank distinction.  Straight from wiki:</p>
<p>In BrE, collective nouns can take either singular (formal agreement) or plural (notional agreement) verb forms, according to whether the emphasis is, respectively, on the body as a whole or on the individual members; compare a committee was appointed&#8230; with the committee were unable to agree&#8230;.[8][9] The term the Government always takes a plural verb in British civil service convention, perhaps to emphasise the principle of collective responsibility[10]. Compare also the following lines of Elvis Costello&#8217;s song &#8220;Oliver&#8217;s Army&#8221;: Oliver&#8217;s Army are on their way / Oliver&#8217;s Army is here to stay. Some of these nouns, for example staff,[11] actually combine with plural verbs most of the time.</p>
<p>In AmE, collective nouns are usually singular in construction: the committee was unable to agree&#8230; AmE however may use plural pronouns in agreement with collective nouns: the team take their seats, rather than the team takes its seats. The rule of thumb is that a group acting as a unit is considered singular and a group of &#8220;individuals acting separately&#8221; is considered plural.[12] However, such a sentence would most likely be recast as the team members take their seats. Despite exceptions such as usage in the New York Times, the names of sports teams are usually treated as plurals even if the form of the name is singular.[13]</p>
<p>The difference occurs for all nouns of multitude, both general terms such as team and company and proper nouns (for example, where a place name is used to refer to a sports team). For instance,</p>
<p>BrE: The Clash are a well-known band; AmE: The Clash is a well-known band.<br />
BrE: Pittsburgh are the champions; AmE: Pittsburgh is the champion.</p>
<p>Proper nouns that are plural in form take a plural verb in both AmE and BrE; for example, The Beatles are a well-known band; The Steelers are the champions.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: vespo</title>
		<link>http://www.theoffside.com/world-football/a-football-team-is-or-a-football-team-are.html/comment-page-1#comment-149962</link>
		<dc:creator>vespo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Sep 2009 16:02:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theoffside.com/world-football/a-football-team-is-or-a-football-team-are.html#comment-149962</guid>
		<description>I think a lot of this confusion comes from the majority of American sports teams havine plural names, while soccer team names are generally gramatically singular.

New York Yankees, Boston Bruins, Cleveland Cavaliers, Detroit Lions, Denver Broncos, etc etc.

But then you have soccer/football teams in Europe that have grammatically singular names like Arsenal, Chelsea, Bolton, Barcelona, which MLS then tries to replicate: Houston Dynamo, Columbus Crew (Seattle is a weird one with the Sounders).

I think most of the confusing is an English/American thing rather than correct/incorrect grammar, coming largely from different naming conventions.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think a lot of this confusion comes from the majority of American sports teams havine plural names, while soccer team names are generally gramatically singular.</p>
<p>New York Yankees, Boston Bruins, Cleveland Cavaliers, Detroit Lions, Denver Broncos, etc etc.</p>
<p>But then you have soccer/football teams in Europe that have grammatically singular names like Arsenal, Chelsea, Bolton, Barcelona, which MLS then tries to replicate: Houston Dynamo, Columbus Crew (Seattle is a weird one with the Sounders).</p>
<p>I think most of the confusing is an English/American thing rather than correct/incorrect grammar, coming largely from different naming conventions.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: timmyg</title>
		<link>http://www.theoffside.com/world-football/a-football-team-is-or-a-football-team-are.html/comment-page-1#comment-149960</link>
		<dc:creator>timmyg</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Sep 2009 15:06:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theoffside.com/world-football/a-football-team-is-or-a-football-team-are.html#comment-149960</guid>
		<description>Al is correct. The AP style refers to teams as &quot;is&quot; because its a singular thing. It does sound weird, but using &quot;are&quot; is incorrect.

Another BIG incorrect usage of grammar is referring to a club as &quot;they&quot; instead of &quot;it&quot;. (Ex. Chelsea need to win its game in hand.]

More info: collective nouns -- In the United States, nouns such as team, Congress, committee and group take singular verbs, such as &quot;is.&quot; These collective nouns also take the pronoun &quot;it&quot; instead of &quot;they.&quot; So, if you&#039;re confused about whether a word such as &quot;team&quot; is an &quot;it&quot; or a &quot;they,&quot; try making up a sentence using the word followed by &quot;is&quot; or &quot;are.&quot; You wouldn&#039;t say &quot;The team are playing well.&quot; Try this, instead: &quot;The team is playing well. It may win this game.&quot; That&#039;s correct.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Al is correct. The AP style refers to teams as &#8220;is&#8221; because its a singular thing. It does sound weird, but using &#8220;are&#8221; is incorrect.</p>
<p>Another BIG incorrect usage of grammar is referring to a club as &#8220;they&#8221; instead of &#8220;it&#8221;. (Ex. Chelsea need to win its game in hand.]</p>
<p>More info: collective nouns &#8212; In the United States, nouns such as team, Congress, committee and group take singular verbs, such as &#8220;is.&#8221; These collective nouns also take the pronoun &#8220;it&#8221; instead of &#8220;they.&#8221; So, if you&#8217;re confused about whether a word such as &#8220;team&#8221; is an &#8220;it&#8221; or a &#8220;they,&#8221; try making up a sentence using the word followed by &#8220;is&#8221; or &#8220;are.&#8221; You wouldn&#8217;t say &#8220;The team are playing well.&#8221; Try this, instead: &#8220;The team is playing well. It may win this game.&#8221; That&#8217;s correct.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Johonna</title>
		<link>http://www.theoffside.com/world-football/a-football-team-is-or-a-football-team-are.html/comment-page-1#comment-149951</link>
		<dc:creator>Johonna</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Sep 2009 06:56:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theoffside.com/world-football/a-football-team-is-or-a-football-team-are.html#comment-149951</guid>
		<description>Team is a singular noun (like family). Team always takes the singular form &lt;i&gt;is&lt;/i&gt; and &lt;i&gt;was&lt;/i&gt;, right?

As for club names... Well, English is a living language. I say, go with what sounds right and, if you write it enough, it becomes the rule. The trick is consistency.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Team is a singular noun (like family). Team always takes the singular form <i>is</i> and <i>was</i>, right?</p>
<p>As for club names&#8230; Well, English is a living language. I say, go with what sounds right and, if you write it enough, it becomes the rule. The trick is consistency.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

