Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
not in spanish it isn't. We only have 2 names for your country and neither one has an NED in it.
Uhm, the abbreviations are international, it doesn't matter what language the person is speaking. The Netherlands would be ALA in Finnish, P-B in French, NED in Swedish, NIE in German, MAD in Estonian etc. What's the point in abbreviations if every language would have their own and nobody else would know what they are?
not in spanish it isn't. We only have 2 names for your country and neither one has an NED in it. The first one is PaÃses Bajos which translated to english means the lowland countries,yes belgium is part of them but in spanish we generally reserve it for the dutch. The 2nd one is by far the most common and it's Holanda which is why it's abbreviated as HOL. I don't know why there isn't a netherlands or something of the sort but it is what it is.
NED is the international abbreviation, exactly because The Netherlands have a very different name in most languages (usually some form of "low countries"). PaÃses Bajos is the Spanish name for The Netherlands as a country, just like Pays-Bas in French of Paesi Bassi in Italian. It might also be the name of the Benelux region as a whole, I don't know about that. Holanda is wrong because Holland is only part of the country of The Netherlands, although it's a very common mistake. It's a bit like calling the US "Texas"
The same is true for the Ivory Coast, which have CIV as the international abbrevation. The Ivory Coast also translates differently in many languages (Elfenbeinküste in German, Ivoorkust in Dutch, Côte d'Ivoire in French, etc.)
NED is the international abbreviation, exactly because The Netherlands have a very different name in most languages (usually some form of "low countries"). PaÃses Bajos is the Spanish name for The Netherlands as a country, just like Pays-Bas in French of Paesi Bassi in Italian. It might also be the name of the Benelux region as a whole, I don't know about that. Holanda is wrong because Holland is only part of the country of The Netherlands, although it's a very common mistake. It's a bit like calling the US "Texas"
The same is true for the Ivory Coast, which have CIV as the international abbrevation. The Ivory Coast also translates differently in many languages (Elfenbeinküste in German, Ivoorkust in Dutch, Côte d'Ivoire in French, etc.)
If I have to correct everyone who wrongly uses the term "Holland", I won't have time to do anything else It's not that important anyway. You asked so I explained.
Is it rational to have no North American teams at the World Cup? I don't think so.
I think it would be a good idea to merge CONMEBOL and CONCACAF but unlike you, I'm not convinced that CONMEBOL would take all their spots. And I have no interest in seeing Bolivia at the WC.
I dont get it: if you say that conmebol wont take all the spots, why are you saying that north america wont have any team at the wc?? its confusing
Anyhow, i dont think conmebol will get all the spots: USA and Mexico would probably (depending the current form of the teams, like, Mexico with what they did in thse qualys WONT qualify, but in they usual form they will) qualify, but Panama, Honduras, Costa Rica, Jamaica, or whoever else qualifies from there, wont. And Peru, venezuela, Colombia, etc, would get their spot.
If CAF+CONMEBOL were to have 9 spots, probably 7 would go to conmebol and the other 2 to USA/Mexico
I dont get it: if you say that conmebol wont take all the spots, why are you saying that north america wont have any team at the wc?? its confusing
Anyhow, i dont think conmebol will get all the spots: USA and Mexico would probably (depending the current form of the teams, like, Mexico with what they did in thse qualys WONT qualify, but in they usual form they will) qualify, but Panama, Honduras, Costa Rica, Jamaica, or whoever else qualifies from there, wont. And Peru, venezuela, Colombia, etc, would get their spot.
If CAF+CONMEBOL were to have 9 spots, probably 7 would go to conmebol and the other 2 to USA/Mexico
You said you wanted to merge with CONCACAF so you could get all of their spots for grabs, by which I assumed you meant that CONMEBOL would take all of CONCACAF's spots if they merged. It seems that we agree, though.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It's not that important anyway. You asked so I explained.
its confusing
