English Language & Usage Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for linguists, etymologists, and serious English language enthusiasts. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

I would like to know when to use singular or plural verb agreement when talking about a country. E.g.,

  1. India have won the match.
  2. India has won the match.

Which statement is grammatical? Please illustrate with some more examples.

share|improve this question

marked as duplicate by Brian Hooper, Kris, RegDwigнt May 5 '13 at 11:36

This question was marked as an exact duplicate of an existing question.

This may be a question about which flavor of English one uses (British, American, Indian, Australian, etc.) & whether you perceive the country as a non-count collective population or a group of separate individuals. In American English, we usually think about a country as a non-count collective entity and use the singular: "India has won the match", "The Netherlands has liberal drug laws", "The Bahamas is "a country consisting of more than 700 islands, cays, and islets in the Atlantic Ocean". Other brands of English may differ. – user21497 May 5 '13 at 8:08
Thanks you so much for the answer Bill. – Vivek Singh May 5 '13 at 8:24
This may also be question about how one regards national cricket teams. If a Test match results in a "win for India" do you see that as triumph for the nation (non-count) or for the group of eleven players who made up the team. India have won the match emphasises the efforts of the (countable) members of the team. One criticism of aussie "supporters" is that they are quick to claim that Australia has won and bask in the reflected glory, but when India wins it is Australia have lost and nothing to do with me. – Fortiter May 5 '13 at 9:22