British attempts to describe baseball provoke ridicule in the US, while American jargon in "soccer" causes amusement and bafflement among British fans. Why do people care so much?
If England and America truly are two nations divided by a common language then sporting talk is where the chasm is at its widest.
The different vocabulary used by fans in the US and UK - not just England - when discussing the same sports seems as entrenched as ever.
Prince Harry won American hearts for the way he handled a baseball bat on his recent visit - and hit a home run.
But the same could not be said for his compatriots. A clip in which the BBC described the sport as "cricket for Americans" was widely circulated in the US, prompting much mirth.
Days later, the new British recruit to American football, Lawrence Okoye, raised eyebrows when he referred to the "pitch" instead of the correct American term, "field".
Confusion also reigns in football - the one with a round ball - in the US, where British fans are flummoxed and occasionally irritated by American phrases.
Fox Sport's new football commentator, Gus Johnson, has been ridiculed for using phrases like "in the six" when describing action taking place in the six-yard box.
It's difficult for British fans in the US when they hear terms they're not familiar with but even worse if the meaning is not clear, says Florida-based Christopher Harris, who runs football blog EPL Talk.
"A popular one is 'on frame'. So they might say 'Gareth Bale hit a shot on frame', meaning on target or on goal.
"That's one that Brits think - 'what is that?' For me it sounds like hitting the post or the crossbar, I wouldn't think it was a shot on target."
Another bugbear among his website's readers is "zero-zero" instead of nil-nil. Or a goalless game being called a "shut-out".
Then there are "cleats" instead of football boots and "field" instead of pitch, "uniform" instead of kit and "sideline" rather than touchline.