Team GB football for 2012?
- Thread starter Dilzybhoy
- Start date
Streathamite
ideological dogmatist
you DON'T think the taxes of everyone in the UK are what's gonna pay for this? you are so, so very wrong. ALL britons will end up paying for this one.zoltan69 said:
Now this idea I like :
A spokesman for the First Minister said: "Mr McConnell does not support the idea of a Great Britain football team but he has suggested that the home nations should play each other in a tournament and the home nation that wins the tournament should represent the United Kingdom in the tournament."
http://sport.scotsman.com/football.cfm?id=2230792005
A spokesman for the First Minister said: "Mr McConnell does not support the idea of a Great Britain football team but he has suggested that the home nations should play each other in a tournament and the home nation that wins the tournament should represent the United Kingdom in the tournament."
http://sport.scotsman.com/football.cfm?id=2230792005
Harold Hill
Jay Emm forgot his p/word
zoltan69 said:
Blimey what a miserable fucker.
Harold Hill
Jay Emm forgot his p/word
steeplejack said:
I've tried but I can't find any other than the link put up earlier in the thread which looks dubious to me.
I'm still interested to know how FIFA can 'force' this issue and why they would want to - even from a financial point of view they must know its a non starter. Other than the fact that (I think) each home association has permanent seats on the council for which there would be easier ways of resolving than taking away the four associations right to play football.
steeplejack
seeing off the new ball
Harold Hill said:
Try these harold:
http://www.sundayherald.com/51598
http://icwales.icnetwork.co.uk/0600...--plots-to-merge-wales-with-uk-name_page.html
http://www.tsn.ca/soccer/news_story.asp?ID=74008&hubName=
I don;t have time to search for more now but, the main points:
1. ideally, Blatter would like to merge the four home nations as they are a 'headache'
2. African/Carribbean/some European associations can;t understand why the UK has four teams and want it ended, pronto.
3. Team GB, with the active participation of all four nations, would be a Trojan horse for such an end.
I fully agree with all those who recognise the danger of this proposal being a 'Trojan Horse'.
I just want to add, that I seem to remember, (I think it was for the Rome Olympics, though it could have been four years later) at a time when the Games were still considered to be amateur, that a British team was entered, and having to be amateur, it was simply the Queens Park squad that was selected, that club being the only amateur club in the English or Scottish leagues. (Is it still truly amateur, BTW?)
I just want to add, that I seem to remember, (I think it was for the Rome Olympics, though it could have been four years later) at a time when the Games were still considered to be amateur, that a British team was entered, and having to be amateur, it was simply the Queens Park squad that was selected, that club being the only amateur club in the English or Scottish leagues. (Is it still truly amateur, BTW?)
JTG said:Do you mean Queens Park? Yep, they're still amateurs
Yes, I thought so. And are they still the owners of Hampden Park?
Harold Hill
Jay Emm forgot his p/word
steeplejack said:
Well only the last one is different from the article posted previosuly and even then Blatter admits its out of his hands, hence my question 'What can FIFA actually do about it?'
Why would African/Caribbean countries care? The Uk having 4 associations doesn't remotely affect their qualification for World Cups.
I don't agree mainly because of the money FIFa would lose from England they could never recoup from a GB team.
steeplejack
seeing off the new ball
Harold Hill said:
I don't know why African/Carribbean countries care. Maybe because they feel under-represented in tournament qualifying, and want a better chance to qualify for a finals?
There's enough in those three articles to rather undermine your repeated evidence-free contentions regarding Scots 'paranoia'. This debate will start all over again when Blatter goes, and an Olympics team GB will make the task of those who want to end the existence of four separate UK nations, easier.
Red Faction
Allez Les Rouges
i think if the caribbean countries did care- they should shut the fuck upHarold Hill said:
it would be quite easy to turn around and ask why the west indies have so many teams too
Monkeygrinder's Organ
Dodgy geezer swilling vapid lager
Red Faction said:
The West Indies isn't a country. It only exists in cricket, there's no reason the individual countries wouldn't have their own football teams.
steeplejack
seeing off the new ball
Red Faction said:
All the 'West Indies" islands are self-governing Commonwealth territories or indeed fully independent republics. Something Scotland etc isn't. So they have every right to full representation on FIFA. As a construct, the "West Indies" only exists on colonial maps, in military history, and in international cricket.
Harold Hill
Jay Emm forgot his p/word
steeplejack said:
If I said paranoia I was probably a bit harsh and would be quite prepared to accept that there would be a wish to have one association from the British isles - I just don't think there is any danger of it happening.
The African/caribbean thing doesn't hold water for me. If they object to the 4 Britsh nations on the grounds it makes UEFA too large, they should be making far greater noise about Turkey, Israel and Kazakhstan being in UEFA.
The English FA would have as much to lose from this yet aren't making a big song and dance about it so I can't help feeling this is a 'Get out of jail' card for the Scottish and WElsh FA. Both have been heavily criticised in recent years so it may well be in their interest to hype up and stand up to a FIFA bogeyman to deflate criticism. Just a thought.
steeplejack
seeing off the new ball
Harold Hill said:
Well, such a PR strategy would, I fear be beyond the "expertise" certainly of the SFA- this was after all the same bunch of people who cocked up the decision to sack Vogts so badly that everyone ended up hating them for making a decision everyone agreed with.
I'm glad you can see the point- and tbh I'd rather the SFA were a bit paranoid about this issue, rather than complacent.
Red Faction
Allez Les Rouges
but turkey and kazakhstan geographically are in europeHarold Hill said:
my point about the west indies is
if they're prepared to sacrifice their autonomy when and as (football v cricket)
then they complain about the home nations
doesnt seem unreasonable that they might lose their autonomy in football too
anyone think maybe one day the pacific islanders will replace tonga + fiji etc in international rugby union altogether?
i think the analogy with a trojan horse is a good one
Harold Hill
Jay Emm forgot his p/word
Red Faction said:
Bar Russia, every country kazakhstan borders plays in Asia. Even borders China.
Red Faction
Allez Les Rouges
thats cos every country kazakhstan borders, bar russia is east of the ural mountainsHarold Hill said:
europes eastern border
Well I voted yes and I am not surpised about the results of the poll (ie a mix).
Just for once it would be cool to see it.
Just for once it would be cool to see it.
steeplejack
seeing off the new ball
Red Faction said:
they don't 'sacrifice their autonomy' at all.
The West Indies is a unique sporting team- a voluntary co-operation where individual territories could go their own way at any time if they so wished. Otherwise, they function as independent Commonwealth countries, in all other sporting activities, in complete contrast to Scotland etc who are not politically independent, but retain a degree of cultural autonomy.
So your analogy doesn't stand up at all. better to try and beat their argumentwith facts and reason rather than insulting hissy fits IMO.
Anti-British Rantings???STFC Loyal said:
I don't know about you but I like to see individuals in the Olympics whom I take a likening to, regardless of origin, to do well.
Even the rowing (GB) team got my support, because it was not the normal team of 5 or more.
The thing is, the Olympics is about one man, on his own, facing all of the world on his own. He does it for no one other than his own satisfaction.
It's a selfish tournament but no less admirable for it. Leave all that to the individual athletes.
"Anti-British"???
To clarify, you can stick all yir nations up yir arse for all I care.
I support those individuals who gave us their commitment to produce their best.
I have supported many, many "GB" players. Wimbledon. I was a Henman fan, now I'm a Murray fan.
How does that make me anti GB?
Edit___ Oh and what kind of Jersey's do you suppose early Olympians felt proud to pull on.
Harold Hill
Jay Emm forgot his p/word
Red Faction said:
Most of Kazakhstan is aswell unless I'm mistaken.
sleaterkinney
Well-Known Member
I think the NI players should play with the Republic, as they do in the other Olympic sports and in the Rugby, If it's a team GB then they wouldn't be able to play in it anyway.STFC Loyal said:
