All things sporting

Scott Sinclair, Joe Allen and Neil Taylor- are in the squad Ally. Think there are two more in reserves.

I'm not sure it should just be about which country in the UK has the best players. In every other single footballing tournament in existence we play as Scotland, England play as England, Wals as Wales and NI as NI- the only tourniment in the world where we can have a team drawn from players from each country is the Olympics.
Surely then when there is only one opportunity Team Great Britain should reflect Great Britain- all of it.

Petty - I dont really agree with that. The Olympics is about winning medals, not about pandering to everyone that feels like they should be involved. The team should be picked on merit and should be the strongest squad it can be. If that meant all Scottish players then fair enough.

The whole sporting thing does wind me up a little. Are we supposed to be British or not? If we are then we should always be represented as British in all sports. But I am sure that there would be uproar in many quarters if it was announced that the world cup 2014 squad would be Team UK!

Its all a bit ridiculous.

The English premiership is one of the best and most competive in the world and one of the richest. As Ally says you could easily find all the players in England-the Welsh are not really there on merit either but because some of the games will be held in Wales- so by your thinking Lance the team would be all englishmen- in which case why call it team GB at all? English manager, english players- whats so different form the england team?
And I still think its bad politics, particulalry at this time.

The premiership may well be one of the richest and most competetive leagues, but I think the current state of the England squad has shown that doesn't mean anything when it comes to the quality of English players. It has probably done more harm than good.

Obviously I couldnt tell you hwo much politics has gone on behind the scenes (I would have thought this would be a good opportunity to include Scottish people in to UK events given the current independence talk), however I believe it should be done completely on merit. There are plenty of opportunities for Scottish players to come through the ranks and I am sure they would be snapped up in the Premiership if they were good enough.

Whether the supporting actions are right, the talk from the Team GB camp is right in my opinion.

There are already Scottish players in the English Priemership- and with the collapse of Glasgow Rangers more are being snapped up by English clubs every day- if they are good enough to play alongisde the English in their own league how come they are not good enough to even make the Team GB squad reserves? The idea that there is not one single Scottish or Northern Irish player who is good enough is laughable, of course there are.
The Olympics already feel from a Scottish perspective, not even an English thing, but a London thing. Yet we are footing our share of the bill for it through our taxes and we don't even get to take part in the most popular sporting event in the country- the football.

Well, there are 18 players obviously split in to each position meaning (theoretically) say 3 GKs, 4 CBs, 2 LBs, 2RBs, 4-6 CMFs, 2 LMs, 2RMs, 2-4 STRs.

So of all the professional players in the UK, you are saying the without any shadow of a doubt, there are scottish players that would rank well enough to fit in to those very limited positions?

Not saying that there aren't, but I think your 'laughable' sentence isn't so side splitting really. Depending on the balance of the squad, the best opportunity is CMF when you are talking only 4-6 name on the list out of the entire UK.... probably followed by GKs.

I am not for 1 second saying there are no good Scottish players, but it needs a little perspective considering that this is a one off team with very limited places. I would imagine an actual UK regualr side would likely have more time to experiment and try out other players.

Re the London thing.... isn't Hampden Park one of the football venues?

It is the cities that bid for the olympics, not the country. I think they have done well getting a lot of sports out of the capital.

So of all the professional players in the UK, you are saying the without any shadow of a doubt, there are scottish players that would rank well enough to fit in to those very limited positions?- Lance

Yes. Without a shadow of a doubt - I'll give you one as an example- Alan McGregor the Rangers keeper- world class, his signature has been sought by several top premiership sides but he's a Rangers man through and through, playing for his boyhood heroes and has always turned them down- but the fact he has been sought after by Priemership clubs year after year trying to tempt him south tells you he is good enough.
Kyle Lafferty, NI top goal scorer is another. Celtic have several quality defenders that could slip into any Premiership team and easily hold their own.

On the Hampden Park issue not sure if its got any football or not, I haven't heard it does- its definetly holding track and field events, that I do know.
If it does host the football will be very interesting to see how many Scots turn up to watch a GB team with no Scots in it given the political climate, very interesting indeed.

Alan Mcgregor is too old... would have to have replaced one of Micah Richards, Ryan Giggs or Craig Bellamy. The latter maybe but I wouldnt replace the other 2!!

Kyle Lafferty is also over age.... would you replcae Richards for him (Richards should have been in the England squad IMO).

Don't forget it is an under 23 competition with only 3 over age players allowed.

Don't really know any N.Irish defenders let alone any under 23.

The Scotland under-21 squad has a lot of up and coming talent I would say.

'Stoke have agreed a deal with former Rangers midfielder Jamie Ness (21) and he will complete his move to the Britannia Stadium once international clearance is received.
"Jamie is a lad with enormous potential who is clearly determined to make the most of this fresh start in the game," manager Tony Pulis told stokecityfc.com. "It's important that we introduce some young blood in strengthening the squad and he certainly fits the bill as someone tipped for a bright future."

Heres the results for the Scotland u21 sqauds most recent competive games:

Thu 06/10/11 UUC Luxembourg U21 1 - 5 Scotland U21
Mon 10/10/11 UUC Scotland U21 2 - 2 Austria U21
Mon 14/11/11 UUC Netherlands U21 1 - 2 Scotland U21
Wed 29/02/12 UUC Scotland U21 0 - 0 Netherlands U21
Thu 31/05/12 UUC Bulgaria U21 2 - 2 Scotland U21

Players good enough to beat the Dutch on their home soil. 11 goals scored in 5 games- you don't get that unless some of them can play a bit. The u21 squad is doing a lot better than the main squad. Its got a lot of potential in it that would only benefit from getting a chance to play in something like the Olympics.

And I still think its important every reason is given for pople to pull together and get behind the team, the team selection fractures that along country lines.

I aplogize in advance for my lack of sporting knowledge, but isnt it all about money these days? there are many foreign players that get huge transfer fees, and it seems to me that in Manchester United there is maybe only a handful of players actually from Manchester, something that in the 60s 70s would have seemed absurd, I am sure the teams then were made up from local talent. Now if Fergie could get his hands on Messi, he would chuck out any Mancunian that was not as big a draw. I am sure its less about who is Scottish, English or Welsh but who is going to get the job done, the goals in the net and pleasing the fat cats on the board. just my two penneth.

You are right if you are talking about the leagues Mrs Figg- but it doesn't appply to the Olympics which is supposed to be about the taking part and all that- sportsmanship ect.

I think the manager had his work cut out when he said he would pick players only on their football and not nationality. Didn't England get to the final of the l last under 21 euro? All other Olympic sports are picked purely for sporting reasons however it is unfair simply due to the fact that the English league is so much bigger than any other in Britain that players there have been perceived to have been playing better than, say, players in Scotland

To me it looks like they only picked the Welsh players to avoid outrage because its a disgrace to suggest that Scotland doesn't have any equally talented players
Also, the manager is English- Stewart something?- who was manager of Englands under21 side (not sure tho) so it does seem unfair IMO


Good thing I don't folllow football

Just scrap the whole thing. Always seems to be someone having a moan so best not to bother.

Or scrap team gb and just let the individual footballing bodies for each British nation decide whether or not they want to qualify. Britain got one automatic spot for football I guess this year for being the host nation but it doesn't have to be like this every Olympics

And surely no one can expect the Irish and the Scottish to support a team gb (despite all the infamous rivalries with the English) which doesn't even feature any of their players entirely made up of English players and not complain? I think their complaints are perfectly justifiable too Lance

I didnt say their complaints werent justifiable. My point was more that whatever the outcome of the team that was picked, there would be people complaining about it. Token players or too many of this nation or player X is clearly better than player Y.

Their complaints would be justifiable too.

Fact is this year there is a Team GB and to be in there, you have to be the best at what you do. If you are not the best at what you do, then dont expect to be picked. If it happens that all of the players in the Team GB squad are the best at what they do, then the complaints being raised are just as valid as those for setting quotas of women on boards of big corporations. Why should someone who has worked hard to get where they are be punished to fill a quota?

Clearly the people that are complaining dont feel that they are British otherwise they would be happy that they are being represented by the players that are picked. That's a fair enough view, one that I don't agree with, but fair nonetheless.

And what about the people that totally believe in the UK? The ones that want to see a Team GB for everything? Scrap this and we will have all of the moaning.

I find it all a bit ridiculous.

Problem is, as I've said since the start, they can pretend all they like but its political, whether they like it or not, I dont mean the decision I mean the ramifications.

You said Lance 'And what about the people that totally believe in the UK? The ones that want to see a Team GB for everything?'- nothing wrong with that view- but you do it for sport and then what? How long before the same question is asked of other things outwith just sport?- why does Scotland have its own legal system? Why not have a GB legal sysytem that covers everyone the same? Same goes for education. Why have seperate country names at all for that matter- why aren't we all just British and nothing else?

Under the surface of 'sporting' questions lurks a whole quagmire of potential radioactive political fall out.

You European types take your football way too seriously. I remember making a casual comment on the Old Forum about how American sports are just sports and getting criticized by everyone who followed (European) football.

There is a football quote Eldo goes like this "Football is not life and death, its far more serious than that!"

That's what you said back then too.

You expect my buckied memory to remember what I wrote on the old forum? I cant remember what I write on this one five minutes after I write it.
And it still true- this is a political mindfield this Team GB thing- if there is a game played in Scotland the pro-Unionist camps will be organising bus loads of people to go to the game and wave Union Jacks so it looks like the Unionists side is strong, I'll put money on that.

We dont have the 'American Dream' over here... just football. Makes the 'European Realisation' pass by quicker.

And Petty, I agree with everything you said in that last post. But then I don't understand why countries want their independence in this day and age. I don't mean the ones that are under dictatorships or that get brutally put down by their oppressors. I mean places like the UK, or Spain and the Catalans or various other examples around the world.

I don't see the issue of having Scotland be Scotland.... same as having counties or whatever that have their own, more localised leadership as it cant all be run by one person.

But then I don't live in Scotland or N.Ireland and don't know how thigs really play out up there. Politics is all bullshit and lies with everyone claiming the opposite of something to be true, so have no idea what really goes on.

Scottish people are no different from me than someone from Manchester or Norfolk.... I dont get why people still insist on seeing it that way. Unfortunately they do and something like a split of the union is only going to ingrain that into the next 10-15 generations of people. That is why something like Europe will not work for a very long time. Everyone is out for their own little bit of the pie and cannot seem to think of the bigger picture where everyone works for the common good.

Edit - Petty, you have posted since I started to write that lenghty piece... so my reference to your 'last post' actually meant the post before your last post.

We dont have the 'American Dream' over here- Lance

Or as Al Murray put it:




I sometites think the English get us wrong regards our view of you lot. We don't actually dislike the English at all, you infuruate us sometimes with your arrogance and boasting and the genral assumption (best displayed when the national team plays) that somehow you are detined to win for no other reason than you are England. But we only feel we can point that out because you are also family, fellow Brits, we still like you. And most of the rest is banter, mock malice in which we are as much mocking ourselves- as the loosing side in histroy often have to do.
Scots like freedom- much as Gibson made that a cliche it is true, there is something in us that goes way back, long before its first political form in the Declaration of Arbroath (which in turn influenced the US constituency). We are the only european nation never to be conquered and just as importantly, never to have conquered another.
Right now we dont have it feels political freedom- we can spend the money we get as we like- but what money we get has to be handed to us like beggars at the door by Westminister and England.
Its not about the English people- we like you, honestly we do. We don't want to cut ourselves off from the people (indeed a common side discussion to indpeendce I have heard hear is specualtion if we got it whether soe of the north of england would want to join us and become Scots) we just want a voice that counts for something.

Surely you guys have a voice over affairs in your own back yard as local MPs in Devon or Yorkshire? In fact do you not currently have more of a say? It that bit that you say... like a beggar for money... where do you draw the line for that then as each village, town and city will have to do the same at the doors of a new government.

If Scotland is not being fairly represented in the UK Parliament, then that is a different story... if not then I dont get it. I don't want Southend to declare independence from the UK so that it can use the money it generates the way that it wants (which is probably good as it doesn't generate any money). Other than scale, I dont see how this debate is any different other than the scale of it and I also think it will just end up with infighting between different areas of Scotland the same as everyone in England moans about where all our hard earned money is.

The nub of the issue is money in a sense Lance- but more its the use of that money.
Scotland votes to the left- for decades that meant Labour, but Blair killed that stone dead, the Scots saw Blair for what he was, a Tory in sheeps clothing. Labour in Scotland collapsed as a result and the SNP soared.

The cunning thing about the SNP is they took up pre-Blair Labours old positions on social issues- health, education ect but the Tory stance on economy and business.
So they favour both free education and cutting business rates and taxes.
Because of this inward investment in Scotland has increased in the recession and exports have to. Oil prices are higher than ever as well.
But all that income goes straight to Westminister.

We then get handed a slice back to spend as we wish. But its a lot, lot less than if we were independent and got all we raised to keep ourselves.
There's only 5 million of us, we shouldn't have the fuel costs we have, our elderly should be able to heat themsleves in winter without worry, we shouldnt have slum housing estates, our schools and hospitals should be better.

But we can't do any of these things because we are limited in devolution by how we can raise funds (we cant alter business rates for example or move much on tax raising or spending, we can;t set a minimum wage different from England or alter the benefits system in any way, we cant decide which wars we send our children to, we can't decide if we want nuclear weapons here) and we are limited in how we can spend the money we are given.
This is about people feeling that they cannot express their political will, make their communities better. And in the current system it feels like Westminister doesn't hear us at all, it just raids our larder whenever it needs to and ignores our wishes.

Sorry that got so long, but don't want you to get the impression this about dislikng the english people in any fashion what so ever. Its about politics and sefl expression.