[Supras]

[quote name='Jambo'ness' date='18 March 2010 - 12:39' timestamp='1268915944' post='4324715']
[quote name='Supras' date='18 March 2010 - 11:36' timestamp='1268912182' post='4324563']
In comparison to who? British players are generally unwilling to play abroad so the only 'big league' they could play in is the English premiership, and many do. However, it is likely to be below Ireland for example because the Scottish league is considerably stronger than the Irish league, you would have to imagine that a pretty high percentage of Scottish players at Rangers at Celtic are either as good or better than the likes of Kevin Kilbane who has played in the Premiership for the majority of his career. Besides that, from the top of my head I can think of the following players who play regularly in the Premiership:

D. Fletcher
Gordon
Hutton
McDonald
McFadden
G. Caldwell
S. Caldwell
Fox (yes, he counts)
S. Fletcher
Berra

What nations of similar size have more players in the Premiership?

Just playing devils advocate but a good half of those could well be playing Championship football next year. Oh and how could you forget Graham Alexander





Stats are fine but we all know you can jig them to suit yourself. Football is the number one sport in Scotland, without question, unlike several others who place basketball, cycling and the likes higher. If these countries concentrated on football the way we do, I have a feeling we would be overhauled by several 'lesser' nations.
[/quote]

What countries in Europe place those sports higher? Again, what lesser nations would 'overhaul' us?

[quote name='Law Stud' date='18 March 2010 - 12:50' timestamp='1268916636' post='4324757']
Republic of Ireland

Given
McCarthy
O'Shea
McShane
Kilbane
R Dunne
Kelly
Whelan
S Reid
Gibson
Duff
A Reid
Lawrence
Ward
Murphy
Doyle
Keogh

And that's just the ones on the squad profile page on the FIA website.
[/quote]

That's cheating Stuart, and it may well have been relevant if I hadn't discussed Ireland in the post you quoted.
I will also add Barry Ferguson to my list.

[quote name='vikingTON' date='18 March 2010 - 16:26' timestamp='1268929586' post='4325316']
The key factor is the level of involvement and interest in the game, demographics is only a limiting factor once all the other factors have been optimised eg better youth facilities, coaching. If anyone can say that the technique level and standard of coaching within Scottish football can't be bettered than they're lying, quite frankly, and the same applies to the league structures.
[/quote]

Again, those factors are dependant on population, larger nations can spend more on facilities and coaching. Secondly, even if all the facilities were optimised (which will never happen, in any country) a country of our population level is still very unlikely to be able to compete with the likes of England or Spain. Finally, tiny nations like Luxembourg or Andorra are going to be shit regardless of how much they spend on football.

Of course they could be made better, you could say the same about any other nation.

[vikingTON]

Supras, on 18 March 2010 - 17:20, said:

Again, those factors are dependant on population, larger nations can spend more on facilities and coaching.

Per capita, how so?

[Supras]

vikingTON, on 18 March 2010 - 17:23, said:

Per capita, how so?

Well, not per capita. Andorra could spend 99% of their GDP on footballing facilities and coaching and they would still be shit, indeed, their facilities will still be poor in compraison to Russia if they spent 1% of their GDP on footballing facilites and coaching - indeed Ice Hockey is the primary sport in Russia.

[rfcgav]

Davie Bhoy, on 15 March 2010 - 01:18, said:

I'm with you on some of what you say. I've felt like chucking it this year on a number of occasions just due to the Refs doing us over left right and centre. I'm sure many of them are cheating us to help Rangers win the league. No beating about the bush here.

However how many St Mirren fans were at the game yesterday...a short journey through to Hamilton? Now all those exuses about poor quality etc are all well and good but they'll all be out in force next week for the final and it's those fuckers that are to blame for the poor quality. If they turned up every home game then the clubs would have more money to buy better players or invest heavier into the youth developement. The atmosphere would be better at games too and this would transmit on to the pitch.

That isn't just aimed at St Mirren but every club is guilty of it. Where were all the Rangers fans today? Celtic fans have also disappeared this season and phone up these phone-ins to talk about how poor we're playing and then go on to say they have a season ticket but don't go any more....well how the hell do they know how badly we played then cos at home we're not shown live apart from the obvious games.

I'd love to give the glory hunting fan a boot up the arse

:code: Im sick of watching my team getting beat left right and centre and the dross that plays for them

Please do chuck it and f**k off.

[Law Stud]

Supras, on 18 March 2010 - 17:20, said:

That's cheating Stuart, and it may well have been relevant if I hadn't discussed Ireland in the post you quoted.
I will also add Barry Ferguson to my list.



Again, those factors are dependant on population, larger nations can spend more on facilities and coaching. Secondly, even if all the facilities were optimised (which will never happen, in any country) a country of our population level is still very unlikely to be able to compete with the likes of England or Spain. Finally, tiny nations like Luxembourg or Andorra are going to be shit regardless of how much they spend on football.

Of course they could be made better, you could say the same about any other nation.

Ok

Wales then

Giggs
Savage
Bellamy
Hennessy
Ricketts
Bale
Ramsey
Edwards
Vokes
Myhill
Nytanga
Collins
Gunter
Collinson
and Davies

[Supras]

Law Stud, on 18 March 2010 - 19:15, said:

Ok

Wales then

Giggs
Savage
Bellamy
Hennessy
Ricketts
Bale
Ramsey
Edwards
Vokes
Myhill
Nytanga
Collins
Gunter
Collinson
and Davies

You're going off in a bit of a tangent here Stuart, many of those mentioned above do not play in the premiership and, in the case of Savage, haven't done for some time. Besides that Vokes does not play regularly.

My point I made about the poor quality of the Irish league meaning all their players of reasonable ability play in England also applies to Wales incidentally.

Thanks for trying though.

[Law Stud]

Supras, on 18 March 2010 - 19:25, said:

You're going off in a bit of a tangent here Stuart, many of those mentioned above do not play in the premiership and, in the case of Savage, haven't done for some time. Besides that Vokes does not play regularly.

My point I made about the poor quality of the Irish league meaning all their players of reasonable ability play in England also applies to Wales incidentally.

Thanks for trying though.

Oh sorry I must have missed that. So the reason there aren't many Scottish players in the EPL is because they CHOOSE to play in the SPL.

[seamus]

The_Judge, on 17 March 2010 - 21:26, said:

Come on Seamus, that was down to how much we were prepared to pay them NOT how good our league was and we all know where that approach got us.

The quality of player impacts on the quality of the league
The quality of player is impacted by the cash that clubs pay therm.

[Supras]

Law Stud, on 18 March 2010 - 20:00, said:

Oh sorry I must have missed that. So the reason there aren't many Scottish players in the EPL is because they CHOOSE to play in the SPL.

Well, it's not a choice to specifically play in the SPL but rather in Champions League football were you playing for Rangers or Celtic. I believe Marc Crosas had a lot of interest from Premiership clubs as did Lafferty but they both chose to move to the old firm. The point is also relevant to Scottish players at the Old Firm, why move to some bottom feeder premiership club when you can get a game in the Champions League and stroll through most SPL games? The likes of Thomson, Brown, Whittaker and McGregor are good enough to play in the Premiership, maybe even Boyd as well. Even Lee McCulloch is regarded as one of Wigans best ever players and their fans were sad to see him go.

If you take away the Old Firm then, in the long term, the number of Scottish players in the EPL will match or exceed the number of Welsh or Irish players.

What is your point anyway? Do you think that no players currently playing in Scottish football are good enough for the Premiership? Similarly, how many players from the Irish or Welsh league are good enough for the Premiership?

[vikingTON]

Supras, on 18 March 2010 - 17:26, said:

Well, not per capita. Andorra could spend 99% of their GDP on footballing facilities and coaching and they would still be shit, indeed, their facilities will still be poor in compraison to Russia if they spent 1% of their GDP on footballing facilites and coaching - indeed Ice Hockey is the primary sport in Russia.

You're only highlighting your own intellectual flaws by choosing stupid examples.

[Law Stud]

Supras, on 18 March 2010 - 20:25, said:

What is your point anyway? Do you think that no players currently playing in Scottish football are good enough for the Premiership? Similarly, how many players from the Irish or Welsh league are good enough for the Premiership?

None, in all three counts - since they would all have gone to Premiership clubs ahead of their own had they had offers.

Lafferty was touted around by Owen Coyle when Burnley were in the Championship. He wouldn't have done that if he believed he was good enough for the Premiership. Davies was put out on loan by Fulham who knew he wasn't good enough for the Premiership.

I don't even think that the normal refuge for Scottish players heading south - Birmingham - would be interested in any of the players you mention. You might get Wolves, or Hull sniffing around Boyd but only if they get relegated.

[Supras]

vikingTON, on 18 March 2010 - 20:46, said:

You're only highlighting your own intellectual flaws by choosing stupid examples.

Well, you asked such a stupid question I am not sure what you expected me to say, besides pointing out that you were wrong. Your last two posts indicate you have abandoned any actual debate and are reverting to typical troll mode.

Besides that, using a very small and very large nation in a comparison is not a stupid example at all when disucssing the importance of population in deciding how successful a nation is at football.

Law Stud, on 18 March 2010 - 21:07, said:

None, in all three counts - since they would all have gone to Premiership clubs ahead of their own had they had offers.

Lafferty was touted around by Owen Coyle when Burnley were in the Championship. He wouldn't have done that if he believed he was good enough for the Premiership. Davies was put out on loan by Fulham who knew he wasn't good enough for the Premiership.

I don't even think that the normal refuge for Scottish players heading south - Birmingham - would be interested in any of the players you mention. You might get Wolves, or Hull sniffing around Boyd but only if they get relegated.

But, they didn't. Robbie Keane could have gone to Wolves on loan but either he or Redknapp rejected the offer.

He is not good enough for the Premiership, he is barely good enough for the SPL, but the interest was there. I am sure Davies could get a game at a lower Premiership team.

And, following that final statement, I am not going to continue to indulge your wind up.

[vikingTON]

Supras, on 18 March 2010 - 21:47, said:

Well, you asked such a stupid question I am not sure what you expected me to say, besides pointing out that you were wrong. Your last two posts indicate you have abandoned any actual debate and are reverting to typical troll mode.

Besides that, using a very small and very large nation in a comparison is not a stupid example at all when disucssing the importance of population in deciding how successful a nation is at football.

Erm no, the question was entirely pertinent, in that biiger nations spend bigger resources often spread among larger and more dispersed groups of footballing interest. So in per capita terms and also in rating efficiency of spending, a country like Ukraine could be spending less than Scotland. Yet Scotland could be spending less than the Netherlands. The majority of successful nations are those with advanced footballing strucutres, interest and culture, allied with a reasonable population. Demographics does not set in stone the fate of a nation in any sport, and it seems clear that while Scotland doesn't need to re-invent the wheel (as HJ has said), to use the simplistic 'we're better than similarly-sized nations' is a cover for the tangible progress that could be made.

[Law Stud]

Supras, on 18 March 2010 - 21:47, said:

Well, you asked such a stupid question I am not sure what you expected me to say, besides pointing out that you were wrong. Your last two posts indicate you have abandoned any actual debate and are reverting to typical troll mode.

Besides that, using a very small and very large nation in a comparison is not a stupid example at all when disucssing the importance of population in deciding how successful a nation is at football.



But, they didn't. Robbie Keane could have gone to Wolves on loan but either he or Redknapp rejected the offer.

He is not good enough for the Premiership, he is barely good enough for the SPL, but the interest was there. I am sure Davies could get a game at a lower Premiership team.

And, following that final statement, I am not going to continue to indulge your wind up.

What wind up?

Supras, in January Boyd and McGregor were on the transfer list. There were no Premiership clubs interested. Celtic had half their team available for transfer. Gary Caldwell got a move to Wigan but their top goalscorer from last season, Scott McDonald, couldn't get a Premiership move and landed up at Middlesborough.

When Wigan signed James McCarthy it would have been a cheap signing to add to their squad. He'll be on pennies compared to much of the squad and had he flopped they would have known that it wasn't going to be a big loss for them. But where are the other highly rated young players in the SPL today that might draw attention from the Premiership.

Our best players have been heading for the Championship for years in the hope they can win promotion and get to the Premiership that way. It's a sad fact but the Welsh and the Irish have had more success in producing players that play for Premiership clubs than Scotland - and by some distance too.

[Supras]

vikingTON, on 18 March 2010 - 22:13, said:

Erm no, the question was entirely pertinent, in that biiger nations spend bigger resources often spread among larger and more dispersed groups of footballing interest. So in per capita terms and also in rating efficiency of spending, a country like Ukraine could be spending less than Scotland. Yet Scotland could be spending less than the Netherlands. The majority of successful nations are those with advanced footballing strucutres, interest and culture, allied with a reasonable population. Demographics does not set in stone the fate of a nation in any sport, and it seems clear that while Scotland doesn't need to re-invent the wheel (as HJ has said), to use the simplistic 'we're better than similarly-sized nations' is a cover for the tangible progress that could be made.

Well, of course per capita is relevant, but it doesn't deter from my central point that population is the primary factor.

Reasonable population? Obviously, the correlation between population and national ranking/quality of leauge is there for everyone to see, where is your evidence that per capita spending has a significant effect on national ranking/quality of league? Of course, it is a factor, but it is not the primary factor.
But you do raise an interesting point, in years gone by Scottish teams were more successful given the long standing history football has in this country and the investment in football. However, as nations like Croatia and those from the Soviet Union (for example, Russia and Ukraine) begin to invest resources in footabll there national team or quality of league has improved considerably. The likes of Shakthar Donestk and Zenit St. Petersbug have spent more in recent years than any Scottish team has done in decades.
Again, I was making the point that Scottish is not 'terrible' or 'in a crisis' or is even in need of any serious restructuring or investment. In order to compile a critique of Scottish football it is only natural we compare ourselves to nations with a similar footballing infrastructure and population, however, all too often we comparee ourselves with the likes of England or even the Netherlands despite the fact these are both considerably larger nations than ourselves.

Well of course progress can be made; the same can be said for all nations.

[vikingTON]

Supras, on 18 March 2010 - 23:58, said:

Well, of course per capita is relevant, but it doesn't deter from my central point that population is the primary factor.

Reasonable population? Obviously, the correlation between population and national ranking/quality of leauge is there for everyone to see

Really? How strong are the Chinese and Indian leagues? Why are they not featuring at the World Cup? Why isn't Russia the dominant European footballing nation?

This post has been edited by vikingTON: 19 March 2010 - 11:34

[vikingTON]

Indeed once you stop putting the cart before the horse, you see that there isn't a strong correlation at all, let's look at, by population, who should be the 32 entrants to the World Cup, removing the federation quotas from the picture for simplicity:

http://en.wikipedia....s_by_population

Ah yes, it's surely only a matter of time before Ethiopia, Bangladesh and Indonesia rise to the global footballing elect.

[Supras]

vikingTON, on 19 March 2010 - 11:34, said:

Really? How strong are the Chinese and Indian leagues? Why are they not featuring at the World Cup? Why isn't Russia the dominant European footballing nation?

I know someone was going to ask that fucking question, I just didn't think it'd be you. Not at any point did I claim it was a sole factor, as for the reasons specific to the country, well you already know them. That said, over the next few decades Russia will likely emerge as a major footballing nation due to considerable investment, despite the fact it is the secondary sport in the country.

vikingTON, on 19 March 2010 - 11:41, said:

Indeed once you stop putting the cart before the horse, you see that there isn't a strong correlation at all, let's look at, by population, who should be the 32 entrants to the World Cup, removing the federation quotas from the picture for simplicity:

http://en.wikipedia....s_by_population

Ah yes, it's surely only a matter of time before Ethiopia, Bangladesh and Indonesia rise to the global footballing elect.

Again, such data is only relevant if I stated it was a sole factor. A far more accurate measure would be the correlation between world rankings and population, a correlation that has already been made and supports my point.

No it's not, they are all very poor countries with little interest in football and a terrain that isn't ideal for the sport.

[AndyM]

ukol, on 17 March 2010 - 19:59, said:

I gave up being interested in Scottish football the day your mob robbed us when Fyssas was sent off for Maloney diving at the corner flag. There were so many things that annoyed me that day, the officials, the constant bigotry coming from the away end and the media and SFA's reaction to the performance of the referee. Not that it was a one off but it just made me think whats the point. I still go to watch us most weeks but it's more to do with a tradition and love for my football club and nothing to do with the horrific state that Scottish footballs in. Rotten to the core.

I agree, Between the thicko bigotry and rotten corruptness of the the Old Firm and the collusion of a craven media and weak influenced referees it's rotten to the fucking core. The only reason I go along to football if I'm not in Corporate with work is to meet up with my mates and to support the club I love. I was in Corporate Hospitality at Tynecastle that day you refer to and normally I'd have a laugh with my colleagues at the Jambos expense, but that went beyond a joke. Maloney also took a dive to win a penalty at Easter Road a matter of weeks later to ensure a very narrow Celtic win..... nothing was made of that. Again utter robbery.

I'd throw in the Andy Davies game vs Rangers as well. Hearts ended up being made to look like the bad guys after that one which I thought was absolutely outrageous.

I actually find it amusing that some of the Sellik-minded troops are crying about refereeing decisions. Did John Hughes make a big fuss about the referees when Zemmama was elbowed in the face by Boyd and no red card was issued, or when Liam Miller was incorrectly sent off at Motherwell, or when the St Johnstone keeper was wrongly allowed to stay on the pitch after taking out an on-rushing Hibs striker and conceding a penalty all within the space of 3 weeks? No he didn't but then Hibs have no ludicrous agendas to push. I guess us diddy teams should really know our place.

As I said.... rotten to the fucking core.

This post has been edited by AndyM: 19 March 2010 - 13:29

[vikingTON]

Supras, on 19 March 2010 - 12:52, said:

I know someone was going to ask that fucking question, I just didn't think it'd be you. Not at any point did I claim it was a sole factor, as for the reasons specific to the country, well you already know them. That said, over the next few decades Russia will likely emerge as a major footballing nation due to considerable investment, despite the fact it is the secondary sport in the country.




Again, such data is only relevant if I stated it was a sole factor. A far more accurate measure would be the correlation between world rankings and population, a correlation that has already been made and supports my point.

No it's not, they are all very poor countries with little interest in football and a terrain that isn't ideal for the sport.

You said it was a primary factor. the evidence does not suggest that this is the case. Therefore, the data is relevant. To do it world rankings then population is to put the cart before the horse.

What tangible evidence is there to suggest that former eastern Bloc countries (to include Ukraine) will develop their game as opposed to the 1970s, when they were as, if not, more competitive than today?

This post has been edited by vikingTON: 19 March 2010 - 20:30

[Supras]

vikingTON, on 19 March 2010 - 20:03, said:

You said it was a primary factor. the evidence does not suggest that this is the case. Therefore, the data is relevant. To do it world rankings then population is to put the cart before the horse.

What tangible evidence is there to suggest that former eastern Bloc countries (to include Ukraine) will develop their game as opposed to the 1970s, when they were as, if not, more competitive than today?

It is, and the evidence does suggest this is the case. You will have to do a lot better than listing the worlds biggest countries and saying they are not all good at football, in fact, why don't you provide a per capita spending list in comparison to world rankings? I believe this is the second time I have asked this question. I am sure small, rich nations like Luxembourg and Switzerland are going to do very well.

Football is becoming more popular in these countries and there is no longer such a focus on olympic events. That, and of course, the considerable investment into the teams I have already mentioned.

[The Idiot Bástard Son]

Ogre, on 14 March 2010 - 23:48, said:

I have been watching Scottish football now for 30 years and can honestly say that the quality on offer now is the worst I have seen in that time. I have a Season ticket for my local team, St.Mirren but will not be renewing this due to the extremely poor quality of football I have been watching for some years now at St.Mirren games and all other Scottish games which I watch either online or on the television.

In addition I have given up with the biased refereeing at SPL and SFA games involving the Old Firm. The decisions today at the Rangers V Dundee Utd game very disgraceful but are nothing new to our game when the Old Firm and Rangers in particular are concerned. Our game is therefore unfair.

I have also been told by a police official that they have been told to turn "a blind eye" to actions by OF fans at away games including sectarian singing which is disgusting. How many people do you know who support "provincial" clubs but do not go to OF games or do not take their kids to these games in their home stadiums ?

St.Mirren play Rangers next Sunday in the League Cup Final and I know of many St.Mirren fans who will not go because it is Rangers that we play and they either fear for their safety or that they will witness once again some dodgy decision by a biased referee.

I love this shít. You watched Saints for 30 years including the worst team in the entire history of the club back in the 90's, when we all wondered if the players had met each other at least an hour before the game let alone try and do something, and now, because the club are in the top flight but not vying for a European place like we used to this is "the worst football" you've ever seen in your life? You're a funny guy! And a fuckwit.