Jump to content

Team GB


JamesM82

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 41
  • Created
  • Last Reply
5 hours ago, thekorean said:

Seems like the best and fairest solution is to go with whomever that advances the furthest.

That is not fair to the other countries, since it gives "Team GB (:yucky)" four chances to qualify (possibly five if Gibraltar count too).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, craigkillie said:

That is not fair to the other countries, since it gives "Team GB (:yucky)" four chances to qualify (possibly five if Gibraltar count too).

Its better than having to put Scottish players in an awkward position.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The rest of UEFA/European IOC members don't care about putting Scottish players in an awkward position though, they care about having a fair chance to qualify for the Olympics without one country having multiple opportunities.

If we (or any other home nation) are worried about our players being put in an awkward position, then it's our responsibility to pull out of this Team GB nonsense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, John Lambies Doos said:

Team GB = Team England. That will be the perception anyway. So no, I won't be supporting them. SFA ever make this move for male football it will be the death of Scotland

No one cared the first time you said it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
16 hours ago, JamesM82 said:

Looks like someone in the SFA has noticed the potential conflict of interest.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/46430993

Seems quite petty to me.  While it isn't ideal the way they're treating qualification, I'd like to hear what the players themselves think of it.  I'd imagine they'd be pretty annoyed to be denied the chance to compete in an Olympic games (which are far more important in the women's game than the men's) on some kind of principled stance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, forameus said:

Seems quite petty to me.  While it isn't ideal the way they're treating qualification, I'd like to hear what the players themselves think of it.  I'd imagine they'd be pretty annoyed to be denied the chance to compete in an Olympic games (which are far more important in the women's game than the men's) on some kind of principled stance.

Surely the principled stance counts for something though; protecting the national team's existence giving more young men and women the chance to play for their country?

to be honest don't see why we don't just have a Scottish Olympics team and give all the nations a chance same as everywhere else.  Pretty sure it could be accommodated if the will is there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, tirso said:

Surely the principled stance counts for something though; protecting the national team's existence giving more young men and women the chance to play for their country?

to be honest don't see why we don't just have a Scottish Olympics team and give all the nations a chance same as everywhere else.  Pretty sure it could be accommodated if the will is there.

But that's the bit that always gets me.   I can see that stance, and understand it, but if your governing body is saying it won't affect anything then I don't see why it keeps getting mentioned.  I know FIFA aren't exactly clean and they could well turn around and change their minds, but if that's the case then get something legal drawn up if necessary.  

Just seems like every time one of these articles comes up, the same paragraph about the SFA being against it, but FIFA saying it's alright comes up.  Had FIFA said the opposite, and that participating would definitely lead to issues, then I'd be one of the first to say get it to f**k.  Instead it just seems like we might rob women of their chance.

EDIT: And following on from that, I don't see the point in us getting involved in a male team should it come to it.  It means nothing to them, so isn't really worth the bother.  The women's team is different.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, forameus said:

But that's the bit that always gets me.   I can see that stance, and understand it, but if your governing body is saying it won't affect anything then I don't see why it keeps getting mentioned.  I know FIFA aren't exactly clean and they could well turn around and change their minds, but if that's the case then get something legal drawn up if necessary.  

Just seems like every time one of these articles comes up, the same paragraph about the SFA being against it, but FIFA saying it's alright comes up.  Had FIFA said the opposite, and that participating would definitely lead to issues, then I'd be one of the first to say get it to f**k.  Instead it just seems like we might rob women of their chance.

EDIT: And following on from that, I don't see the point in us getting involved in a male team should it come to it.  It means nothing to them, so isn't really worth the bother.  The women's team is different.

It's about precedent.  And we've been told before there have been questions asked about the Home Nations before.

Plenty overseas territories have their own IOC, i'd rather people started getting behind giving our lassies a chance in our own team.  Even more participation for all the nations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 04/12/2018 at 08:44, forameus said:

Seems quite petty to me.  While it isn't ideal the way they're treating qualification, I'd like to hear what the players themselves think of it.  I'd imagine they'd be pretty annoyed to be denied the chance to compete in an Olympic games (which are far more important in the women's game than the men's) on some kind of principled stance.

It's not petty at all. It's nice to see a principled stance in football. Team GB was supposed to be a one off thing, but of course that was a pack of lies. There should be neither a men's or women's team going forward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/8/2018 at 02:07, QwaarJet said:

It's not petty at all. It's nice to see a principled stance in football. Team GB was supposed to be a one off thing, but of course that was a pack of lies. There should be neither a men's or women's team going forward.

Why shouldn't there be?  Why does it matter?  Purely because it "risks affecting our status"?  I've already said that if that was going to be the case, fine.  But given FIFA have repeatedly said that it won't, then it's a pointless stance.  

Anyway, the SFA have now said they won't block it, so good news.  Won't please certain bitter people, but potentially great for those that aren't just ranting online and are actually involved in representing their country.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FIFA said that it wouldn't affect our status, but power can shift. The African and Asian nations are becoming more powerful and are gaining more of a foothold in the governance of the world game. 

It's not inconceivable that, in the not too distant future, the governing body will decide that the home nations no longer have any privileged status, and may use the Olympics and "Team GB" as precedent to back up their argument.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...