Scots on the move

[Donathan]

On 18/07/2022 at 12:10, Satoshi said:

England is a much bigger country than all three of those mentioned (it's more than double the size of the Netherlands and Belgium combined).

Their record relative to their continental rivals like Italy, Spain, France and Germany is dire. They are comfortably bottom of that pack in every sense.

They have had two good tournaments in a row but still lost to tiny Croatia (who themselves were hammered by France in the final) whilst Italy dominated them in a final, something that hasn't been done so comprehensively since Italy were dominated by Spain (both in the preceding game, and in the 2012 final).

England are better than Scotland the same way Scotland are better than Luxembourg. Relative to their peers, Englands record is disastrous. Indeed, it's worth than many non peer countries.

This surely isn't news, right?

 

Absolute pish. Italy beat England in the final last year because they simply held their nerve better in a penalty shootout. England could easily have won if Southgate hadn’t had a moment of complete madness where he brought on one player who hadn’t kicked a ball in the entire tournament and another who’d hardly been involved to take penalties in the shootout. 
 

 

Acting like it was some comprehensive dismantling is completely wide of the mark. The vast majority of major finals in the past 20 years have either been won by the odd goal or on penalties. The only times a team has cruised to a major title since 2002 were Spain beating Italy 4-0 in euro 2012 and France’s 4-2 win over Croatia in the last World Cup final. 

Edited July 27, 2022 by Donathan

[General dissaray]

Mikey Johnston to Standard Liege on loan with Ronnie Dalia decent move if he can stay fit

[Pie Of The Month]

Another Scot making the move abroad.

[Marshmallo]

"David Bates is now really good again and should be in the next squad"

^^^ all you lot on here

[Satoshi]

On 27/07/2022 at 00:37, Scumjob said:

Say what you want with your comparisons to peers but the joy of following your national team lies in the journey rather than the results and ours have been much shorter than those of England fans, limited to qualifying campaigns rather than main events.

We were for two decades denied even the experience of seeing Scotland at a major tournament and the concept of a run to the knockout stages (whether destined for failure or not) gripping the nation is a mere dream for us. 

Following Scotland can basically be summed up with that Trainspotting meme and the "It's shite being Scottish" caption. At least England fans get to enjoy it some of the time. We get fleeting moments of elation (sometimes not even that) interspersed with long periods of despair and occasional periods of horrible, horrible tension that normally end up back in despair.

Yes I'm a miserable b*****d.

Yes you are.

Scotland have had no results as embarrassing in recent history as losing to Iceland.

If you wanted guaranteed success follow Real Madrid and Brazil. 

For the rest of us, you can only compete with your peer group. Scotland will only be as good as England (on a consistent basis) if we match their population (i.e. multiplying it 12 times). It's not going to happen, get over it.

 

[Scumjob]

6 hours ago, Satoshi said:

Yes you are.

Scotland have had no results as embarrassing in recent history as losing to Iceland.

If you wanted guaranteed success follow Real Madrid and Brazil. 

For the rest of us, you can only compete with your peer group. Scotland will only be as good as England (on a consistent basis) if we match their population (i.e. multiplying it 12 times). It's not going to happen, get over it.

 

Hmm I'm not sure about that, Iceland are a decent side - see like most normal people I measure a side by it's results and players not population size.

Being bummed senseless by a poor Ireland side was embarrassing.

Being battered by Kazakstan was embarrassing.

Drawing with the Faroes...

Losing to Lithuania...

That time Wales battered us 4-0.

Or Morocco rinsing us back in 98...

It's a litany of shameful results for us comparable to England losing to a strong Iceland side.

I'm not sure what you're telling me to get over, I think you've misunderstood at some point, I'm merely observing that your talking a stream of pish.

[Satoshi]

7 minutes ago, Scumjob said:

Hmm I'm not sure about that, Iceland are a decent side - see like most normal people I measure a side by it's results and players not population size.

Being bummed senseless by a poor Ireland side was embarrassing.

Being battered by Kazakstan was embarrassing.

Drawing with the Faroes...

Losing to Lithuania...

That time Wales battered us 4-0.

Or Morocco rinsing us back in 98...

It's a litany of shameful results for us comparable to England losing to a strong Iceland side.

I'm not sure what you're telling me to get over, I think you've misunderstood at some point, I'm merely observing that your talking a stream of pish.

You think Morocco are worse than Iceland?

They weren't a strong team at all, they only won one game in the group stage (scoring a last minute winner against Austria) and France put 5 past them the next round. They had a few good players but most of their team, their golden generation, wouldn't get near the Scotland team.

That squad have since become a disgrace, a national embarrassment mired in sex abuse scandals (not relevant to their football mind).

Iceland spent most of their footballing history doing nothing because it's a tiny country. Their future will be mostly doing nothing too.

England losing to them was far, far worse than Scotland losing to Morocco or away to Kazakhstan. 

You've admitted you're a miserable b*****d but even amongst people that hate the Scottish national team I've never seen any seriously claim Morocco are worse than Iceland.

Morocco should be expecting to beat Scotland, not the other way around. Losing to them is no embarrassment.

 

 

 

[Donathan]

Iceland had a golden generation where they qualified for two straight tournaments and did decently in them. Beating England was an upset but I wasn’t entirely shocked. I can honestly think of about ten of our results since 2000 straight off the top of my head that were more embarrassing:

 

In no particular order: 

 

1. Falling 2-0 down in Toftir after 12 minutes and having to scramble to a 2-2 draw.

 

2. and 3. Dropping points in Lithuania not once but twice, a 1-0 defeat in 2003 and a 0-0 draw in the opening qualifier (can’t remember if it was the 2010 World Cup or euro 2012(

 

 

4. and 5. Two defeats in Georgia, one of which would have qualified us for euro 2008 in a group with France and Italy.

 

6. Losing at home to Belarus in a must win qualifier under Walter Smith. 
 

7. Getting hammered by Kazakhstan 

 

8. and 9. Twice dropping points to Macedonia very early on in campaigns, which effectively killed our chances of qualifying before they’d even begun. 
 

10. and 11. Draws in Moldova and Belarus 

[Scumjob]

3 hours ago, Satoshi said:

You think Morocco are worse than Iceland?

They weren't a strong team at all, they only won one game in the group stage (scoring a last minute winner against Austria) and France put 5 past them the next round. They had a few good players but most of their team, their golden generation, wouldn't get near the Scotland team.

That squad have since become a disgrace, a national embarrassment mired in sex abuse scandals (not relevant to their football mind).

Iceland spent most of their footballing history doing nothing because it's a tiny country. Their future will be mostly doing nothing too.

England losing to them was far, far worse than Scotland losing to Morocco or away to Kazakhstan. 

You've admitted you're a miserable b*****d but even amongst people that hate the Scottish national team I've never seen any seriously claim Morocco are worse than Iceland.

Morocco should be expecting to beat Scotland, not the other way around. Losing to them is no embarrassment.

 

 

 

By your logic we should only compare Iceland with their peers and Morocco is a much bigger country population wise. Iceland's population would have to increase 100 times over.

I don't hate Scotland at all, but your claim that England aren't more succesful than us is absurd.

[HalfCutNinja]

6 hours ago, Scumjob said:

Hmm I'm not sure about that, Iceland are a decent side - see like most normal people I measure a side by it's results and players not population size.

Being bummed senseless by a poor Ireland side was embarrassing.

Being battered by Kazakstan was embarrassing.

Drawing with the Faroes...

Losing to Lithuania...

That time Wales battered us 4-0.

Or Morocco rinsing us back in 98...

It's a litany of shameful results for us comparable to England losing to a strong Iceland side.

I'm not sure what you're telling me to get over, I think you've misunderstood at some point, I'm merely observing that your talking a stream of pish.

There's never been a strong Iceland side. That's one of the most hilarious result's in the history of international football.

[HalfCutNinja]

4 hours ago, Donathan said:

Iceland had a golden generation where they qualified for two straight tournaments and did decently in them. Beating England was an upset but I wasn’t entirely shocked. I can honestly think of about ten of our results since 2000 straight off the top of my head that were more embarrassing:

 

In no particular order: 

 

1. Falling 2-0 down in Toftir after 12 minutes and having to scramble to a 2-2 draw.

 

2. and 3. Dropping points in Lithuania not once but twice, a 1-0 defeat in 2003 and a 0-0 draw in the opening qualifier (can’t remember if it was the 2010 World Cup or euro 2012(

 

 

4. and 5. Two defeats in Georgia, one of which would have qualified us for euro 2008 in a group with France and Italy.

 

6. Losing at home to Belarus in a must win qualifier under Walter Smith. 
 

7. Getting hammered by Kazakhstan 

 

8. and 9. Twice dropping points to Macedonia very early on in campaigns, which effectively killed our chances of qualifying before they’d even begun. 
 

10. and 11. Draws in Moldova and Belarus 

None even close. You're a craven weirdo Britnat. England have by far the worst record of all their peers. Amongst our peers Scotland's is very good.

[HalfCutNinja]

2 hours ago, Scumjob said:

By your logic we should only compare Iceland with their peers and Morocco is a much bigger country population wise. Iceland's population would have to increase 100 times over.

I don't hate Scotland at all, but your claim that England aren't more succesful than us is absurd.

They're not. Not remotely. 

[Bing.McCrosby]

7 hours ago, Scumjob said:

Hmm I'm not sure about that, Iceland are a decent side - see like most normal people I measure a side by it's results and players not population size.

Being bummed senseless by a poor Ireland side was embarrassing.

Being battered by Kazakstan was embarrassing.

Drawing with the Faroes...

Losing to Lithuania...

That time Wales battered us 4-0.

Or Morocco rinsing us back in 98...

It's a litany of shameful results for us comparable to England losing to a strong Iceland side.

I'm not sure what you're telling me to get over, I think you've misunderstood at some point, I'm merely observing that your talking a stream of pish.

Of course its not measured just by population.

The guy @Satoshi is an absolute walloper.

If you do just measure it by population England are doing remarkably well. Of the 24 countries with higher populations they are doing way better than 20 of them.

Including China and India who have more than 20 times their population.

[Bing.McCrosby]

1 hour ago, HalfCutNinja said:

None even close. You're a craven weirdo Britnat. England have by far the worst record of all their peers. Amongst our peers Scotland's is very good.

How are you judging who is and who isn't a peer out of interest?

[General dissaray]

David Bates joining Legia Warsaw for £200 000 from the bo peeps

[Bing.McCrosby]

12 hours ago, Satoshi said:

You've admitted you're a miserable b*****d but even amongst people that hate the Scottish national team I've never seen any seriously claim Morocco are worse than Iceland.

Just one more thing.

You've never heard any Scotland fans declaring that Morocco are worse than Iceland?

I find that very hard to believe, do you go to the games?

Frankly the constant chat among fans at hampden about whos better between Morocco and Iceland nearly drove me away. Its literally all Scotland fans talk about. And why wouldn't they.

Perhaps you spend to much time shouting "you all hate yourselves" and don't hear it.

 

[Satoshi]

14 hours ago, Donathan said:

Iceland had a golden generation where they qualified for two straight tournaments and did decently in them. Beating England was an upset but I wasn’t entirely shocked. I can honestly think of about ten of our results since 2000 straight off the top of my head that were more embarrassing:

 

In no particular order: 

 

1. Falling 2-0 down in Toftir after 12 minutes and having to scramble to a 2-2 draw.

 

2. and 3. Dropping points in Lithuania not once but twice, a 1-0 defeat in 2003 and a 0-0 draw in the opening qualifier (can’t remember if it was the 2010 World Cup or euro 2012(

 

 

4. and 5. Two defeats in Georgia, one of which would have qualified us for euro 2008 in a group with France and Italy.

 

6. Losing at home to Belarus in a must win qualifier under Walter Smith. 
 

7. Getting hammered by Kazakhstan 

 

8. and 9. Twice dropping points to Macedonia very early on in campaigns, which effectively killed our chances of qualifying before they’d even begun. 
 

10. and 11. Draws in Moldova and Belarus 

None of those games are even close to being as bad. England losing to Iceland, especially after an early goal, was a massive shock.

Absolutely astounded people don't realise this. 

Every nation you mentioned is a significantly bigger country than Iceland.

12 hours ago, Scumjob said:

By your logic we should only compare Iceland with their peers and Morocco is a much bigger country population wise. Iceland's population would have to increase 100 times over.

I don't hate Scotland at all, but your claim that England aren't more succesful than us is absurd.

Correct, it's not Iceland fault they are much worse than Morocco, not much you can do when you are the size of a small town. Iceland do incredibly well Vs their peers - good for them.

Morocco, for many reasons including too strong a domestic league, do pretty poorly compared to their peers and most of their best players are diaspora. They are far from great, but are still far better than Iceland - and certainly should be better than Scotland.

The Scots who thought they were walkovers in 1998 were obscenely ignorant.

6 hours ago, BingMcCrosby said:

Of course its not measured just by population.

The guy @Satoshi is an absolute walloper.

If you do just measure it by population England are doing remarkably well. Of the 24 countries with higher populations they are doing way better than 20 of them.

Including China and India who have more than 20 times their population.

Those countries do not have football as their dominant sport.

England does, as does Spain, Italy, France and Germany. They are England's peers not India and China.

It's not just measured by population, but combined with football being the dominant sport there's an incredibly clear correlation. The biggest county with football as the dominant sport, Brazil, is the best. Germany is next with a decent claim to being second best. 

Meanwhile the likes of San Marino and Andorra might love football but they are total crap and always will be. Not much you can do when your opponents have 1000s of times as many players to choose from.

In a game Glasgow select Vs Dingwall select I know who my money would be on.

 

6 hours ago, BingMcCrosby said:

How are you judging who is and who isn't a peer out of interest?

How about nations of a similar population with a similar level of interest in football? Like those mentioned above.

2 hours ago, BingMcCrosby said:

Just one more thing.

You've never heard any Scotland fans declaring that Morocco are worse than Iceland?

I find that very hard to believe, do you go to the games?

Frankly the constant chat among fans at hampden about whos better between Morocco and Iceland nearly drove me away. Its literally all Scotland fans talk about. And why wouldn't they.

Perhaps you spend to much time shouting "you all hate yourselves" and don't hear it.

 

In 1998 there was an obscenely ignorant perspective towards Morocco.

And in the context of that conversation, the other poster was saying Scotland losing to Morocco was worse than England losing to Iceland.

Which is absolutely mental, England are quite a bit better than Scotland and Morocco quite a bit better than Iceland. It's one of the most mental takes I've ever seen on this forum. I'm sure the poster is suitably embarrassed now.

[HalfCutNinja]

12 hours ago, BingMcCrosby said:

How are you judging who is and who isn't a peer out of interest?

Using a combination of basic football knowledge and average intelligence. 

[Bing.McCrosby]

1 hour ago, HalfCutNinja said:

Using a combination of basic football knowledge and average intelligence. 

Its not as simple as saying oh thats a football country and that isn't. Do Scotland not have the highest representation at matches per population in Europe?

How about how many people or children play the sport? This and what facilities and coaching available are whats going to be the driving forse for producing players.

This part here im just absolutely guessing at, Scotland as a football obsessed country. With the highest attendances in Europe per population. Surely must have a high percentage of players per population.

Which is why we should be doing better than other European countries with similar populations.

[Bing.McCrosby]

7 hours ago, Satoshi said:

In 1998 there was an obscenely ignorant perspective towards Morocco.

And in the context of that conversation, the other poster was saying Scotland losing to Morocco was worse than England losing to Iceland.

Which is absolutely mental, England are quite a bit better than Scotland and Morocco quite a bit better than Iceland. It's one of the most mental takes I've ever seen on this forum. I'm sure the poster is suitably embarrassed now.

Not as embarrassing as saying "I've never heard Scotland fans claiming Iceland are better than Morocco"