Jump to content

Scots on the move


Recommended Posts

19 hours ago, HalfCutNinja said:

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

a quick search shows that in 2018 Iceland were ranked in FIFA's top 20. That is a strong side in my view unless only top 10 are considered strong or whatever the subjective cut-off point is to suit any argument. 

Iceland beating England was indeed hilarious on a number of levels but not in terms of shocks. Iceland were playing well, had a good group stage and were confident going into the game. England were the same old England - functional if unspectacular with usual frailties including over-confidence on and off the field. England were on their way down the rankings and out of the top 10, Iceland, at 34 continuing their climb up the rankings. 

A team beating another team ranked 20 or so places above them on a neutral venue is not routine but not wholly unexpected or unprecedented either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, BingMcCrosby said:

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.

Look mate we get it you're a craven Britnat weirdo so bristle like f**k when someone correctly points out England's record compared to their peers is and always has been absolutely howling. The rest is just noise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, KingRocketman II said:

a quick search shows that in 2018 Iceland were ranked in FIFA's top 20. That is a strong side in my view unless only top 10 are considered strong or whatever the subjective cut-off point is to suit any argument. 

Iceland beating England was indeed hilarious on a number of levels but not in terms of shocks. Iceland were playing well, had a good group stage and were confident going into the game. England were the same old England - functional if unspectacular with usual frailties including over-confidence on and off the field. England were on their way down the rankings and out of the top 10, Iceland, at 34 continuing their climb up the rankings. 

A team beating another team ranked 20 or so places above them on a neutral venue is not routine but not wholly unexpected or unprecedented either.

Yes it was. Iceland were and always have been shite. Have a look at their squad from then tell us who they all played for. They were and are shite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, HalfCutNinja said:

Look mate we get it you're a craven Britnat weirdo so bristle like f**k when someone correctly points out England's record compared to their peers is and always has been absolutely howling. The rest is just noise.

Im certainly not a britnat, never heard the term before. But I can guess what it means. I dont support England in anyway. Dont dislike the people, but I want them to lose at football. And personally would rather we were independent, so that kind of blows that theory out the water.

Also the post you quoted didn't actually even mention England?

Just say "I have no meaningful answer" next time.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, HalfCutNinja said:

Yes it was. Iceland were and always have been shite. Have a look at their squad from then tell us who they all played for. They were and are shite.

Regardless of your opinion on their players, they got to the quarter finals of a major tournament.

An achievement the apparently over performing Scotland could only dream of.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, BingMcCrosby said:

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

You do have a habit of being deliberately dense, so let me break it down for you.

That poster (who have wisely left the thread) thought Scotland losing to Morocco was more embarrassing than England losing to Iceland. This is patently nonsense and was pointed out.

I've heard a lot of nonsense spoken about the national team by the self haters, but never anything that reached those depths.

22 hours ago, BingMcCrosby said:

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.

Actually, Scotlands incredibly strong domestic league (far better than any peers) holds us back, as it does for Morocco, Turkey, Russia and many others. Basically, you will end up with good players who don't challenge themselves at the highest level because they can earn decent money and live at home. Callum McGregor is a clear present example of a player good enough to play at the highest level, but chooses not to, because he can get a very good wage and live in the city where he was born and his family is (which is fair enough). It's the same reason why you don't see many players from these nations playing abroad, there are some Ukrainians / Russians / Turks / Egyptians etc. abroad but many others who could move don't.

Contrast that with dire domestic leagues like Ireland, Wales, Finland etc. - almost their entire national teams (and certainly all their good players) will be made up of players playing abroad. 

This obviously doesn't affect the top 5 leagues in the world, where they are the highest level even if a high proportion of domestic players stay (i.e. England).

It affects countries like Brazil and Argentina to a lesser extent, but both have a long history of exporting talent to Europe (and Brazil is so big that many players will move abroad). What has changed in recent decades is the age at which they leave, you won't see many players over the ages of 21, 22 moving from Brazil / Argentina to a top European nation, the likes of Vinicius, Alvarez, Aguero, Jesus, Richarlison, Rodrygo (and countless others) all left fairly young.

Scotland factually does do better than most nations with similar populations (as well as better than many larger countries). We're not the best in our peer group (our domestic game is) but we're far from the worst.

England, clearly, are the worst of their peer group. And it's not even remotely close.

21 hours ago, KingRocketman II said:

a quick search shows that in 2018 Iceland were ranked in FIFA's top 20. That is a strong side in my view unless only top 10 are considered strong or whatever the subjective cut-off point is to suit any argument. 

Iceland beating England was indeed hilarious on a number of levels but not in terms of shocks. Iceland were playing well, had a good group stage and were confident going into the game. England were the same old England - functional if unspectacular with usual frailties including over-confidence on and off the field. England were on their way down the rankings and out of the top 10, Iceland, at 34 continuing their climb up the rankings. 

A team beating another team ranked 20 or so places above them on a neutral venue is not routine but not wholly unexpected or unprecedented either.

The World Rankings are a bit opaque, but a quick look at their squad confirms they were still crap at this point. That squad of players was crap before, and has been crap subsequently. Going on a cup run is far from unheard of in football, and credit to them for having a good few years, but they are back down to earth with a bang now (as was to be expected).

They didn't have a particularly good group stage, they won one game (with a last minute winner against Austria). France hammered them in the next round.

Every media report at the time called it a huge shock, because it was. Have a look at the bookies odds on the game. Or even after England scored earlier.

It was a massive shock result from a team who have been rubbish their entire history, and have been rubbish since. It's maybe the worst result in Englands history, it's undoubtedly Icelands best.

I know another poster thought this, but do you think Scotland losing to Morocco was worse?

10 hours ago, BingMcCrosby said:

Regardless of your opinion on their players, they got to the quarter finals of a major tournament.

An achievement the apparently over performing Scotland could only dream of.

It's not so much apparently, but over the course of Scotlands history there is no doubt our national side overperforms in qualifying for world cups.

We have actually played Iceland 6 times, and won every single time.

But I have no doubt that in my lifetime Scotland will reach a quarter final of (at least) a 24 team Euros. Let's hope we don't ship 5 goals when we do.

Keep thinking we're terrible and hopeless though, you are a self hater after all. 

Edited by Satoshi
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Satoshi said:

You do have a habit of being deliberately dense, so let me break it down for you.

That poster (who have wisely left the thread) thought Scotland losing to Morocco was more embarrassing than England losing to Iceland. This is patently nonsense and was pointed out.

Here it is, direct quote from you. Youve never heard Scotland fans claim Morocco are worse than Iceland 🤣 What a fool

On 28/07/2022 at 10:11, 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.

I never read the rest of the last post, I seen the last line when deleting it for the quote. As stated before by me, proven correct again.

Paragraphs of jabbering with "everyone who disagrees hates themselves" at the end😂

I think your projecting your feelings.

Edited by BingMcCrosby
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, HalfCutNinja said:

Yes it was. Iceland were and always have been shite. Have a look at their squad from then tell us who they all played for. They were and are shite.

 

1 hour ago, Satoshi said:

 

The World Rankings are a bit opaque, but a quick look at their squad confirms they were still crap at this point. That squad of players was crap before, and has been crap subsequently. Going on a cup run is far from unheard of in football, and credit to them for having a good few years, but they are back down to earth with a bang now (as was to be expected).

They didn't have a particularly good group stage, they won one game (with a last minute winner against Austria). France hammered them in the next round.

Every media report at the time called it a huge shock, because it was. Have a look at the bookies odds on the game. Or even after England scored earlier.

It was a massive shock result from a team who have been rubbish their entire history, and have been rubbish since. It's maybe the worst result in Englands history, it's undoubtedly Icelands best.

I know another poster thought this, but do you think Scotland losing to Morocco was worse?

so take out the fact they qualified for the tournament. Ignore their performances in the tournament itself. Ignore the fact they continued to perform well after the tournament to put them into the top 20 best teams in the world. Ignore the rankings altogether in fact. 

However judge the strength of the Icelandic team at that time on who their players played for and assess whether England's defeat was a shock based on hyperbole red top headlines. And consider whether Morocco beating Scotland was a bigger shock to add some perspective. 

I'll leave you guys to it. 

Edited by KingRocketman II
typos
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, 2426255 said:

 

I've heard the bid was around €3 Million, but Club Brugge are looking for around €5/6 Million. 

Obviously the Scot’s abroad Twitter will be raging, but a move to a top end championship team wouldn’t be a bad move for him IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, KingRocketman II said:

 

so take out the fact they qualified for the tournament. Ignore their performances in the tournament itself. Ignore the fact they continued to perform well after the tournament to put them into the top 20 best teams in the world. Ignore the rankings altogether in fact. 

However judge the strength of the Icelandic team at that time on who their players played for and assess whether England's defeat was a shock based on hyperbole red top headlines. And consider whether Morocco beating Scotland was a bigger shock to add some perspective. 

I'll leave you guys to it. 

The answer is that it was clearly a massive shock.

I've seen some historical revisionism in my time but this truly takes the biscuit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Satoshi said:

The answer is that it was clearly a massive shock.

I've seen some historical revisionism in my time but this truly takes the biscuit.

The answer to what?

They got to the quarter finals of a major tournament thats a fact, your the one who's trying to downplay that.

And then accuse others of revisionism😂

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, BingMcCrosby said:

The answer to what?

They got to the quarter finals of a major tournament thats a fact, your the one who's trying to downplay that.

And then accuse others of revisionism😂

I'm not downplaying it all, I'm not surprised you completely missed the point again.

It's a great result for Iceland, their best ever. And reaching a QF is almost certainly the best they will ever do.

The male Icelandic football team has since been mired in a number of sexual abuse cases but that doesn't detract from their football.

The point was how horrific a result it was for England. And it undoubtedly was.

No idea what your point is, I assume you have nothing as usual.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Satoshi said:

I'm not downplaying it all, I'm not surprised you completely missed the point again.

It's a great result for Iceland, their best ever. And reaching a QF is almost certainly the best they will ever do.

The male Icelandic football team has since been mired in a number of sexual abuse cases but that doesn't detract from their football.

The point was how horrific a result it was for England. And it undoubtedly was.

No idea what your point is, I assume you have nothing as usual.

 

You are absolutely downplaying it, its exactly what you are doing. Wtf are you talking about.

Thats twice you have mentioned a sexual abuse scandal also, what relevance is this?

Is it something you think Scotland fans should be debating, as well as the ongoing Iceland vs Morocco debate?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, BingMcCrosby said:

You are absolutely downplaying it, its exactly what you are doing. Wtf are you talking about.

Thats twice you have mentioned a sexual abuse scandal also, what relevance is this?

Is it something you think Scotland fans should be debating, as well as the ongoing Iceland vs Morocco debate?

The criticism is of England, not Iceland. No idea why you don't get this.

And it's relevant as the team is totally disgraced in Iceland now.

It's not something Scotland fans should be debating because saying Iceland losing to england was a massive shock is such a clearly obvious statement I didn't think anyone would bother disagreeing.

Clearly I forgot the mindset of some of the people on this board to talk down the Scottish national team at any possible opportunity. Imagine thinking Scotland losing to Morocco was worse than England losing to Iceland? The mind boggles. These people really exist.

2 hours ago, KingRocketman II said:

😂

Yeah it was a massive shock - one of the biggest ever in international football. What wasn't a massive shock was Iceland being hammered by France in the next round.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Scotty Tunbridge said:

Obviously the Scot’s abroad Twitter will be raging, but a move to a top end championship team wouldn’t be a bad move for him IMO.

Especially if Burnley continue to play the way they did on Friday night. Looks like they'll pass the ball about and build from the back which should suit Hendry down to the ground.

Elliot Anderson also being linked with Burnley on loan this morning which would be a good move for him. I'm sure I read Howe wanted to keep him around the first team squad but would be much better to see him out at a decent level playing most weeks than sitting on Newcastle's bench.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Satoshi said:

The criticism is of England, not Iceland. No idea why you don't get this.

And it's relevant as the team is totally disgraced in Iceland now.

It's not something Scotland fans should be debating because saying Iceland losing to england was a massive shock is such a clearly obvious statement I didn't think anyone would bother disagreeing.

Clearly I forgot the mindset of some of the people on this board to talk down the Scottish national team at any possible opportunity. Imagine thinking Scotland losing to Morocco was worse than England losing to Iceland? The mind boggles. These people really exist.

Yeah it was a massive shock - one of the biggest ever in international football. What wasn't a massive shock was Iceland being hammered by France in the next round.

No you were criticising Iceland, their players, their performances, and for some reason a sexual abuse scandal. Which again isn't in any way relevant.

Don't you remember? Scroll back

Edited by BingMcCrosby
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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