Ireland v scotland

[Satoshi]

8 hours ago, Binos said:

If the sfa are calling it a success that's a clear sign that it wasn't 

So you don't think getting to the playoffs in the next WC qualifying is a success?

It's fine, just a bizarre mindset. You probably don't think getting to the world cup is a success, only winning every game 5-0.

6 hours ago, ahemps said:

Yeah 9 in a row must be awful, luckily that doesn't happen here.

We have also seen 2 unbeaten seasons in the last 4 and recently had a quadruple treble. We are without a doubt they most uncompetitive league in Europe. We have the biggest financial disadvantage between the top 2/3 and the rest (only Portugal comes close).

Salzburg got to the Europa semis a few years ago beating Sociedad, Dortmund and Lazio on the way and went out after extra time to Marseille, they were a ball hair off matching Rangers achievement of a final but you keep shouting about 40yrs ago when we last won a trophy as if it's relevant today. And a one off cup run can happen at anytime so while it was a great achievement lets not kid ourselves on and say this was expected by Rangers, they played out of their skins to get there but they had one of the worst records of a team to get to a European final. They lost 3 knockout games and had the lowest points (8) of a 2nd placed team to qualify. Salzburg took 10points from their CL group last year which had the champions of France and Seville in it. 

And I don't hate the Red Bull model at football clubs, they scout well and sell the players on just like Lille, Benfica and Brentford etc. so it is not exclusive to them, it is open for anyone to do the same (Celtic were doing it fairly well for a while but not to the same level). They don't go into masses of debt to buy players and keep them for the sake of winning trophies like Rangers have done. If they lived within their means would they have achieved a Europa final?

I am not a died in the wool traditionalist that thinks this is such a bad thing. They are a successful brand who have invested in sport. I don't have an issue with that. I get why others in Austria would but it is like any successful team, they are disliked because they are successful.

Salzburg had won three titles before 2007 (less than Aberdeen, Hearts, Hibs, and one more than Dumbarton), they now have 16. You're right, that doesn't happen in Scotland. Thank god.

How does one define an uncompetitive league? Most leagues have a small number of teams dominating. Given RB Salzburg have won 9 consecutive titles and most by a huge margin I think it's clear they are more uncompetitive, and I haven't even bothered to check any others. Scotland have had two different winners in the last two years and the gap was 4 points in 38 games, not 18 in 22. I mean, you can think Austria is far more competitive, but you would just be factually wrong. 

So there has been three European finalists from Scotland since the new millenium, and zero from Austria? Glad you agree. Random cup runs can happen, not usually 3 though. Even if they are benefitting from having a team run by a marketing company, and we are not. Without that they would be no where. I'm sure most Austrian fans would prefer that, RB are pretty despised. As for winning European cups 40 years ago, my point was that the Scottish league was far better than the Austrian league and history is very relevant in that. Despite being a big country, with a wonderful footballing history, they haven't even come close to matching the Scottish domestic in achievements or proportional attendances. They fall far behind. And it's no slight on them, pretty much every European nation does - we are far ahead of our peer group nations in our domestic game.

I don't personally hate the RB model either but it's because it doesn't affect me. If you were a fan of a club in Austria (or Germany or whererver) then obviously you are going to hate it. It's like a club taking over Aidreonians* and quickly transforming them into by far the best team in the country by far who win the league by scores of points every year. Austrian fans despise this, and would probably hate that you're (wrongly) using the RB model as something to prop up their domestic game.

Celtic and Rangers will both try the RB model (most medium sized clubs try it), but obviously they won't do it as successfully because they are doing it as individual entities not conglomerates. Running 10 bars will give you economies of scale over running one bar. Additionally doesn't help that RB have genuine professionals in marketing / sales etc. working for them and Celtic and Rangers are run by bigoted weirdos and gangsters (although tbf the recent head of McKinsey was a big Celtic fan who apparently gave them advice sometimes).

RB Salzburg (and other clubs like them) are not hated just for being successful, you can't be that naive. Clearly their ownership model contributes to that hatred and that is why they are protested against / boycotted around the world. Surely you know this?

But overall, glad you agree that Scottish teams reach more finals recently, win more European cups and have a much higher proportion of their population going to matches. They have more league winners in the last 2 years than Austria have in the last 9 and the final places are much closer. Were it not for a marketing company taking over one of their failing teams 15 years ago they would be pretty much no where (and almost all Austrian football fans would prefer it). I know Scots love to self hate, but given the above, would anyone seriously rather be like the Austrian Bundesliga? Can't imagine a single fan actually wanting that.

*They have taken over lots of different clubs, some in deep lower leagues, so it's just an example.

[ahemps]

5 hours ago, Satoshi said:

How does one define an uncompetitive league? Most leagues have a small number of teams dominating. Given RB Salzburg have won 9 consecutive titles and most by a huge margin I think it's clear they are more uncompetitive, and I haven't even bothered to check any others. Scotland have had two different winners in the last 38 years and the gap was 4 points in 38 games, not 18 in 22. I mean, you can think Austria is far more competitive, but you would just be factually wrong. 

FTFY

There are Scots alive who have seen 9 in a row 3 times. It has happened 3 times in 55 yrs (3x9=27) almost half the titles in that time period have been won in a run of 9 in a row.

5 hours ago, Satoshi said:

How does one define an uncompetitive league? Most leagues have a small number of teams dominating. Given RB Salzburg have won 9 consecutive titles and most by a huge margin I think it's clear they are more uncompetitive, and I haven't even bothered to check any others. Scotland have had two different winners in the last two years and the gap was 4 points in 38 games, not 18 in 22. I mean, you can think Austria is far more competitive, but you would just be factually wrong. 

I think the Uruguay league holds the record for the same 2 teams winning it at something like 45yrs. When we smash that out the park it will be a great day for competitive sport. An achievement you can hold up to say how great we are and how ultra competitive our game really is.

[eez-eh]

“Glad you agree” is the new “be specific”.

[Satoshi]

18 minutes ago, ahemps said:

FTFY

There are Scots alive who have seen 9 in a row 3 times. It has happened 3 times in 55 yrs (3x9=27) almost half the titles in that time period have been won in a run of 9 in a row.

I think the Uruguay league holds the record for the same 2 teams winning it at something like 45yrs. When we smash that out the park it will be a great day for competitive sport. An achievement you can hold up to say how great we are and how ultra competitive our game really is.

Well it's good you only addressed one part of my post.

I also never said our league was ultra competitive, just that it blows all our peers out the water in terms of proportional attendances and continental success. Because it does.

Most European leagues look on ours with envy and you can hardly blame them, we are a small nation who has punched above our weight for so long now. 

[HuttonDressedAsLahm]

1 hour ago, Satoshi said:

Well it's good you only addressed one part of my post.

I also never said our league was ultra competitive, just that it blows all our peers out the water in terms of proportional attendances and continental success. Because it does.

Most European leagues look on ours with envy and you can hardly blame them, we are a small nation who has punched above our weight for so long now. 

It's a poor measure of relative performance though.  If Bill Gates walks into a pub in Shettleston tomorrow, everyone is a billionaire on average, but no one is any richer.

 

[Satoshi]

1 hour ago, HuttonDressedAsLahm said:

It's a poor measure of relative performance though.  If Bill Gates walks into a pub in Shettleston tomorrow, everyone is a billionaire on average, but no one is any richer.

 

Our proportional attendance would still be one of the highest in Europe if you took away the old firm (and didn't make similar adjustments elsewhere).

Same with our european record for the matter, aberdeen have more European trophies than every Austrian side combined.

So it isn't just the old firm by any means.

[Binos]

9 hours ago, Satoshi said:

So you don't think getting to the playoffs in the next WC qualifying is a success?

It's fine, just a bizarre mindset. You probably don't think getting to the world cup is a success, only winning every game 5-0.

 

Qualifying is a success 

Not qualifying is not a success 

And if you have the same group of players qualifying for multiple tournaments,  you would want to see them building on their performances at respective successive tournaments 

Perfectly normal mindset 

[Satoshi]

46 minutes ago, Binos said:

Qualifying is a success 

Not qualifying is not a success 

And if you have the same group of players qualifying for multiple tournaments,  you would want to see them building on their performances at respective successive tournaments 

Perfectly normal mindset 

Except qualifying from the WC qualifying group to the playoff is also a success. Which pretty much everyone would agree on except you it seems, self hater in chief.

I would 100% take wc playoffs next time, would you?

[HuttonDressedAsLahm]

52 minutes ago, Binos said:

Qualifying is a success 

Not qualifying is not a success 

And if you have the same group of players qualifying for multiple tournaments,  you would want to see them building on their performances at respective successive tournaments 

Perfectly normal mindset 

It's only in football where 80% of all teams fail every season under that metric.  Not everyone can qualify for a WC, and in UEFA's case, only 13/55 sides can.  From the 2026 World Cup, it's going to 6/10 CONMEBOL teams but only 16/55 sides in UEFA.  Asia will get 8 qualifiers (up from 4.5) and New Zealand will now qualify every time.

I for one, am looking forward to the posters in here arguing that Bolivia, Iraq, New Zealand, and United Arab Emirates, are better and more successful sides than Scotland, Ukraine, Czech Republic, Russia, Turkey, Norway, and Greece. 

[Binos]

7 hours ago, Satoshi said:

Except qualifying from the WC qualifying group to the playoff is also a success. Which pretty much everyone would agree on except you it seems, self hater in chief.

I would 100% take wc playoffs next time, would you?

Wtf are you talking about 

Enjoying not qualifying for tournaments 

[Binos]

7 hours ago, Satoshi said:

Except qualifying from the WC qualifying group to the playoff is also a success. Which pretty much everyone would agree on except you it seems, self hater in chief.

I would 100% take wc playoffs next time, would you?

Do you work at the sfa or something 

[Satoshi]

7 hours ago, Binos said:

Wtf are you talking about 

Enjoying not qualifying for tournaments 

Do you fundamentally not understand how the playoffs work?

Before I waste another response, would you be happy qualifying for the playoffs in the next wc qualifying group? Yes or no.

[2426255]

Dear oh Dear oh dear.  (Mark Clattenburg speaking)

 

Edited June 17, 2022 by 2426255

[velo army]

Gretna getting to the 2006 Scottish cup final meant that the Scottish first division was every bit as good as the SPL that year.

This is the logic you're employing here when you use Rangers' appearance in the final as some sort of indication of superiority of the league in which they play.

The Austrian league is better than the top tier in Scotland by any metric not requiring a time machine.

Their top team is better than our top team. Their third best would comfortably beat Hearts. It's been pointed out that their coefficient is better than ours. 

You doubling down with such verbosity is a sight to behold.

 

[craigkillie]

52 minutes ago, velo army said:

The Austrian league is better than the top tier in Scotland by any metric not requiring a time machine.

Their top team is better than our top team. Their third best would comfortably beat Hearts. It's been pointed out that their coefficient is better than ours.

 

There is barely a difference between the league coefficients - they are currently one place ahead of us, but that is based on performances in 2017/18 - over the last four years Scotland have outperformed them.

I don't think it's clear cut at all that Austria Vienna would comfortably beat Hearts. St Johnstone played LASK last season and there wasn't a lot between them, and that was a shit St Johnstone team as we would soon discover over the season. They might well play each other and we can have the chance to work that out.

[velo army]

1 hour ago, craigkillie said:

 

There is barely a difference between the league coefficients - they are currently one place ahead of us, but that is based on performances in 2017/18 - over the last four years Scotland have outperformed them.

I don't think it's clear cut at all that Austria Vienna would comfortably beat Hearts. St Johnstone played LASK last season and there wasn't a lot between them, and that was a shit St Johnstone team as we would soon discover over the season. They might well play each other and we can have the chance to work that out.

Thanks for that. So perhaps there's barely a fag paper between our leagues then. The OP of this particular debate was saying that ours is much better but his supporting evidence was rubbish. 

I seem to have been talking pish about their league being better if the coefficient isn't too different. 

Edited June 17, 2022 by velo army

[Satoshi]

On 17/06/2022 at 20:11, velo army said:

Thanks for that. So perhaps there's barely a fag paper between our leagues then. The OP of this particular debate was saying that ours is much better but his supporting evidence was rubbish. 

I seem to have been talking pish about their league being better if the coefficient isn't too different. 

Yeah well at least you see that now.

On Gretna you might have a point I'd that happened repeatedly but it didn't, three times Scottish teams have reached European finals this millennium, for Austria its stone cold zero. I'm not even sure if they have reached many semi finals.

We have also won far more European trophies than them.  

Bear in mind this is a country almost double our size with an amazing footballing legacy, and we are leaving them well behind. It's quite extraordinary, and a wonderful indication of the strength of our domestic game.

As pointed out it's not just Austria either, Poland and Hungary are far behind too.

[John Lambies Doos]

Yeah well at least you see that now.
On Gretna you might have a point I'd that happened repeatedly but it didn't, three times Scottish teams have reached European finals this millennium, for Austria its stone cold zero. I'm not even sure if they have reached many semi finals.
We have also won far more European trophies than them.  
Bear in mind this is a country almost double our size with an amazing footballing legacy, and we are leaving them well behind. It's quite extraordinary, and a wonderful indication of the strength of our domestic game.
As pointed out it's not just Austria either, Poland and Hungary are far behind too.

Is that really a barometer on the state of our league/development etc.?
I mean since 2005, only 2 French clubs have reached a European final(same as us) with both getting beat...and 1 of them was multi millions PSG.
Are we honestly saying the Scottish league is on par with the French.?
Should be based on development of players, ie French league develops well for the bigger leagues ie German, Italian, Spanish and English.

[red23]

I remember a conversation i had with a rangers fan offshore when they went tits up.

Was telling me how awful it'd be if Rangers are forced in to the bottom league because of "us". He said "be careful what you wish for, think what you's are doing, you're cutting your nose of to spite yourselves and will end up with a league with the same team winning every year, doesn't that even concern you?"

Rangers/Celtic winning year after year is the same difference tbh. 

[Bonksy+HisChristianParade]

On 20/06/2022 at 07:52, Satoshi said:

Yeah well at least you see that now.

On Gretna you might have a point I'd that happened repeatedly but it didn't, three times Scottish teams have reached European finals this millennium, for Austria its stone cold zero. I'm not even sure if they have reached many semi finals.

We have also won far more European trophies than them.  

Bear in mind this is a country almost double our size with an amazing footballing legacy, and we are leaving them well behind. It's quite extraordinary, and a wonderful indication of the strength of our domestic game.

As pointed out it's not just Austria either, Poland and Hungary are far behind too.

Have you ever been right about anything? Lower league teams have made the final of the Scottish Cup five times since Gretna did it.