A reality check: Our standing in Europe

[DA Baracus]

Queen's Park are better than Hearts.

[Satoshi]

9 minutes ago, DA Baracus said:

Queen's Park are better than Hearts.

Not better, you could say they are overall slightly more successful in the Scottish cup (with their last final in 1900).

Doesn't really work in club football where Hearts have been above Queens park for over a century.

Historical results obviously don't make you better than another nation, but it's important in terms of considering the long term trends. If Wales are better than Scotland for 50 years we should be worried, but there's no evidence to suggest it's anything other than a minor anomaly that will soon correct itself.

When Scotland qualified for two world cups in the 1970s and England didn't I'd be saying the same then - this is an unsustainable trend that will quickly correct itself. And it did.

[Chewing Taffies]

Denmark have been better than us for 40 years. Hopefully this anomaly corrects itself soon.

[TheScarf]

9 minutes ago, Chewing Taffies said:

Denmark have been better than us for 40 years. Hopefully this anomaly corrects itself soon.

As have Wales for the last 10.  I don't care how many wins Scotland got over Wales and Denmark in 1748 or whenever.

[Ben Reilly]

1 hour ago, DA Baracus said:

Queen's Park are better than Hearts.

That's the most sensible post in this thread yet.

[Satoshi]

50 minutes ago, Chewing Taffies said:

Denmark have been better than us for 40 years. Hopefully this anomaly corrects itself soon.

Probably not, the two countries are similar sizes with a similar interest in football. Denmark will probably grow faster and has more diversity, they wont be better for the next 40 years (they certainly haven't been better for each of the last 40 years, just overall). I expect it will be quite close in future, with Denmark maybe edging it overall.

This is just international football, our domestic game pisses all over theirs - always has and probably always will.

40 minutes ago, TheScarf said:

As have Wales for the last 10.  I don't care how many wins Scotland got over Wales and Denmark in 1748 or whenever.

At least that answers one of my questions, you only care about the last 10 years but no other time period.

Wonder what you thought when Wales lost to Serbia 6-1 10 years ago, at least we haven't had any results that embarrassing. We haven't reached their heights certainly, nor come close to their lows.

[Chewing Taffies]

3 minutes ago, Satoshi said:

This is just international football, our domestic game pisses all over theirs - always has and probably always will.

This is the Tartan Army section Pep. We were only discussing international football.

Edited June 7, 2022 by Chewing Taffies

[TheScarf]

2 minutes ago, Satoshi said:

 

At least that answers one of my questions, you only care about the last 10 years but no other time period.

Wonder what you thought when Wales lost to Serbia 6-1 10 years ago, at least we haven't had any results that embarrassing. We haven't reached their heights certainly, nor come close to their lows.

Give me Wales' record at tournament qualification, then performance at said tournament, over Scotland's any day.  I don't care how many times Scotland have qualified and got a measly point.

[Satoshi]

28 minutes ago, Chewing Taffies said:

This is the Tartan Army section Pep. We were only discussing international football.

Fine, still important context to give. We consume far more domestic than international football, and it's something that Scotland is a world leader at in terms of proportional attendances and continental success / population. Most Danish fans would love to replicate our domestic success I would suspect.

27 minutes ago, TheScarf said:

Give me Wales' record at tournament qualification, then performance at said tournament, over Scotland's any day.  I don't care how many times Scotland have qualified and got a measly point.

2 world cup qualifcations Vs 9? Fair enough, you've won the aforementioned boss level.

Wales have won 1 in 5 games at the world cup, Scotland have played 23 and won 4. Quite extraordinary thinking the former is better but that's Scotland fans for you!

You sound like a ray of sunshine.

[TheScarf]

3 minutes ago, Satoshi said:

Fine, still important context to give. We consume far more domestic than international football, and it's something that Scotland is a world leader at in terms of proportional attendances and continental success / population. Most Danish fans would love to replicate our domestic success I would suspect.

2 world cup qualifcations Vs 9? Fair enough, you've won the aforementioned boss level.

Wales have won 1 in 5 games at the world cup, Scotland have played 23 and won 4. Quite extraordinary thinking the former is better but that's Scotland fans for you!

You sound like a ray of sunshine.

No mention of Euro 2016 and 2020?  Ah no wait, that's far too recent for P and B's football historian.

[John Lambies Doos]

Wales' qualification record isn't even close to ours, nor is their head to head record. Covered in more detail the other thread, but on current trends they will match our wc qualification in 266 years (assuming we don't qualify in that period) and would need to beat us 38 consecutive times to match our head to head record.
I also don't think their current squad is better than ours, but if you do then fair enough. They are no doubt punching above their weight at the moment - good for them, Scotland has been punching above our weight most of our history - nice to see someone else get a small taste!

Yeh, if u go back to the days of yore you are correct. However I prefer to look at the more recent past. In the last 20 years their qualification record and their actual progression in tournaments is far better than ours, as is the head to head.
Heh, let's look back to the 1800's when at times we were the best team on planet

[Satoshi]

3 minutes ago, TheScarf said:

No mention of Euro 2016 and 2020?  Ah no wait, that's far too recent for P and B's football historian.

Well I was talking about the world cup! But yes Scotland have also qualified for more Euros than Wales (3 vs 2). Wales have played one more match in total.

And relatively poor teams can have cup runs, it's why Wigan won the FA cup and why Greece won the Euros (and why Iceland and Wales reached QF / SF).

It's inevitable it will happen in Scotland (which you will hate I'm sure). But one cup run, or two, doesn't change or alter a century and a half of footballing history. 

At Wales' current record of qualifying once every 38 years they will take 266 years to match Scotlands qualification record for the World Cup (assuming we never qualify in that period). To match our head to head they would need to win 38 consecutive matches without response. 

The ball is round (great book incidentally) and sometimes sport throws up unexpected cup runs. If it was entirely predictable nobody would watch it. But you can't beat long term trends, there's a reason why Wales are behind Scotland the overwhemling majority of the time, and why they will continue to be in future.

1 minute ago, John Lambies Doos said:

Yeh, if u go back to the days of yore you are correct. However I prefer to look at the more recent past. In the last 20 years their qualification record and their actual progression in tournaments is far better than ours, as is the head to head.
Heh, let's look back to the 1800's when at times we were the best team on planet

For The Scarf it's 10 years, for you is 20. For the other guy it was 40 years. For me, either all of the history is relevant or only the last result (or few results) are.

Different ways of looking at things I guess. 

[TheScarf]

Just now, Satoshi said:

Well I was talking about the world cup! But yes Scotland have also qualified for more Euros than Wales (3 vs 2). Wales have played one more match in total.

And relatively poor teams can have cup runs, it's why Wigan won the FA cup and why Greece won the Euros (and why Iceland and Wales reached QF / SF).

It's inevitable it will happen in Scotland (which you will hate I'm sure). But one cup run, or two, doesn't change or alter a century and a half of footballing history. 

At Wales' current record of qualifying once every 38 years they will take 266 years to match Scotlands qualification record for the World Cup (assuming we never qualify in that period). To match our head to head they would need to win 38 consecutive matches without response. 

The ball is round (great book incidentally) and sometimes sport throws up unexpected cup runs. If it was entirely predictable nobody would watch it. But you can't beat long term trends, there's a reason why Wales are behind Scotland the overwhemling majority of the time, and why they will continue to be in future.

For The Scarf it's 10 years, for you is 20. For the other guy it was 40 years. For me, either all of the history is relevant or only the last result (or few results) are.

Different ways of looking at things I guess. 

No, everyone on here is in agreement that Wales and Denmark have been better than us for at least a decade (Denmark far longer) but you're going on about daft stats from 60 years ago and trying to say that Scotland are better than both.  

Wales and Denmark are better than Scotland, and I'm fairly certain 99% of people on here would take their international history over ours (from the fucking minute football was invented 150 odd years ago seeing as you're a historian).  I would, without question.

 

[eez-eh]

10 hours ago, Satoshi said:

Hardly unlucky, it very much depends on your definition of how much. What sticks out is their victory at a Euros they didn't qualify for (and Scotland did). Great stroke of luck on their part, but good to them for winning. But, if you desire, they are far better. Would you be willing to concede Scotland were far better for the 100 years before that?

There is no “if you desire” about it. In that timeframe they’ve played at nearly double the amount of major tournaments as Scotland, and have won 1 of them and been semi-finalists in 2, with Scotland failing to progress beyond the first round every time.

There is no contest.

10 hours ago, Satoshi said:

I know people like the which round in the cup you got to metric, it's literally the only thing people have given how far ahead we are on most head to head records and qualification records. But surely even the most self hating scot ever concedes that our qualification record is quite extraordinary compared to our peers?

By the “which round in the cup you got to metric” do you mean to say the “only way of determining how successful an international team has been at a major tournament metric”?

[Satoshi]

6 minutes ago, TheScarf said:

No, everyone on here is in agreement that Wales and Denmark have been better than us for at least a decade (Denmark far longer) but you're going on about daft stats from 60 years ago and trying to say that Scotland are better than both.  

Wales and Denmark are better than Scotland, and I'm fairly certain 99% of people on here would take their international history over ours (from the fucking minute football was invented 150 odd years ago seeing as you're a historian).  I would, without question.

 

The time periods keep changing. And fair enough if you would prefer Wales' meagre history, I certainly wouldn't. But it's personal choice. Some people like 1 great year, rather than 20 good ones.

6 minutes ago, eez-eh said:

There is no “if you desire” about it. In that timeframe they’ve played at nearly double the amount of major tournaments as Scotland, and have won 1 of them and been semi-finalists in 2, with Scotland failing to progress beyond the first round every time.

There is no contest.

By the “which round in the cup you got to metric” do you mean to say the “only way of determining how successful an international team has been at a major tournament metric”?

But for the latter, the only way of determining is how you perform at an international tournament, not how often you get there.

So that by reasoning, someone who gets to the second round once, is better than someone who qualifies for 20 consecutive times but doesn't get past the first round? And it wouldn't matter if that one side spent the rest of their history getting hammered 6-1 off average teams and finishing bottom of their qualifying group? And getting repeatedly beaten by the team who qualifies consistently but doesn't get past the first round? 

Quite an extrardinary mindset, but fair enough, at least you're consistent.

Edited June 7, 2022 by Satoshi

[John Lambies Doos]

My main two sporting loves are Football and Rugby. I'd take Wales international record for both over Scotland's in a heartbeat.
We have been a seething mess once we reach tournaments

[Lex]

We had a real golden period of 24 years between 1974 and 1998. We qualified for five out of six world cups and two out six Euro's, we made seven tournaments out of 12. In the 24 year period since between 1998 and 2022 we qualified for one tournament out of 12. Before 1974 we were fairly hopeless at qualifying too, we never made it to three world cups in a row between 1962 and 1970 and we never qualified for a single European Championships between 1968 and 1988.

The golden period looks like the anomaly, we've been pretty hopeless at international football apart from it. Even during that period we couldn't get past the first stage of a tournament once.  Something Wales, Ireland, Nothern Ireland, Denmark and other similar European nations have all managed several times. 

[thew2020]

9 minutes ago, Satoshi said:

The time periods keep changing. And fair enough if you would prefer Wales' meagre history, I certainly wouldn't. But it's personal choice. Some people like 1 great year, rather than 20 good ones.

But for the latter, the only way of determining is how you perform at an international tournament, not how often you get there.

So that by reasoning, someone who gets to the second round once, is better than someone who qualifies for 20 consecutive times but doesn't get past the first round? And it wouldn't matter if that one side spent the rest of their history getting hammered 6-1 off average teams and finishing bottom of their qualifying group? And getting repeatedly beaten by the team who qualifies consistently but doesn't get past the first round? 

Quite an extrardinary mindset, but fair enough, at least you're consistent.

I have counted this now - and you have mentioned Wales losing 6-1 SEVEN times in the last week - Was this the last time you watched Wales play, as I doubt many Welsh fans even remember that result. For a man so focused on 100 years of results I find you obsessively focusing on this one result quite unusual. 

The statement 'the natural order will resume' sounds like a statement an arrogant English fan would state if they were ever to lose to Scotland - When Scotland next beat England I really hope you don't just say 'The natural order will resume shortly, England have a great history against Scotland (qualifications and H2H record) so we shouldn't be excited/happy'

[eez-eh]

5 minutes ago, Satoshi said:

The time periods keep changing. And fair enough if you would prefer Wales' meagre history, I certainly wouldn't. But it's personal choice. Some people like 1 great year, rather than 20 good ones.

But for the latter, the only way of determining is how you perform at an international tournament, not how often you get there.

So that by reasoning, someone who gets to the second round once, is better than someone who qualifies for 20 consecutive times but doesn't get past the first round? And it wouldn't matter if that one side spent the rest of their history getting hammered 6-1 off average teams and finishing bottom of their qualifying group? And getting repeatedly beaten by the team who qualifies consistently but doesn't get past the first round? 

Quite an extrardinary mindset, but fair enough, at least you're consistent.

Yes, lets focus on the a Wales part because the Denmark one didn’t go so well for you.

Scotland have been better than Wales for most of history but in my lifetime Wales have exceeded us. It’s fair to question why Wales have been so much better than us for the past decade and have hit heights that Scotland never have.

[John Lambies Doos]

What really annoys me is that as a country we accept this mediocre pish.
In essence, football is our only sport... Wales is a rugby country, ROI a GAA country.
We have a population of 6 million. With that we can't even qualify for tournaments..never mind go deep at them. Do you think teams like Croatia are happy to get papped out in group stages.
The SFA are an absolute disgrace, they have failed us for years....yet there has never been any dramatic overhaul
What was it Einstein said......