The Anybody But England Thread.

[Marc Albrighton]

Well a lot of english people don't particularly care about them unless we play them, although the way they are so desperate for us to fail because they are never there themselves definitely makes it enjoyable for me atleast.

[milnerpoint]

I would say a huge number of Scots dont care about England either, its just us rabid, bitter fans who take pleasure in your failure.

Nevermind, you can get a good laugh at our expense when we fail to get to the next Euro's and we will have a good laugh when you guys go out in the groups with zero points, we can even have a new ABE thread when it all comes along.

[Marc Albrighton]

Yea you clearly don't care Deary me.

[Wiggins Top Boys]

Again. Just odd.

[milnerpoint]

Yea you clearly don't care Deary me.

I never said i didnt care, i have clearly shown that i do care about England losing, as it greatly pleases me, i care so much i'm rabid about it all.

[Marc Albrighton]

You as in the scots, you knew what i meant and yes a huge amount quite clearly do care.

[Boltman]

Speak for yourself but generally i've been pretty supportive of All of the home nations side + Ireland

This is the thing that I don't understand.

Scotland v England rivalry isn't really any different to the logic behind why Liverpool fans like to see Man U struggle and vice-versa, Celtic and Rangers etc, it's a natural rivalry. What I really don't understand is why anyone would actually shout for a foreign country. As a Scot I find the 'I'm English but I always support Scotland???' thing a bit condescending.

The Ireland thing is just utterly bizarre. Couldn't give a toss about them, have no interest in hearing about them. Might as well be Panama or Surinam. 'Oh but a lot of Irish players play in Britain!!!', aye, and so do players from practically every other country on the planet yet ITV/BBC don't treat those nations as if they were England or Scotland.

[Just-Wool]

This is the thing that I don't understand.

Scotland v England rivalry isn't really any different to the logic behind why Liverpool fans like to see Man U struggle and vice-versa, Celtic and Rangers etc, it's a natural rivalry. What I really don't understand is why anyone would actually shout for a foreign country. As a Scot I find the 'I'm English but I always support Scotland???' thing a bit condescending.

Scotland isn't a foreign country. (Until September at least). It isn't a far leap to realise that people in the UK want each UK state to do well, regardless of the noise made by others.

After all, we're all the same country - we really should have a UK team anyway.

[Boltman]

No we're not. We're the same State. States are a completely manufactured entity. It's hardly any wonder that a lot of people absolutely do not identify with them in any way. Scotland and England are separate countries whether you like it or not.

[bluebirds4life]

A UK team would be the worst thing ever.

[milnerpoint]

They tried it with team GB, it was terrible, and no one really cared out with England. Infact most were opposed to it.

The UK is not a country as Boltman says, its a state, Scotland, England, Wales and N.Ireland are not the same country.

[TM]

I don't really see how national rivalry isn't seen as the same as club rivalry?

Liverpool fans wouldn't want Man Utd to win a European competition and vice versa? We have shared TV with England and that TV would be insufferable if England went deep again in a World Cup/Euros Finals

[chopra_hill]

WAKE UP ITS A BEAUTIFUL MORNING

See you in France lads hahaha

[Marc Albrighton]

Wales wont be seeing anyone in france.

[Just-Wool]

The UK is a unitary State. So yes, it is a country.

If the UK isn't a country then neither is China, France, Sweden and a whole host of other countries too numerable to type here.

Your passport is a UK passport.

Your driving licence is a UK driving licence.

You are UK citizens.

We are represented at G7, Nato, the EU and everywhere else politically as the UK.

Like it or not, until September, the UK is the country we all live in officially.

[ri916]

Milnerpoint . Remember lads this is guy who deletes people off facebook for supporting the 'No to Scottish independence' campaign.

[Confused Clarity]

This thread was started with tongue firmly in cheek to have a bit of a laugh between both camps.

Milnerpoint has picked up the ball & Forest Gump style - run with it.

[Retro]

This is the thing that I don't understand.

Scotland v England rivalry isn't really any different to the logic behind why Liverpool fans like to see Man U struggle and vice-versa, Celtic and Rangers etc, it's a natural rivalry. What I really don't understand is why anyone would actually shout for a foreign country. As a Scot I find the 'I'm English but I always support Scotland???' thing a bit condescending.

The Ireland thing is just utterly bizarre. Couldn't give a toss about them, have no interest in hearing about them. Might as well be Panama or Surinam. 'Oh but a lot of Irish players play in Britain!!!', aye, and so do players from practically every other country on the planet yet ITV/BBC don't treat those nations as if they were England or Scotland.

I don't think there's many people in England who support Scotland in anything. I don't know any. Ireland inexplicably do get support... I haven't really worked out why.

England and Scotland (and England and Wales) aren't natural rivals either. That'd be like Leyton Orient thinking they are rivals to Arsenal.

[ri916]

This thread was started with tongue firmly in cheek to have a bit of a laugh between both camps.

Milnerpoint has picked up the ball & Forest Gump style - run with it.

Yeah, and 99% of the 'arguments' have come from people failing to realise that someone was winding them up . Sadly I think Milnerpoint posts are genuine though...

[Rhino]

I don't think there's many people in England who support Scotland in anything. I don't know any. Ireland inexplicably do get support... I haven't really worked out why. England and Scotland (and England and Wales) aren't natural rivals either. That'd be like Leyton Orient thinking they are rivals to Arsenal.

You know better than most that the reasons for the rivalry between the two countries (/kingdoms) has very little to do with the football teams and their respective qualities.

[eldeniro]

There's no way this thread was ever going to be anything other than a coma-inducing cringe worthy facepalm fest because the internet isn't ready for tongue in cheek arguments about their countries yet.

[Pukey]

This thread was started with tongue firmly in cheek to have a bit of a laugh between both camps.

Milnerpoint has picked up the ball & Forest Gump style - run with it.

I liked the idea of the thread but it was never, ever going to go any other way, was it?

[Confused Clarity]

Of course not.

But let's get this back on track by talking about how I won £100 out of England's misery! \o/

[Retro]

You know better than most that the reasons for the rivalry between the two countries (/kingdoms) has very little to do with the football teams and their respective qualities.

Scotland aren't England's historical rivals either. When did Scotland ever politically rival England? Never.

France are England's historical rivals. In fact nearly all of England's dealings with Scotland were a direct result of our political rivalry with France.

[JD nawrat]

England and Scotland (and England and Wales) aren't natural rivals either. That'd be like Leyton Orient thinking they are rivals to Arsenal.

Except we are natural rivals, because both of our nations are the pioneers of football. Our history goes back further than any other nation and our rivalry goes with that history. The first teams to play football and the first teams to develop a rivalry over football (with each other, obviously).

Perhaps a more appropriate comparison of teams would be that England and Scotland are a bit like Manchester United and Manchester City (pre-billionaire takeover). One is massive, generally speaking successful (not that you have anything to show for it bar one trophy almost 60 years ago) and the other used to be able to compete at the same level but has since fallen far and can't compete to the same degree anymore. There's still a bitter resentment from each side towards the other, though.

As I've said a couple times now - I don't hate England. If you guys do well I'll be happy for the fans. I don't believe I've made any serious wind up posts in here... well, not until people started bringing up Scotland. And then I only react because it's tit for tat. It's still not entirely serious. I've taken this thread as a laugh and I think most have, except it would seem milnerpoint and perhaps bluebirds a couple pages ago

[JD nawrat]

Scotland aren't England's historical rivals either. When did Scotland ever politically rival England? Never.

France are England's historical rivals. In fact nearly all of England's dealings with Scotland were a direct result of our political rivalry with France.

It's nothing to do with politics. it can be just about football, you know? Although the historical politics (going bar a thousand years here) does come into it somewhat.

It's like I said - when you're the only two football teams in the world and you play each other regularly, you begin to hate one another. That rivalry grew and grew and never really stopped until one day we turned to **** and then Scotland v England matches stopped happening regularly.

[Retro]

It's nothing to do with politics. it can be just about football, you know? Although the historical politics (going bar a thousand years here) does come into it somewhat.

It's like I said - when you're the only two football teams in the world and you play each other regularly, you begin to hate one another. That rivalry grew and grew and never really stopped until one day we turned to **** and then Scotland v England matches stopped happening regularly.

You should have perhaps read the post I was responding to.

I'm old enough to remember when the Scottish national side could realistically compete with England. They were good days to be honest.

[milnerpoint]

Of course its a good laugh, but i wont hide away from the fact that i enjoy watching England lose, much like i enjoy watching Rangers lose, its rivalry, you dont want a rival to win. I really didnt think i was taking anything too serious in here.

[darren1983]

It's nothing to do with politics. it can be just about football, you know? Although the historical politics (going bar a thousand years here) does come into it somewhat.

It's like I said - when you're the only two football teams in the world and you play each other regularly, you begin to hate one another. That rivalry grew and grew and never really stopped until one day we turned to **** and then Scotland v England matches stopped happening regularly.

You are aware he's responding to a point that said the rivalry has very little to do with football right?

[JD nawrat]

You should have perhaps read the post I was responding to.

Why yes, yes I should have

FWIW I did read it, I just misread Rhino's post :o

[TM]

You should have perhaps read the post I was responding to.

I'm old enough to remember when the Scottish national side could realistically compete with England. They were good days to be honest.

I see what you are saying (qualification wise) but we lost 3-2 to England last year at Wembley and we were 2-1 up our ranking/managers haven't helped us over the last 16 years as we normally get a dire draw and at least 2 teams that are miles better than us to start off with. England generally get easy qualification draws because of their ranking which I'm not saying they don't deserve but with the same ranking, I think we'd have probably got to a European Championships at least in the last 16-20 years

[JD nawrat]

I harp on about the qualification/ranking/seeding system a lot on this forum because it is really unfair. It requires one of two things:

1. A sudden rush of superstars through your nation, propelling you to being a good side that can beat others (Belgium in the last few years are a good example).

2. Some very good results where you're overachieving that allow you to get higher in the rankings, thus higher in the seedings. Do that and you can just keep beating the smaller sides and qualifying for tournaments, keeping your seeding/ranking high (Greece have lived off of Euro 2004 ffs!).

Without either of these things, Scotland will never get an easy draw for qualification. Thankfully Euro 16 is achievable and if we get to the competition proper, that will be enough to ensure that our WC18 group is a little easier than we could usually expect, because we'd move up into Pot 2 most likely. We're currently 4 and just missed out on 3, so a good qualifying campaign could see us move right past 3 and into 2.

The system is all about rewarding the teams that are already doing great and keeping them in a position to do great. It's ********.

[ri916]

I harp on about the qualification/ranking/seeding system a lot on this forum because it is really unfair. It requires one of two things:

1. A sudden rush of superstars through your nation, propelling you to being a good side that can beat others (Belgium in the last few years are a good example).

2. Some very good results where you're overachieving that allow you to get higher in the rankings, thus higher in the seedings. Do that and you can just keep beating the smaller sides and qualifying for tournaments, keeping your seeding/ranking high (Greece have lived off of Euro 2004 ffs!).

Without either of these things, Scotland will never get an easy draw for qualification. Thankfully Euro 16 is achievable and if we get to the competition proper, that will be enough to ensure that our WC18 group is a little easier than we could usually expect, because we'd move up into Pot 2 most likely. We're currently 4 and just missed out on 3, so a good qualifying campaign could see us move right past 3 and into 2.

The system is all about rewarding the teams that are already doing great and keeping them in a position to do great. It's ********.

So every competition with seedings is unfair then? What do you propose they do instead?

[JD nawrat]

So every competition with seedings is unfair then? What do you propose they do instead?

No, not every competition.

The Champions League managed a good workaround by doing the Best Placed Playoff and the Champions Playoff (or whatever they call it). Obviously that can't really translate into the European qualifiers for major tournaments but it's an example of how you can better balance out the seedings to avoid having the same teams qualify every single time.

I mean, I want the best teams at major tournaments, of course I do. It does my head in that we have to watch Iran and Ashkan Dejagah take on Lionel Messi and Sergio Aguero when we all know that should be Zlatan Ibrahimovic and Sweden there.

But when I see a side like Greece at the World Cup - a team bereft of quality, with nothing going for them bar some good facial hair and a nice kit - it makes me sick because they're there on the back of **** easy qualifying routes that they achieved ten years ago. The system shouldn't be so rewarding to past successes if you ask me.

[ri916]

No, not every competition.

The Champions League managed a good workaround by doing the Best Placed Playoff and the Champions Playoff (or whatever they call it). Obviously that can't really translate into the European qualifiers for major tournaments but it's an example of how you can better balance out the seedings to avoid having the same teams qualify every single time.

I mean, I want the best teams at major tournaments, of course I do. It does my head in that we have to watch Iran and Ashkan Dejagah take on Lionel Messi and Sergio Aguero when we all know that should be Zlatan Ibrahimovic and Sweden there.

But when I see a side like Greece at the World Cup - a team bereft of quality, with nothing going for them bar some good facial hair and a nice kit - it makes me sick because they're there on the back of **** easy qualifying routes that they achieved ten years ago. The system shouldn't be so rewarding to past successes if you ask me.

So, in short, you don't have a better idea then?

[JD nawrat]

To give you an idea of what I'm talking about - Greece won Euro 2004 and moved up into 7th in the rankings. Fair enough, they earned that success. Fair play to them.

In the ten years following, despite never having coming close to matching that achievement, their lowest ranking has been 20th. Greece has been a top 20 team in the last decade? My arse it has.

WC 06 quals. (drawn before they won Euro 04 so they were Pot 3 going into the quals) - Ukraine, Turkey, Denmark, Albania, Georgia and Kazakhstan.

EU 08 quals. (now Pot 1 thanks to their Euro triumphs automatically making them Pot 1) - Turkey, Norway, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Hungary, Moldova, Malta. (Trivia: Not a single team here was at the World Cup in 06)

WC 10 quals. (Pot 1 again because they qualified for Euro 08) - Israel, Switzerland, Moldova, Latvia and Luxembourg (****ing lol, state of this group, still only finished second!)

EU 12 quals. (highest ranked Pot 2 team thanks to qualifying for WC10) - Croatia, Israel, Latvia, Georgia, Malta (so even when knocked down a pot they got an easy draw, went undefeated in the group lol)

WC 14 quals. (Pot 1 again) - Bosnia, Slovakia, Lithuania, Latvia, Lichtenstein

EU 16 quals. (pot 1 AGAIN) - Hungary, Romania, Finland, N. Ireland, Faroe Islands.

Their finishes in those tournaments?

DNQ, Groups, Groups, QFs, Groups, probably Groups at a minimum because that group is pathetically easy - even we would top that group.

Give a team an easy group to qualify out of and if they do it, the 'competitive nature' of their group gives them enough ranking points to stay top seeds. Surely there's something inherently wrong about that idea? "Scotland must beat Germany to become Pot 1. Greece must beat Latvia to remain in Pot 1." yeah, thanks for that.

[JD nawrat]

So, in short, you don't have a better idea then?

I don't but it isn't up to me to make sure the system is fair, is it? I'm sure the geniuses at UEFA and FIFA can think of something a bit fairer than I can.

I am really at a loss as to how Greece topping a group containing 7 diddy teams and then bombing out of the groups of the competition proper with 3 losses is deserving of Pot 1 status for three of the last four major tournaments.

Anyone who defend such ******** and comes up with the "well think of something better yourself then!" idea is a joke.

[TM]

maybe something similar to tennis could be an option? although it would be a harsh one

win Euro 2004 like Greece did, if you don't win Euro 2008 then those points you gained in 2004 come off for the next qualification campaign? it is a bit harsh though, similar to when a tennis player wins a Slam on the men's side and gets 2k for it and then has to defend that 2k in the tournament next year or loses a lot of points if they go out early

[ri916]

Aren't the Euro's qualification and the world cup qualification seeded differently anyway? One is done by UEFA and then the other by FIFA Rankings. The reason Greece keep qualifying for major tournaments is precisely because they are better than the pot 3/4/5/6 teams they come up against and some Pot 2 sides in the qualification, they are just as deserving as any of the other teams that qualify. It also works both ways, if Greece are in Pot 1 it means that Scotland could draw them and have a relatively easy group. The reason you can't come up with a better way of doing it JD is because frankly there isn't one imo, as there's never going to be a perfect way of doing these things. The only thing that really should be improved is how the UEFA/FIFA Rankings are done, as they're mostly a load of bollocks. You're also forgetting that Friendlies also count (at least for the FIFA Rankings at least) to a country's ranking, and the quality of the opposition you beat is also taken into consideration, so really if Greece are in a **** easy group they shouldn't be at an advantage in terms of maintaining their ranking, but like I say the formula FIFA use to work it out is massively unbalanced which probably leads to Greece being ranked as high as they are.

tldr; The system isn't perfect but it's the best we have, what needs improving is how the Rankings are worked out. The fact is that if Scotland are one of the best 12(?) or so teams in Europe, then they would most likely qualify for the world cup (and comfortably qualify for the Euros) but they're not. You've only qualified for one major tournament in my lifetime for a good reason.

[ri916]

maybe something similar to tennis could be an option? although it would be a harsh one

win Euro 2004 like Greece did, if you don't win Euro 2008 then those points you gained in 2004 come off for the next qualification campaign? it is a bit harsh though, similar to when a tennis player wins a Slam on the men's side and gets 2k for it and then has to defend that 2k in the tournament next year or loses a lot of points if they go out early

What Greece did in 2004 has no bearing on the current rankings, and there is a current system in place similar to that (think you only earn points for the last 4 years?). I think the point JD is making is that the knock on of them winning Euro 2004 was getting easy qualifying groups for future tournaments which kept their Ranking up where they needed it to be to stay in Pot 1.

[JD nawrat]

The tennis system is a short term season/year long thing, so it isn't really adaptable to national football because we work on 2 year 'seasons', if you like.

But yeah, the point I'm making is that the knock on effects of Greece winning 04 has kept them getting easy groups and because of the awards for winning easy groups, their poor showings against actual teams of quality isn't mattering one little jot. They've won something like 4 games in their last 6 major tournaments and yet they're still ranked 12th in the world, pot 1 for both FIFA and UEFA competition and will continue to do **** at tournaments and stay Pot 1 until they start losing to the crappy teams or the crappy teams suddenly get good. Which could be a while away.

I know Scotland aren't top 12 material, it's not strictly about Scotland though. Because of the way the groups worked out, we got Giorgios Samaras at the World Cup instead of Zlatan Ibrahimovic. That sort of stuff pisses me off. It's not that Sweden weren't good enough - they got Germany in their group so they were always going to finish 2nd there. And then they draw Portugal in the qualifier, which is unfortunate. Greece also went through qualifiers tbf, but instead of drawing Portugal they got Romania and breezed into the competition proper.

If it were Sweden v Greece in that qualifier playoff I wouldn't moaning right now

Luck of the draw is harsh, but it's not just that I'm annoyed about. It's the biggest picture. The fact Greece are a mainstay of the top 20 teams in the last decade (apparently) despite having had zero quality since Euro 04. Their previous nine years do not match up to where they are being ranked and seeded by the governing bodies.

[georginho_juventusygr]

What will happen in this thread when England are out?

[Marc Albrighton]

We basically are out so more of the same i'd imagine.

[JD nawrat]

We basically are out so more of the same i'd imagine.

Got a great chance of qualifying ffs. You just need to beat Costa Rica and hope Italy win their two last games and I can see all three of those things happening.

[darren1983]

Got a great chance of qualifying ffs. You just need to beat Costa Rica and hope Italy win their two last games and I can see all three of those things happening.

"great chance"

[Fe98]

We move on to Spain?

Oops.

[TM]

Germany?

although personally I'd love to see them win it, that generation deserves to win something major

[Eleanor_Rigby]

I remember being told by umpteen English fans that us Scots have a chip on our shoulder when it comes to the English national team and England fans don't really give a **** about Scotland whether we win, lose or draw. 2 weeks later you could not hear a single note of the Scottish anthem due to the booing when we turned up at Wembley to play them in the Euro finals. Then there's the fans on here such as theboydonegood (or whatever he's called) that are every bit as rabid as we're being made out to be.

You see the same people crying in club threads whenever a rival fan has a pop at them, so it's no surprise they're in here spouting their nonsense too.

[milnerpoint]

Better watch Eleanor, you dont want to come across as rabid about it all.

[JD nawrat]

"great chance"

Win against the smallest side, the weakest side of the group. The supposed whipping boys who were there for teams to flex muscles and score goals against. Yes, you have a great chance. With all due respect to Costa Rica, they have nowhere near the quality of England. You win and you're through is basically your scenario. Great maybe exaggerated, but you do have a very good chance to qualify.