Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Needlesh

Scottish Football - what's the point?

Recommended Posts

 

10 hours ago, GenBr said:

I don't disagree that the competitions are run in favour of the bigger clubs, but it would never make sense to base seeding on previous European competitions. Whilst half the teams in the Prem League qualify for Europe these days they would still be seeded much higher than any team that qualified from Scotland based on the league they qualify from and the position they finished. And judging by their performance so far it seems more than fair - are Rangers the only ones still in a competition?

As I've said before we haven't qualified for Europe in almost 50 years and we have played the same amount of games as Aberdeen has in the European cup - we've won more of them as well.

Have to agree to disagree on the seeding basis. If Wolves and Burnley are better than the rest of the smaller clubs, then go unseeded and they will get through anyway. Burnley failed. Its typical UEFA closed shop. 

Anyway, regarding Derbys european record. I cant see any stars above the Rams head.......plenty above this one new-kit-315x372.jpg.93e7ad0e4c86fb795094867cbb5d8b0c.jpg

😉😉😉

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, CWC1983 said:

 

Have to agree to disagree on the seeding basis. If Wolves and Burnley are better than the rest of the smaller clubs, then go unseeded and they will get through anyway. Burnley failed. Its typical UEFA closed shop. 

Anyway, regarding Derbys european record. I cant see any stars above the Rams head.......plenty above this one 

😉😉😉

Just have no seeds at all then - make it random rather than giving preferential treatment to clubs. I don't have any stake in this - Derby aren't rich enough to qualify for Europe again - pick the seeds at random for all I care.

And Jesus Christ - those stars aren't much to brag about- they aren't exactly European cups - not even Europa Leagues/Uefa Cups. Its a cup winners cup and a super cup. Any old team can put stars on their shirts - Huddersfield have 3 to commemorate winning the league 80 years ago - it doesn't make it much of an achievement. At least the two stars that Forest gave themselves are for competitions that actually mean something.

Share this post


Link to post
56 minutes ago, GenBr said:

Just have no seeds at all then - make it random rather than giving preferential treatment to clubs. I don't have any stake in this - Derby aren't rich enough to qualify for Europe again - pick the seeds at random for all I care.

And Jesus Christ - those stars aren't much to brag about- they aren't exactly European cups - not even Europa Leagues/Uefa Cups. Its a cup winners cup and a super cup. Any old team can put stars on their shirts - Huddersfield have 3 to commemorate winning the league 80 years ago - it doesn't make it much of an achievement. At least the two stars that Forest gave themselves are for competitions that actually mean something.

Sorry but for me you're wrong on Huddersfield.  League champions of England (three times) is an achievement regardless of when it was done.  More than happy for them to have three stars on their league shirt.  Teams like Forest and Ipswich who play league games week in week out with multiple stars but who have only been champions of England once should be charged under the trades description act.

And in general, stars on club badges are pony.

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, GenBr said:

Just have no seeds at all then - make it random rather than giving preferential treatment to clubs. I don't have any stake in this - Derby aren't rich enough to qualify for Europe again - pick the seeds at random for all I care.

And Jesus Christ - those stars aren't much to brag about- they aren't exactly European cups - not even Europa Leagues/Uefa Cups. Its a cup winners cup and a super cup. Any old team can put stars on their shirts - Huddersfield have 3 to commemorate winning the league 80 years ago - it doesn't make it much of an achievement. At least the two stars that Forest gave themselves are for competitions that actually mean something.

Haha, are you really downplaying a European trophy? 

Beating Bayern and Real Madrid to win the cup, and then European Champions Hamburg over 2 legs. 

West Germany was a powerhouse of European football in those days. PSG were in the semi's and French football was in the ascendancy in 83. Madrid were the core of the Spanish national side. 

Hardly a competition to be sniffed at. 

You are correct however, not exactly Malmo. 😁

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
On ‎03‎/‎08‎/‎2019 at 22:38, RadioactiveWaste said:

Fair point. I just never took to Carlisle in my Sellafield days. No particular reason, just not fond it.

 

Carlisle had the chance to take the most league games without a win record away from us last year. Just get a draw Macclesfield who hadn't won for about 37 games.   They let them win 2-1 in the last minute after being one up with 5 minutes to go .  Immediate banishment and being forced to play Stenhousemuir every week till the end of time is the only fitting punishment.

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Will Hughes Hair said:

Sorry but for me you're wrong on Huddersfield.  League champions of England (three times) is an achievement regardless of when it was done.

Can't agree. Leicester winning the other year is far more impressive than the teams winning, in a time of sports science and professional athletes, as opposed to half the players going to the pub and playing with hangovers like they did in the past. 

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, Andicis said:

Can't agree. Leicester winning the other year is far more impressive than the teams winning, in a time of sports science and professional athletes, as opposed to half the players going to the pub and playing with hangovers like they did in the past. 

Footballers have been professional athletes n England since 1885.  Yes the standard of the game has changed and evolved but that does not alter the fact that since the league started only one team every season has been able to claim to be the best in the land.  Herbert Chapman's Huddersfield were no more a bunch of pissed up Sunday league players than the Busby Babes in the fifties or the Rams in the seventies.

If only those teams had access to sports scientists, their legacies would mean so much more.

Share this post


Link to post
10 hours ago, Will Hughes Hair said:

Footballers have been professional athletes n England since 1885.  Yes the standard of the game has changed and evolved but that does not alter the fact that since the league started only one team every season has been able to claim to be the best in the land.  Herbert Chapman's Huddersfield were no more a bunch of pissed up Sunday league players than the Busby Babes in the fifties or the Rams in the seventies.

If only those teams had access to sports scientists, their legacies would mean so much more.

I don't consider fifties or seventies achievements much either. Including Derby's. When footballers started taking care of themselves, and becoming athletes and not just footballers, that's when the game changed for the better, for me. 

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account.

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.