England, Scotland, Wales, & Northern Ireland - United.

[spencer_carlos]

Under one team - United Kingdom/Great Britain.

Any possibility?

Every decade or so, the Lions from the British Isles can take on major footballing powers like Brazil & Argentina. Or for historic purposes against France, Germany, & the United States. :cool:

(It works in rugby. Why not football?)

[Gordon EF]

Under one team - United Kingdom/Great Britain.

Any possibility?

Every decade or so, the Lions from the British Isles can take on major footballing powers like Brazil & Argentina. Or for historic purposes against France, Germany, & the United States. :cool:

(It works in rugby. Why not football?)

Because football people are more partisan and more aggesive, we hate each other too much.:D

[lamb]

Under one team - United Kingdom/Great Britain.

Any possibility?

Every decade or so, the Lions from the British Isles can take on major footballing powers like Brazil & Argentina. Or for historic purposes against France, Germany, & the United States. :cool:

(It works in rugby. Why not football?)

no, not a chance, because it would soon become anglo-centric and offer nothing for the rest of us to want to support bar the odd token player.
(somewhere in the back of my mind i seem to remember reading something about a UK representative team having played the odd game years and years ago.....could be wrong though)

[Flyin Ryan]

It'd become Anglo-centric? Isn't the United Kingdom/Great Britain pretty much Anglo-centric to start with?

I'm not dissing Scotland, Northern Ireland, and Wales. I think they're nothing more than colonies by fact from 500 years ago. That's politically simplistic I know, but England runs the other three "home nations". I mean, you don't see the Confederacy taking on the Union taking on the Louisiana Purchase taking on California on a "national" scale every year in soccer, or American football or basketball or baseball for that matter. I think territorial soccer teams are fine (CONCACAF!), but only when there's a political separation by reality (Bermuda for example).

[uber_coupon]

Scotland and England deserve to field different teams in their own right.

After all, both countries were co-founders of the modern game.

Have Americans ever invented a sport that was adopted by the whole world on the same scale as Association Football?

NO

And why not?

Because American sports are SH1TE. . . . end of!

[Flyin Ryan]

Basketball is played in the Americas and Puerto Rico, most of Europe, China, and Oceania.

American Football is played in the U.S. and Canada and Germany.

Baseball is played in North America, Central America, parts of the Caribbean, Korea and Japan.

Soccer doesn't matter in North America outside of Mexico, the Caribbean outside Jamaica and Trinidad, Oceania, better than half of Asia, and better than half of Africa.

Back to my point, you mention Scotland is a country. Scotland is not a country. Palestine is more of a country than Scotland, it has a political leader that "speaks" for the country. Scotland's political leader is Tony Blair, and he's in London.

[Mobile]

Basketball is played in the Americas and Puerto Rico, most of Europe, China, and Oceania.

American Football is played in the U.S. and Canada and Germany.

Baseball is played in North America, Central America, parts of the Caribbean, Korea and Japan.

But they are all wank sports.

Soccer doesn't matter in North America outside of Mexico, the Caribbean outside Jamaica and Trinidad, Oceania, better than half of Asia, and better than half of Africa.

So? It's still the greatest sport in the world by a long way.

Back to my point, you mention Scotland is a country. Scotland is not a country. Palestine is more of a country than Scotland, it has a political leader that "speaks" for the country. Scotland's political leader is Tony Blair, and he's in London.

Whether or not Scotland is a country (personally I'd say it is a nation and therefore deserves a national team), the fact is that the first ever game of international football was played between England and Scotland, thus establishing our rights to have separate teams for as long as we feel like it. End of story.

[Flyin Ryan]

Fine then, I'm happy for you, but why doesn't Scotland declare themselves independent of England? Or Wales or Northern Ireland? You maintain a sense of national pride without having the ability to be free to make your own decisions. I mean I'm proud to be from North Carolina, but it's not like I look to it as my country and homeland, that's the United States. If I ever did, I'd push for it to leave the Union. I guess my point is, what do you consider yourself a citizen of:

1. United Kingdom (Northern Ireland, Wales, England, Scotland, lots of small overseas territories)
2. Great Britain (England and Scotland)
3. Scotland

Only in case 3 should you have a national team, but in that case you're pushing for a separate identity, meaning an independence from England.

If London gets the Olympics in 2012, what teams will play in the men's and women's soccer tourney? My guess is England...

[Scottish_Morton]

The difference is that Scotland has been an idependant nation, it has a history as an independant nation! When India was part of the British empire do you think that they should've played in a Great British team in any sport?

our political leader is Jack McConnel. He is the First Minister, we also have our own government, they deal with Scotland's issues i.e. health, education, transport etc.

[Flyin Ryan]

^ As for your point concerning India and the British Empire with sport, France does that today with Martinique, Guadeloupe, and until recently New Caledonia (one of the French national team's longtime starters was a Guadeloupe resident).

You guys are taking this way too personally. I am looking for why Scotland has its own team when it is under the same national umbrella as England? Just because the two played their first game against each other should have nothing to do it (Remember, Sepp Blatter thinks soccer was invented by the Chinese. ;) )

From what Scottish fans have said on here for their reasoning why, I could file an application for North Carolina to have a football association with FIFA, and could then file for CONCACAF.

-We have a political leader in Mike Easley, and the North Carolina state legislature deals with health, education, and transport, etc., but N.C. and Governor Easley cannot overrule the U.S. and President Bush (as is the same I believe with Scotland/McConnell and the UK/Blair). There are certain issues not given to the federal government that are given to our state like the issues I stated above.
-North Carolina has been an independent nation, from 1790 to 1791 (the period between the official formation of the United States and our state's passing of the Consitution, we were a bit slow to warm to it). Plus, we left and were a part of another country from 1861 to 1865. Scotland was part of the formation of Britain in I think 1601 and has been a member ever since(brownie point to me if that date is right). England's first ever settlement in the New World wasn't even founded until 1607.

[lanman]

-North Carolina has been an independent nation, from 1790 to 1791 (the period between the official formation of the United States and our state's passing of the Consitution, we were a bit slow to warm to it). Plus, we left and were a part of another country from 1861 to 1865. Scotland was part of the formation of Britain in I think 1601 and has been a member ever since(brownie point to me if that date is right).

The main difference is that North Carolina agreed to become a state within the USA, whereas the United Kingdom was formed through an Act of Union between Scotland and England in 1707 (they had had the same monarch for around a century). Scotland retains, amongst other things, it's own legal system and educational system.

Whether Scotland is a country, a nation or whatever is irrelevant in this situation - they have a Football Association which pre-dates any other save England and were playing the game long before FIFA even came into being. They have every right to field a national team regardless of the political situation.

[Scottish_Morton]

For the record i'm Scottish and would never say I was British.

Scotland have had a national team and national leagues for well over a century. In many ways Scotland is an independant nation, when it comes to football this is the case.

[Seph]

The North Carolina example is a bad example anyway. Historians outside of the South do not consider N.C. to have been a state in the 1790s or to have been a part of a seperate country in the 1860s. It went straight from being a British colony to being part of the U.S. under the Second Continental Congress in 1776. All of the rest is just details of how to govern. (I'm a history teacher, don't make me explain the Articles of Confederation to you! I'll do it!)

The Scots are a distinct ethnic group in a distinct geographical region, thereby making them a nation. Americans have become such over time, as have Mexicans, Canadians, and other nations of the "New World".

After all, it's called "international" football and not "inter-country" football. It's about your nationhood, not your political leadership.

[Seph]

do not consider N.C. to have been a state in the 1790s


Sorry, that's a typo. I meant "do not consider N.C. to have been a nation" not "state".

[Flyin Ryan]

I'll take your point about not being a nation in the 1790s, I was just fishing for an example. However, North Carolina was very much part of a different country in the 1860s, maybe not by law, but by fact (you say you're a history teacher, so you should know better than anyone else that the winner writes history ;) ).

Ok, I'll take the point about Scotland being a "nation" although I don't entirely agree with it being due to ethnicity. That's all I was looking for was why they are considered as such. But by that definition, wouldn't that mean that other "nations" like the Basques, the Catalans, Kashmir, the Kurds, Gibralter, Chechens, Native American reservations in Canada and the U.S. and the like would have a right to a national soccer team by those guidelines. It opens up a big can of worms.

[Gordon EF]

Basketball is played in the Americas and Puerto Rico, most of Europe, China, and Oceania.

American Football is played in the U.S. and Canada and Germany.

Baseball is played in North America, Central America, parts of the Caribbean, Korea and Japan.

Soccer doesn't matter in North America outside of Mexico, the Caribbean outside Jamaica and Trinidad, Oceania, better than half of Asia, and better than half of Africa.

As Mobile says, wank, wank, wank.


Back to my point, you mention Scotland is a country. Scotland is not a country. Palestine is more of a country than Scotland, it has a political leader that "speaks" for the country. Scotland's political leader is Tony Blair, and he's in London.

Maybe a short perusal of the facts before making silly statemants will make you look less of a fool. Scotland is a country, this is a fact. If you want conformation, look up a UK government website.

Palestine is not a country, that's the difference here isn't it?

p.s. Tony Blair and Gordon Brown are both Scottish.

[Gordon EF]

Fine then, I'm happy for you, but why doesn't Scotland declare themselves independent of England? Or Wales or Northern Ireland?

Do understand the meaning of the word, "union", as in 'United Kingdom'?


You maintain a sense of national pride without having the ability to be free to make your own decisions.

I think you'll find we make a lot of our own decisions and are free to declare independanc any time we want.[/QUOTE]


I mean I'm proud to be from North Carolina, but it's not like I look to it as my country and homeland, that's the United States. If I ever did, I'd push for it to leave the Union. I guess my point is, what do you consider yourself a citizen of:

You see, that's because North Carolina is a state within the country of USA. Much like, I am proud to be a Fifer, which is a region, within my country, which forms part of the unionj of countries, making up the UK.

I am a British citizen but I am 100% Scottish, Scottish is my nationality. Get it, Scotland is a country within a country. It really isn't difficult.


1. United Kingdom (Northern Ireland, Wales, England, Scotland, lots of small overseas territories)
2. Great Britain (England and Scotland)
3. Scotland


Wales is part of Great Britian also, although Britian or Great Britain is an acceptable term for the UK.

[/QUOTE]
Only in case 3 should you have a national team, but in that case you're pushing for a separate identity, meaning an independence from England.[/QUOTE]

We have a national team, we always have and we always will. We do have a seperate identity, from Britain. That's beacuse we are a country, a seperate country.


If London gets the Olympics in 2012, what teams will play in the men's and women's soccer tourney? My guess is England...

Yes, that would be my guess, seing as the games would be in England.

[Gordon EF]

It's because we are a country. the situation in the UK is unique. Also, it probably has a lot to do with the fact that that football, as we know it today, originated within the UK.

[QUOTE]
From what Scottish fans have said on here for their reasoning why, I could file an application for North Carolina to have a football association with FIFA, and could then file for CONCACAF.

That might be difficult, seeing as NC is not a country and has no power within FIFA, as all the 'home' nations do.:D


-We have a political leader in Mike Easley, and the North Carolina state legislature deals with health, education, and transport, etc., but N.C. and Governor Easley cannot overrule the U.S. and President Bush (as is the same I believe with Scotland/McConnell and the UK/Blair). There are certain issues not given to the federal government that are given to our state like the issues I stated above.
-North Carolina has been an independent nation, from 1790 to 1791 (the period between the official formation of the United States and our state's passing of the Consitution, we were a bit slow to warm to it). Plus, we left and were a part of another country from 1861 to 1865. Scotland was part of the formation of Britain in I think 1601 and has been a member ever since(brownie point to me if that date is right). England's first ever settlement in the New World wasn't even founded until 1607.

Tony Balir has no power over many aspects of Scottish politics. The fact remains, NC- not a country, Scotland-a country.

[Gordon EF]

Ok, I'll take the point about Scotland being a "nation" although I don't entirely agree with it being due to ethnicity. That's all I was looking for was why they are considered as such. But by that definition, wouldn't that mean that other "nations" like the Basques, the Catalans, Kashmir, the Kurds, Gibralter, Chechens, Native American reservations in Canada and the U.S. and the like would have a right to a national soccer team by those guidelines. It opens up a big can of worms.

Maybe they should be condsidered nations. However, we have defended our nation from every invasion. And have defeated every invader to our country. If this was not the case, we probably would not be a seperate country, much like Wales, which is a princilpaity.

[Holyjoe]

Fine then, I'm happy for you, but why doesn't Scotland declare themselves independent of England? Or Wales or Northern Ireland? You maintain a sense of national pride without having the ability to be free to make your own decisions.

I refer the honourable gentleman to the Scottish Parliament (http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/home.htm) website.

If London gets the Olympics in 2012, what teams will play in the men's and women's soccer tourney? My guess is England...

FIFA would have to amend their Olympic regulations first to allow any of the home nation sides to play in the Olympic games.
Again I refer the honourable gentleman to the website of the English Football Association (http://www.thefa.com/TheFA/ContactUs/YourShout/Postings/2004/09/No_GB_Olympic_Team.htm).

The only way any of the sides could compete at the London Olympics would be as a unified 'Team GB' (http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/other_sports/olympics_2012/4101949.stm) side.