Scary Bear Posted September 7 Share Posted September 7 2 hours ago, BFTD said: Being too young to remember when they were properly good, I still find it a bit wild that Poland finished third at two World Cups out of three in the modern age. They were still considered England's bogey team when I was a kid. Lato and Boniek must have been something else. Croatia having back-to-back second and third place finishes is also tremendous. The Dutch have to be the kings of this shit though; three World Cup finals, plus a third and fourth place finish on top, not to mention a European Championship win. Uruguay ruined their diddy credibility by actually winning two World Cups IMO; that's just not cricket. You know how kids say “I’m [popular player who is killing it at the World Cup]?” Well, Boniek was a name after the ‘82 World Cup but most folk would rather be Zico, Falcao or Socrates and those hoors didn’t even win it. From memory, ’86 World Cup it was Maradona, Platini, or Tigana. Anyway, Boniek must have been doing something right that folk wanted to be him. Since then Poland have been gash. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Bing Posted September 7 Share Posted September 7 1 hour ago, O'Kelly Isley III said: I see that China lost 7-0 the other day.... I don't understand your point. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BFTD Posted September 7 Share Posted September 7 13 minutes ago, Old Bing said: I don't understand your point. We could probably take China, if we're playing well. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted September 7 Share Posted September 7 (edited) 7 hours ago, TheScarf said: Its extremely foolish to think a countries population determines how successful they are at international football. And yet, that's not the spectacularly demented point that people are objecting to. Of course it doesn't "determine" how successful they are. It does very significantly influence it though. It's back to this mindless 'all or nothing' thing that certain P&B wallopers seem to specialise in. Edited September 7 by Monkey Tennis 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IAmNotAWindowCleaner Posted September 7 Share Posted September 7 40 minutes ago, BFTD said: We could probably take China, if we're playing well. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheScarf Posted September 7 Share Posted September 7 10 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said: And yet, that's not the spectacularly demented point that people are objecting to. Of course it doesn't "determine" how successful they are. It does very significantly influence it though. It's back to this mindless 'all of nothing' thing that certain P&B wallopers seem to specialise in. You calling anyone a walloper on here is the reddest of necks. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted September 7 Share Posted September 7 2 minutes ago, TheScarf said: You calling anyone a walloper on here is the reddest of necks. Yeah fine. Give those at The Flat Earth Society my love. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TPAFKA Jersey 2 Posted September 7 Share Posted September 7 1 hour ago, Scary Bear said: You know how kids say “I’m [popular player who is killing it at the World Cup]?” Well, Boniek was a name after the ‘82 World Cup but most folk would rather be Zico, Falcao or Socrates and those hoors didn’t even win it. From memory, ’86 World Cup it was Maradona, Platini, or Tigana. Anyway, Boniek must have been doing something right that folk wanted to be him. Since then Poland have been gash. I never wanted to be Boniek. I mean who wants to be a ginger. Paolo Rossi all the way! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted September 7 Share Posted September 7 4 hours ago, TheScarf said: You’ve used the absolute extreme to make your point, I can do that too. Why are China and India not that two best footballing nations? They should be surely? Because they don't have a strong footballing history, culture or infrastuture obviously. These things also matter. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TPAFKA Jersey 2 Posted September 7 Share Posted September 7 2 hours ago, Cheese said: How about, good culture, facilities and coaching can overcome population disadvantages to a certain degree and bad culture, facilities and training can hinder larger populations from reaching the levels that others do ? Nope! Haven’t you been paying attention? That won’t work for the Scarf. Population has to be completely irrelevant. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richey Edwards Posted September 7 Share Posted September 7 Remember that there are two Chinas. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crawford Bridge Posted September 7 Share Posted September 7 Nigeria should be doing better. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BFTD Posted September 7 Share Posted September 7 Is nobody going to discuss the elephant in the room - the enormous landmass advantage that Antarctica holds over almost everyone? 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted September 7 Share Posted September 7 (edited) On 07/09/2024 at 15:01, TheScarf said: Because you always get some absolute f**king idiot gurning about population sizes whenever Scotland make a c**t of it in a qualifier. And then stubborn c***s like me telling them they’re talking shite. It's a case study in behaviour in this place. Because you get irritated by people citing population to justify Scotland chucking a game, you idiotically state that population is utterly irrelevant in how well countries do at football. When challenged on the blatant absurdity of such a claim, rather than say 'Aye ok, but population isn't everything', you double down and instead present as being completely wedded to a view you're not actually thick enough to hold. It's weird. Edited Tuesday at 06:09 by Monkey Tennis 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Theroadlesstravelled Posted September 7 Share Posted September 7 1 hour ago, Monkey Tennis said: Because they don't have a strong footballing history, culture or infrastuture obviously. These things also matter. Long may it continue that England check all these boxes and still win nuffin. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tartan Dave Posted September 7 Share Posted September 7 22 hours ago, BucksburnDandy said: I came away from the game last night massively annoyed and while slightly mellowing today, I'm still very grumpy. I feel that Clarke got his starting lineup wrong. Ralston and Hanley cost him with their lack of match sharpness, McLean starting was poor and we played some fairly pedestrian stuff at the start of the game. I felt we wasted the first half. Clarke ultimately did change things by bringing on Doak, Shankland and Gauld which helped massively to bring some attacking threat down the right wing. But bringing Gilmour off for Morgan was a sub that killed our momentum and the winner starts with McGinn dithering on the ball in the middle of the park. Playing the same personnel that let him down over the last year in a different system didn't work for too long of the game last night. It's a real struggle to see where the next win comes from right now. If he loses all 6 games in this group, fan pressure will mount hugely. Clarke currently has enough media fans that mean the SFA board won't pull the trigger regardless of what the punters think. There were positives and I will list below while going through individuals: Gunn - felt he could have been more nimble at the opener to stop it, but no chance with the other two goals Ralston - For long spells of that game last night, he was really good. First half bar the penalty, he engaged the wing back early, he was tenacious and he was comfortable. Second half he started poorly then won a couple of tackles and grew back into it. Brilliant assist for the equaliser. However he was dreadful for the penalty. And that's his problem. He makes a game changing mistake in most games. Hanley - Very good all night until the inexplicable brain fart at the end. Ridiculous decision. Idiotic McKenna - For a team who conceded 3 and lost, I thought McKenna was really good last night. A very assured display Robertson - Steady enough display. Can't complain defensively. Unlucky with the McTominay goal with a great delivery. Sometimes not the best decision making. Gilmour - he was grand, a really good player. Lacks physically but my God he is tenacious. Good sharp finish for his goal. McLean - not his fault but he's not up to this level. Too slow on the ball, too many poor decisions with passes and too loose with his passing. An impact player at best to close games out. Criminal that Clarke played him, the man not good enough to dislodge McGregor. McGinn - I'm going against the general train of thought. I thought he was mince last night. Offered no real defensive support and protection for Ralston, didn't offer width in an attacking sense, took a few fouls but I have to say I wasn't massively impressed at all. Also guilty at the winner for being caught taking far too long on the ball. McTominay - Aye a good display. Offered real quality on the ball, took his goal well, should have scored in the first half. Calm and assured on the ball, good working back off the ball and grew better as the game wore on. He was pretty decent. Christie - Really happy with his display. First half he was a good attacking outlet, combining well with McTominay and Robertson down the left, hitting the byline a few times. Immense touch to set up Gilmour and thought he was unlucky to be taken off although maybe his race was run. Defensively works his socks off too. Dykes - Worked hard, he did fine. Got some mixed service and did fine with it Doak - what a joy. Really good attacking threat. Brilliant at the equaliser. Brought Ralston on. Some start Gauld - really mature display. Combined well with Robertson wide left then when central combined well with Morgan and Doak Shankland - much like Dykes, received mixed service and did fine. Lacking a bit of confidence but was absolutely fine Morgan - carried some threat but felt him coming on lost some momentum in the middle of the park. Not held against Morgan at all. A good option to have. Hard to see where we get a win in the rest of the group. Been a real brutal last 12 months as a Scotland fan. Even the one win was hard going. This sums up my feelings almost perfectly in a way I couldn't. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DiegoDiego Posted September 7 Share Posted September 7 3 hours ago, BFTD said: Is nobody going to discuss the elephant in the room - the enormous landmass advantage that Antarctica holds over almost everyone? Scotland's attempt at recreating Antarctica's landmass advantage: 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2426255 Posted Sunday at 13:31 Share Posted Sunday at 13:31 Result aside, an enjoyable game of football against a team at our level. We played reasonably well, as did Poland. A draw would've been fairer. Similar to the Hungary game: a coin flip game that we lost. I have no issue with the performance the team gave. Looking ahead to the World Cup I didn't see anything in this game that was particularly different to what's gone before. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Bing Posted Sunday at 14:42 Share Posted Sunday at 14:42 1 hour ago, 2426255 said: Result aside, an enjoyable game of football against a team at our level. We played reasonably well, as did Poland. A draw would've been fairer. Similar to the Hungary game: a coin flip game that we lost. I have no issue with the performance the team gave. Looking ahead to the World Cup I didn't see anything in this game that was particularly different to what's gone before. Why oh why can't we win a coin flip! Clarke must be the unluckiest coin flipper around. -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Staggie Posted Monday at 21:42 Share Posted Monday at 21:42 Lydon Dykes has gone from sub at championship QPR to Sub at div one Birmingham, form clearly a top issue 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.