NOTE TO ADMINS: I COULD ONLY TAG TWO NATIONAL TEAMS, SO PLEASE ADD SCOTLAND AND WALES
I've searched through this forum for an existing thread on on this topic but couldn't find one, so thought I'd start my own as I feel it's an interesting topic and worthy of discussion.
- How does everyone feel about us having a "Team GB" football side (I use quotation marks because the term is a misnomer when it should really be called Team UK)?
- Do Welsh/Scottish/N.Irish fans feel that it threatens their own FA's autonomy, despite FIFA's assurances?
- Should football even be in the Olympics
- Does anyone even care?!
Here's my two-pence worth:
- A sport should only be in the Olympics if the competition serves as the pinnacle, the most important occasion, of that sport. This is true of track & field, and a lot of othe revents, but not of football, tennis, golf or many others. If there is a comptetion in that sprot that is more important than the Olymnpics, it shouldn't be in it
- Furthermore, the Olympics were always about amateur competitors or, at the very least, about individuals competing against one another; they shouldn't be about nations competing. Athletes should be there to represent themselves, not their nations
- I don't think a Team GB football team will threaten the autonomy of Wales, Scotland and N.Ireland as individual footballing nations. However, I am against the idea of a 'British' football team: firstly, because of he reason I've offered in the previous point; and secondly, because the United Kingdom is NOT a nation, it is a political entity comprising of nations and provinces, and we're always being told that politcs should be kept out of football and other sports.
- Two words; Stuart Pearce. I don't need to say anything more on that particular issue!
These days I struggle to generate enthusiasm for the England team; but a GB football team is something I couldn't care less about if I tried.
Team GB football team - good or bad
posted on 8/11/11
Athletes should be there to represent themselves, not their nations
------
That's probably the most ignorant comment I've ever read. It's like saying Wayne Rooney should go out week in week out to represent himself and not manchester united.
I'm happy with team GB as a ONE OFF. It's not something I'd support in the long term though.
This country (England since its the London games) is the home of football. I always feel nations which host the games should bring there tradition, an for me football is our greatest tradition. So I'm happy for it.
posted on 8/11/11
Personally I think the Welsh and Scottish FA's need to grow up on the entire matter.
Also I think that football and more importantly footballers have no place at the Olympics. As you say the Olympics is about althletes doing their sport simply for the love of the sport and for the thrill of competition. They train extremely hard and dont often earn all that much money for it and this competition is the summit of a career of hard work.
Can any one footballer really say the same? The David Beckham plc may see it as another chance to have his face plastered all over the papers, but personally I'd much rather watch and read about Bolt, Phelps and Hoy than what posh or any of the other wags have got on their heads that day.
posted on 8/11/11
comment by RonAlvinho (U6117)
Athletes should be there to represent themselves, not their nations
------
That's probably the most ignorant comment I've ever read. It's like saying Wayne Rooney should go out week in week out to represent himself and not manchester united.
------------------------------------------
Ironic, when clearly you've missed my point and have displayed your own ignorance. Thanks to your own comment, mine can no longer be the most ignorant comment you've ever read.
The Olympics was, until fairly recently, a competition for individuals; not just in its classical sense, but much of the early modern Olympics were about individual, amateur atheletes taking part in a competition that superceded cultural, national and political boundaries.
The notion of countries compteting against one another - indeed, even the idea of professional atheletes taking part - contradicts the original ethos of the Olympic games. So does, by extension, the idea of individuals resresenting nations.
Your analogy of Wayne Rooney/Man Utd is also nonsensical; representing a club team as a paid employee is not the same as taking part in the Olympic games as an athlete. The reason Rooney doesn't go out representing himself is because that is not the point of football competitions, and nor should. I'm saying that Olympics, on the other hand, should be about individual representation, as thats was what they used to be about.
posted on 8/11/11
Northern Ireland fans will obviously love the GB team because it will feed into their rich sense of "britishness"... although none of their players will get anywhere near the 1st XI obviously...
posted on 8/11/11
comment by LarrysBargainBucket (U6589)
Northern Ireland fans will obviously love the GB team because it will feed into their rich sense of "britishness"... although none of their players will get anywhere near the 1st XI obviously...
------------------------------------------------
I'm not sure they'll like the name, though! There's a campaign in N.Ireland to get the Olympic team's name changed from 'Team GB' to 'Team UK', as N.Ireland is not actually part of Great Britain.
posted on 8/11/11
Good point geography John. A point I'd like to raise is, Ireland cannot have a football team at the Olympics because we're in the same situation as the UK. The Ireland Olympic team is for the whole island but there's two FA's on the island. People from NI are free to choose to represent Team GB or Team Ireland.
If the UK is allowe have a football team at the Olympics, Ireland should be allowed also.
posted on 8/11/11
I would have prefered a short tournament between the 4 teams to determine which would represent "Team GB" at the olympics, much like the competitors in other sports compete to represent "Team GB". Although the losing countries would possibly not support the team representing "Team GB", you would at least get full support from the fans of the winning country. With a "Team GB" built from all the countries' players then you risk no-one being too interested.
Using this method would also minimise the risks of losing the independent status of the four associations as one of the associations would "win" their place at the olympics through fair competition against the other countries (therefore keeping everything distinct and separated).
Having said this, a midfield of Walcott, Wilshere, Ramsey, Bale, sounds good to me...
posted on 8/11/11
Team GB is a fantastic idea- as will the future potential of proud Ulstermen standing on the Olympic podium as the Union Flags flies high and proud.............
posted on 9/11/11
CHE:
Congrats on your fine riposte to the aggressive RONALVINHO above.
Im sorry, but I just cant raise enthusiasm for the idea of a Team GB. For a start, as someone pointed out above, the name's not really accurate as NI is not part of Great Britain, so it would have to be called Team UK.
Maybe for England, Scotland and Wales, but Im not sure about NI.
posted on 9/11/11
By the way, one of our regular posters on here, MEGAN, has posted several threads previously on the NI board about a Team GB. Hes currently using the handle, WELCOMEHOMELIAM. You can see one of his posts two above.