TB has been on STV news backing a GB team for the 2012 olympics saying "If it's good enough for the athletes to be in Team GB, from any nationality, then it should be good enough for the footballers" I have to agree with him in a way, I know this will be a controversial viewpoint here but if you think about it athletes represent both nations, Scotland at commonwealth games level and GB at olympic level and in Rugby players represent Scotland at 6 nations and World cup levels and GB (the British Lions) at test level, why can't we have a British team at a lower international level? The olympics football competition is made up of teams of a majority of under 23 y/o players and is not under FIFA jurisdiction so where is the problem?

http://sport.stv.tv/...ons-on-team-gb/

Edited June 22, 201114 yr by marks

I have tickets for the Olymipics football in Glasgow. I think Terry would be an excellent choice of manager for Team GB. The fact that the games are being held on this island should have some sway on the entry of a football team in these games especislly. I can't see an issue with this so long as it doesn't impede on the Scottish national side in the long-term. And for the record I follow Scotland and go to games when work commitments permit.

Totally disagree, would be setting a very dangerous precedent and could not trust FIFA under any circumstances. This would be the first step towards losing our national status and identity as a footballing nation.

Some "phrases" that tend to put some peeple off the idea of cross national allegiances - Fabio Capello and Berti Vogts.

To me Olympic football is in the same bracket as Olympic Rugby or Cricket or Golf - a feckin media focussed, money seeking circus act and one that would never attract career focussed footballers.

But Butcher as the boss would fit the media bill, then stick in Beckham as captain and Giggs as vice captain - stir in a mixture of young wannabees and cover with a Big top.

Anyone who views this as in any way positive is misguided.

Fact is that FIFA is desperate to abolish (what they view as the unprecedented privilege) the individual teams within these islands and this move will be grasped on. As far as the officials are concerned this is the island of England with GB just another name for it. TB shows exactly the stance I would expect from a former England captain being asked about an English Olympics. I disagree with his view in the strongest possibly terms and cannot understand why anyone who claims to support, follow or have the interests of our national team at heart can think otherwise. Wiser than TB have aired their views very publicly and are diametrically opposed. These people are of course Scottish, Irish or Welsh. I have yet to here an English pundit speak against the move and don't expect to. England and GB are the same aren't they?

On a separate note, I think it is nonsensical that football is part of the Olympic games and have no interest in who takes part or wins. Don't have a clue who has won the title in the past or when it started. I can however, name every World Cup winner, the scores in most of the finals, where it took place and who the star was. Surely this is the same for most football fans?

Why am I bothered if I have no interest in Olympic football?

Simply because it undermines my national team's identity, gives encouragement to those who seek a one team island and is the beginning of the end.

STOP IT NOW!

Edited June 23, 201114 yr by Sorted

Not much of an ICT debate here but i agree with Terry Butcher. All other athletes from Scotland competing in the Olympics are in team GB so why not in football? This is a tournament i believe we should be apart of and my only problem would be how would the squad be selected. I would like to see each nation given a minimum amount of about 4-5 players to compete making its a fair and equal representation of the four nations involved.

Its stupid to think just because we will play under 23 football with GB that our entire national team will be stripped. This is a one off tournament every 4 years, In Rugby you have the British Lions and you also have the four individual nations still competing. Even in Tennis we represent GB in the Davis Cup, another one off tournament.

We don't really take the Olympic football too seriously but i think that has to do with the European Championships being on during the same summer with the Olympics taking a backseat to that. The Olympics was never intended to compete with the major tournaments and that is why FIFA made the rule that only 3 players over the age of 23 can play in each squad. This doesn't make the competition less impressive and from watching Olympic football in the past i would say there are alot of excellent matches.

For anyone who doesn't know much about the competition it isn't just a bunch of nobodies that fill up the squads. In 1988 Romario was the competitions top goal scorer, in 1996 it was Bebeto and Hernan Crespo, In 2000 it was Ivan Zamorano, 2004 Carlos Tevez, and in the last world cup Giuseppi Rossi. Argentina has won the previous two tournaments with some excellent youth players including Messi, Mascherano, Tevez, Riquelme, Di Maria.

Great Britain has won the Olympic football competition the most times with 3 golds. We had a team in the past which was successful, why then for a one off can't we get together just like every other sport does for competitions like this.

Edited June 23, 201114 yr by ICTPAISLEY

I think this is all a big deal over nothing. Olympic football isn't a big deal and most of the time it's utter garbage, full of players you've never heard of. I don't think "Team GB" will have any influence on whether the Scotland, Wales etc teams survive and when the British team was on the go before (managed by Matt Busuby I may add), nothing changed. I don't think it will change anything this time either. Much a-do about nothing if you ask me.

Edited June 23, 201114 yr by Renegade

Its stupid to think just because we will play under 23 football with GB that our entire national team will be stripped. This is a one off tournament every 4 years, In Rugby you have the British Lions and you also have the four individual nations still competing. Even in Tennis we represent GB in the Davis Cup, another one off tournament.

No it is not. Sepp Blatter, he of the fair and transparen elections and who leads an organisation that can of course never be influenced by money, and who have proven to say one thing to the future King of England (and GB) and then do another has made that quite clear. On the one hand, he states that competing in the Olympics will not affect sovereignty in terms of how the home nations are viewed by FIFA and in the next breath goes and says the opposite to a different audience ......

This is why the home nation football associations agreed with the English FA that they could compete on their own as Team GB without their objection, but also without their involvement.

The only time there is a team Scotland in athletics is for the Commonwealth games. No other international competition has a team Scotland so comparrisons there are non existant. FIFA does not like 5 nations from these islands and will find any excuse to argue there should only be 2 so NO TO TEAM GB I say.

If FIFA didn't have a "one team" agenda, then why give the FA the remit to enter a team under the banner of "Team GB" without the need for agreement from the other associations? That alone shows total contempt for the other 3 associations and should be enough for people to realise exactly what FIFA think of our right to be independent footballing nations. What's more, who or what gives FIFA and/or the BOA the right to say that one nation can stand alone and call themselves GB?

Regardless of whether or not it would be the thin end of the wedge in terms of putting more pressure on for a National UK team, why should we be expected to submit ourselves to the whims of the English FA?

It really speaks volumes for just how out of date and out of touch these people really are. During a time when devolution is one of the main aims of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland....they think we are going to accept a policy that pushes in the total opposite direction!!!

Totally disagree, would be setting a very dangerous precedent and could not trust FIFA under any circumstances. This would be the first step towards losing our national status and identity as a footballing nation.

I agree with Donview. I would be worried that FIFA would then push for a team GB for all events. Sepp Baltter made a comment about this recently - something a long the lines of GB having 4 representatives in competitions..... another reason I wanted SFA / Stewart Reagan to shut their mouths about getting the presidential vote postponed.

and lets not even go there with UEFA who also want this too !!!!!

FIFA and UEFA know there are too many "nations" in Europe as a result of the breakup of the USSR and other countries like Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia etc. It means that tournaments in Europe are harder to fit teams into and competition for World Cup slots are also harder as more and more nations from other parts of the world demand a larger representation in terms of qualification spots for the World Cup.

In March 2011 Blatter said this ..... "this composition has no influence on any privileges existing actually with Fifa, according to the decisions taken in 1946 at a Fifa congress in Luxembourg. So it's very clear. If they play, there is no sanction from the Fifa part." http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/league_of_wales/9416122.stm

Also in March 2011, George Peat revealed this ....."Mr Blatter told us at an informal function that, if we agreed to be part of Team GB, our position would be in jeopardy. My immediate reaction was one of surprise. I glanced over at the English table and their two guys, Lord Triesman and Sir David Richards just looked at each other. David Will, who was the Fifa vice-president for 15 years, has always told us on no account to get involved. David Taylor [the general secretary of Uefa] says the same thing. So we're viewing this as a serious warning." http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2009/mar/01/fifa-sepp-blatter-england-scotland-ireland-wales-fa-home-nations

and from the NoTeamGB website FAQs .......

http://www.noteamgb.com/Q-And-A-About-No-Team-GB.htm

FIFA President Sepp Blatter recently gave assurances that the Home Nations would not be forced to merge even if they established a Team GB and allowed it to compete in the 2012 London Olympics – is he not to be trusted?

Neither Sepp Blatter nor Jerome Valcke are in any position to give any such assurances. FIFA operates as a democracy, and it would be 2/3rds of the FIFA members that would decide on the future of the home nations teams, not any one individual. Absolutely no official (from FIFA or otherwise) is in any position to make any guarantees as to how any of the member states may vote in the future.

Sepp Blatter actually released a completely contradictory statement in March 2008 when he said: "If you start to put together a combined team for the Olympic Games, the question will automatically come up that there are four different associations so how can they play in one team. If this is the case then why the hell do they have four associations and four votes and their own vice-presidency? This will put into question all the privileges that the British associations have been given by the Congress in 1946."

This warning, from the most powerful man in football, should leave every football fan in no doubt as to what is at stake here, the very existence of our International Football Teams.

If this is the case then surely the likes of the Faroese and Greenland teams are at risk, both of these are constituent countries like Scotland, Northern Ireland, Wales and England.

Although Greenland have not yet been accepted into FIFA Sepp Blatter himself has sent a precedent by visiting the park in Qaqortoq and approving the pitch for international matches, the first step towards acceptance as a member of FIFA. If FIFA are in the process of accepting a consituent country of Denmark then they do not have much of an argument for making other constituent countries play under the nationality of the larger entity, especially as two of the countries are founders of the international game.

There's no way a one-off junior tournament will result in the loss of all four international teams for the World Cup. If it happened year upon year, perhaps, but this is a storm in a teacup. Nothing wrong with being Scottish and British. If some players don't want to, fair enough but I wouldn't want to deny any young boy their opportunity to appear in the Olympics. I'll be supporting Team GB, just as I will Scotland in the World Cup etc. It's not the leagues merging, it's not a regular team, it's simply a one-off as the Olympics are being held in Britain. End of. I'll be disappointed if the British team contains no Scots.

Whilst I do not disagree with you Marks, you are forgetting one crucial thing - and I also meant to respond to ICTPaisley with the same thing when he compared Athletics, Rugby and any other sport - to this situation.

We are talking about FIFA, an organisation that IMHO is rotten to and from the core, an organisation where bags of cash or TV rights or other lucrative things are (allegedly) set on (or under) the table in return for favours or decisions ....... would YOU trust them to have ANY consistency in decision making when they have shown none of it in recent years?

There's no way a one-off junior tournament will result in the loss of all four international teams for the World Cup. If it happened year upon year, perhaps, but this is a storm in a teacup. Nothing wrong with being Scottish and British. If some players don't want to, fair enough but I wouldn't want to deny any young boy their opportunity to appear in the Olympics. I'll be supporting Team GB, just as I will Scotland in the World Cup etc. It's not the leagues merging, it's not a regular team, it's simply a one-off as the Olympics are being held in Britain. End of. I'll be disappointed if the British team contains no Scots.

Its a "loose thread" for those who want to remove power from the home nations to grab onto though ... unravel enough thread and you're screwed !!!!

For me, the answer seems simple ..... re-instate the home internationals as an U23 event (or one that mirrors the Olympic rules) - even if it is only once every 4 years - and make the prize for winning it very straightforward. The winning nation represents UK/GB at the Olympics, and runs the team under the auspices of its own independent FA association.

For me, the answer seems simple ..... re-instate the home internationals as an U23 event (or one that mirrors the Olympic rules) - even if it is only once every 4 years - and make the prize for winning it very straightforward. The winning nation represents UK/GB at the Olympics, and runs the team under the auspices of its own independent FA association.

I like that thinking, green dot for that.

This is all very interesting and is a reflection of the unique status of the home nations within the United Kingdom. One the one hand nobody seems to object to the fact that there is "team GB" for just about every sport under the sun but yet there is this furore about football. If we obect to Scottish players being part of a UK team then surely we should object to the whole concept of a British team in the Olympics and instead have separate teams as in the Commonwealth Games.

It seems to me that the only reason most folk object to Scottish participation in a UK team is the fear that Fifa will insist on a single team for the UK in all tournaments. This Fifaphobia is a pretty poor reason to deny the UK a team in the Olympics for a sport which we invented. I understand that fear but I don't share it. I can understand other nations questioning why the UK should have 4 teams and as the individual home nations are not independent states there is clearly a good argument for there being only a UK team allowed. But that being the case, one might argue, why has there not been a move to force a single team on us before now? Why wait for an Olympic UK team? The answer to this is that regardless of the political argument, a UK team would be stronger than any of the Home Nations on their own and therefore more likely to win things. If we were more likely to win things, other nations would be less likely to win and why would they vote for that? It would be like turkeys voting for Christmas. Think of the stronger England teams over the years and add in the likes of George Best, Ryan Giggs, Denis Law, Kenny Dalgeish and Pat Jennings into the mix! Blatter can threaten and huff and puff all he likes but having team GB in the Olympic football competition will not lead to the end of the Home Nations as members of Fifa. Going ahead with team GB would give a number of important messages to Blatter and they are

A Scotland Olympic team could do well if only they would introduce some more contemporary events.

We're not just good at heart disease

I don't see how the Scottish football team could be abolished because of this when FIFA happily recognises numerous much less credible "nations". However, the politics of FIFA are such that they wouldn't hesitate to reduce the relative power of the home nations if they got a sniff of a chance.

There's no way a one-off junior tournament will result in the loss of all four international teams for the World Cup. If it happened year upon year, perhaps, but this is a storm in a teacup. Nothing wrong with being Scottish and British. If some players don't want to, fair enough but I wouldn't want to deny any young boy their opportunity to appear in the Olympics. I'll be supporting Team GB, just as I will Scotland in the World Cup etc. It's not the leagues merging, it's not a regular team, it's simply a one-off as the Olympics are being held in Britain. End of. I'll be disappointed if the British team contains no Scots.

Its a "loose thread" for those who want to remove power from the home nations to grab onto though ... unravel enough thread and you're screwed !!!!

For me, the answer seems simple ..... re-instate the home internationals as an U23 event (or one that mirrors the Olympic rules) - even if it is only once every 4 years - and make the prize for winning it very straightforward. The winning nation represents UK/GB at the Olympics, and runs the team under the auspices of its own independent FA association.

**like**

Sorry Terry its no to Team GB from me!!!! for all the reasons detailed by others. Too big a risk to take.

In Rugby you have the British Lions and you also have the four individual nations still competing. Even in Tennis we represent GB in the Davis Cup, another one off tournament.

I would say world football is a massive business and there's no shortage of nations wanting to qualify for World Cups. There are various political motives for combining nations such as ours, unlike in rugby where the six nations is pretty much on a par with the World Cup, and the World Cup needs nations like Scotland to make it interesting/competitive.

Fifa doesn't need us, we're a minnow. They don't want us either, in case it gives other people/regions ideas.

Maybe if rugby ever attained the status of football as a world game then our rugby team would be threatened in the same way.

I'm against it, just in case you didn't notice.

Edited June 24, 201114 yr by TheMantis