Finnegan Posted 2 April 2009 Posted 2 April 2009 I was going to start a thread on this but since it's in here already, what the hell.Finners, San Marino are a joke of a national football team. It's so pointless to play them it's actually embarassing. There are special tournaments for small island teams, so why don't they play in them instead? They are never going to improve, and the fact that they've never won a competetive game speaks volumes for this. They've only ever won one game ever for god sake and that was in a friendly against Lichtenstein. How often do they get beaten in excess of 3 or 4 goals, even against so-called lesser nations? The World Cup qualifying is a competetive event, and San Marino being part of it makes it somewhat of a mockery. Let's be honest, they're only good for the comedy value. If you don't think that's a exceptionally twattish thing to say then I'm not really going to point it out for you. I love Victoria Beckham!!! Ew. Like fucking ET.
Bert Posted 2 April 2009 Posted 2 April 2009 If you don't think that's a exceptionally twattish thing to say then I'm not really going to point it out for you. What Joe's saying is right though. Just because you disagree, doesn't make it nailed on wrong.
Dr The Singh Posted 2 April 2009 Posted 2 April 2009 If you don't think that's a exceptionally twattish thing to say then I'm not really going to point it out for you.Ew. Like fucking ET. I haven't done either but up for both!!!
James. Posted 2 April 2009 Posted 2 April 2009 What Joe's saying is right though. Just because you disagree, doesn't make it nailed on wrong. Yeah I pretty much agree with Joe. I would argue that it would actually be beneficial to the smaller teams to play each other in a pre-qualifying tournament compared to the current system. But I think Finnegan is against any kind of stratification anywhere, whether it be football, society or whatever. It's those left wing ideals of his. Nice in theory, not so nice in practice...
Dr The Singh Posted 2 April 2009 Posted 2 April 2009 Yeah I pretty much agree with Joe.I would argue that it would actually be beneficial to the smaller teams to play each other in a pre-qualifying tournament compared to the current system. But I think Finnegan is against any kind of stratification anywhere, whether it be football, society or whatever. It's those left wing ideals of his. Nice in theory, not so nice in practice... Yeah bloody too right, he was against me stratifying either ET or Victoria Beckham!!!!
StanSP Posted 2 April 2009 Posted 2 April 2009 Yeah I pretty much agree with Joe.I would argue that it would actually be beneficial to the smaller teams to play each other in a pre-qualifying tournament compared to the current system. But I think Finnegan is against any kind of stratification anywhere, whether it be football, society or whatever. It's those left wing ideals of his. Nice in theory, not so nice in practice... A pre-qualifying tournament for what though? If it's going to be for World Cup qualifiers we're back at square one. And, question in general, how do you define a small team? What's the boundaries of a small nation compared to a big nation? And when can one rise up to become a bigger nation?
James. Posted 2 April 2009 Posted 2 April 2009 A pre-qualifying tournament for what though? If it's going to be for World Cup qualifiers we're back at square one. And, question in general, how do you define a small team? What's the boundaries of a small nation compared to a big nation? And when can one rise up to become a bigger nation? A pre-qualifying tournament to get into the World Cup qualifiers. You could use previous performance as a way of determining which teams would need to pre-qualify. Maybe if the pre-qualifier actually qualifies for the World Cup proper they could then be exempt from pre-qualifying the next time round. I haven't thought it through completely but I'm sure mankind has the ability to derive a system that would work.
Bert Posted 2 April 2009 Posted 2 April 2009 Teams are never going to improve getting hammered 6,7,8,9,10-0 every time they play.
Finnegan Posted 2 April 2009 Posted 2 April 2009 Yeah I pretty much agree with Joe.I would argue that it would actually be beneficial to the smaller teams to play each other in a pre-qualifying tournament compared to the current system. But I think Finnegan is against any kind of stratification anywhere, whether it be football, society or whatever. It's those left wing ideals of his. Nice in theory, not so nice in practice... But here, though, I really don't see where it's problematic in practice. It's difficult to be an idealist in the real world because you just come across being naive and a little bit simple, hence why I don't go round actually telling people "Hey, anarchy's a great idea!" and "Yknow communism COULD work!" But in football? The beauty of it is giving everyone an opportunity to compete, if that's a mockery then I think you've got a really sad attitude. The whole "let's have a qualifying round for them!" idea is total pish n'all. These teams are all equally shit, it won't make any difference to how effective they are in the tournament you'll just serve to have fewer of them. Which in turn will make the groups unbalanced for whoever has the extra fixture against, say, the Faroes as opposed to having to go to new-found lowest-rankers like Lithuania or Georgia or Slovenia. Face it. There's no justification for removing these teams other than: A. A bunch of English (and probably German, Italian and whoever) fans think they're pointless and B. Probably the whiney, overpayed dicks that play for these "big" nations can't be fucked making the journey.
StanSP Posted 2 April 2009 Posted 2 April 2009 A pre-qualifying tournament to get into the World Cup qualifiers.You could use previous performance as a way of determining which teams would need to pre-qualify. Maybe if the pre-qualifier actually qualifies for the World Cup proper they could then be exempt from pre-qualifying the next time round. I haven't thought it through completely but I'm sure mankind has the ability to derive a system that would work. Why though? They'll end up getting thrashed again. just because they can beat another smaller nation, won't mean that they can beat teams once they are put in WCQ groups. IT's even worse if a pre-qualifier qualifies for the World Cup because they are 9/10 likely to get beaten on a bigger stage..
Sparky Posted 2 April 2009 Posted 2 April 2009 Id leave qualifying as it is , id probably play a few more tournaments for the lesser nations . On a completly seperate note not placed purly to wind Finners up(ok maybe a little) ive just noticed Burkina Faso Bahrain and Congo are above Wales in the world rankings Things can turn around in international football , Turkey used to get dispatched 7/8-0 in the late 80s and Northern Ireland who were regularly hammered now lead their group .
Finnegan Posted 2 April 2009 Posted 2 April 2009 Id leave qualifying as it is , id probably play a few more tournaments for the lesser nations . On a completly seperate note not placed purly to wind Finners up(ok maybe a little) ive just noticed Burkina Faso Bahrain and Congo are above Wales in the world rankings Things can turn around in international football , Turkey used to get dispatched 7/8-0 in the late 80s and Northern Ireland who were regularly hammered now lead their group . Totally. Agree with all of that - and Wales are shocking, mate, totally deserved. Although, that said, the populations of microstates makes them a slightly different situation to Turkey and Northern Ireland. Still, I don't really see that it's a problem as it is. She's rancid. What's wrong with you!?
lildave3 Posted 2 April 2009 Posted 2 April 2009 :laugh: at Finners saying he'd turn down Victoria Beckham.
Finnegan Posted 2 April 2009 Posted 2 April 2009 :laugh: at Finners saying he'd turn down Victoria Beckham. I'm honest and I'm a realist. There are very few celebrity women I'd kick out of my bed - I'm usually the first to point this out when people call other famous hotties unattractive, say they're too skinny, too big, too whatever. Victoria Beckham's my exception. Not attracted to her in the absolte slightest. To such a degree I find her a turn off. No word of a lie.
Finnegan Posted 2 April 2009 Posted 2 April 2009 Im dissapointed. A strange mix of plastic and bones. Ych y fi.
Fox You Forest Posted 2 April 2009 Posted 2 April 2009 I would, wouldn't want her hanging around for long afterwards though she's annoying as fcuk.
Corky Posted 2 April 2009 Posted 2 April 2009 I love Victoria Beckham!!! Wouldn't say love, but wouldn't say no either
lildave3 Posted 2 April 2009 Posted 2 April 2009 She's basically one step away from Michael Jackson. Yep, she's definitely a middle aged crazy bloke who hankers for children.
Miquel The Work Geordie Posted 2 April 2009 Posted 2 April 2009 Yep, she's definitely a middle aged crazy bloke who hankers for children. :laugh:
Finnegan Posted 2 April 2009 Posted 2 April 2009 Yep, she's definitely a middle aged crazy bloke who hankers for children. Exactly! So I appreciate it's quite exciting knowing you have something of a chance, but still, eww!
Koke Posted 2 April 2009 Posted 2 April 2009 I agree with Finners. I often find it quite ironic when people dismiss other celebs for being too this or too that as if we look any better ourselves. Victoria Beckham is an exception. I well and truly would not touch her. I find her a complete turn off.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.