In case you missed it

There ARE other teams(we'd have no-one to play otherwise) and here's where all-comers can discuss the wider world of football......

Moderator: Zulus Thousand of em

Post Reply
H. Pedersen
Passionate
Passionate
Posts: 2438
Joined: Sat Aug 06, 2005 5:56 am
Location: Seattle, WA, USA

Post by H. Pedersen » Fri Sep 14, 2007 2:08 am

blurred wrote:
nobby7 wrote:If the english had been in our group(THE SCOTS) you would be in about 4th place in the table. ...
A valid and yet completely irrelevant point. Yes, I believe that England would have struggled if they were replaced with the Scots, and well done to them for their performances to date by the way. But they can't be in that position, because England are good enough to be seeded in the upper echelons of FIFA rankings, meaning they avoid some of the 'big guns'.
Which is an absolute travesty. The seeding system needs to be re-worked since the major factor appears to be team popularity rather than ability. Still haven't figured out why Spain got seeded in the World Cup despite barely qualifying, and don't get me started on Mexico . . .
Top
User avatar
Worthy4England
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 32702
Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 6:45 pm

Post by Worthy4England » Fri Sep 14, 2007 11:10 am

I know it must be concerning to you Fatshaft, wondering what to do about a team that's top of a table, so I've posted a different table to make you feel more like - well - errr - in your comfort zone, something that the Scots are more used to...

ICC World Twenty20: Group D
P W L T N/R R/R Pts
1 Pakistan 1 1 0 0 0 2.55 2.0
2 India 1 0 0 0 1 0.0 1.0
3 Scotland 2 0 1 0 1 -2.55 1.0

:-) Good to see the Old Enemy doing well in the football mate.
Top
User avatar
Bruce Rioja
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 38742
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 9:19 pm
Location: Drifting into the arena of the unwell.

Post by Bruce Rioja » Fri Sep 14, 2007 11:23 am

Worthy4England wrote:I know it must be concerning to you Fatshaft, wondering what to do about a team that's top of a table, so I've posted a different table to make you feel more like - well - errr - in your comfort zone, something that the Scots are more used to...

ICC World Twenty20: Group D
P W L T N/R R/R Pts
1 Pakistan 1 1 0 0 0 2.55 2.0
2 India 1 0 0 0 1 0.0 1.0
3 Scotland 2 0 1 0 1 -2.55 1.0

:-) Good to see the Old Enemy doing well in the football mate.
What, no Faeroe Isles? :mrgreen:
May the bridges I burn light your way
Top
User avatar
Dave Sutton's barnet
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 28812
Joined: Sun May 14, 2006 4:00 pm
Location: Hanging on in quiet desperation
Contact:
Contact Dave Sutton's barnet

Post by Dave Sutton's barnet » Fri Sep 14, 2007 11:52 am

H. Pedersen wrote:
blurred wrote:
nobby7 wrote:If the english had been in our group(THE SCOTS) you would be in about 4th place in the table. ...
A valid and yet completely irrelevant point. Yes, I believe that England would have struggled if they were replaced with the Scots, and well done to them for their performances to date by the way. But they can't be in that position, because England are good enough to be seeded in the upper echelons of FIFA rankings, meaning they avoid some of the 'big guns'.
Which is an absolute travesty. The seeding system needs to be re-worked since the major factor appears to be team popularity rather than ability. Still haven't figured out why Spain got seeded in the World Cup despite barely qualifying, and don't get me started on Mexico . . .
Aye, there's more than one team up the top of the rankings who only have to beat places with more coconut trees than footballers. As you well know.
Top
User avatar
Montreal Wanderer
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 12942
Joined: Thu May 26, 2005 12:45 am
Location: Montreal, Canada

Post by Montreal Wanderer » Fri Sep 14, 2007 12:46 pm

H. Pedersen wrote:
blurred wrote:
nobby7 wrote:If the english had been in our group(THE SCOTS) you would be in about 4th place in the table. ...
A valid and yet completely irrelevant point. Yes, I believe that England would have struggled if they were replaced with the Scots, and well done to them for their performances to date by the way. But they can't be in that position, because England are good enough to be seeded in the upper echelons of FIFA rankings, meaning they avoid some of the 'big guns'.
Which is an absolute travesty. The seeding system needs to be re-worked since the major factor appears to be team popularity rather than ability. Still haven't figured out why Spain got seeded in the World Cup despite barely qualifying, and don't get me started on Mexico . . .
I'm still trying to figure out why the US was something like 5th in the FIFA rankings before the World Cup.
"If you cannot answer a man's argument, all it not lost; you can still call him vile names. " Elbert Hubbard.
Top
communistworkethic
Legend
Legend
Posts: 7404
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2005 9:08 pm
Location: in your wife's dreams
Contact:
Contact communistworkethic

Post by communistworkethic » Fri Sep 14, 2007 12:57 pm

what a ridiculous statment Monty, obviously they got that right, they just got all the others wrong!
power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely

kevin nolan is so fat, that when he sits around the house he sits around the house
Top
CrazyHorse
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 10572
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2005 2:51 pm
Location: Up above the streets and houses

Post by CrazyHorse » Fri Sep 14, 2007 12:57 pm

Montreal Wanderer wrote:
H. Pedersen wrote:
blurred wrote:
nobby7 wrote:If the english had been in our group(THE SCOTS) you would be in about 4th place in the table. ...
A valid and yet completely irrelevant point. Yes, I believe that England would have struggled if they were replaced with the Scots, and well done to them for their performances to date by the way. But they can't be in that position, because England are good enough to be seeded in the upper echelons of FIFA rankings, meaning they avoid some of the 'big guns'.
Which is an absolute travesty. The seeding system needs to be re-worked since the major factor appears to be team popularity rather than ability. Still haven't figured out why Spain got seeded in the World Cup despite barely qualifying, and don't get me started on Mexico . . .
I'm still trying to figure out why the US was something like 5th in the FIFA rankings before the World Cup.
Bribery and corruption?
Businesswoman of the year.
Top
User avatar
Montreal Wanderer
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 12942
Joined: Thu May 26, 2005 12:45 am
Location: Montreal, Canada

Post by Montreal Wanderer » Fri Sep 14, 2007 1:27 pm

communistworkethic wrote:what a ridiculous statment Monty, obviously they got that right, they just got all the others wrong!
:oops: Je m' excuse.
"If you cannot answer a man's argument, all it not lost; you can still call him vile names. " Elbert Hubbard.
Top
User avatar
Hoboh
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 13330
Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 8:19 am

Post by Hoboh » Fri Sep 14, 2007 4:45 pm

Better lock the gates at Carlise lads, Bonny prince charmings been spotted on the way down heading a bunch of rubble.......errr sorry thats rabble. Send for Hadrians Gate keeper at once.
Top
fatshaft
Passionate
Passionate
Posts: 2124
Joined: Sat Aug 19, 2006 9:04 pm
Location: Aberdeen
Contact:
Contact fatshaft

Post by fatshaft » Fri Sep 14, 2007 9:34 pm

hoboh2o wrote:Better lock the gates at Carlise lads, Bonny prince charmings been spotted on the way down heading a bunch of rubble.......errr sorry thats rabble. Send for Hadrians Gate keeper at once.
LOL. Has he got Adam Ant with him?
Top
User avatar
Dave Sutton's barnet
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 28812
Joined: Sun May 14, 2006 4:00 pm
Location: Hanging on in quiet desperation
Contact:
Contact Dave Sutton's barnet

Post by Dave Sutton's barnet » Sat Sep 15, 2007 12:53 pm

fatshaft wrote:
hoboh2o wrote:Better lock the gates at Carlise lads, Bonny prince charmings been spotted on the way down heading a bunch of rubble.......errr sorry thats rabble. Send for Hadrians Gate keeper at once.
LOL. Has he got Adam Ant with him?
Ridicule is nothing to be scared of.
Top
Nozza
Dedicated
Dedicated
Posts: 1418
Joined: Mon Mar 20, 2006 3:55 pm
Location: On the Premier League Express!

Post by Nozza » Sat Sep 15, 2007 6:01 pm

I work with a Scot (he's a dirty tax dodging student, bit like me, now. :D ) and was all full of himself on Thursday morning, despite everyone congratulating him on a nothing less than superb victory and he turned around and said:

"The only thing hat soured my night was hearing you won".

Bitter cunt.

I once watched an England game in Scotland, and it was worse than watching Sunderland in Newcastle. Absolute hared/bigotry from them, yet whenever I have seen Scotland play in England, people are usually happy if they win. :|
Niall Quinn wrote:"Fans epitmoise a clubs spirit. We're nothing without the fans.
Top
a1
Passionate
Passionate
Posts: 3427
Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2004 2:11 pm

Post by a1 » Sat Sep 15, 2007 6:22 pm

Nozza wrote:I work with a Scot (he's a dirty tax dodging student, bit like me, now. :D ) and was all full of himself on Thursday morning, despite everyone congratulating him on a nothing less than superb victory and he turned around and said:

"The only thing hat soured my night was hearing you won".

Bitter c*nt.

I once watched an England game in Scotland, and it was worse than watching Sunderland in Newcastle. Absolute hared/bigotry from them, yet whenever I have seen Scotland play in England, people are usually happy if they win. :|
you shouldve sed -

"my favorite goal against england was ... "

[pause for a bit]

"when patrick kluvert scored against us in 1996"

that'll shut him up
Top
Post Reply

Return to “Other Footy”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 32 guests