stevenmcn Posted October 16, 2018 Share Posted October 16, 2018 5 hours ago, Chripper said: The greater population = the greater at football myth has been debunked years ago. Uruguay are half our size and yet they produce top players. No one can cite them having better weather as being the catalyst. We should have dozens of indoor facilities dotted around the country in order to combat the snow and ice. We don't. Plus our basic football attitude is atrocious, it's along the lines of "Punt the ball as far up the park as you can, because the more you knock the ball aimlessly into the box, the more chances of scoring a goal". If we were the size of Brazil we'd still be abysmal. Totally agree, this population thing is nonsense. You only need to find around 30 or so players to form a squad, so whether you have 2 million or 200 million, it shouldn't be difficult, as proven by the likes of Denmark and Croatia who have a similar population to us and, without checking, seem to reach more finals than not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texas Pete Posted October 16, 2018 Share Posted October 16, 2018 5 hours ago, Chripper said: The greater population = the greater at football myth has been debunked years ago. Uruguay are half our size and yet they produce top players. No one can cite them having better weather as being the catalyst. We should have dozens of indoor facilities dotted around the country in order to combat the snow and ice. We don't. Plus our basic football attitude is atrocious, it's along the lines of "Punt the ball as far up the park as you can, because the more you knock the ball aimlessly into the box, the more chances of scoring a goal". If we were the size of Brazil we'd still be abysmal. Name one other country with a population of less than 40 million that have won the World Cup. I’ll save you some time, there isn’t one. Uruguay are really the exception to the rule. Having a bigger population doesn’t necessarily mean you will automatically have better players. What it does mean is there will likely be more money to spend on coaching and facilities which will lead to better players. The top clubs in Europe all come from countries with large populations. That’s because that’s where the money is. They nurture the best players. Sure, every now and again a smaller country, like Belgium, Denmark or Croatia will do very well at a tournament or will have a rich vein of players to choose from but it is quite rare. Belgium were shite 15 years ago and will probably be shite again in 15 years. Germany, Brazil and Spain will always be good at football. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobby Russell's Lovechild Posted October 16, 2018 Share Posted October 16, 2018 22 minutes ago, stevenmcn said: Totally agree, this population thing is nonsense. You only need to find around 30 or so players to form a squad, so whether you have 2 million or 200 million, it shouldn't be difficult, as proven by the likes of Denmark and Croatia who have a similar population to us and, without checking, seem to reach more finals than not. China and India have over a billion each, yet have shite teams (China even seems awash with money for their league) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobby Russell's Lovechild Posted October 16, 2018 Share Posted October 16, 2018 (edited) 4 minutes ago, Texas Pete said: Name one other country with a population of less than 40 million that have won the World Cup. I’ll save you some time, there isn’t one. Uruguay are really the exception to the rule. Having a bigger population doesn’t necessarily mean you will automatically have better players. What it does mean is there will likely be more money to spend on coaching and facilities which will lead to better players. The top clubs in Europe all come from countries with large populations. That’s because that’s where the money is. They nurture the best players. Sure, every now and again a smaller country, like Belgium, Denmark or Croatia will do very well at a tournament or will have a rich vein of players to choose from but it is quite rare. Belgium were shite 15 years ago and will probably be shite again in 15 years. Germany, Brazil and Spain will always be good at football. But Czechoslovakia, Denmark, Greece, Holland and Portugal have won the Euro's, that'll do for me Edited October 16, 2018 by Bobby Russell's Lovechild Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texas Pete Posted October 16, 2018 Share Posted October 16, 2018 1 minute ago, Bobby Russell's Lovechild said: But Denmark and Greece have won the Euro's, that'll do for me Both freak results. Demmark didn’t even qualify for Euro 92 and Greece are utter horseshit now. Smaller countries can produce good teams but it tends to be a lot rarer than bigger countries producing them and not as sustainable. Large countries don’t produce top teams if they don’t invest in the game. The USA is a prime example. If football was the national sport in the US, they would probably have won the World Cup several times. They don’t invest in grass roots football, coaching and training facilities and most small countries can’t afford to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KirkieRobRoy Posted October 16, 2018 Share Posted October 16, 2018 I'm not expecting to win the World Cup. Qualifying for it would be nice. Croatia got to the final They have a smaller population than us. I'm not expecting to win the Euros. Qualifying for it would be nice. Iceland had a terrific run at Euro 16 and they have a smaller population than Edinburgh. And both of them beat England on the way. I'd settle for that. The SFA have hidden behind the 'Och, we're a wee country, ye cannae expect anything' for too long. It's been rumbled. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texas Pete Posted October 16, 2018 Share Posted October 16, 2018 8 minutes ago, KirkieRobRoy said: I'm not expecting to win the World Cup. Qualifying for it would be nice. Croatia got to the final They have a smaller population than us. I'm not expecting to win the Euros. Qualifying for it would be nice. Iceland had a terrific run at Euro 16 and they have a smaller population than Edinburgh. And both of them beat England on the way. I'd settle for that. The SFA have hidden behind the 'Och, we're a wee country, ye cannae expect anything' for too long. It's been rumbled. I don’t remember anyone from the SFA saying or even suggesting that. The SFA are certainly guilty of mismanaging football in this country for years though and should have been investing the money we have all ploughed into their coffers over the years in grassroots facilities instead of relying on clubs to develop youngsters. Things are improving though and hopefully we will have a decent crop of youngsters coming through in the next 10 years or so. The fact is though the SFA have nowhere near the same resources as the FA or the DFB etc. People keep citing Croatia but what about all the other countries with populations similar to us that are just as shite as us or worse? Its not easy to achieve what Croatia have achieved. We should seriously look into their model and copy it if we can. I’m not sure the SFA would be interested in doing that though. 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.