Thetownend.com

i just had a thought.

aside from the political issues, the key reason nobody is keen on having a british football team at the olympics in 2012 is because it could adversely affect the individual standings of the representative football associations.

why not have a team comprised of amateurs instead? i don't understand very well how the system works, so it may not be possible but if the amateurs weren't representing any football association then FIFA/UEFA can't say that all four countries must now compete as one in future competitions.

regardless, it'd be nice to see amateur footballers competing for a prize that professionals wouldn't give a shit about.

I think there should be a team GB but using amateur players instead of pro players as not to affect our individual standings with UEFA and FIFA.

isn't that what i just suggested?

hahaha.quality

sometimes i feel like i'm underappreciated around here.

you'd miss me if i was gone.

I was thinking something similar the other day. Don't they already do some sort of non-league england XI thing?

so basically poxford versus argentina U23's?

i like the idea.imagine how the nation would get behind a team of nobodys who will bust a gut and give their all.

 Amateurs, not pub players.

 I think we should revisit history...the forerunner of the UEFA Cup, the Fairs Cup, started out with cities being represented by teams composed of players from the city....so for the first final London v Barcelona

 This was the London team....:
 
 Jack Kelsey (Ars), Peter Sillett (Che), Jim Langley (Ful), Danny Blanchflower (Tot), Maurice Norman (Tot), Ken Coote (Bre), Vic Groves (Ars), Jimmy Greaves (Che), Bobby Smith (Tot), Johnny Haynes (Ful), George Robb (Tot).

 Barcelona had a couple of token Periquitos...won 8-2 on aggregate.

 So stick in a London team...

 

Yep, it's the "National Game XI" or used to be anyway. And unlike their pro counterparts, they actually win things - no wonder they can't get pro contracts with that kind of attitude.

Maybe we should have a team of amatuers?


 :)

Would you go say any non-league players or proper part-timers? Most the conference teamsare full time aren't they?

There was thing on the radio about an England Learning Difficulties 11 the other week.They had to take stringent tests to prove that they weren't  clever.Thats the route to go down I reckon,the the Jocks will probably be over represented

I was agreeing more to the point young sonic!

Why does the "0" in the 2012 logo look like Australia?  Is it meant to?

I can't get passed it looking like Lisa Simpson giving a blow job. Ever since someone made that comment it is all I can see/

:D I mentioned it t'other day on here - but I think it was discussed on TEF when it was unveiled.

[url width=385 height=450]http://www.bbc.co.uk/london/content/images/2007/06/04/2012_logo_white_385x450.jpg[/url]

Why dont they use the England C time and that level, i belive thats Conference and lower?

I still think it's too much hassle. Who cares? Football is a token sport at the Olympics anyway. We have two international competitions England, Scotland, Wales and Norn Iron are utterly useless at, why combine to add a third team effort of inept football?

The Euro's are held in Poland and Ukraine that year too - that is surely the priority?

If we field Semi-Pro, students, whatever against Brazil, Argentina et al who take this seriously then we'll be embarressed.

It's a waste of time.

 Is it possible to enter a women's team and not a men's?  Women's football, is desperate for exposure....(having watched a Swindon Ladies' bird, take her shirt off and throw it to the ground on receiving a red card) it has to be a good thing.

 The England team isn't too shabby right now....no idea if the rest of the UK is any good....but we need a women's team there.

 As hosts we have a straight right of entry to all comps, and I suspect there is some sort of moral imperative to enter a team in all of them.

 The point about Euro 2012 is valid, if we qualify

Just enter the England U21 team.

Sounds like a gay Gary Glitter tactic to me.

Any GB team needs to be under 23 anyway, apart from 3 (i think) over 23's allowed. This always gets missed out of any argument it seems

Shouldn't even be in the Olympics to be honest, no sport should be unless getting Gold in the Olympics is considered the pinnacle of acheivement in that sport.  Therefore Tennis should also be removed.

If the sport has to stay in it, then we should enter in the true spirit of the Olympics and send in the part timers, England C.  For those guys it will mean something, and wuite frankly, provided they take it seriously, that's all I would ask.  Rather that than having some collection of overpaid pro's for whom it's less important than their pre season training.

MUST.....NOT.... BITE.....

I cant believe all you english folk are so ambivalent at the prospect of losing your national team and having it replaced by Gordon Browns last ditch attempt to preserve the union.

I found an interesting article on the beeb over the weekend where Blatter (in March) was quoted as saying a British team at the Olympics would endanger the four separate nations' membership of FIFA.  Only a couple of months later he back tracks, just goes to show he cannot be trusted.

Let's be honest, any team made up of players from the whole of Britain would be 85% English anyway.

It'd only be those (lesser) celtic nations that would lose their national team.

"Gone Fishin"

Not a fish it's just fact mate.

Not at all, why would any sane manager pick 11 english over paid, big headed kj's with over inflated ego's.  england have a dreadful team spirit, unlike the Scots for example.  And your argument fails as soon as start to pick the team, best keeper in Britain - Craig Gordon, who last time I checked isn't english.

I've seen Craig Gordon many times and the odd great save aside, is vastly overrated - just like every keeper in the UK!!! He has a shoddy defence in front of him I grant you.

I think we get the message though - the Scots are on the up - England are overpaid egomaniacs - like we didn't know ;)

Anywho, it'll be a Scotsman who'll probably lead these gang of renegades in 2012.... If he's in then I blame Scotland if this farce is approved  :D

I can't see Fergie doing it.

Gordon for Scotland > Gordon for Sunderland.

And anyone would struggle keeping goal for the Mackems.

See you love it really.

RULE BRITTANIA!

Hence why i said 85% and not 100%.

So if there were 2 non english players selected your theory is shot out the water.  A "British" side containing Gordon, Hutton and Bale, in a couple of years wouldn't be too unexpected (talking general terms not for the Olympics).

I'd be happy with that. Don't forget a squad is made up of more than 11 players though Jan.

Fair point Jay, but your original post stated any "team"...... not squad.  Can we call it a day on this one now? 

I'm bored - I also don't want Team GB F.C. to happen. But here's my Great Britain squad if it was this year and everyone was fit. I've not put a whole lot of effort into it, simply using wikipedia to get information. I've tried to incorporate all nations. (1-11 isn't my first XI either) It's not to be taken seriously  ;)

01. Craig Gordon (25) Scotland
02. Alan Hutton (23) Scotland
03. Gareth Bale (19) Wales
04. Steven Taylor (22) England
05. Micah Richards (20) England
06. Aaron Ramsey (19) Wales
07. David Bentley (23) England
08. Ashley Young (23) England
09. Wayne Rooney (22) England
10. David Healy (29) Northern Ireland
11. James Milner (22) England
12. Jamie O'Hara (21) England
13. Joe Hart (21) England
14. Steve Davis (23) Northern Ireland
15. Theo Walcott (19) England
16. Jonny Evans (19) Northern Ireland
17. Scott Brown (23)  Scotland
18. Chris Gunter (19) Wales
19. Tom Huddlestone (21) England
20. James Morrison (22) Scotland
21. Ross McCormack (22) Scotland
22. Gabriel Agbonlahor (21) England
23. Ben Alnwick (21) England

M. Stuart Pearce (Eng)