Would you welcome the Old Firm into England?

Watch
Poll: Old Firm in the PL?
Yes - only if they work their way up (13)
52%
Yes - direct entry (1)
4%
No, **** them (10)
40%
Undecided (1)
4%
This discussion is closed.
The_Mighty_Bush
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#21
Report 4 years ago
#21
(Original post by United1892)
You'd let UVF FC in but not IRA United? Double standards.
You are making a very false equivalence here. Rangers fans do not show support for the UVF to the same extent as Paedo FC fans do for the IRA. They named their main fans group after the IRA, they constantly sign pro-IRA songs while it is rare to hear pro-UVF songs at Rangers games, they boo and spit on anyone wearing a poppy for remembrance day etc.

Not to mention that at least the UVF didn't bomb mainland Britain or try to make the Republic part of Britain again against the population's wishes.
0
United1892
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#22
Report 4 years ago
#22
(Original post by The_Mighty_Bush)
You are making a very false equivalence here. Rangers fans do not show support for the UVF to the same extent as Paedo FC fans do for the IRA. They named their main fans group after the IRA, they constantly sign pro-IRA songs while it is rare to hear pro-UVF songs at Rangers games, they boo and spit on anyone wearing a poppy for remembrance day etc.

Not to mention that at least the UVF didn't bomb mainland Britain or try to make the Republic part of Britain again against the population's wishes.
So Rangers don't sing songs about being 'up to our knees in fenian blood'. It's not a false equivelency both are as bad as each other both would happily abuse (or worse) a man because he was catholic/protestant.

No they bombed the republic because they opposed them not the UK.
0
The_Mighty_Bush
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#23
Report 4 years ago
#23
(Original post by United1892)
So Rangers don't sing songs about being 'up to our knees in fenian blood'.
Don't see what's wrong with that at all .You sound learn what the word actually means.

(Original post by United1892)
It's not a false equivalency both are as bad as each other both would happily abuse (or worse) a man because he was catholic/protestant.
Some of Rangers greatest players of recent memory have been Catholic. It has nothing to do with religion. It's about them supporting terrorism, being traitors to their own country, hating the country they live in and thinking that they are Irish but not living there and covering up paedophilia at their club.

(Original post by United1892)
No they bombed the republic because they opposed them not the UK.
We are talking about them joining the English league system, which will never happen anyway, so you should be thinking about why should English people want to see a club which supports an organisation which bombed their own cities enter their league system?
0
United1892
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#24
Report 4 years ago
#24
(Original post by The_Mighty_Bush)
Don't see what's wrong with that at all .You sound learn what the word actually means.
I know. It's derived from a historic brotherhood and basically means irish republican or catholic.


Some of Rangers greatest players of recent memory have been Catholic. It has nothing to do with religion. It's about them supporting terrorism, being traitors to their own country, hating the country they live in and thinking that they are Irish but not living there and covering up paedophilia at their club.
Rangers didnt sign a catholic player from Celtics formation to 1989. Celtic has always signed both catholics and protestants. Rangers fans are just as happy to support terrorism so long as it is by the UVF not the IRA. It's not really their fault that their ancestors moved to Scotland. Also I don't buy into all this **** about traitors just because they happen to have different views to you.

We are talking about them joining the English league system, which will never happen anyway, so you should be thinking about why should English people want to see a club which supports an organisation which bombed their own cities enter their league system?
i don't particularly want to taint the league with either of the clubs. I also think it'd be bad for Scottish football if they lost both teams.
0
The_Mighty_Bush
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#25
Report 4 years ago
#25
(Original post by United1892)
I know. It's derived from a historic brotherhood and basically means irish republican or catholic.
It doesn't mean Irish Catholic. It means political activist or usually terrorist.

(Original post by United1892)
Rangers didnt sign a catholic player from Celtics formation to 1989.
That's not true at all. In recent times it has been Celtic fans who have been the one booing Catholic players at Rangers like Neil McCann and calling them traitors or orange *******s or whatever.
0
Zerforax
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#26
Report 4 years ago
#26
Seems like Scotland are slowly trying to push through as much devolution/separation as possible even though they voted no to a split in the referendum.

So no, their Scottish teams can **** off
0
moggis
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#27
Report 4 years ago
#27
God YES.

It would be wonderful.

However for various reasons which no doubt others have mentioned ( didn't have time to read posts) it's very very unlikely to ever happen.

More likely I think is some kind of North Atlantic league involving the best teams from Portugal,Holland,Scotland,Begium etc.

That would be good as well.

The main point is that it's a 'tragic' waste that such HUGE clubs have to play dross week after week after week.

Of course,on the other hand,it would be grossly unfair on the smaller teams but at least they could win their leagues and they should receive some kind of compensation as well.
0
United1892
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#28
Report 4 years ago
#28
(Original post by The_Mighty_Bush)
It doesn't mean Irish Catholic. It means political activist or usually terrorist.
It is used as an insult to itish catholics.


That's not true at all. In recent times it has been Celtic fans who have been the one booing Catholic players at Rangers like Neil McCann and calling them traitors or orange *******s or whatever.
Yeah, Ir was major signings. There were however very few of them with one of the signings being told to keep the fact he was catholic secret and one of them getting released as soon as it was found out they were a catholic.
0
mmm778899
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#29
Report 4 years ago
#29
(Original post by United1892)
You'd let UVF FC in but not IRA United? Double standards.
Are the UVF anti-British? No.
1
Zander01
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#30
Report 4 years ago
#30
If the union is to unfortunately remain then it should happen. That way the premier league would become genuinely competitive and even richer
0
United1892
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#31
Report 4 years ago
#31
(Original post by mmm778899)
Are the UVF anti-British? No.
Are they terrorists? Yes.
Just because they have the same aim as you doesn't make what they do right.
0
Zander01
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#32
Report 4 years ago
#32
(Original post by Depleted)
No player would ever want to live in ****ty Scotland, and location alone would mean that they'd be comfortable mid-table at best.
Says the guy from Manchester :rofl:


Everyone knows some oil rich billionaires would buy either one or both of the clubs
0
barnetlad
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#33
Report 4 years ago
#33
No. I believe in Scottish independence and so wish the separate Scottish League to remain.

From a sporting perspective it would not make sense to have two Scottish clubs in and no other. Then to merge the Leagues even if there was regionalisation below say the top two divisions would be unfair to fans given travelling distance and cost. Even unfair to most Manchester United fans who would have a long trip to Glasgow from the south of England.
0
Tony_LeaS
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#34
Report 4 years ago
#34
If Welsh sides can enter English leagues, why cant Scottish sides? Celtic and (new) Rangers would compete well here if I am honest, and I would like them. Scottish leagues could feed into the English leagues probably? Or just bring Rangers and Celtic, gives teams like Aberdeen, ICT and St Johnstone a chance over there.
0
Depleted
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#35
Report 4 years ago
#35
(Original post by Zander01)
Says the guy from Manchester :rofl:


Everyone knows some oil rich billionaires would buy either one or both of the clubs
And I never argued anyone wants to live in Manchester? It's the reason London clubs do well, and that even the likes of Spurs can get top level talents. In any case Celtic wouldn't reach the level of United, which goes some way to negating the whole ****ty location part.
0
Zander01
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#36
Report 4 years ago
#36
(Original post by Depleted)
And I never argued anyone wants to live in Manchester? It's the reason London clubs do well, and that even the likes of Spurs can get top level talents. In any case Celtic wouldn't reach the level of United, which goes some way to negating the whole ****ty location part.
Define well? Arsenal and Spurs are **** and don't attract the best players at all. Only Chelsea do and... what a coincidence they're owned by an oil rich billionaire.
0
Depleted
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#37
Report 4 years ago
#37
(Original post by Zander01)
Define well? Arsenal and Spurs are **** and don't attract the best players at all. Only Chelsea do and... what a coincidence they're owned by an oil rich billionaire.
Ozil, Sanchez, Cech, Modric etc were all good/borderline World Class players, and London was a major draw for them. It's a top 5 city in the world (not including weather for obvious reasons!), of course it makes it easier for London clubs to get top players.
0
Zander01
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#38
Report 4 years ago
#38
(Original post by Depleted)
Ozil, Sanchez, Cech, Modric etc were all good/borderline World Class players, and London was a major draw for them. It's a top 5 city in the world (not including weather for obvious reasons!), of course it makes it easier for London clubs to get top players.
It might make it slightly easier but it's by no means the most important factor players consider when moving to a club.

The chance for success and the prestige of the club is more important. That and money of course
0
Depleted
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#39
Report 4 years ago
#39
(Original post by Zander01)
It might make it slightly easier but it's by no means the most important factor players consider when moving to a club.

The chance for success and the prestige of the club is more important. That and money of course
Would be nice to think like that but that's not how it works. Sanchez joined Arsenal purely for location, after 13/14 Liverpool looked like they had better propsects, a style of play that suits him down to the ground, a starring central role and guaranteed CL qualification, as well as the same wages. He joined Arsenal for London. Cech the same, else he'd have gone to PSG. Happens time and time again, guarantee if Di Maria was at Arsenal or Chelsea or Spurs he'd have given it another year before jumping ship.
0
username917703
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#40
Report Thread starter 4 years ago
#40
I can't remember the player, but he was offered more money by a club with better prospects and still went to Fulham/Palace/a club of that stature purely because they were based in London.
0
X
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

How are you finding researching unis for 2021 entry?

I have been able to get all the information I need from online research (65)
19.35%
I have tried virtual events and found them useful (72)
21.43%
I have tried virtual events and did not find them useful (62)
18.45%
I would be interested in trying socially distanced or scaled down in person events (70)
20.83%
I want to but don't know where to start with researching unis for 2021 entry (34)
10.12%
I haven't started researching yet (33)
9.82%

Watched Threads

View All