clubchamp98
Journeyman Pro
We might like it a bit more if we were top but we’re notI believe the original idea of the nations league was to replace the pointless/meaningless friendlies.
We might like it a bit more if we were top but we’re notI believe the original idea of the nations league was to replace the pointless/meaningless friendlies.
Citys best shirt by a country mile is there third shirt. Very similar to the yellow and black one City wore during the Gillingham play off final when we were a Liddle club.Some "interesting" designs. Still can't believe how bad the Chelsea one is https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/czq6eqw9el5o
That looks like a goalie shirt to me.
Oh come on.......pointless for a few top countries perhaps but a great competition for the vast majority of smaller nations.Hopefully they'll scrap the Nations League! Utterly pointless competition.
I'd say it is good for all countries, if it is between that or friendlies. The top countries get to play against other top countries more often. Theoretically, all nations should be able to play in more competitive games, whilst still treating them fairly casually, and a way to experiment with different players / formations if they want.Oh come on.......pointless for a few top countries perhaps but a great competition for the vast majority of smaller nations.
If only Southgate had experimented moreI'd say it is good for all countries, if it is between that or friendlies. The top countries get to play against other top countries more often. Theoretically, all nations should be able to play in more competitive games, whilst still treating them fairly casually, and a way to experiment with different players / formations if they want.
Although the timing of the games could be better. Especially as, at the end of the 2022/23 season that included the winter World Cup, England had to play Hungary, Germany, Italy and Hungary again between 4th June to 14th June. That was a joke.
Have they replaced friendlies? It feels like we still play loads of friendlies as well, and the Nation's League are additional. I've done no research, that's just what it feels like. Do managers experiment as much as they would in friendlies either? Are they still trying out new players or do they want to win more because it effects co-efficients for qualifying and that sort of thing?I'd say it is good for all countries, if it is between that or friendlies. The top countries get to play against other top countries more often. Theoretically, all nations should be able to play in more competitive games, whilst still treating them fairly casually, and a way to experiment with different players / formations if they want.
Although the timing of the games could be better. Especially as, at the end of the 2022/23 season that included the winter World Cup, England had to play Hungary, Germany, Italy and Hungary again between 4th June to 14th June. That was a joke.
England have played no more than 2 friendlies per calender year since 2019, and played no friendlies in 2019. Whereas before 2019, they'd play usually play 4-6 friendlies per year.Have they replaced friendlies? It feels like we still play loads of friendlies as well, and the Nation's League are additional. I've done no research, that's just what it feels like. Do managers experiment as much as they would in friendlies either? Are they still trying out new players or do they want to win more because it effects co-efficients for qualifying and that sort of thing?
Agree with you, some of the timings of international games are so stupid. Especially right at the end of that season as you pointed out (didn't we lose both or play very poorly?). I always hate it when the season feels like it's just started as well and they already go to internationals in early September. Fans seem to universally hate this as well.
Each to their own I guess. A bit like what managers choose to do in the League Cup. Some will field their strongest sides, some will give the reserves a chance and many will do something in between. It is a competition that gives managers the flexibility to do this. I guess it is a balance between what their and the fans expectations are. Some big nations may play strong sides, as they want to use every opportunity to get their best side playing together and working on tactics, building confidence. Other big nations will experiment with other players, see if they can fill any voids in the future, step up to the plate. Try young players.Have they replaced friendlies? It feels like we still play loads of friendlies as well, and the Nation's League are additional. I've done no research, that's just what it feels like. Do managers experiment as much as they would in friendlies either? Are they still trying out new players or do they want to win more because it effects co-efficients for qualifying and that sort of thing?
Agree with you, some of the timings of international games are so stupid. Especially right at the end of that season as you pointed out (didn't we lose both or play very poorly?). I always hate it when the season feels like it's just started as well and they already go to internationals in early September. Fans seem to universally hate this as well.
Is there not some sort of qualifying spots etc into Euros or World Cup based on where a team finishes in the Nations Legaue ?Hopefully they'll scrap the Nations League! Utterly pointless competition.
Flippin eck Doon, you been working a night shift. And just got up.
I suspect he was up watching the game, followed by a full night bender of celebrations. All work in Scotland cancelled today, as it was announced it would be a Public Holiday following Celtic's win. So, in fairness to him, taking a bit of time out to post in here, in between the celebrations, is admirableFlippin eck Doon, you been working a night shift. And just got up.
The women's team/Team GB needed England finish top of their Nations League group to qualify Olympic women's football tournament.Is there not some sort of qualifying spots etc into Euros or World Cup based on where a team finishes in the Nations Legaue ?
They are at least a bit more than friendlies and should be used to bring in and test new players
There is no British mens team. Apparently Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland feared that it would risk their independence in FIFA / UEFA tournaments (although there was a one-off team at London 2012)The women's team/Team GB needed England finish top of their Nations League group to qualify Olympic women's football tournament.
Not sure about the mens team.
Decorating the lounge actually, whilst quietly enjoying the UK dominance of Scottish League fitba,I suspect he was up watching the game, followed by a full night bender of celebrations. All work in Scotland cancelled today, as it was announced it would be a Public Holiday following Celtic's win. So, in fairness to him, taking a bit of time out to post in here, in between the celebrations, is admirable
We should just enter the England team as the GB team. We'd only be one Andy Robertson away from an actual GB team then anyway.There is no British mens team. Apparently Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland feared that it would risk their independence in FIFA / UEFA tournaments (although there was a one-off team at London 2012)
So, basically the home nations cannot agree between themselves in fielding a combined side. Whether the reason is genuinely about their independence, or the fact that there would be inevitable moaning from the individual Football Associations when certain players of other nations get picked ahead of their players.
Obviously different with the women's team, again possibly several reasons for that. The Olympics is more prestigious in the womens game, and nations can send their strongest sides, rather than being restricted to mainly U-23's like the men