robinfriday10 wrote:
doesnt it have something to do with voting eg seperately they get 1 vote each, together they still only get 1 vote.
not sure if it is for fifa or uefa voting tho? anyone know?
The reason we play seperately has nothing to do with the voting but of course we get seperate votes, we're seperate football associations. Why do San Marino and Italy get seperate votes, and Cypus, Greece and Macedonia?
so should the European Union be represented at the Olympics as a whole ?
not being smart... San Marino, Cyprus, FYROM, are all seperate republics are they not?
what im getting from this is that it's the seperate association that is actually represented, fair enough considering the name FIFA...
does wales have a seperate assoc. or is that part of the English FA ?
Brings me to another topic... England and Wales cricket board??? .... lol
God is an Englishman wrote:
As for me being a tosser on this forum, it's not just on the forum. I'm a tosser in real life as well.
robinfriday10 wrote:
doesnt it have something to do with voting eg seperately they get 1 vote each, together they still only get 1 vote.
not sure if it is for fifa or uefa voting tho? anyone know?
The reason we play seperately has nothing to do with the voting but of course we get seperate votes, we're seperate football associations. Why do San Marino and Italy get seperate votes, and Cypus, Greece and Macedonia?
so should the European Union be represented at the Olympics as a whole ?
not being smart... San Marino, Cyprus, FYROM, are all seperate republics are they not?
what im getting from this is that it's the seperate association that is actually represented, fair enough considering the name FIFA...
does wales have a seperate assoc. or is that part of the English FA ?
Brings me to another topic... England and Wales cricket board??? .... lol
Of course they shouldn't and that's my point. England, wales and scotland are also seperate countries.
England and wales cricket board had to be that way since glamorgan joined the ecb.
Bacon888 wrote:Wales isn't a country, is it? I thought it was a principality.
Interesting question, geographically it has not been a principality since 1542. However there is the honourary title of the "Prince of Wales" bestowed upon a married primary heir to the throne. As such the term principality exists despite not being formally and constitutionally correct.
Bacon888 wrote:Wales isn't a country, is it? I thought it was a principality.
Interesting question, geographically it has not been a principality since 1542. However there is the honourary title of the "Prince of Wales" bestowed upon a married primary heir to the throne. As such the term principality exists despite not being formally and constitutionally correct.
So its neither here nor there. When will your lot ever get things right?!
I'm thinking that blackadder and baldrick really did assist sorting such things back in the days.
Bacon888 wrote:Wales isn't a country, is it? I thought it was a principality.
Interesting question, geographically it has not been a principality since 1542. However there is the honourary title of the "Prince of Wales" bestowed upon a married primary heir to the throne. As such the term principality exists despite not being formally and constitutionally correct.
So its neither here nor there. When will your lot ever get things right?!
I'm thinking that blackadder and baldrick really did assist sorting such things back in the days.
please read my text above if you are struggling to understand