What is the UK?

ivan087

ziggy67 wrote:

And Wales doesn't have its own Parliment, culture or language???

Do you really think countries that are a few years old should be allowed but Scotland & England who played the very 1st international shouldn't?

I think FIFA's beef with the home nations is that they each have a seat at the top table there which i agree should be changed.

Finally why not have a European team? Aren't we all under the European Parliment?

wales doesnt have its own parliment, its an assembly. an assembly has slightly more powers then a county council. there isnt much of a welsh culture. its been a principality of england since the 1100s. yes it has a language and thats about it. your missing my point. at the end of the day wales and scotlands are regions of the UK, so is northern ireland.

you asked why new independent nations should have a team before scotland etc. because they are a nation!!! EQUAL to france, germany, uk, and ireland. my question is this - why should wales (for example), who are officially not a nation have a team over a region like basque or brittany or hundreds of other regions. there should be rules for everyone, why should certain places have different rules. not really fair is it?

jcoote

*Wrong User Account*

ziggy

This post has been deleted.

ivan087

ziggy67 wrote:

Can i just ask what you make of the Granny rule? I am dead against it which probably makes me look hypocritical- tough on nationality, soft on nation status

i think the granny rule is a load of balls when you have players like tony cascarino who doesnt have a drop of irish blood playing for this country. im not in the slight bit nationalistic but i think when it comes to playing for a country, it should be the one that you were born in or have lived in for most of your life. it really makes football a joke and ireland more of an english b-side then anything. id rather see a team of 11 irish lads giving it a 110% then a bunch of english rejects.

arggh im really in a ranting mood today, 6 hours off the fags!!!:mad:

axer

rsynnott wrote:

Why? There are four separate (non-soveriegn) countries involved.

Nope there ain't. They are not countries in any form. I agree they should be only allowed one team in any event but I guess that is up to the event organisers.

Earthhorse

Surely the United Kingdom is exactly that - a Kingdom. It just happens to be comprised of the countries England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.

To the OP, when people use the term UK like that they are doing so casually and are not really concerned with technical definitions.

samb

SCULLY wrote:

Why do people have a problem with someone saying ' I'm off to the U.K. ' yet it seems fine to say ' I'm going to the States ' which is far far vaguer?

I suppose the follow up question to that is 'what states will you visit in the US' whilst if someone says they are off to UK the follow up question may be 'are you leaving this island?'

The Granny rule is difficult and generally I agree it is a load of nonsense. But defining nationality is not clear-cut.
e.g if you are born in Ireland and live here till your 4, then move to england and live there for 20years. What are you? culturally you are certainly English IMO but you can clain Irishness if you like. Does it matter what your parents are, or should it? Mine are both English (although they have now lived most of their lives in Ireland) but I am completely Irish IMO, I could get a Bristish passport if I wanted (maybe to go to oz again).
But yes, I grandparent Irish is nonsense.

axer

Earthhorse wrote:

Surely the United Kingdom is exactly that - a Kingdom. It just happens to be comprised of the countries England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.

The UK is a country comprised of England, Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland - they are all parts of the UK but they themselves are not countries.

ziggy

This post has been deleted.

rsynnott

axer wrote:

The UK is a country comprised of England, Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland - they are all parts of the UK but they themselves are not countries.

They are strictly speaking (non-sovereign) nations. The UK is a unitary state.

Earthhorse

They are also referred to as constituent countries.

LordSutch

Earthhorse wrote:

Surely the United Kingdom is exactly that - a Kingdom. It just happens to be comprised of the countries England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.

To the OP, when people use the term UK like that they are doing so casually and are not really concerned with technical definitions.

You have put your finger on the point Earthhorse "When people use the term UK they are doing so casually" and fair enough too! but that raises the point why do offical adverts on Radio/TV from Vodafone Ireland (for example) talk about roaming charges in the UK or Northern Ireland? personally speaking, I dont care if the North stays or leaves the UK (thats up to them) but its the confusion that seems to remain in every day speak even on the airwaves that baffles me, and I have even heard a member of the Dail talking about boarding a train from Britain to Scotland!

ivan087

ziggy67 wrote:

What about rugby then?
Should there be a UK team & should NI be part of it?

there are only 10 very good teams in rugby in which the UK nations are in that top 10. making a UK team would take away from rugby, weakening the spectacle and weakening the six nations. so there is no need. maybe in the future there could be a british team in which northern players could pick between britain and ireland.

Gurgle

Earthhorse wrote:

Surely the United Kingdom is exactly that - a Kingdom. It just happens to be comprised of the countries England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.

Yep UK is the kingdom - a political entity. Formerly 'The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland'. Now 'The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland'. (I'm not sure but the kingdom might include Gibralter)

The Brittish empire included the kingdom, this was essentially the heart of the empire but the kingdom never included (for example) India.

Great Britain is an Island, a geographical entity, the largest of the Brittish Isles. The island of Ireland being the second largest.

edit - Irish people hesitate to use the term 'Great Britain' because the word 'Great' invokes the idea 'Wonderfull' rather than 'Big'.

ziggy

This post has been deleted.

thejuggler

Does anyone know how Britain came to be called Great Britain? Should we call ourselves Fantastic Ireland? Perhaps other European Countries could join in We could have Super Spain, Fabulous France and Gigantic Germany.

Earthhorse

It's great meaning large or immense, they're using it in the pejorative sense.

murphaph

thejuggler wrote:

Does anyone know how Britain came to be called Great Britain? Should we call ourselves Fantastic Ireland? Perhaps other European Countries could join in We could have Super Spain, Fabulous France and Gigantic Germany.

years and years ago Britain was called Breton, but so was Brittany, so confusion arose. The sensible thing to do was to rename Britain to 'Great Britain' as it's a lot bigger than Brittany. That's all. It's no different to modern day Oberbayern (Upper Bavaria) being used to distinguish it from low lying parts of that state as it's the bit with the Alps in. Same with Saxony (Sachsen) and lower Saxony (Niedersachsen). Purely geographic terms-doesn't mean anyone's any better than anyone else.

ivan087

ziggy67 wrote:

So are you now saying that they are seperate nations then?

Is this not a double standard? If it is wrong to have 4 football teams then it should be wrong to have 4 rugby teams too.
It seems to me that if you do it for one sport you have to do it for them all.

yeah i get what you are saying and it is a double standard. but in terms of rugby - there are very few good teams out there at the moment. the top teams, say france or NZ, could be beaten by only a handful of teams - such as wales or scotland. so, in order to keep rugby exciting and a spectacle and to make the world cup a bit more exciting, there should be seperate welsh/scottish/english teams.

also, the UK would dominate rugby - having the pick of british and ulster players.

maybe in the future when rugby teams such as the USA, italy, etc get to a higher standard, then there should only be a british side.

samb

thejuggler wrote:

Does anyone know how Britain came to be called Great Britain? Should we call ourselves Fantastic Ireland? Perhaps other European Countries could join in We could have Super Spain, Fabulous France and Gigantic Germany.

Yes, it was the french normans who named it that. Just means bigger britany, greater in size.

ziggy

This post has been deleted.

Determined2005

It's because we consider the whole island to be one country albeit in 2 states. Hence we are sometimes a bit confused about whether to refer to the North as being in the UK or not.

rsynnott

ArthurF wrote:

You have put your finger on the point Earthhorse "When people use the term UK they are doing so casually" and fair enough too! but that raises the point why do offical adverts on Radio/TV from Vodafone Ireland (for example) talk about roaming charges in the UK or Northern Ireland? personally speaking, I dont care if the North stays or leaves the UK (thats up to them) but its the confusion that seems to remain in every day speak even on the airwaves that baffles me, and I have even heard a member of the Dail talking about boarding a train from Britain to Scotland!

They're a company. Their ads are not 'official'. Presumably they thought it'd be worth their while to avoid offending lunatic-fringe republicans at the cost of accuracy. Of course, lunatic-fringe republicans probably use Meteor anyway, it being the only Irish-owned mobile telecom. (Of course, it uses orange as a corporate colour; that must be a dilemma for them!)

Gurgle

rsynnott wrote:

Of course, lunatic-fringe republicans probably use Meteor anyway, it being the only Irish-owned mobile telecom.

You'd think that wouldn't you.
And they don't watch BBC, drive Fords or Vauxhalls or support English football clubs. They didn't go off to work on building sites in London for the 80s. :rolleyes:

LordSutch

rsynnott wrote:

They're a company. Their ads are not 'official'. Presumably they thought it'd be worth their while to avoid offending lunatic-fringe republicans at the cost of accuracy

But would changing the advert wording to: "Roaming charges in Britain & Northern Ireland" really upset lunatic-fringe Republicans? and if so, Why?

rsynnott

ArthurF wrote:

But would changing the advert wording to: "Roaming charges in Britain & Northern Ireland" really upset lunatic-fringe Republicans? and if so, Why?

No, no, the correct wording would be "roaming charges in the UK"" or "roaming charges in Britain". That would upset lunatic-fringe republicans because it takes NI as being part of the UK. You could, I suppose, say "roaming charges in Great Britain and Northern Ireland", though you then risk upsetting people from the Isle of Man.

joolsveer

In Irish Wales is an Bhreatain Bheag or Little Britain

zippo22

ArthurF wrote:

......... then you have people saying things like "I am going to the UK for the weekend!...........

I've never heard anybody say they were going to the UK. People say they are going to England or over to Wales or going to Scotland.

A Dub in Glasgo

I find that a lot of Irish people refer to Britain as England. I am living in Scotland since 1993 and still people (from Ireland) say 'What is it like living in England?', 'Heres some English money (referring to sterling)' etc.

This is not something peculiar to Ireland though (although I have met plenty of people who still think the Republic of Ireland (or 'Southern' Ireland) is British). They get confused when I state that the most northern part of Ireland is in 'Southern' Ireland.

LordSutch

This thread has certainly given me food for thought, and there seems to be so many variations on what I thought was a straight forward question in the first place: I still say that the UK is a quite straight forward entity comprising as it does by international law and geography as the island of Britain + Northern Ireland (excluding the Isle of Man), but obviously this is not recognised or not understood by large swathes of of the population both here and on the island of Britain! fascinating indeed.