Independence for England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ire

atleti scouse · Post by **atleti scouse** » Wed Jul 09, 2008 1:31 pm

Hello, sorry to bring this up again but this is something that all assosiated with the UK feel critical. In world football these countries all have their independant teams and in soccer project it should be the same. Ask anyone in the UK " where are you from? ", they will answer by giving you their respective country Scotland, Wales etc. I dont want to represent the UK but i want to represent England, just like another player may choose Scotland etc. I have been talking for too long now so will come to the conclusion, thanks for having patience.

1) Everyone that is registered for UK will have to choose Scotland, England, Wales or Northern Ireland ( your UK players will then change to the country you chose )

2) After this you will have to do the same for your staff nationality

I think on a different topic that having Yugoslavian staff, players etc is still a problem imo so i would want to avoid this for Soccer Project members from the UK.

Im aware most will say this isnt needed etc but as a Englishmen i want the right to represent my country, this applies to every member of the UK, on our passports it might say UK but in our hearts and mind we are all English, Scottish etc.

Thank you for reading this.

sljivovica · Post by **sljivovica** » Wed Jul 09, 2008 6:58 pm

I'm for it.

atleti scouse · Post by **atleti scouse** » Thu Jul 10, 2008 1:15 am

Thanks

Korsarul_negru · Post by **Korsarul_negru** » Thu Jul 10, 2008 7:18 am

I agree to.

SBroccoli · Post by **SBroccoli** » Thu Jul 10, 2008 9:00 am

In that case, I think the best thing to do would be to adopt the official nationalities according to FIFA. It will add a number of more nationalities than just those mentioned here.

zandyy · Post by **zandyy** » Thu Jul 10, 2008 11:14 am

Copy pasting my comment on this from the last time it was discussed:

According to the Fifa website, there are 208 football nations. SP has 234 nations. If people feel strongly about having 4 nations in the UK and no nations that have no actual football leagues, then a manageable solution would be to delete and add countries according to the Fifa list, and then maybe give managers with problematic nationalities or those who have youth coordinators with problematic nationalities a certain period of time to chose a new nationality. From that point on, those nationalities that should not be here would eventually get extinct, with the minimum fuss for developers.

Just an idea – as I said, I don’t think it’s that important.

Razvanica · Post by **Razvanica** » Thu Jul 10, 2008 11:29 am

I didn't notice that until now. It's just weird not having Scotland or Ireland but having Vatican or Heard Island and McDonald Islands. And that Yugoslavia thing is not the same as the UK, as every ex-Yugoslavian country is present in SP so it's like having them twice. I don't agree with zandyy, I think this is important for the realism of the game, I am sick and tired with all those monks playing against me.

Oh,and the funny thing is that Heard Island and McDonald Islands are uninhabited but we have 9 managers representing them.

cruxify · Post by **cruxify** » Thu Jul 10, 2008 12:54 pm

Then we're going to have a problem with the English and Faroe Islands flags as they're almost identical.

atleti scouse · Post by **atleti scouse** » Thu Jul 10, 2008 12:55 pm

Thanks for the feedback guys, well i know Yugoslavia split up but theres still yugoslavian players AND Serb players which i think is wrong as Yugoslavia exists no more. The same could happen to Britain if independence was made but i agree with Razvanica that the manager would have to choose England, Scotland, Wales or Ireland.

Razvanica · Post by **Razvanica** » Thu Jul 10, 2008 1:09 pm

cruxify wrote:Then we're going to have a problem with the English and Faroe Islands flags as they're almost identical.

Yeah, well, we already have identical (not similar) flags. For example Heard Island and McDonald Islands are Australian territories so they have the same flag as Australia.

Any idea who made a list of NAMES for these UNINHABITED islands?

LE: I took a look, we only have managers from Heard Island and McDonald Islands, the players they got are just coming from random countries. So I guess it could make some sense: SP tries populating these islands...

cruxify · Post by **cruxify** » Thu Jul 10, 2008 1:31 pm

Razvanica wrote:
cruxify wrote:Then we're going to have a problem with the English and Faroe Islands flags as they're almost identical.
Yeah, well, we already have identical (not similar) flags. For example Heard Island and McDonald Islands are Australian territories so they have the same flag as Australia.

Any idea who made a list of NAMES for these UNINHABITED islands?

No idea but I'm just assuming that they googled an Australian newspaper and took names from there. The lists for all countries is pretty much wrong anyway, the other day I saw a Belgian player called Dragan Dragutinovic, and that's a Serb name. Similarly, half of the Australian names in the database are Slavic.

But anyway, I agree that we adopt the FIFA list. And what's the point of Antarctica?

SBroccoli · Post by **SBroccoli** » Thu Jul 10, 2008 2:17 pm

cruxify wrote:Then we're going to have a problem with the English and Faroe Islands flags as they're almost identical.

Lol.

There are clear blue lines on the Faroe Isles flag. It's just as different from the UK flag as the Scandinavian flags are from eachother (all crosses with various combinations of red, blue, white and one bastard with yellow).

Btw.: Denmark and Malta have the same flags. And the swiss flag is almost identical too.

I don't hink this is a problem.

Bottom line, though, I'd suggest cutting down with one nation at least: Antarctica. This 'nation' simply doesn't make sense!

Razvanica · Post by **Razvanica** » Thu Jul 10, 2008 2:28 pm

SBroccoli wrote:and one bastard with yellow

SBroccoli wrote:Bottom line, though, I'd suggest cutting down with one nation at least: Antarctica. This 'nation' simply doesn't make sense!

Oh, no, and what about my uninhabited Australian islands?

Zé da Silva · Post by **Zé da Silva** » Thu Jul 10, 2008 3:17 pm

SBroccoli wrote:Btw.: Denmark and Malta have the same flags. And the swiss flag is almost identical too.

Identical are the flags of Romania and Chad, but as said that isn't a real issue.

Just playing the devil's advocate here (it's a weakness of mine, I really enjoy doing that), but I'd just like to address a couple of points. Please don't kill the messenger.

The concepts of "nation", "state", "territory" and "country" are too fuzzy and often clash with each other. You can't devise a list of nations without receiving criticism. Cases like Tibet, Chechnya, Israel, Taiwan and Kosovo spring to mind.
And as for "feeling" English or Welsh, surely many Galicians and Catalonians feel they're from different nations too. And some Koreans don't feel that it's a paralel that will diferentiate northeners from southeners.
Furthermore, the home nations can't take part in the Olympics unless they put together a British team.

The game developers could indeed have used as a definition "territories which have a football federation associated to FIFA". But one could argue that this system isn't perfect either as it leaves out the Vatican City, which, in case you didn't know, is a fully sovereign state and a non-member observer of the United Nations (the same statute Switzerland had until 2002), and includes the Cook Islands, whose head of state is the Queen of New Zealand. And just to cite another example, if there really were Western Saharans playing the game, under this system they wouldn't find "their nation" and would have to be forced to play under the flag of Morocco, which they c/would find insulting.

The point of having nations in the first place is that you must choose your nationality upon registering. That is not the same as "which national team would you be eligible to play for if you were a footballer". There is no FIFA in SP. What would surely make no sense would be to have two weights and two measures regarding your own personal nationality and your players'.

So the criteria used was that to be listed a territory (country or dependency) had to be a member of either the United Nations or one of their specialised agencies. Which opens the door for Antarctica and other uninhabited territories and closes it for England and such. But your problem with that seems not to be that you don't recognise them as having the right to be listed, but not recognising the people who registered as being from there to actually come from those territories. If you're sick of playing "monks" then you should also feel sick of playing "Afghans" and other nations filled up with non-nationals.

This is just an alternate theory, consider it, but take it with a grain of salt.

cruxify · Post by **cruxify** » Thu Jul 10, 2008 3:49 pm

SBroccoli wrote:
cruxify wrote:Then we're going to have a problem with the English and Faroe Islands flags as they're almost identical.
Lol.

There are clear blue lines on the Faroe Isles flag. It's just as different from the UK flag as the Scandinavian flags are from eachother (all crosses with various combinations of red, blue, white and one bastard with yellow).

Btw.: Denmark and Malta have the same flags. And the swiss flag is almost identical too.

I don't hink this is a problem.

Bottom line, though, I'd suggest cutting down with one nation at least: Antarctica. This 'nation' simply doesn't make sense!

On the normal flag there is but the flags on SP are too small to notice the lines. Well at least I can't, my eye sight isn't that strong.

The Scandinavian countries' flags aren't the least bit identical as the colours are completely different so it's very easy to differentiate. Most flags of the McDonald Islands and what not have very similar flags to that of Australia/New Zealand, it's just that the flags are too small to see the differences.