[Link] james mcfadden

Most people in Scotland hadn't heard of Lubo. Dr Jo Venglos knew everything there was to know about him; Lubo was also about 100x times the player. Like I said; that's not the safe option that was a stupid option. The captain of Slovakia, capped over a half century of times, that you as a manager know is a genius inside out or a guy who struggled to get a game for Scotland.

I've already talked you through why that analogy doesn't work. Do you feel it likely that a young Catholic footballer from Papa New Guinea grow up watching Celtic; knowing all about Scottish football and what is expected as a footballer at Celtic? That's the difference; Celtic is based in Scotland. It is more likely a fan of the club or someone who has grown up knowing Scottish football is more likely to know what is required at Celtic.

You seem to be thinking that I am saying that we should only sign Scottish players or choose nationality over all other options; which is something that has never been suggested in this thread. You are debating against a fallacy and making up analogies that is a fallacy and debating on that premise. Which just doesn't work.

Not once have you debated the point that I am making; that Celtic Football Club should have a core of players that know what is required of a football player at Celtic; know what is required in Scottish Football and know what it means to represent Celtic both on and off the pitch.

Do you feel that is something Celtic shouldn't have or that it is more likely somebody from America or Spain or Italy knows that better than somebody who is Scottish (or Celtic supporting Irish)?

 

But despite Venglos knowing the qualities of Moravcik, there was no way of telling if he would succeed at Celtic, much like the situation with Miku. As you mentioned yourself earlier, 'Miku, a class player who was doing very well...he comes over not having a clue what is involved in Scottish football or Celtic and it just doesn't work out for him.'

To be fair you've not really talked me through why it 'doesn't work', what you said was 'that's a lot of bollocks where religion has * all to do with football'. I don't know why a players nationality is considered any different. I want the best players for Celtic, whether they're Scottish or from Papa New Guinea. There's a Kenyan currently playing for Celtic who has, in my opinion, demonstrated that he understands what playing for Celtic means far more than Scotsmen like Kenny Miller and Craig Beattie, for example.

I think the supporters, the manager, and staff at the club should and will ensure what is expected from Celtic players no matter where they're from.

 

You've ignored the rest of the post; once again. If you can't see the difference between somebody who is Scottish knowing what it is to play for Celtic and somebody who is just Catholic who could be from anywhere and never even heard of us know what it is the that's just stupidity to be honest.

There is no way but in that situation Lubo was 100% the safe option; very cheap; manager knows him inside out and there was the added fact that he was a * genius with players like Zinedine Zidane talking him up to the hilt. That is a very, very safe option.

Larsson was similar, Wim Jansen knew what he was like; knew he was class and he was available for very; very cheap.

Nobody is saying that being Scottish is the be all and end all but it is a contribution if they fulfill the before criteria I have stated.

Could you answer the last question that I asked in my previous post.

 

But what you're saying simply doesn't add up. Kenny Miller and Craig Beattie are Scottish and I would argue they didn't demonstrate they knew 'what it is to play for Celtic'. Maybe I should ask the question in a different way; should Celtic be more inclined to sign Scottish Catholics (as the majority will no doubt be Celtic supporters and know 'what it is to play for Celtic') as opposed to Scottish Protestants (the majority of whom may not support Celtic and therefore may not understand 'what it is to play for Celtic' quite as well)? To be clear, this is certainly not my view.

But that's all very easy to say about Moravcik in hindsight. Similarly, people were saying how much of a coup signing a 'class' player like Miku was at the start of the season.

I answered your question. I don't care if there are 11 players from Papa New Guinea, America, Spain, Italy (or anywhere else), who had never previously heard of Celtic, playing. I think it is the manager, the staff and the supporters who will/should ensure that the players know 'what it means to represent Celtic both on and off the pitch'.

 

Nationality alone does not dictate whether or not you are going to be a good Celtic player. I don't think that is what anyone is trying to argue here.

Nationality does have a huge part, however, in how well you adapt to life at Celtic. Kids who grow up in Scotland tend to understand not only the rougher nature of our game, but also the pressure that goes with playing for Celtic. That, in my opinion, is why Scottish players often represent less of a gamble. Because if is likely they are mentally and physically equipped to deal with it.

I doubt any of our regular posters would say that Barry Robson or Paul Hartley are better footballers than Massimo Donati. But, at the same time, I don't think you'll find anyone who wouldn't agree that they both contributed far more to the club.

Guys of lesser quality, who have the right mentality upstairs when it comes to playing for this club will always have a place in the team.
When I was growing up it was Peter Grant. Not the best, but knew exactly what was required. Even McManus. So short of quality, but would run through a brick wall for Celtic. Hartley and Robson, as I mentioned above.

The old Rangers team under Walter Smith was filled with guys like that. Our squad was much better than theirs, yet they won 3 in a row?

 

No they shouldn't because that is idiotic. Religion has no basis on it; whatsoever. I have no idea why you should keep bringing it up. It doesn't make sense.

Kenny Miller and Craig Beattie weren't good enough to play for Celtic; which is something you seem to be ignoring as well. I don't know why you're doing that either.

Last part is the only part of this debate you have made any sense whatsoever; while that isn't a view that I necessarily agree with. I believe that you need leaders on the park who know what it is as well; I think you can see the difference when the likes of Scott Brown and Charlie Mulgrew are on the pitch; along with Anthony Stokes.

I know what you are getting at but having players coming from completely different cultures; not knowing the club and stepping into a team full of players who are of the same mindset; it just doesn't work in practice.

Look at all the genuinely world class teams around the world; they all have their core of players who are from their country; who know all about the club playing for them to set the standard on the pitch.

We had that with the likes of Lambert, now we have it with Brown.

Sir Alex Ferguson's United was based on it with the likes of Roy Keane, Giggs, Scholes, Beckham, Ferdinand and Rooney.

Look around the world and how it is in practice: Chelsea, Man United, Barcelona, Real Madrid, Bayern Munich, Borrusia Dortmund.

They all have this in common.

 

Spot on mate.

 

Again, I understand what you're saying, but as I mentioned earlier for every Hartley or Robson (I don't agree with you when it comes to Grant and McManus!) there's a Kenny Miller or a Craig Beattie. A players nationality in my eyes is as relevent as his religion- it shouldn't even come into consideration.

 

Kenny Miller didn't suit our system, domestically. And Craig Beattie was made of glass. Neither were ever going to be success stories at Celtic.

Nationality is far more relevant. Scott Brown could be into Scientology for all I care. The fact he grew up playing in Scotland and has the right attitude/mentality more than makes up for what he may lack, technically. You can see his attitude is infectious, and we go up a gear when he plays.

 

Much in the same you've argued Scots will have more of an idea, than people from Papa New Guinea (or elsewhere), about what it takes to be successful at Celtic, it is surely only reasonable to 'localise' that logic, and come to the conclusion that Scottish Catholics (the majority of whom will no doubt be Celtic supporters) will have more of an idea than Scottish Protestants (the majority of whom may not be Celtic supporters)? But again, to reiterate, that's not what I'm suggesting.

That's precisely my point on Kenny Miller and Craig Beattie (or any * player from anywhere)! These guys weren't * because they're Scottish, but because they're terrible football players! Similarly, players like Paul McStay weren't great because they're Scottish, but because he was a brilliant football player.

I disagree with Mulgrew, but I do understand you're point. Although I would argue someone like Brown isn't a good leader because he's Scottish, but because he's a natural leader. Similarly, Henrik Larsson, Johan Mjallby, Chris Sutton, Stan Petrov, John Hartson etc were great leaders not because of their nationality, but beacuse they were naturally great leaders.

 

But why are you putting Scott Brown's postive traits (which I do agree with you on) down to the fact he grew up playing in Scotland? Why is his nationality considered important in this instance?

 

Henrik Larsson, Stillian Petrov, Johan Mjallby, Chris Sutton and John Hartson... none of whom are former Celtic capatains. They were special players and great leaders but they got passed over for Paul Lambert, Jackie McNamara and Neil Lennon precisely because of the reasons I have previously stated.

Can I just re-iterate again I am not saying the qualities that I've been mentioning trump talent; I'm saying you need a core of the squad that knows the team, the club and the league inside out.

No, that doesn't make sense because again you're bringing peoples gods and whatever hocus pocus they do on a Sunday into it. I still don't see what religion has got to do with this whatsoever.

It's the fact they know the club; know the league; grew up in amongst Celtic fans and know what the supporters are expecting that makes it so effective. Somebodies * doesn't come into that whatsoever. Why the * do you keep bringing religion into this? Religion has * all to do with football.

 

I'm not putting all his traits down to his nationality. But having prior experience of playing in the SPL made him a less risky signing, and means he knows in no uncertain terms the requirements of playing for Celtic.

Nationality doesn't determine a players quality. But it usually guarantees a level of experience and understanding etc.

Personally, I like seeing Scots and academy products in the side, along with the foreign talent.

 

I could be wrong, but I think all of them have worn the captains armband? Is that not right?

Listen, I can completely understand what you're saying- I just don't happen to agree with it, that's all. I agree with you that players must demonstrate a desire and an understanding in terms of what playing for Celtic means, I just don't think that boils down to nationality, it's not relevant in my eyes.

What is it that doesn't make sense to you? Surely it's only reasonable to assume that the majority of Catholics in Scotland will be Celtic supporters (given the clubs history, links and connections etc) and therefore will have more of an understanding about what playing for Celtic means as opposed to Scottish Protestants (the majority of whom may not be Celtic supporters)? Therefore, much in the same way it's been argued Scots know what it takes play for Celtic because they've been surrounded by it, are Catholic Scots not more inclined to be even more 'enshrined' in it all things considered, in your eyes?

 

Religious point? No, not necessarily.

Most people I know who support Celtic don't follow religion whatsoever. So if I had to choose? I'd choose the atheist?

 

From my own point of view, I just can't comprehend why it's important. Hypothetically speaking, if Celtic won the European Cup next season without a single Scottish player in the squad, would that make a difference for you?

The way I see it is Celtic have had some great Scottish players, some disgraceful Scottish players, some great non-Scottish players and some disgraceful non-Scottish players (if that makes sense ).

 

Okay, but you understand what I'm getting at. The majority of those that attend Catholic schools etc etc. Why is that not relevant but nationality more so (given the connections, history, links etc mentioned earlier)?

 

Because I don't think a * that you happen to believe in has any link to the football team you support or if you take you're communion or do your rosary has any reflection whatsoever in football.

I really wouldn't care; I would pick the player I think has the better attitude.

 

But I think I'm right in saying the facts and figures would suggest it does, whether people like it or not. I think I'm correct in saying the majority of Scots who attended Catholic schools would be far more inclined to support Celtic than other clubs.

Now given that the argument is that Scots are more clued up about what it takes to succeed at Celtic (or however you want to word it) as oppossed to people from elsewhere, on the basis that they're surrounded by it etc; surely it is then only reasonable to 'localise' that logic even further, and assume those 'Catholics' are even more 'enshrined' in it (all things considered) and would therefore be even more clued up about what it takes to succeed at Celtic.