Andy to play for Scotland, if...

...they vote for Independence

https://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/blogs/tramlines/murray-reveals-his-view-on-scottish-independence-vote-after--negativity-062523901.html

Brits, get your passports ready, who ever wants to go to Andys Hotel in Cromlix, Kinbuck.

Now, let's not get all Political, this is a Tennis forum

Edit: Ok, just remembered that I found my Brit Passport too, so Visas for me as well

I raised on eyebrow that he thought the No campaign was negative. Has he seen the Yes campaign?!

Doesn't matter to me in the least though. My favourite players are Serbian, Argentine and Swiss. I don't care what flag players play under.

Whatever I guess, people should be voting because they think its the right thing economically for their country, not because they hate Gordon Brown, because Everyone hates Gordon Brown.

At least there is civilized vote for independence, unlike the Ukraine/Russian fiasco, or the land grab in the Middle East.

Apologies, Jahu, for a bit of political slant to my post.

Davis Cup draw is at 4pm then we'll see who Scotland (GB) are fighting it out with

In the last DC, GB beats USA and yet USA is a seeded country? Odd how that comes about.

LF, you are welcome, and right too, thought Politics have banned me a few times, love it and well worth it

JM, will be wierd

HM Murdoch wrote:I raised on eyebrow that he thought the No campaign was negative. Has he seen the Yes campaign?!

Doesn't matter to me in the least though. My favourite players are Serbian, Argentine and Swiss. I don't care what flag players play under.

The whole thing is hilarious. I very much hope they vote Yes, for everyone's sake.

The Scots will have to take the consequences of voting for spending other people's money free from the burden of blaming others for their problems.
The English can get the hang of big Constitutional change and not be so afraid when it comes their turn to get out the EU.

Alec Salmond will have to deliver. No, strike that, he'll never run out of someone else to blame.

Well Salmond will become their scapegoat if its independent, either way it goes. Remember how much people used to like Nick Clegg? Thats the risk hes running.

He is, of course, entitled to back whichever campaign he wants. Though I do find it strange he's based the decision on what he perceives as negativity by one of the camps. Surely it should be based on what he thinks is right, not how the message has been delivered.

Social media has gone nuts of course... "I knew he was anti-British". I bet his PR people are scrambling for some damage limitation statement as we speak.

Yeah thats the worry, you dont want people voting cause they hate the no campaign, but because the yes campaign has enough benefits to outweigh the risk. Hes probably regretting saying anything tbh, but itll pass im sure, especially if its a no

Also GB have USA again in DC, so... how the heck are they gonna seed the two if GB does split?

temporary21 wrote:Also GB have USA again in DC, so... how the heck are they gonna seed the two if GB does split?

Scotland wouldn't be independent for a few years even if there is a yes vote (which btw is very very unlikely).

Danny_1982 wrote:He is, of course, entitled to back whichever campaign he wants. Though I do find it strange he's based the decision on what he perceives as negativity by one of the camps. Surely it should be based on what he thinks is right, not how the message has been delivered.

Those were my thoughts exactly; a pretty shallow reason to support the yes campaign. This could seriously improve/damage the standard of living not just in the UK, but also in Scotland.

Danny_1982 wrote:
Social media has gone nuts of course... "I knew he was anti-British". I bet his PR people are scrambling for some damage limitation statement as we speak.

Of course we don't know if he's 'anti-British', and lots of Murray haters will try and inflame things, but considering he must have known the emotions on both sides and the fact he doesn't update his twitter account that often; he must have felt pretty strongly at the moment in time to say what he said. Certainly doesn't come across as someone who loves Britain.

I'm supporting the Yes Campaign though- simply because I feel it would be more democratic for all parts of the UK.
Scotland are ultimately under a Coalition government led by the Conservative party, but the numbers of seats the Tories have in Scotland is close to 0.
Meanwhile the rest of the UK is more pro-Conservative; and this would be reflected- electorally this would be a pretty big boost to them and their chances in future general elections.

Yes that old SNP tory gripe....

It Must Be Love wrote:I'm supporting the Yes Campaign though- simply because I feel it would be more democratic for all parts of the UK.
Scotland are ultimately under a Coalition government led by the Conservative party, but the numbers of seats the Tories have in Scotland is close to 0.
Meanwhile the rest of the UK is more pro-Conservative; and this would be reflected- electorally this would be a pretty big boost to them and their chances in future general elections.

Its funny in some respect, the yes campaign if successful would put the tories at a huge advantage in every subsequent election, and its not like the tories would go away, theyd still have to deal with the debt and the oil and the trading and the breakup of the scottish pound. Its a big risk, they could shoot themselves right in the feet doing this

temporary21 wrote:

It Must Be Love wrote:I'm supporting the Yes Campaign though- simply because I feel it would be more democratic for all parts of the UK.
Scotland are ultimately under a Coalition government led by the Conservative party, but the numbers of seats the Tories have in Scotland is close to 0.
Meanwhile the rest of the UK is more pro-Conservative; and this would be reflected- electorally this would be a pretty big boost to them and their chances in future general elections.

Its funny in some respect, the yes campaign if successful would put the tories at a huge advantage in every subsequent election, and its not like the tories would go away, theyd still have to deal with the debt and the oil and the trading and the breakup of the scottish pound. Its a big risk, they could shoot themselves right in the feet doing this

Well it would make the Tories essentially 'go away' in Scotland; as for the risks- well of course there would be some risks, no one is denying that. The question for the Scots is whether the risk is worth the reward- and it seems very very likely now that the No campaign will win and they will reject independence.

Whichever campaign he backed, he was going to be perceived as "anti" the other one. That's the tribal nature if the world today. Which is why I'm surprised he said anything.

Good job he won Wimbledon while he was still British! Or do we have to reinstate the drought?

The Scots would need to develop Scottish Tories as the left always runs out of other people's money, it's what it does.

The best thing is the vote doesn't matter; the idiocy of the party leaders giving it all to Scotland in a panic means federalism is unavoidable. Excellent.

bogbrush wrote:

The best thing is the vote doesn't matter; the idiocy of the party leaders giving it all to Scotland in a panic means federalism is unavoidable. Excellent.

I swear Gordon Brown just made up some constitutional changes on the spot, and Cameron just went along with it.
Surely it won't get past Westminster ?

The Scots would need to develop Scottish Tories as the left always runs out of other people's money, it's what it does.

Hmm, if there was a right wing party doing well in Scotland, it would take quite a few years; and wouldn't be the damaged Tory brand.

But, BB, that nice Mr Salmond has said that Scotland will be a fairer and better country without those nasty Tories. He's got a real zinger of a line about pandas and Tories that's still as funny and clever as the day I first heard it.

Free neeps for all, comrade!

"Ye'll nay be havin' a sale will ye?" *

* Bonus point for naming the commercial.

"och aye the 'No' "

Murray should have kept his clapper shut...

Hmm the exit polls got 54-46 on the no. The word on the stat strett is theyve got a 99% certainty of a no. Uh oh...

temporary21 wrote:Hmm the exit polls got 54-46 on the no. The word on the stat strett is theyve got a 99% certainty of a no. Uh oh...

I've said this for a while- there was not much doubt about it.

All they will have achieved is lingering disharmony. They should never have got this close had a) all Scots been allowed to vote, b) all other Brits been allowed to vote, and c) Gordon Brown had took on Alex Salmond and not, pardon the pun, wet fish Darling who almost handed YES team the vote!

lydian wrote:All they will have achieved is lingering disharmony. They should never have got this close had a) all Scots been allowed to vote, b) all other Brits been allowed to vote, and c) Gordon Brown had took on Alex Salmond and not, pardon the pun, wet fish Darling who almost handed YES team the vote!

Agree on c, but not a) and b). If there's a vote on independence- only people living in that nation should be able to vote on it.

No, it's a divorce and after 300 years of marriage it's one hell of a divorce, the 2 'people' involved should have had a say...the way proper grown ups do, not 1 hot-headed party running off. Anyway, I suspect either way this is the start of a long term separation due to irreconcilable differences.

Come on Lydian you can't be serious here?

Deadly. To analogise the marriage further, it wasn't a case of both parties living in separate houses already...20% of Scottish people live in England/Wales/Northern Ireland...yet couldn't vote. Like tennis surfaces it's an homogenised situation. In that scenario you have to give both sides of the homogeneity a chance to have their say...or allow the 20% to vote within the Scottish only vote...because many of those 20% will still have Scottish interests...property, business, money in banks, other vested interests. It was never a clean break situation...but despite all that, crazily Cameron gave Salmond the perfect opportunity nonetheless...they'll never get a better one! For a while anyway...

lydian wrote:No, it's a divorce and after 300 years of marriage it's one hell of a divorce, the 2 'people' involved should have had a say...the way proper grown ups do, not 1 hot-headed party running off. Anyway, I suspect either way this is the start of a long term separation due to irreconcilable differences.

No; in a marriage if one of the couple wants a divorce; you can't stop them.

lydian wrote:Deadly. To analogise the marriage further, it wasn't a case of both parties living in separate houses already...20% of Scottish people live in England/Wales/Northern Ireland...yet couldn't vote. Like tennis surfaces it's an homogenised situation. In that scenario you have to give both sides of the homogeneity a chance to have their say...or allow the 20% to vote within the Scottish only vote...because many of those 20% will still have Scottish interests...property, business, money in banks, other vested interests. It was never a clean break situation...but despite all that crazily Cameron gave Salmond the perfect opportunity nonetheless...they'll never get a better one!

Scots living in the rest of the UK is a bit of a grey area; but certainly the idea that all Brits could vote in this is ridiculous- it is an independence referendum after all.
Would you not think it was ridiculous if there was a similar situation in Russia and a region/nation wanted to leave; and then all Russians voted for that region/nation to stay in even though the majority of people in that region itself wanted to leave ?
Not that the UK is similar to Russia; I'm just saying the process of an independence referendum can't include votes from people outside the region wanting independence.

Cameron did the right thing in allowing this; and the good news for the pro-Unionists is that it looks like there's almost certainly going to be a no vote.

I don't agree on those living outside of said country origin. It's not clear cut to exclude them. Salmond secured that knowing it boosted the yes vote. Anyway, it's all moot...they're going nowhere and Murray will wish he kept his clapper shut when playing alongside Edmund next year in DC...when you can guarantee he'll face questions on it.

lydian wrote:I don't agree on those living outside of said country origin. It's not clear cut to exclude them. Salmond secured that knowing it boosted the yes vote. Anyway, it's all moot...they're going nowhere and Murray will wish he kept his clapper shut when playing alongside Edmund next year in DC...when you can guarantee he'll face questions on it.

Do you think he'll lose home support (outside Scotland) because of this ?

Is it just me, or is there a feeling in the air that a cracker of an article from Hawkeye could be coming up ?

It Must Be Love wrote:Is it just me, or is there a feeling in the air that a cracker of an article from Hawkeye could be coming up ?

Oh god forbid... I think Andys respected enough to get past this easy. Hes apparently had some tweets about Dunblane from some total t*ats, but on the whole itll be forgiven... hes a former wimby champ after all

Oh dear and I thought we lived in a Democratic world. Shoot Murray because he voices a political opinion that isn't what some want to hear.

One thing whatever happens tonight - think on those who voted no and don't EVER complain again about such rank rotten policies such as Poll Tax, sending troops into Iraq, the corruption of Westminster etc because you are voting to stay in that organisation. That is all I will say on it.

Hmm perhaps forgivens the wrong word, forgottens a better one

It was wonderful to see the former Prime Mentalist back, it reminded me of so much fun from yesteryear.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=7iPaiylUYW0

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=07LApKvFZEM

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=9Gi7qqvRlY0

If drawing arbitrary lines on a map gives some people satisfaction, so be it, but people of all origins live across many countries, the boundaries are political constructs because politicians desire a controllable entity. Elections require well defined lines.

It is good to see a civilized way to discuss and resolve differences, unlike the Ireland blood-letting, or the tribal internecine wars elsewhere in the world.

Happily ever-after they lived!

It Must Be Love wrote:Is it just me, or is there a feeling in the air that a cracker of an article from Hawkeye could be coming up ?

LOL, that was exactly my thought.

Glasgows the last hope for yes now, and it needs to be massive

And now comes the inevitable resentful, ungracious, bile-laden whine from Salmond......

and there it was... out of 32 areas he got 4... and the capital city overwhelmingly voted no. Look on the bright side, he wont be droning on about independence in every single sporting event now.

So, Andy to keep playing for Britain, not bad, not bad

Might get a little booed sometimes in UK, but thats life.

Looks like the result has smoked Salmond...! Having put his neck on the line and sought to fragment the population will he now step aside to allow someone else to unify Scotland and its place within UK as a whole. We need less countries not more...it's the politics of separation, division and patriotism which only ever leads to conflict.

Wonder how Murray is now feeling about his forlorn tweet yesterday too...it's not a matter of shooting Murray CC, but the guy is a representative of GB in tennis...having nailed his political colours to independence it will put him in an awkward situation for a while. Yes he has a right to express his opinions of course but people who operate at a broad GB/UK representative level outside politics should really leave open expressions of politics out of it. This is because by tweeting in the manner he did, by trying to use his sporting influence and prominence to political effect, he was naively and inadvertently linking sport to politics...and for me, just like music and politics, that's a big no, no.

Odd from Murray to get involved. I have no issue with him expressing an opinion personally but, after declining to comment for ages, I'm surprised he did so at the last minute. I would have thought his PR team would have advised him to stay well clear. Also, it was a pretty dumb reason for deciding to support "Yes"!

I thought it would have been more sensible for him to keep out of it and that the timing was poor. However he is entitled to an opinion even though it is one I would disagree with. Can't believe that Andy Murray saying Yes or JK Rowling saying No (just a couple of examples) would be a reason for anyone deciding which way to vote on such an important issue. Think the fact that there was around an 85% turnout to vote shows that people took it more seriously than that.

Without wanting to get too political, it doesn't look a bad result for the "Yes" campaign. I have to say I was expecting it to be a resounding "No". I can't believe that the SNP were genuinely expecting a "Yes" vote but they have shown there is a very strong backing for independence. I would say it gives them a strong hand for greater devolved powers. Had it been a yes vote, I am unconvinced they are in a position to really drive it through - I suspect it might well have gone horribly wrong.

Yes, and he should of kept quiet, knowing referendum 99.9% will not pass the YES vote.

As BSlippy says, waiting till last minute to voice your opinion, kind of made him look a little naive.

Anyway you English people, take it easy on him from now on...

Poor Andy, he's gonna go down as one of the most hated sportsmen in his country ever