Jump to content

Lundekvam or Svensson or Ostenstad or Ekelund?


georgeweahscousin
 Share

Recommended Posts

Yes he is, Finland is classified as a Scandinavian country

 

Finland is a Nordic country, but not a Scandinavian one. Scandinavia is both a cultural area (ruling out Finland with an unrelated language and culture) and a geographic one (ruling out Iceland, which has a related language, but is far removed). Iceland is also a Nordic country.

 

All Scandinavian countries would laugh at the idea of being grouped with Finland, with whom they share nothing but a small border.

 

In other words, you can't choose Niemi unless we change the thread title.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Difficult to answer each was good in their own right. Eklund certainly had skils but was injury prone so not sure how good a player he would have developed into> svenson was good but I have a soft spot for claus

 

There is one other player who should be considerd Jo tessum a good utility player

 

Spot on except the comment re Ekelund. He was already developed! A class act. I think I am right to say that Le Tissier was asked after he retired who was the best player he had ever played with and his answer was Ekelund. Absolutely gutted when he had his injury problems. Oh and bless Bally - which other manager have we ever had who could borrow a class act from the likes of Barca because they were mates with the Barca manager!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who is Saints best ever Scandinavian?

 

Do you agree with the tweeters?

 

http://wp.me/p1mFFL-b1

 

Someone else has already corrected the part about Scandinavian / Nordic ..Finland is NOT classed as Scandinavia, if you'd lived here you'd understand why, but if you added Baltic , you could include Marian Pahars..but seriously I don't like the questions about " best ".

 

You can't compare players who were in different generations, and players who didn't play the same role as each other.

I would never compare Michael Svensson with Claus Lundekvam as they had different defensive roles, and were at their best when playing alongside each other. They never "competed " for the same shirt number.

 

Östenstad was really a better player than even if record suggests and Ekelund sadly ought to have been playing for Saints for 10 years instead of only a handful of games. Matt Le Tissier is quoted as saying that he ( Ekelund ) was one of the best players he played alongside.

 

IF you talikng Finland, I'd rate Niemi a very good keeper,considering that I also recall Peter Shilton spending FIVE seasons with Saints in the mid 1980's.

 

Almost no-one recalled Norwegian Jo Tessem, who took upon himself every role asked of him by successive managers, and never disgraced the side but drew criticism from a small group of disgruntled fans who never thought him worthy of a "real first team place " especially when he didn't live up to expectations when forced (by other injuries ) to cover for the in-form James Beattie !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Finland is a Nordic country, but not a Scandinavian one. Scandinavia is both a cultural area (ruling out Finland with an unrelated language and culture) and a geographic one (ruling out Iceland, which has a related language, but is far removed). Iceland is also a Nordic country.

 

All Scandinavian countries would laugh at the idea of being grouped with Finland, with whom they share nothing but a small border.

 

In other words, you can't choose Niemi unless we change the thread title.

 

This site among with many others seems to disagree with you. Is the exclusion of Finland from Scandinavia a Norwegian thing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This site among with many others seems to disagree with you.

Is the exclusion of Finland from Scandinavia a Norwegian thing?

 

** well they 've still got their facts wrong.

 

Denmark and Norway share a common alphabet, and understand each other easier in conversation.

Norway used to be a part of the Kingdom of Sweden until 100 years ago and their spoken language is very similar.

 

All three countries share a common heritage, whereas Finland has a totally different history and their language is more like

Hungarian than any of the others.

 

It's not a discriminartory thing either, they are just different. Most of the countries are lumped together and described as

Nordic rather than the geographical term Scandinavia. Rather like the old arguement about UK, Great Britain , the British Isles. The actual geographical proximity to each other means nothing more.

 

You wouldn't say that the English were like the French ..just because they are seperated by a stretch of water !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This site among with many others seems to disagree with you. Is the exclusion of Finland from Scandinavia a Norwegian thing?

 

This site? look above and you'll see this site agrees with me, at least those who live in Scandinavia, read David in Sweden's post above. You don't have to spend long in any of the Scandinavian countries to realise how separate Finland is and why. Its closest ties are to Sweden, although linguistically it's actually closest to Hungarian, but they also don't regard it as part of Scandinavia. The Scandinavian countries all have deeply intertwined histories, understand each other's languages without ever having to learn them and enjoy friendly banter and rivalry. Finland aren't ever mentioned and have no strong partnership with Scandinavia.

 

I've worked in or with international schools and state schools in all three Scandinavian countries and the difference between Nordic countries and Scandinavia has been part of the geography syllabus.

 

Have a look at Wikipedia, they explain it fairly well too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I could have only one of them playing for us now, and in his prime, it would be Killer.

 

Killer and Fonte together would be the best CB pairing in the division.

Yeah, but can you imagine Ekelund and Lallana in the same team? Personally, I feel cheated that we were deprived of them both, to differing degrees, by injury.

 

I find it very difficult to compare the worth to the team, of players in different positions. Technically, Ekelund was the best. Defensively, Svensson was the best. Value for money, Lundekvam was best. If I had to choose one, it would probably be Ekelund.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...