Lord Almighty am I confused. That’s the last time I try to believe anything I read on a website about non-league football.
I’ve seen Gretna as the answer to the trivia question “What’s the only Scottish team to play in the first round proper of the FA Cup?” But I know that’s wrong, too, because Queen’s Park (of Glasgow) used to play in the FA Cup back in the 19th century.
Yeah, that quiz answer is well wrong. Queen’s Park in fact lost 2 successive FA Cup finals, and played one of their semi-finals in Edinburgh. Rangers and presumably other teams also played in the FA Cup until the Scottish Football Association banned their members from entering; I would guess that was some time in the 1880s or 90s.
As a Berwick Upon Tweed resident I thought I’d clear up a couple of things here. First of all lets throw the “Berwick still at war with Germany” idea someone mentioned straight out the window. Berwick has not officially changed hands for centuries now, not decades and certainly there was no doubt of who owned it during WW2. A for russia, being at war with; That is true. At the time of Crimean indeed there was some doubt so Berwick was seperated in the war decleration and excluded from the peace treaty leading to the anomoly. Berwick is of course not at war with russia in any real sense of the word now, but it is still technically speaking at war, as no peace treaty has been, or could be signed. Some have suggested that some ceremony took place in the 60’s to end war, but this to the best of my knowledge didn’t happen, and couldn’t have. This is because Berwick is not a seperate entity, it is entirely a product of England, and as such has no right or ability to sign treaties with other countries. The only way the ‘war’ with russia could be ended formally would be if England (Britain) signed another treaty with russia, this time including Berwick. The problem is this interesting fact has spiralled into a popular myth. I have NO IDEA where that Germany war suggestion came from! Is completely untrue!
The link provided by ruadh seems to imply that “Scotch” means something different from “Scottish.”
What’s the difference?
Scotch is a type of drink.
“Scotch” is used to describe various things, such as whisky, pies and mist. However when used outwith these specific contexts it is regarded as offensive, especially when applied to people. It’s outdated in a way similar to the way the word “negro” is (I’m not saying its use is as offensive though). Acceptable adjectives are “Scots” and “Scottish”.
BTW are we going for the record number of tangential hi-jacks on this thread? Let’s see how many more we can start!
Yes, the preferred adjective for “from/of Scotland” is either Scottish or Scots. Scotch is only used for certain items of food and drink (especially whisky – without an e).
In ruadh’s link, from the context it looked like “Scotch” people were ethnically Scottish folks who live in England, while Scottish people actually live in Scotland.
Is that accurate, in any wise?
No, although it’s possible that some England-based people might still use the word “Scotch”.
Berwick on Tweed = in England
North Berwick = in Scotland
(sorry if that has been made clear already - sort of scanned in a a hurry)
ah - so we are collecting hi-hijacks?
Well… there was one time I went to Dundee (ie ostensibly for univerity work but really for buying birthday presents) and was sort of confused as the Caird Hall and the square in front of it were covered with hammer and sickle flags and pics of Lenin.
Looking around, I could see that no-one else was giving it a second thought. So for a tiny while I was thinking “OK maybe we are a bit out of touch in St. Andrews, and there revolution has hapened, and I did not hear, cos I had not bought a newspaper”.
Of course, it was jsut for the making of a film. But there was a fleeting impression that Dundee was NOT at war with the USSR but was now a part of it.
I remember in the 1970’s when the Mayor of Rome and the Mayor of Tunis signed a peace treaty, finally ending the Punic Wars…
Trinopus