Date: 3rd June 2007 at 7:40pm
Written by:

Apparently the new president of the SFA, George Peat, wants the song ‘Flower Of Scotland’ to be scrapped as our national anthem.

Peat was quoted as saying that he feels that the song is a ‘total dirge’ and that something more ‘uplifting’ is required.

I suppose it’s all about personal taste when it comes to this sort of thing, but I do tend to agree with the guy. ‘Flower Of Scotland’ is never a song that I’ve particularly liked. I think it’s far too slow and a bit dreary to be a national anthem and it doesn’t really help that the lyrics are glorifying a battle that took place something like 700 years ago either. To me its popularity kind of sums up a problem that we have in Scottish society, whereby we are generally as anti-English as we are pro-Scottish. I’ve always hated this attitude as it really just exposes the large inferiority complex that so many Scots still seem to have when it comes to England. Surely there’s no need for this sort of attitude to exist these days?

I do wonder though, if the song was ever to be dropped as the national anthem, what would be selected to replace it. I never used to have a problem with ‘Scotland The Brave’ and I think that it certainly fits the bill when it comes to being a more ‘uplifting’ song, but I can’t ever see them going back to that.

I just hope that we don’t end up going the Proclaimers route……….!


41 Replies to “‘Flower Of Scotland’ To Be Ditched?”

  • Flower Of Scotland is no better than God Save The Queen – it’s essentially the Scottish equivalent. I agree it should be binned, but as you say, just as long as it’s not in favour of the Proclaimers!

  • Totally disagree with almost every point in your article. Every time i hear Flower of Scotland the hairs on the back of my neck stand up. When Hampden is packed and the anthem is sung its a very proud and emotional moment. Take this away and there’s only one song that will be voted its replacement and that will be 500 miles. The worst song in history. Firstly, you cant walk 500 miles and you certainly cant walk 500 more. And if somehow you managed this, you wouldnt be falling down at anyone’s door, you would be getting an oxygen mask fitted by a paramedic. As for the anti-english stuff. I’m all for it. I hate them. The FA, the players and the media are arrogant and their fans are thugs. I’m just praying we manage to get a game against them at Wembley and we get it right up them. Mon the Scots !!!!

  • MrH: Of course not. But you have consented to giving him some editorial capacity of late.
    Additionally, you have a responsibility to deal with this, it aint good enough to trivialize it, or frame it as ‘personal taste’.

  • I thought that was ‘stonesy’ who had editorial “capacity” – not STONES1874 (who is entitled to his opinion, even if it is a bit extreme)

  • I guess in this case its the responsibility of the editor to set the parameter between freedom of opinion and simply coming on this site and suggesting that jews are filth or that black people are feckless and lazy. If thats the site you want then go for it.

  • Craig, I don’t think anybody mentioned black people or Jews. And as I said, I do think there is a case of mistaken identity on your part. As far as I know, this is an open forum for anyone to comment on – if you don’t agree with people’s opinions you have the right to reply. That’s the beauty of the internet. I’d rather read someone’s honest opinion (however misguided I might think it is) than know the views on here are sanatised or censored to appear more politically “correct” (Nazism in different clothes as far as I’m concerned). Take a chill pill, pal.

  • Yeah it was a case of mistaken identity – “stonesy”‘s a different person…..a very different person actually! As for the subject in hand guys, I think it’s great that we can have strong debate on a whole series of things on here and wouldn’t want anyone to stop their input because they think we condone people going over the top. In this case I do not agree with what was said, but I still don’t think he actually said anything racist and until it gets to that stage, I think we just have to accept that everyone has different views, no matter how extreme they are. What do people generally feel about this? This is much your site as it is the Editor’s or Vital Football’s.

  • SJ: Of course nobody spoke of jews or blacks – my point was purely illustrative, suppose they had – would this be acceptable to you personally on Vital Hearts (as an expresion of ‘free opinion’)?

  • It wouldn’t be acceptable if they’d been grouped and ridiculed because of the fact that they were Black or Jews. I think that really should be a given. As soon as anyone does overstep the mark they will be dealt with accordingly. We’ve done so in the past but although it’s been close at times, I don’t think anything has merited that treatment lately. If anyone has any specific examples they’d like to discuss with me on this (now or in the future), just drop me an e-mail though.

  • MrH: Appreciate your position on this.
    But if someone can profess hatred for what is a diverse group of people (anglo-irish, anglo-scots, english asians, caribbean english, anglo-poles, anglo-jews, nurses, car workers, miners etc ) then not only are they a racist fool, they also surely have the capacity to ‘hate’ other groups – this is their inherent mindset isn’t it?

Your Comment