Mr Straw said that a team unifying the English, Scottish, Northern Irish and Welsh teams would give the UK a better chance of success in international tournaments.
The English and Scottish Football Associations have been critical of the plans, saying that Britain would lose influence in world football as each national association has its own vote in the ruling bodies UEFA and FIFA.
Would you support such a unified team? Would it be more succussful? Or would you be sad to see your national team disappear?
Why not have done with it and have an EU team then we would win the World Cup almost every time?
GH,
UK
A UK team would just be England with
Ryan Giggs.
Steve Bush,
England
In response to Colin from the Netherlands, I feel it is time that we stopped identifying ourselves with static and anachronistic ideals like nations or tribes. My own order of identity runs as me, my immediate circumstances and history, the human race, the whole of reality, God. Sure, that might seem a tad more abstract, but each of those things/ideas can be seen to relate directly to me - unlike nationhood, which doesn't.
James MacLaren,
UK
I don't know why Mr Straw thinks a UK football team will fare any better. Since East and West Germany merged their national side has gone down the toilet.
Rod Maxwell,
Scotland
One of the major benefits of having separate football teams in Britain is when they play each other, as can be demonstrated by England vs Scotland. It strikes me that this proposal is another example of this government's obsession with pandering to politically correct issues.
Andrew,
England
It will never happen, simply to appease political "inclusiveness". We know who we are and it's about time the English did as well. It would be a team made up of 90%+ English anyway.
Dylan,
Wales
Why on earth would we want to join up with the other FA's when we are eventually going to have independence?
Neil,
Work - Belgium/ Home - Scotland
England, Scotland, Wales and Ireland are the
last teams formed by nations - not the state.
Let it stay as is. It's more fun and joy with national,
not countrywide teams in Britain.
Lukasz,
Poland
In January, Jack Straw said that the English have a "propensity to violence" and had used it to "subjugate" Ireland, Wales and Scotland. Is it not hypocritical to
now be stressing "I am English" and to press for a single British football team?
Max Hess,
UK
I am in favour of a united national team. I hate football and it would mean less of it on TV.
David Heffron,
UK
No, because then they would be known as F.C.U.K.
T.J. Cassidy,
U.S.A.
And get rid of an excuse for rampant nationalism and all out prejudice? What would the tabloids do? They'd have to turn their attention to Johnny foreigner! Oh, they already do don't they ...
Chris C,
UK
This debate seems to have been sparked because of comments being made about the UK's only success is in athletics. This statement is not only a gross overstatement, but totally incorrect! The UK leads the field in many sports. Did Mr Straw fail to watch the Olympics a few weeks ago? Cycling, Shooting, Judo, Rowing ... Any more wild unfounded statements to be made?
Mark Williams,
UK
British teams might have some chance to win at football and would be stronger at rugby. Besides, there is a British Olympic team. Of course with devolution, Britishness seems less likely and I think it's time the English started to identify themselves. (English for me is anyone born in England, nothing to do with colour or religion). My order of identity is English, British, UK, European ...
Colin,
Netherlands
I think it would be better for the British football teams to play in a regular 'six nations' style tournament as they hardly ever seem to get any practice playing as a team.
I'm sure the TV rights, ticket sales, and merchandising opportunities would be enough to tempt the greedy players and clubs to allow this to happen.
Julian,
UK