Let's be honest, it would be stretching the Ireland/France joke far too far for Charlize Theron to lift out Netherlands from the World Cup draw later today and say 'Scotland!'.In the end, we weren't that close to qualifying so Scots will dig into their ancestry to find a Sovakian grannie or a Kiwi cousin to find an adopted team to support next Summer.
In the many years that Scotland has not qualified for a major tournament I have always thought that the Republic of Ireland being there has helped quell any bubbling anti-English resentment that tends to surface to the top during such weeks north of the border. A little bit too-eager passion for the boys in green has, I felt, papered over something else that lies beneath. I vaguely recall newspaper accounts of some pretty fierce, deplorable attacks on people who had the audacity to have an English flag in their window. Is it wrong of me to fear a repeat in 2010? Potentially months before an independence referendum?
And yet, there should be no need for any of this. Just down the m74 we have our closest friends and neighbours the English to get right behind. Not only does the team have a strong chance of going all the way but the personalities in the squad have perhaps never been so appealing.
David Beckham is a modern day rock and roll star, the European Barack Obama. Peter Crouch and David James possess statesmanlike qualities that I daresay will carry them very far once they hang up their boots. Wayne Rooney still plays football like a wee boy in the park which is stunning to watch while refreshingly dry michael Owen's unlikely return to the top tier of football will be a bittersweet delight after the agony of a leg break in the last finals. Rio Ferdinand will hopefully be spared another series of the cult classic 'World Cup Wind Ups' by taking up a central defence role and I personally enjoy the father/son, Shaun Wright Phillips/Ian Wright link up between the respective penalty and commentary boxes.
Of course, the common complaint amongst Scots is that England go on about 1966 so much and are apparently are so convinced they'll win that Tartan Army fans couldn't possibly support them. I am bemused by this on both scores.
(1) I very rarely hear English football fans gloating about, or even talking about, 1966 any more. The focus is clearly on winning another trophy rather than looking back 44 years to the last one. I am adamant that I hear significantly more Scottish fans moaning about 1966 than English fans mentioning it.
(2) Why shouldn't England be hopeful of winning? They demolished Croatia and Ukraine convincingly enough, losing only to the Eastern Europeans once their passage had been secured and master tactician Capello has them playing very attractivee football at times.
Let's be fair, England would never get away with a theme tune of 'Don't Come Home too Soon' as we would in Scotland. I can't imagine the Spanish, Italians, Brazilians, Argentinians and Dutch are going into this thinking 'Ah well, it's the taking part that counts'.
So come on England, get a great draw this afternoon (~5:30pm) and bring us some top drawer entertainment in the summer, and the trophy too if you can manage it.
PS If anyone wants to elucidate why they are supporting 'anyone but England' then by all means feel free to do so, but keep it civil please.
29 comments:
A hundred percent behind you, Jeff - and (gulp!) England.
I won't be supporting them and none of my English mates will expect me to, but we will enjoy the games together I'm sure.
It's not the fans who go on about 1966 as much as the commentators and a couple of them are pretty serious offenders (Motson & Tyldesley if my memory serves correctly). Indeed it's so common you wouldn't have to look far for a spread market on the minute the first mention of 1966 will be made.
Most of my family are English, but I won't be supporting England for the reason that I hate Rooney and the rest.
Spoilt, overpaid chumps.
I'm cheering us on for something we can actually win: the Rugby.
Main reason for the 'anyone but England' attitude in my case is I hate the blanket coverage that the English team gets from the media during tournaments. There are more important things in the world then 22 men and a bit of leather.
As such however, I'll be found complaining about the whole world cup rather then just England.
*takes his ball and goes home*
Well I'll obviously be supporting England.... In fact decent football is the only thing I miss about living in Scotland ;-).
However, it is times like this I really miss our old friend Scottish Unionist. Where will we be without a analytical post on the use of term "the great Satan".
Great blog as ever Jeff. You really are one of the most rational people in the blogoshere. I agree with pretty much every point you made. On an individual level I love watching all of the English players.
However, mo matter how much I tell myself I am supporting England this time around, as soon as that (inevitable) first goal goes in against them something deep on my psyche, some overwhelming, primordial urge, forces me to cheer. And I just have to text all my English mates to...err...congratulate them. And I am meant to be a Unionist. But to paraphrase Mr Shankly, this is not a matter of politics, it's more important than that.
While your point is valid, and one which deserves further exploration, I cannot take seriously any piece which uses the following phrase:
"Peter Crouch and David James possess statesmanlike qualities that I daresay will carry them very far once they hang up their boots."
Next thing you'll be comparing Hillary Clinton to Kris Boyd...
As Jim says, it's the media that's the problem. Things like Des Lynam saying "this is when the tournament really begins" before England's first match in Euro 96 - over a decade ago, I know, but it's the one that most sticks in my head, and the coverage we get is always the same ignorant tosh. You tune into a match between Brazil and Portugal, and most of the half-time talk is about England's match the next week against some minnows. It's just utterly boring and the only way of getting round it - other than emigrating for the summer - is for England to get knocked out ASAP.
Besides, Nigeria have been my "second team" since 1994, and Germany have always been one of my favourite European teams (as well as Croatia, since the days of Davor Suker helping them trounce Italy twice on the way to Euro 96). So they'll be the ones I'll be cheering on. I've never subscribed to the "we're all part of the UK so we should support each other" argument, mainly because I don't recognise the Union, so as far as I'm concerned, England is just another country.
Incidentally, however, I'm more of an "anyone but Italy" man - I'm fed up of seeing them cheat their way through tournaments. Anyone remember that awful penalty decision in the 5th minute of injury time against Australia last time, which saved them from getting knocked out in the second round? Disgusting. But I would have to concur with Mr Fagan - no matter how hard I try, I just can't help feeling a massive sense of glee when England concede a goal.
Jeff
I too will be supporting England, always have as a sort of second team, but I dont really know why, other than I guess it's a sort of residual Britishness....all those union jacks waving at me as a wean watching Wembley '66 must have had a residual impact!
It's not though the "anyone but England" attidude I take issue with, but the objection to it. Cause it's as natural as "anyone but Rangers" for a Celtic fan", "anyone but Liverpool" for an Everton" fan, etc etc. It's kind of a basic instinct not to want your nearest rivals to do well - especially when your team is the "undergog" in this rivalry. Surely anyone can understant this, but certain unionists commentators chose to make an issue of this, and no doubt will again as June approches.
I aint reasearched this but I suspect "anyone but Spain" is pretty prevalant in Portugal, "anyone by Germany" in Austria. This dont make people with this attidude racists or bigots, but rather people who take support of their own team more seriously than me.
And one outlook I object to is the "we always support you jocks" response by English folks horrified that they dont have Scotland's unqualified allegience in times like these. It's all a bit patronising to me. Why should they support us with 100 plus teams better than us to watch?
My view? Support who you want and congratulate the winner.
Malc
Never mind that, what about comparing Becks with one of the world's greatest orators ;)
Still, I do enjoy watching England and wish them well.
I will not be supporting England, not because of the English people or the English team....
But because of the English media. Motson usually gets a 1966 reference in within a few minutes of the first match. Some of the other commentators are as bad. And the tabloids go on and on and on and on and on and on.....
Una,
Apart from being white and fairly inarticulate, Beckham could be Obama. And you know, not being cool enough, being someone that might listen to Gordon Brown etc etc...
But it's the idea of someone who knows how to do the robot (Crouch) as a statesman was a bridge too far for me.
As for supporting England, I'm hugely Catherine Tate about it. I half cheered for them in the RWC Final in 2007 (I was watching with my future father in law who is English) but very much cheered on Australia in 2003 (watching with my own father, who isn't English). Scotland aren't there, I don't really care - just hope to see some decent football on the way.
But I empathise entirely with those who don't support England because of the media/ commentators. They forget that their broadcasting is for a UK-wide audience, and that the UK is more than England. And that grates.
Just to clarify, the media aren't the reason I don't support England, as grating as they are.
I don't support England because I don't need to support them. I have my own team, Scotland, and if they're not playing then I'm just going to enjoy the tournament and see how it goes.
In 1990 You'd have thought I was from Cameroon the way the Indominable Lions captured my heart.
In 1994, the 3 tenors concert was the highlight of the tournament - although, how the Argentinians didn't realise Diego was on something is beyond me.
In 1998 I was shouting for France.
In 2002 it was Turkey and in 2006, having lived in Germany for a while they were my hope, but Zidane out Brazilling the Brazilians will live forever.
"PS If anyone wants to elucidate why they are supporting 'anyone but England' then by all means feel free to do so, but keep it civil please."
English is not my nationality, and England is not my national football team. Since as a Scot I'm team-less in this coming World Cup then I can choose who I want to support in the tournament.
I won't automatically support England because I don't feel any more national pride in their success in football than I do for say Mexico or France.
I'll wait to see who I like and then I'll support them.
There are thirty two national teams in the World Cup tournament who are not my national team and it's a reflection of the subservient relationship between Scotland and England that as a Scot I'm being asked to justify why I'm not supporting England from the start.
Is this demand to justify any lack of support for the England team also being applied to the Irish, Norwegians and to all the rest who failed to qualify or is it just the Scots who are required to support England automatically?
The wall-to-wall media coverage gets too much for me I'm afraid. Apart from anything else I find I enjoy the tournament much more once the jingoism and hyperbole recedes.
That said I think England have a decent chance this time. They've got some real match winners and there aren't many great teams around just now. Spain undoubtedly are a great team, Brazil perhaps, but beyond that everyone else has weaknesses. It's a good chance for England to do well, but I wonder if they have enough depth in their ranks for a long tournament.
For the sake of my in-laws I'll be behind Germany again. Here's hoping they play some nice expansive stuff like in 2006.
Why do some people feel the need to chide us about which team we support in a game of football?
Do you ask us to like Mozart?
Do you ask us to support Boston Red Sox?
Why do you feel the need to support England?
Is it sychophancy?
The fear that was bred into the pysche of some Scots can be sickening to watch.
Scots have every right to wish the worst for English sporting ambition, since their success is rubbed into us at every chance.
England by its geographic size and population dominates the scene in the UK.
The BBC in Scotland rolled over a long time ago like a skooking dog and allowed England to screw them for funds so that we now cannot fund Scotlands sport on BBC Scotland.
The sooner Scotland gets free of this suffocating union the better our relationship with them will be, until then it is anyone but England, think what you will.
I would sooner rub broken glass into my eyes than cheer them on. Its not hatred, just The Auld Enemy.
I've got nothing against England, but I wont be supporting them, why should I? I'm not English, I'm Scottish.
My view is let the best team win, and if that happens to be England, then so be it.
I don't much care how England do either way but it does annoy me how this is interpreted as some sort of hatred and I should be supporting England with all my heart like a good little colonised chappie.
If they win it, good for them & congrats, but it won't dismay or enthuse me.
The press should just stfu about the whole thing and let people be as tribal or irrational as they like. It is football, that's how it works. It exploits tribalism for its own ends.
Agree with Jim, Doug and others. I have family reasons for supporting Germany but even if I didn't, England would not be my automatic next choice.
I'd be no more pleased if they did well than any other team.
If Argentina win,I won't here about it on my TV ad nauseum as they are not my national team. If England win I will hear about it ad nauseum, AS IF they were my national team.
I think as some of the other commentators have pointed out, it's the English media who get people's backs up. I have English relatives, and even they are embarassed by the constant references to any match involving England when, say, Mexico are playing the Netherlands.
Motson won't be there next year, so really the only serial offender in South Africa will be Clive Tyldsley.
Good post AWC. Neighbouring rivalry is probably the biggest reason for us Scots not supporting England. Greece and Turkey, France and Spain, Canada and the US, India and Pakistan, Poland and Germany, etc, etc...
If I were watching a game that didn't involve England, I'd naturally root for the underdogs, unless the favs were playing the game beautifully - Argentina, Brazil, Holland and France, have all caught my imagination during previous World Cups.
And yes, the English commentators and media often forget about their UK audience. Maybe they don't forget; maybe they just don't care!
Here's a little taster of what some of our neighbours really think of us. (This was pointed out to me by a Labour friend who is happy with the Union, but who could not believe what he was reading!)
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/borisjohnson/6689013/A-healthy-wealthy-London-is-the-best-medicine-for-Scotlands-ills.html
I'll be supporting the team my coupon says I need to win. BUt yes, I'll cheer England. It was the country my mum was born in, and where she lived for the first 18 years of his life.
My dad, btw, tells a story of how in 1966 he was working as a summer job with Dundee council roads team. And so, he watched the final with his colleagues, a very partisan, very Scottish crowd. Who all cheered when England scored. Can you imangine the same thing next summer?
If the media adopted a less strident approach to the whole circus, I'd be agnostic at worst to England's prospects. As it is, the constant references to 1966, "our lads", Germany's "ruthless efficiency" and Clyde bloody Tyldesley mean I'm in the market for a Slovenian flag.
Our broadcasters are just as jingoistic and myopic in the unlikely event of us qualifying, but England doesn't have to put up with our nonsense. The reverse is not true.
Plus Wayne Rooney, for all his talent and skill, still has a head like a King Edward. And I'm not sure I can support a tuber in the World Cup.
Like many others, it's the media that are the problem. It's the constant references to "us", our" etc when the broadcast is to all four football nations that gets me every World Cup.
I have no problem, however, this time round. My grandson is American - so it's USA for me.
I always quite like the style of play of some of the West African teams, especially Nigeria.
Have never seen New Zealand play so that will be a first.
As for England, well we all know it is written in the stars that they will be knocked out by Germany or Argentina - on penalties - as usual.
Of course England fans still go on about 1966. Jeez, I've heard plenty of Scottish nationalists invoke the Declaration of Arbroath or the Battle of Bannockburn in their arguments against continued union with the rest of the United Kingdom and more specifically England, and that was centuries ago.
I guess people like to hark back to what they see as their most significant moment. For English football fans that moment was 1966. I daresay if Scotland had done the same and brought the world cup home in 1978 we would be hearing about it just as much.
And it's not so much that English fans want their Scottish counterparts to lend them unquestioning support but more the 'anyone but England' mindset when the illfeeling seems not to be reciprocated quite so enthusiastically when the situation is reversed, like it was in 1978 or in 1994 when the Republic of Ireland qualified. It smacks of jealousy more then anything else.
And for those who argue that they dislike England purely for their spoilt, overpaid players I have to ask - which of the large teams aren't composed of players like this? So why England in particular? And would they hate the Scottish team if - in their humble opinion - their representatives began to resemble those of their Southern neighbours?
its perhaps a testament to your skills that i would class that as a "good post" despite me not agreeing with a single word you said.
for a kick off, for whatever reason, england are our main footballing rivals, perhaps when celtic gtet kicked out the scottish cup (as they will when they face morton) rangers fans should get behind them
and as for the media, if you dont think they mention '66 as much, i dont know what youv been watching.
apparently if you swap ivory coast and uruguay, group g is the same as group f was in 1966, must be fate.
as for their prospects, perhaps they are in with a shout, but even when its obvious toe veryone they are 2nd rate (2006 springs to mind) the media always talk them up, theres no way the premiership is the best league in the world.
there is also scapegoat ism rife in the english press,
in 2007, we were chaeted against italy by a shocking decision, and there was rightly uproar in scotland. in 2009 however, when davie weir simply sold the jerseys, thousands of tartan army foot soldiers rightly said, well that was just poor defending, (and proceeded to crack a joke about the last time we let the dutch loose in RSA). in 2004, john terry blatantly impeded the goalkeeper, a foul was given but there was howls of derision in england, one paper even going so far as to print the referees contact details
I wonder if the Dutch support the Germans if they don't qualify for tournaments?
Do Manchester United fans support City when they're knocked out of a cup?
As many have said, it's local rivalry.
Also, one must bear in mind that, in a footballing context, there is no Britain. We have seperate leagues, seperate cups, seperate governing bodies and seperate national teams.
In short, England and Scotland are RIVAL teams.
Why should the fact we are in a POLITICAL union mean I have to support England? Does this mean I have to support a European Union member if they are playing a South American or African team?
Add to this, and this is as good an explanation as any for the 'anyone but England' mentality, the fact that we have piped into our homes in Scotland a stream of partisan commentary on a RIVAL national teams miseries and glories and you can see where tensions might arise.
Good God! if the team concerned was Brazil or Luxembourg or anyone else, the end result would be the same.
Can you imagine the Dutch sitting in their cosy Dutch living rooms watching and listening to a constant stream of partisan German coverage?
Don't get me wrong, everyone has the right to be partisan when it comes to supporting your national team (and the English commentators are probably no worse or better than anyone else) but they are a RIVAL national team and their groans and glories should not be continually foist upon the other nations in the UK.
Very interesting thread.
As an englishman living in Sutherland I don't ask for Scots to support England. I always have a feeling of support towards any of the "Home" nations - but that is a personal choice.
My only complaint is when the prevailing attitude is "everyone but." I don't subscribe to the anyone but United sentiment in the FA Premiership. I cringed one Christmas when my (then younger and less mature) Greek nephews threatened not to eat Turkey - I was tempted to serve them Greece instead. I found the sectarianism of the Walloons of my sisters home at the time, regards the Flemish, and vice versa decidely unpleasant. And we don't have to look to far to see where an extreme version of that kind of ill-feeling goes. I view it as a sign of immaturity that one's concentration is on hoping for the failure of others rather than the success and self-confidence of oneself.
I watched Brasil deservedly defeat a tacticcally inept and uninspred England at the 2002 event. The best team won is the finest epitaph to a match I know, and as several contributors have said - I will withdraw my support from even Brasil (my wife's country of birth) if they are diving, fouling and genreally besmirching the "beautiful game."
Surely overtly anti-England / English behaviour would serve only to belittle the Scottish nation and its people, in the eyes of others.
Post a Comment