So England lost 3-2 to Holland in a friendly. That in itself shouldn't cause much of a shock. But the football media in England and it seems the majority of the fans are intent on getting worked up about anything and everything, being hypocritical and nonsensical with it.
They seemed intent on getting Capello out, but Pearce can seemingly do nothing right either. He was apparently at fault for the display last night, even though Capello or Redknapp, whose reputation seems to grow daily, would have pretty much played the same team and got the same result.
Before the game there was a clamour to blood the younger players, get them some experience. Now there are complaints that our 'better' players were left out, talk of this being a 'reserve' team and widespread condemnation that we did not win the game.
Let's take a reality check here. The Dutch were runners up at the last world cup, they're ranked second in the world. They played a pretty strong side, with masses of experience. Why did anyone expect England to win? All we could hope for was a good performance and some experience for the young players, who need time to gel and grow as a unit.
So what of the performance, so lambasted despite the fact we could easily have finished the gmae with a draw?
In the first half, which ended 0-0, the English were marginally the better side. I believe we had more chances on goal. Remember again that this is against the second best team in the world.
Early in the second half we had a couple of lapses in concentration and a piece of individual brilliance by robben left us trailing 2-0. This is to be expected when the young players are playing together for the first time, a little bit of inexperience will lead to mistakes. This is exaclty what friendlies are for.
Even so, they showed character to pull back the score to 2-2. They didn't panic and kept going, which is admirable. The majority of the players didn't look lost at this level.
It was slightly unfortunate that Robben scored a late winner (although why was there only 4 minutes of stoppage time after the long delay due to Smalling's injury? England could've had a chance to equalise.) but it doesn't mean the performance wasn't a credit to the players. They showed exactly what was lacking in the World Cup, sprit and determination and a bit of passion.
Yet they are roundly criticised and derided as 'reserves'.
Which highlights the real problem in this country, not the players or the manager or even the FA, but the media and the fans who constantly criticise and disparage whatever happens on the pitch.
Thursday, 1 March 2012
Thursday, 16 February 2012
Random Rant: Racism
SO the big thing recenty in the world of football (aside from Capello resigning) is racism, and two incidents in particular; Terry and Suarez.
I want to talk about Suarez, and specifically about Liverpool and their shambolic handling of the case.
The facts as I see them are as follows;
Suarez admitted to using a derogatory term to Evra at least once.
The FA ban Suarez.
This would seem quite logical. There was some discussion over how many times the word was used and the context of the word but basically an independent panel deemed that Suarez was guilty and banned him. The reaction since by Liverpool and their supporters has been laughable, or at least it would've been if it hadn't have been not in the least bit amusing. These are some of the arguments I've seen recently;
1. Evra is a liar or that he uses the race card.
This was tackled, disgracefully, in an actual statment by Liverpool. The fact is that this is the first time Evra has accused someone of racial abuse. Prior incidents where he has been involved it has been others who have made the accusations. When it comes to him being a liar, I don't see how that stands up at all, given that Suarez himself admitted using the word and the panel heard testimonies from several other players and staff from both clubs that proved Evras's testimony. The same statements (from Liverpool's own staff) that proved Suarez's testimony was unreliable.
2. The conspiracy theory; Evra not being charged in the same way, John Terry not being charged in the same way.
So the FA are out to get Liverpool and are basically all United fans. Right. It has been said that Evra should be charged too for his abuse of Suarez that aparently provoked him. As far as I know, no-one has raised a complant against Evra, so he has nothing to answer too. Him insulting Suarez might make him an unsavory character, butthat isn't the issue. It doesn't matter if Evra is a saint or an arsehole. Every players gets and gives abuse out on the football pitch, the issue here is Suarez *racially* abused Evra. Evra did not racially abuse Suarez. Terry's case is being handled diffeently because the police got involved following a complaint made to them by a member of the public. The FA can't intevene until that case is completed. When it is, they might well charge Terry in the same way that they did suarez.
3. On a related note; they took Evra's word over Suarez, there wasn't any real evidence.
The FA are not a court of law and they charge players based on probability. So if there is enough evidence to support what happened, they will find the player guilty. But it was not one player's word against the other. Liverpool's own lawyers signed off on the fact that it wasn't; they agreed that there was enough evidence to convict. Why do you think they didn't appeal? Evra's testimony was cross checked against many others and found to be corroborotive. Suarez's was not.
Regardless of the severity of the ban, after being found guilty, that should have been it. There might've been a bit of a sense of injustice, they might have hated Evra, but Liverpool should have accepted that their own player admitted to saying a word that he shouldn't have done, therefore he deserved his punishment.
Instead, no apology was forthcoming. The club supported Suarez and treated the whole thing like they had been hard done by. They supported a player who had been charged with racially abusing another player. They booed a player who had spoken up about being racially abused.
Then came the hadnshake. Just when you thought it couldn't get any worse, the chance to diffuse the situation and at least stop it from dragging on was rejected.
Eventually, after widespread condemnation, Liverpool and Suarez released PR apologies without meaning, but even then some fans tried to claim injustice and released pictures of the handshake trying to claim that Evra was the one who didn't shake hands.
I've been amazed by the lengths people will go to in supporting a player because he plays for their club, even though he is so blatantly in the wrong. It's depressing really and I do feel sorry for Liverpool in a funny way that they got this so badly wrong and have now tainted the club and it's history with the stench of racism.
Such a shame.
I want to talk about Suarez, and specifically about Liverpool and their shambolic handling of the case.
The facts as I see them are as follows;
Suarez admitted to using a derogatory term to Evra at least once.
The FA ban Suarez.
This would seem quite logical. There was some discussion over how many times the word was used and the context of the word but basically an independent panel deemed that Suarez was guilty and banned him. The reaction since by Liverpool and their supporters has been laughable, or at least it would've been if it hadn't have been not in the least bit amusing. These are some of the arguments I've seen recently;
1. Evra is a liar or that he uses the race card.
This was tackled, disgracefully, in an actual statment by Liverpool. The fact is that this is the first time Evra has accused someone of racial abuse. Prior incidents where he has been involved it has been others who have made the accusations. When it comes to him being a liar, I don't see how that stands up at all, given that Suarez himself admitted using the word and the panel heard testimonies from several other players and staff from both clubs that proved Evras's testimony. The same statements (from Liverpool's own staff) that proved Suarez's testimony was unreliable.
2. The conspiracy theory; Evra not being charged in the same way, John Terry not being charged in the same way.
So the FA are out to get Liverpool and are basically all United fans. Right. It has been said that Evra should be charged too for his abuse of Suarez that aparently provoked him. As far as I know, no-one has raised a complant against Evra, so he has nothing to answer too. Him insulting Suarez might make him an unsavory character, butthat isn't the issue. It doesn't matter if Evra is a saint or an arsehole. Every players gets and gives abuse out on the football pitch, the issue here is Suarez *racially* abused Evra. Evra did not racially abuse Suarez. Terry's case is being handled diffeently because the police got involved following a complaint made to them by a member of the public. The FA can't intevene until that case is completed. When it is, they might well charge Terry in the same way that they did suarez.
3. On a related note; they took Evra's word over Suarez, there wasn't any real evidence.
The FA are not a court of law and they charge players based on probability. So if there is enough evidence to support what happened, they will find the player guilty. But it was not one player's word against the other. Liverpool's own lawyers signed off on the fact that it wasn't; they agreed that there was enough evidence to convict. Why do you think they didn't appeal? Evra's testimony was cross checked against many others and found to be corroborotive. Suarez's was not.
Regardless of the severity of the ban, after being found guilty, that should have been it. There might've been a bit of a sense of injustice, they might have hated Evra, but Liverpool should have accepted that their own player admitted to saying a word that he shouldn't have done, therefore he deserved his punishment.
Instead, no apology was forthcoming. The club supported Suarez and treated the whole thing like they had been hard done by. They supported a player who had been charged with racially abusing another player. They booed a player who had spoken up about being racially abused.
Then came the hadnshake. Just when you thought it couldn't get any worse, the chance to diffuse the situation and at least stop it from dragging on was rejected.
Eventually, after widespread condemnation, Liverpool and Suarez released PR apologies without meaning, but even then some fans tried to claim injustice and released pictures of the handshake trying to claim that Evra was the one who didn't shake hands.
I've been amazed by the lengths people will go to in supporting a player because he plays for their club, even though he is so blatantly in the wrong. It's depressing really and I do feel sorry for Liverpool in a funny way that they got this so badly wrong and have now tainted the club and it's history with the stench of racism.
Such a shame.
Random Rant: Cinema
Hello all.
I went to the cinema last night to watch Chronicle (good film actually).
It served to remind me of all the things I despise about a trip mto the cinema. There are two I'd like to focus on;
1. The amount of time it takes to get to the actual bloody film. What with the adverts, the cinema advertising itself, the stupid annoying Orange 'turn off your phone' malarky, and the trailers that are now so long and give away so much of the films they advertise, they might as well be the films themselves.
2. Even more irritating is the stupid pricing of the whole thing. I love film and I enjoy watching things on the big screen. But I rarely go and when I do it's only ever on Wednesdays to make use of the Orange Wednesday two for one tickets. If the cinema lowered the ticket prices to a resonable level, then I would go a lot more often. I'm sure a lot of people feel the same. then you get there and you're faced with having to pay like £8 for a tub of popcorn, or £4 for a small drink, or god knows how much for some pick and mix. I always take a drink and often some snacks to and sneak them into the cinema. Or I go without. And again, why don't cinemas realise that if they lowered their prices just a bit, just to a reasonable ok we know this is expensive but but we appreciate you have to make money level, then many more people would buy snacks and drinks. Or buy more snacks and drinks.
It's not rocket science.
I went to the cinema last night to watch Chronicle (good film actually).
It served to remind me of all the things I despise about a trip mto the cinema. There are two I'd like to focus on;
1. The amount of time it takes to get to the actual bloody film. What with the adverts, the cinema advertising itself, the stupid annoying Orange 'turn off your phone' malarky, and the trailers that are now so long and give away so much of the films they advertise, they might as well be the films themselves.
2. Even more irritating is the stupid pricing of the whole thing. I love film and I enjoy watching things on the big screen. But I rarely go and when I do it's only ever on Wednesdays to make use of the Orange Wednesday two for one tickets. If the cinema lowered the ticket prices to a resonable level, then I would go a lot more often. I'm sure a lot of people feel the same. then you get there and you're faced with having to pay like £8 for a tub of popcorn, or £4 for a small drink, or god knows how much for some pick and mix. I always take a drink and often some snacks to and sneak them into the cinema. Or I go without. And again, why don't cinemas realise that if they lowered their prices just a bit, just to a reasonable ok we know this is expensive but but we appreciate you have to make money level, then many more people would buy snacks and drinks. Or buy more snacks and drinks.
It's not rocket science.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)