The Round Ball Game - II

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

I agree that penalty shoot outs are just not football.

How about this for an idea:
When there is a level score after 90 mins
We play the Golden goal for the next half hour - but with a twist.
Both teams lose a man (chosen by the manager) every three mins.
With less and less players on the field the odds of a goal will go up and up.
That way the team game element is preserved until the last.

Something along those lines might well be worth trying.

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

The BBC showed the match live in 4K UHD on BBC iPlayer. The picture quality was stunning, except that the colour cast was somewhat peachy.

[Serial_Apologist]

Something along those lines might well be worth trying.

[jayne lee wilson]

The problem with deciding games on a retrospective points or cards system is of course the loss of tension and profound sense of anticlimax that would result.
Imagine waiting to be declared the winner on points after extra time! Not much glory there - and an encouragement to be defensive late on in the game, just when the greatest dramas can occur.
Probably a sense of injustice too, especially if the margin was narrow and a controversial booking had gone against you a few games before.

Other things have been tried, best known being the Golden Goal, from 1993-2003, where the first team to score in extra time is the winner. Many fans disliked this from the start, robbing the game as it did of the long and wonderful history of comebacks, last-minute goals and other high-scoring ET dramas; unfairly favouring the side with the better strikers. I remember my feelings of deflation when Germany and France won the EUROS in this way in 1996 and 2000 - especially the latter, a great game until then; suddenly over, suddenly diminished. A gimmick instead of a grand finale.
It seemed to betray the history of the game, trivialise the game's richness and unpredictability, and fairness as well. The short-lived Silver Goal followed, where if a team led after the first 15' of ET, they were the winners. But this was disliked from the start (although Greece will always love it!), and became a choice left to the organisers, so most reverted to 30' Extra Time and Penalties.

Penalties are a genuine footballing action based on skill and nerve. Ability under pressure, choices between cunning, power and direction. Keen observation of the goalie, and the keeper of the striker.
Like much else in significant games then, only more focussed and intense. It can be practised. (And it gives goalies a chance to be the hero). And you can't deny how tense and grippingly dramatic they can be.

There were short-lived suggestions once, that instead of the penalty kick, the striker should set off from the halfway line with the ball, and both they and the keeper would then be free to attack or defend the goal as they wished. I rather liked this idea, but again, it didn't get far.

****
I wouldn't worry too much about Saka or Sancho. Saka has been one of Arsenal's outstanding players for at least two seasons, and Sancho an established Borussia Dortmund player before his recent move to Man Utd. Sancho's record for penalties before EURO 2020/1 was: 10 scored, 1 missed. Saka had never taken one in a senior match, making Southgate's choice (especially for the 5th) more controversial.
Very young; it will hurt, and they won't forget it. It is a part of their lives now, but they may come to see it as enriching of both soul and deeper ability, deeper wisdom, over time.

But they do know what this is about. They already knew it could happen.

[Serial_Apologist]

Very interesting point.

To me there seemed to be a lot of "physicality" in the games, and I really can't say that some of the games looked like matches I saw a long while ago. The opening goal (England) was excellent - and as far as I could tell, based on sheer skill.

However it is "just" a game, and if football afficionados think the game was good and the outcome fair, so be it.

What is a massive blemish on this is the hateful messages which have been sent to members of the England team after the match. If any similar messages were sent to members of other teams I would also condemn those.

I'm also not keen on booing national anthems of teams from other countries. Some football "fans" need to be given sessions in tolerance.

Also, the behaviour of "fans" who think it's OK to celebrate and leave trash in parts of London - such as Leicester Square - are just appalling.
There is no real excuse for that.

I am very much afraid that these are undeniable facets of modern day soccer culture, whether genuine fans acknowledge or wish to disassociate themselves; they stem from the transforming of the game into something quite different from what it was when my father took me to see Chelsea play at Stamford Bridge in the 1950s - part of the empire of big business - attracting the kinds of mentality that see their rights to behave as free individuals freely disposing of their income and anti-social attitudes inseparably engraved in the culture of populist politics football has become inseparable from.

It is this above all that has put me off following "the game" for many years now. While I greatly respect Southgate and the changes for the better he has brought about in the team and is trying to instill in the supportership, it's going to take much more to shift these kinds of mindset in which the imperatives of the game are reproduced and now strongly entrenched.

[teamsaint]

I am very much afraid that these are undeniable facets of modern day soccer culture, whether genuine fans acknowledge or wish to disassociate themselves; they stem from the transforming of the game into something quite different from what it was when my father took me to see Chelsea play at Stamford Bridge in the 1950s - part of the empire of big business - attracting the kinds of mentality that see their rights to behave as free individuals freely disposing of their income and anti-social attitudes inseparably engraved in the culture of populist politics football has become inseparable from.

It is this above all that has put me off following "the game" for many years now. While I greatly respect Southgate and the changes for the better he has brought about in the team and is trying to instill in the supportership, it's going to take much more to shift these kinds of mindset in which the imperatives of the game are reproduced and now strongly entrenched.

I can only speak as I find S-A.
As you may be aware, I go to about half of Southampton’s premier league games, and the odd away game. I have been to a substantial number of matches every season ,until March 2020 ,since 1970.
There have been long periods of time where a minority of those attending were prepared to get involved in or accept a level of quite serious disorder and what would now be regarded as unacceptable behavioue.
Today, that situation is really very different. Though segregation of fans is still necessary, I would say that in the main, supporters are intolerant of trouble makers, racism and other offensive behaviour. In particular, racially offensive language is widely regarded as unacceptable.
The above is not universally true, but these are large crowds, and there are always people of dubious views drawn to large crowds.
I suspect that trouble reported jn the media among crowds at times of big international games is often among those who are not regular attenders. PL. and other pro football is a fairly expensive pastime, and those with real commitment tend to be very protective of “ their” club ( billionaire owners notwithstanding) and intolerant of those who damage the name of their club.
In particular, football and fans have shown a real lead in anti - racism, through the long standing “ kick it out” campaign, which I am convinced has been hugely influential, both inside and outside the game.

[Serial_Apologist]

I can only speak as I find S-A.
As you may be aware, I go to about half of Southampton’s premier league games, and the odd away game. I have been to a substantial number of matches every season ,until March 2020 ,since 1970.
There have been long periods of time where a minority of those attending were prepared to get involved in or accept a level of quite serious disorder and what would now be regarded as unacceptable behavioue.
Today, that situation is really very different. Though segregation of fans is still necessary, I would say that in the main, supporters are intolerant of trouble makers, racism and other offensive behaviour. In particular, racially offensive language is widely regarded as unacceptable.
The above is not universally true, but these are large crowds, and there are always people of dubious views drawn to large crowds.
I suspect that trouble reported jn the media among crowds at times of big international games is often among those who are not regular attenders. PL. and other pro football is a fairly expensive pastime, and those with real commitment tend to be very protective of “ their” club ( billionaire owners notwithstanding) and intolerant of those who damage the name of their club.
In particular, football and fans have shown a real lead in anti - racism, through the long standing “ kick it out” campaign, which I am convinced has been hugely influential, both inside and outside the game.

That's good to hear.

[Mario]

Today, that situation is really very different.

Brilliant ts, simply brilliant! Couldn’t agree more.

Try taking your children to a football game in the 80’s. Now, I’m surrounded by families with children at Old Trafford (or at least was).

And must politics permeate into every aspect of modern-day living? No matter one’s dislike for a political party, politicians generally, and the odd prime minister notwithstanding, may I please beg (yes, as someone who doesn’t even live in your country), that we stick to sport and “our beautiful game”, and keep politics firmly where it should remain, outside of it?

Sport and politics CAN be mutually exclusive, but only if we choose them to be so.

I kept quiet last week, because even though I’m miles away, I was getting pretty fed-up with the tedious, mundane, repetitive criticism of the simple game of football, by certain individuals.

My own country is divided right down the middle between supporters for the Italians and supporters for the English. Now, two days later, half the country is in mourning (including me), and the other half is in ecstasy.

Far more important than talking about politics, is talking about the miserable time three young players are going through at the moment because for one brief moment, they failed in their duty. While in certain parts of the world, women are being raped, children are being sodomised and men are being tortured, and three young players are being racially abused (yes I'll say it myself, two of which represent Man Utd... allegedly), we are spending time talking about populist politics - shameful!

This past weekend will long be remembered as a joyous affair, and heaven knows the world needed an injection of joy.

So there!

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=always+look+on+the+bright+side+of+life

Mario

[Richard Barrett]

In particular, football and fans have shown a real lead in anti - racism, through the long standing “ kick it out” campaign, which I am convinced has been hugely influential, both inside and outside the game.

I have no interest in football but I also have no doubt that most football enthusiasts, like most human beings, are not out and out racists. Many people, including myself, were brought up some decades ago in an environment where racism (of both "out and out" and casual/unintentional varieties) was much more prevalent in British society than it is now. The problem now is that racists (a) have social media as a platform from which to broadcast their vileness and (b) are more or less tacitly supported by a government whose "popularity" depends on keeping them on side. In a very valuable article in today's Guardian, David Olusoga says:

During the tournament the thinktank British Future released the results of a survey that showed that one in 10 people regard Englishness as a racial identity. In their minds, black people can never truly be English. Not many decades ago many more than 10% of us held that view. Yet although outnumbered, that 10% are never silent. While England were winning, their hate was largely exiled to the toxic margins of social media. But literally within minutes of the team’s first and only defeat, and given a free pass by the government to target their national team, those who believe blackness and Englishness are mutually exclusive unleashed their fury against the black players who missed penalties... the shame and shock that many people feel at the abuse directed against England’s black players will not halt the drumbeat of calculated provocation and wilful division that has helped bring us to this point. That campaign is sanctioned by politicians so shameless that last week they donned newly purchased England tops, to cheer on a team whose moral stance they had derided only last month.

Sport is politics. It always has been. But mutual respect and support are also politics, and such things are actively suppressed when a government cynically stokes division for its own benefit.

[Ein Heldenleben]

I think I read that Twitter deleted 1500 racist tweets from 850,000 in total. Small comfort but had Twitter been around in the seventies I think there would have been sadly many more. The worst racist incident at a sports event I have ever witnessed was at the Cricket World Cup final in 1976 and dealt out by two MCC members to a member of the fielding West Indian side ( who went on to thrash England).
I’ve been to a fair few footy matches and rugby matches and only rarely heard a racist comment though there were occasionally objectionable noises . Even in the 80’s there were regularly anti-racist campaigners outside the Gallowgates end at St James’s Park in Newcastle - there was a lot of anti- racist campaigning in the Seventies and Eighties when the National Front and BM were explicitly racist ( in my view ) political parties and drew on a small minority of football “fans” as supporters. I tended to stay away from South East London matches in the 70’s as there was quite a lot of violence directed at pretty much anyone a few hooligans took a dislike to - with a particular animus towards Pakistani people ( or more accurately those the thugs believed to be from that country) . Things are so much better now…though I rarely go now.

[Bryn]

. . . Sport is politics. It always has been. But mutual respect and support are also politics, and such things are actively suppressed when a government cynically stokes division for its own benefit.

Indeed, and the stylised war game of Association Football provides a clear expression of this. It plays the role of a substitute "continuation of politics by other means".

[french frank]

I kept quiet last week, because even though I’m miles away, I was getting pretty fed-up with the tedious, mundane, repetitive criticism of the simple game of football, by certain individuals.

I think this is where a misrepresentation occurs: who is critical of 'the simple game of football'? How could anyone possibly criticise that?

It's more about being appalled (OED 'dismayed, shocked, discomfited, terrified') by the behaviour of those "involved" with the game. And by "involved", I'm not targeting the genuine fans but the hangers-on - the thugs, the WAGs - plus the excesses of emotion, joy, despair, rage, and the media hype, the money, the celebrity culture. Nothing to do with the 'simple game of football'.

[vinteuil]

I think this is where a misrepresentation occurs: who is critical of 'the simple game of football'? How could anyone possibly criticise that?

It's more about being appalled (OED 'dismayed, shocked, discomfited, terrified') by the behaviour of those "involved" with the game. And by "involved", I'm not targeting the genuine fans but the hangers-on - the thugs, the WAGs - plus the excesses of emotion, joy, despair, rage, and the media hype, the money, the celebrity culture. Nothing to do with the 'simple game of football'.

... thank you for that, which articulates my feelings very well

.

[gurnemanz]

the thugs, the WAGs - plus the excesses of emotion, joy, despair, rage, and the media hype, the money, the celebrity culture. Nothing to do with the 'simple game of football'.

Don't mind the WAGS ... but during the Euros I avoided at all costs the media "build-up", especially talk of uniting the nation and absurdly premature discussion of Gareth's impending knighthood and a celebratory bank holiday. I tuned in at the beginning of the actual match, preferably missing the anthems, except the Marseillaise, which is the only decent one. I sometimes switched off the commentary completely, especially the ITV man.

Now looking forward to the new season with Palace's potentially exciting new manager, Patrick Vieira. Vive la France!

[Sir Velo]

The worst racist incident at a sports event I have ever witnessed was at the Cricket World Cup final in 1976 and dealt out by two MCC members to a member of the fielding West Indian side ( who went on to thrash England).
.

A pedant writes: there was no Cricket world cup in 1976. In the 1975 cricket world cup final, the West Indies beat Australia by 17 runs. Four years later, in 1979, the West Indies beat England by 92 runs. In 1976, the touring West Indies team beat England 3-0 in a five match test series. To which of these events are you referring?