World Cup Thread
- Thread starter Toro
- Start date
All England was partying last night after seeing the Germans go out of the tournament and the Italians go into the Final. It's not that often that the English want the French to win, but I hope Henry and the rest kick Ronaldo and pals out of the tournament tonight.
When it comes to footballing arrogance and assuming that your country has won the World Cup before it has even got to the Final (what the Scots often accuse the English of doing), the Germans take it a very high level, surpassing even the English.
On another forum, there is a German guy who has as his signature: "1954 Bern - 1974 Munich - 1990 Rome - 2006 Berlin". And that was BEFORE Germany had even reached the Quarter Final.
Now that Germany has been knocked out, guess what his signature is now? It's "1954 Bern - 1974 Munich - 1990 Rome - 2010 Johannesburg".
The Scots often accuse the English of footballing arrogance, but surely even we come nowhere near the Krauts.
When it comes to footballing arrogance and assuming that your country has won the World Cup before it has even got to the Final (what the Scots often accuse the English of doing), the Germans take it a very high level, surpassing even the English.
On another forum, there is a German guy who has as his signature: "1954 Bern - 1974 Munich - 1990 Rome - 2006 Berlin". And that was BEFORE Germany had even reached the Quarter Final.
Now that Germany has been knocked out, guess what his signature is now? It's "1954 Bern - 1974 Munich - 1990 Rome - 2010 Johannesburg".
The Scots often accuse the English of footballing arrogance, but surely even we come nowhere near the Krauts.
Re: RE: World Cup Thread
WOW take a lesson "princess" pick and team and support them!!!
It seems to me that you need no help hanging yourself out there for critizism. You should by your last post that you certainly live up to your nick. Respect is something you earn and you definitely are a long way from earning it. Just because when you came into this forum you didn't want to "ruffle any feathers" and keep you mouth shut that is your problem. You clearly show that you are a prejudice "anklebiter". So tell you what why not go back to your posts about my highschool or cheerleading or "your last boyfriend" and let the adults talk. Maybe you should change your name to "GlossyFigJamPrincess" it suits you better. You certainly show that you like to "lair it up" but unfortunately you have "Kangaroos loose in the top paddock ". So go play with your doll.
Anyway sorry about that back to football.
Personally I would love to see Portugal win as firstly they have never made it to the final and secondly I would like to see a European final (ok so they are like distant cousins that is why I pick them over France (yes I do consider France European also) but sue me
family first even if it is very distant family you know LOL) but I think that they are going to have a hard time about it. Portugal have had gruelling knockout matches with Holland and England and I don't know if they have another in them.
Portugal must do without the suspended Petit against France but now they can welcome back Deco and Costinha who both missed the quarter-final victory over England is that enough I guess we will see. Regardless it will be another fantastic match I am sure.
glossprincess said:AUSSIE AUSSIE AUSSIE!! OI OI OI!!! But we wont win
WOW take a lesson "princess" pick and team and support them!!!
It seems to me that you need no help hanging yourself out there for critizism. You should by your last post that you certainly live up to your nick. Respect is something you earn and you definitely are a long way from earning it. Just because when you came into this forum you didn't want to "ruffle any feathers" and keep you mouth shut that is your problem. You clearly show that you are a prejudice "anklebiter". So tell you what why not go back to your posts about my highschool or cheerleading or "your last boyfriend" and let the adults talk. Maybe you should change your name to "GlossyFigJamPrincess" it suits you better. You certainly show that you like to "lair it up" but unfortunately you have "Kangaroos loose in the top paddock ". So go play with your doll.
Anyway sorry about that back to football.
Personally I would love to see Portugal win as firstly they have never made it to the final and secondly I would like to see a European final (ok so they are like distant cousins that is why I pick them over France (yes I do consider France European also) but sue me
family first even if it is very distant family you know LOL) but I think that they are going to have a hard time about it. Portugal have had gruelling knockout matches with Holland and England and I don't know if they have another in them.Portugal must do without the suspended Petit against France but now they can welcome back Deco and Costinha who both missed the quarter-final victory over England is that enough I guess we will see. Regardless it will be another fantastic match I am sure.
Italy were fabulous in the semis, so they don't really deserve this right now, but I saw this elsewhere and it made me laugh.
(And apologies to CI in advance.)
(And apologies to CI in advance.)
This is an interesting way of looking at it.
sports nut: The stadium scene.
Why Diving Makes Soccer Great
In defense of soccer's biggest villains.
By Austin Kelley
Posted Tuesday, June 27, 2006, at 5:20 PM ET
Italian defender Fabio Grosso fallsIn the final moments of Monday's World Cup match between Italy and Australia, Italian defender Fabio Grosso streaked up the left side toward the goal. He shrugged off one defender who tried to drag him down, then cut into the penalty area. Desperate to stop him, Australia's Lucas Neill slid into his path. Grosso made contact with Neill's prone body and sprawled onto the ground. The referee blew the whistle: penalty.
The Italians made the shot and won the game, 1-0. Fans of the Socceroos are now crying foul, saying Grosso fell on purpose to draw the penalty. After watching numerous replays, I agree that the Italian fell to the ground too easily. The referee still made the right call. This World Cup has inspired a mass of editorial bile about the evils of diving. But diving is not only an integral part of soccer, it's actually good for the sport.
Soccer players fall to the ground without being dragged down or tripped. Once they're on the ground, they often roll around on and exaggerate their injuries. A lot of people hate these theatrics and even characterize them as immoral. Dave Eggers recently said in Slate that flopping is "a combination of acting, lying, begging, and cheating." But diving is far from outright cheating. Rarely do athletes tumble without being touched at all. Usually, they embellish contact to make sure the referee notices a foul, not to deceive him completely.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Obvious, undeserved flops should be punished with yellow cards. Ghana's Asamoah Gyan was justly ejected (on his second yellow) from Tuesday's match with Brazil when he fell without a Brazilian in sight. Such displays serve to discredit more honest, contact-driven divers like Grosso. Diving is like drawing a charge in basketball. When it is done well, it is a subtle (and precarious) art.
Consider the classic matchup between a skilled dribbler and a big, tough defender. The attacker must use his quickness and wit to get by. The bigger man, though, can always resort to a "professional foul"—an intentional foul in which there is no attempt to play the ball. The defender will give away a free kick, but that will hurt only in certain parts of the field. So, what is the attacker to do? If he finds a flailing leg in his way, he can do nothing except barge right into it. And maybe writhe around on the ground for a bit, encouraging the referee to hand out a card, thus discouraging the brutish defender from trying such rough tactics in the future.
Far from being a sign of corruption, diving is, in certain ways, a civilizing influence. Divers are usually quicker, smaller players. As athletes get bigger and stronger, the little guy gets nudged aside. If professional fouls and brute force reign supreme, creative play and joyful improvisation will suffer.
FIFA doesn't see it this way. Prior to this year's World Cup, the organization issued special instructions to referees to crack down on "simulation." This misguided initiative has failed miserably. We've had more flopping than ever despite a record number of yellow cards and ejections.
Referees are partly responsible for the culture of diving. Officials are much more likely to blow their whistles when they see a few somersaults, and players know they might not get a call if they stay on their feet. But in soccer there is only one main referee patrolling a pitch that measures up to 120 by 80 yards. He cannot see everything, and diving is particularly hard to discern. Even with the benefit of slow-motion replays, it's sometimes difficult to tell a flop from a "natural" fall.
The scorn heaped on divers usually doesn't have to do with the logistics of refereeing, though. In reality, it's distaste for the spectacle. American sports are loaded with comic set pieces—a hockey player tossing his gloves for a ceremonial tussle or a baseball manager kicking dirt at the umpire. Like tumbling soccer players, these performers act to provoke sympathy or indignation. The difference is in the style of emotional drama.
In most American sports, the theatrics are aggressive. They are not operatic displays of vulnerability. To appreciate diving, we must sympathize or scorn the injured player—we must get into the melodrama. Some fans are afraid to take the plunge, preferring to argue that diving makes soccer players seem like babies or, worse still, women. (Former England striker Gary Lineker has called for a special "pink card" to be shown to divers.) Their distaste for the dive is rooted in an idea of masculinity, not in an analysis of the game itself. That idea of masculinity is preventing them from enjoying a pretty good show.
The other most pervasive critique of diving is a nationalist one. Depending on who you talk to, Sunday's flop-heavy, four-red-card debacle between the Netherlands and Portugal was the fault of either Iberian gamesmanship or Dutch fakery. For Anglo-American commentators, crusades against floppers are often laced with a distrust of wily, olive-skinned outsiders. In March, the London Times initiated a campaign to "kick out the cheats." Playacting was said to have infiltrated English soccer from outside. "It's crept into our game lately, but it is a foreign thing," Alan Stubbs, an Everton defender, recently remarked. "They speak good English, it's not as if they don't understand what they're doing."
Whether or not you must know English to understand what you're doing, diving is hardly a recent conspiracy cooked up in southern climes. Reports of flopping go back to the early days of the sport, and—surprise!—Brits have been influential in its development. Manchester City striker Francis Lee, for example, was one of the first great divers of the television era. He won theatrical penalties in the 1960s and 1970s, long before the famed Argentine flopper Diego Simeone took his first fall. Fans who champion the "fair play" and the "work ethic" of traditional English soccer tend to overlook the dives of skilled English players like Michael Owen.
There is nothing more depressing than a player who goes to the ground when he might have scored. Ronaldinho and Thierry Henry, arguably the world's best players, will stay on their feet at all cost for the sake of a beautiful pass or a brilliant run at the goal. But the next time you see an artful dribbler derailed by a clumsy oaf, take a minute to think about whose side you're on. Doesn't the dribbler deserve a somersault or two to remind the world that the only way to stop him is through violent and graceless means?
sports nut: The stadium scene.
Why Diving Makes Soccer Great
In defense of soccer's biggest villains.
By Austin Kelley
Posted Tuesday, June 27, 2006, at 5:20 PM ET
Italian defender Fabio Grosso fallsIn the final moments of Monday's World Cup match between Italy and Australia, Italian defender Fabio Grosso streaked up the left side toward the goal. He shrugged off one defender who tried to drag him down, then cut into the penalty area. Desperate to stop him, Australia's Lucas Neill slid into his path. Grosso made contact with Neill's prone body and sprawled onto the ground. The referee blew the whistle: penalty.
The Italians made the shot and won the game, 1-0. Fans of the Socceroos are now crying foul, saying Grosso fell on purpose to draw the penalty. After watching numerous replays, I agree that the Italian fell to the ground too easily. The referee still made the right call. This World Cup has inspired a mass of editorial bile about the evils of diving. But diving is not only an integral part of soccer, it's actually good for the sport.
Soccer players fall to the ground without being dragged down or tripped. Once they're on the ground, they often roll around on and exaggerate their injuries. A lot of people hate these theatrics and even characterize them as immoral. Dave Eggers recently said in Slate that flopping is "a combination of acting, lying, begging, and cheating." But diving is far from outright cheating. Rarely do athletes tumble without being touched at all. Usually, they embellish contact to make sure the referee notices a foul, not to deceive him completely.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Obvious, undeserved flops should be punished with yellow cards. Ghana's Asamoah Gyan was justly ejected (on his second yellow) from Tuesday's match with Brazil when he fell without a Brazilian in sight. Such displays serve to discredit more honest, contact-driven divers like Grosso. Diving is like drawing a charge in basketball. When it is done well, it is a subtle (and precarious) art.
Consider the classic matchup between a skilled dribbler and a big, tough defender. The attacker must use his quickness and wit to get by. The bigger man, though, can always resort to a "professional foul"—an intentional foul in which there is no attempt to play the ball. The defender will give away a free kick, but that will hurt only in certain parts of the field. So, what is the attacker to do? If he finds a flailing leg in his way, he can do nothing except barge right into it. And maybe writhe around on the ground for a bit, encouraging the referee to hand out a card, thus discouraging the brutish defender from trying such rough tactics in the future.
Far from being a sign of corruption, diving is, in certain ways, a civilizing influence. Divers are usually quicker, smaller players. As athletes get bigger and stronger, the little guy gets nudged aside. If professional fouls and brute force reign supreme, creative play and joyful improvisation will suffer.
FIFA doesn't see it this way. Prior to this year's World Cup, the organization issued special instructions to referees to crack down on "simulation." This misguided initiative has failed miserably. We've had more flopping than ever despite a record number of yellow cards and ejections.
Referees are partly responsible for the culture of diving. Officials are much more likely to blow their whistles when they see a few somersaults, and players know they might not get a call if they stay on their feet. But in soccer there is only one main referee patrolling a pitch that measures up to 120 by 80 yards. He cannot see everything, and diving is particularly hard to discern. Even with the benefit of slow-motion replays, it's sometimes difficult to tell a flop from a "natural" fall.
The scorn heaped on divers usually doesn't have to do with the logistics of refereeing, though. In reality, it's distaste for the spectacle. American sports are loaded with comic set pieces—a hockey player tossing his gloves for a ceremonial tussle or a baseball manager kicking dirt at the umpire. Like tumbling soccer players, these performers act to provoke sympathy or indignation. The difference is in the style of emotional drama.
In most American sports, the theatrics are aggressive. They are not operatic displays of vulnerability. To appreciate diving, we must sympathize or scorn the injured player—we must get into the melodrama. Some fans are afraid to take the plunge, preferring to argue that diving makes soccer players seem like babies or, worse still, women. (Former England striker Gary Lineker has called for a special "pink card" to be shown to divers.) Their distaste for the dive is rooted in an idea of masculinity, not in an analysis of the game itself. That idea of masculinity is preventing them from enjoying a pretty good show.
The other most pervasive critique of diving is a nationalist one. Depending on who you talk to, Sunday's flop-heavy, four-red-card debacle between the Netherlands and Portugal was the fault of either Iberian gamesmanship or Dutch fakery. For Anglo-American commentators, crusades against floppers are often laced with a distrust of wily, olive-skinned outsiders. In March, the London Times initiated a campaign to "kick out the cheats." Playacting was said to have infiltrated English soccer from outside. "It's crept into our game lately, but it is a foreign thing," Alan Stubbs, an Everton defender, recently remarked. "They speak good English, it's not as if they don't understand what they're doing."
Whether or not you must know English to understand what you're doing, diving is hardly a recent conspiracy cooked up in southern climes. Reports of flopping go back to the early days of the sport, and—surprise!—Brits have been influential in its development. Manchester City striker Francis Lee, for example, was one of the first great divers of the television era. He won theatrical penalties in the 1960s and 1970s, long before the famed Argentine flopper Diego Simeone took his first fall. Fans who champion the "fair play" and the "work ethic" of traditional English soccer tend to overlook the dives of skilled English players like Michael Owen.
There is nothing more depressing than a player who goes to the ground when he might have scored. Ronaldinho and Thierry Henry, arguably the world's best players, will stay on their feet at all cost for the sake of a beautiful pass or a brilliant run at the goal. But the next time you see an artful dribbler derailed by a clumsy oaf, take a minute to think about whose side you're on. Doesn't the dribbler deserve a somersault or two to remind the world that the only way to stop him is through violent and graceless means?
I didnt mean support only one country in the World Cup! Clearly, you have a problem with listening, or reading as it is in this case! I said pick a nationality!!
As for previous posts I've made, this forum is about discussing various issues of relevance to members and gathering other people's opinions on the matter and thats all I've ever done.
You've shown no maturity whatsoever in any of your 19 posts so you're one to talk about letting the adults talk!
As for previous posts I've made, this forum is about discussing various issues of relevance to members and gathering other people's opinions on the matter and thats all I've ever done.
You've shown no maturity whatsoever in any of your 19 posts so you're one to talk about letting the adults talk!
Portugal 0-1 France
WORLD CUP FINAL
ITALY VS FRANCE
The first all-European World Cup Final since 1982.
-------------------------------------------
3rd/4th place play-off - Germany VS Portugal
Goodbye Ronaldo, you little diving dweeb.
Ronaldo was booed by the crowd throughout the whole game. Is it just me or are the Portuguese even dirtier than the Italians? These players must have dived at least 20 times during this game, and Ronaldo was up to his usual dirty tricks. In my opinion, the referee didn't show enough yellow cards to the Portuguese.
Ronaldo just has to hope that he doesn't meet Wayne Rooney in a dark alleyway.
WORLD CUP FINAL
ITALY VS FRANCE
The first all-European World Cup Final since 1982.
-------------------------------------------
3rd/4th place play-off - Germany VS Portugal
Goodbye Ronaldo, you little diving dweeb.
Ronaldo was booed by the crowd throughout the whole game. Is it just me or are the Portuguese even dirtier than the Italians? These players must have dived at least 20 times during this game, and Ronaldo was up to his usual dirty tricks. In my opinion, the referee didn't show enough yellow cards to the Portuguese.
Ronaldo just has to hope that he doesn't meet Wayne Rooney in a dark alleyway.
I LOVE IT!!!!!!
I thought I'd never say this BUT, Thank you my french compadre's, the french fans even boo'ed Ronaldo hahaha AND beat the pityful Portugal with a Penalty!!!! hahaha
Thank You France, thank you, You've made my world cup
I thought I'd never say this BUT, Thank you my french compadre's, the french fans even boo'ed Ronaldo hahaha AND beat the pityful Portugal with a Penalty!!!! hahaha
Thank You France, thank you, You've made my world cup
Well, I picked France to win it all at the beginning of this thread, and I'd love it if they proved me right, but Italy are a better side playing better football, so I'm not too confident in my pick.
Aah! Poor Cristiano as France knock out Portugal
By IAN COLE, Daily Mail
6th July 2006
In tears: Ronaldo cries after the World Cup semi-final defeat by France
France coach Raymond Domenech praised Zinedine Zidane after his 34-year-old captain shot Les Bleus into Sunday's World Cup Final against Italy.
Zidane's 33rd-minute penalty did for England's conquerors Portugal in last night's semi-final in Munich.
Portugal's Cristiano Ronaldo, villain of Wayne Rooney's sending-off last Saturday and accused of diving last night, was in tears at the finish.
His manager Luiz Felipe Scolari was steered away from a confrontation with Uruguayan referee Jorge Larrionda, who had angered Scolari by giving a penalty when Arsenal's Thierry Henry turned past Chelsea's Ricardo Carvalho and went down under Carvalho's challenge.
Portugal goalkeeper Ricardo, whom England had found almost invincible in their penalty shootout, was beaten from the spot by Zidane off a three-step run-up.
Domenech said: "Zidane has worked solidly for the past month to be ready to play in a match like this."
Ronaldo and Scolari both blamedthe referee for the 1-0 semi-final defeat.
Portugal were denied a spot-kick of their own when Manchester United winger Ronaldo clashed with Willy Sagnol - although TV replays indicated any contact was minimal.
Ronaldo said: "He was a very bad referee and it should have been a penalty," while Scolari added: "We know South American referees and they know how to kill a game. All I can say is he was right when he granted the penalty on the French player and he made a mistake when he didn't give Portugal a penalty when Cristiano Ronaldo was fouled."
On his confrontation with the French players after the game, Scolari added: "The French players made some absurd comments about our players and our country that I cannot repeat, insane and insulting words."
dailymail.co.uk
-----------------------------
Well, they ARE French, Scolari, so don't worry about them. Just find yourself fortunate that you are Brazilian so you don't have to live right next door to them like I do.
By IAN COLE, Daily Mail
6th July 2006
In tears: Ronaldo cries after the World Cup semi-final defeat by France
France coach Raymond Domenech praised Zinedine Zidane after his 34-year-old captain shot Les Bleus into Sunday's World Cup Final against Italy.
Zidane's 33rd-minute penalty did for England's conquerors Portugal in last night's semi-final in Munich.
Portugal's Cristiano Ronaldo, villain of Wayne Rooney's sending-off last Saturday and accused of diving last night, was in tears at the finish.
His manager Luiz Felipe Scolari was steered away from a confrontation with Uruguayan referee Jorge Larrionda, who had angered Scolari by giving a penalty when Arsenal's Thierry Henry turned past Chelsea's Ricardo Carvalho and went down under Carvalho's challenge.
Portugal goalkeeper Ricardo, whom England had found almost invincible in their penalty shootout, was beaten from the spot by Zidane off a three-step run-up.
Domenech said: "Zidane has worked solidly for the past month to be ready to play in a match like this."
Ronaldo and Scolari both blamedthe referee for the 1-0 semi-final defeat.
Portugal were denied a spot-kick of their own when Manchester United winger Ronaldo clashed with Willy Sagnol - although TV replays indicated any contact was minimal.
Ronaldo said: "He was a very bad referee and it should have been a penalty," while Scolari added: "We know South American referees and they know how to kill a game. All I can say is he was right when he granted the penalty on the French player and he made a mistake when he didn't give Portugal a penalty when Cristiano Ronaldo was fouled."
On his confrontation with the French players after the game, Scolari added: "The French players made some absurd comments about our players and our country that I cannot repeat, insane and insulting words."
dailymail.co.uk
-----------------------------
Well, they ARE French, Scolari, so don't worry about them. Just find yourself fortunate that you are Brazilian so you don't have to live right next door to them like I do.
Re: RE: World Cup Thread
I think Italy will win - but only because of a weird coincidence.
Since 1970, Italy have reached the World Cup Final every 12 years - 1970, 1982, 1994, and 2006. They lost in the 1970 World Cup Final against Brazil. Then they slaughtered West Germany 3-1 in the 1982 Final (the Germans don't have a good record against the Italians). Then they lost against Brazil in a penalty shoot-out in the 1994 Final. So, if they keep following the same pattern, they will win the 2006 Final.
Toro said:
I think Italy will win - but only because of a weird coincidence.
Since 1970, Italy have reached the World Cup Final every 12 years - 1970, 1982, 1994, and 2006. They lost in the 1970 World Cup Final against Brazil. Then they slaughtered West Germany 3-1 in the 1982 Final (the Germans don't have a good record against the Italians). Then they lost against Brazil in a penalty shoot-out in the 1994 Final. So, if they keep following the same pattern, they will win the 2006 Final.
Re: RE: World Cup Thread
Well, here's another strange coincidence.
The last title France won was Euro 2000.
Along the way, they beat Spain (just like this year), then beat Portugal on a penalty (just like this year), and finally played and beat Italy in the final (just like this year?)
Blackleaf said:
Well, here's another strange coincidence.
The last title France won was Euro 2000.
Along the way, they beat Spain (just like this year), then beat Portugal on a penalty (just like this year), and finally played and beat Italy in the final (just like this year?)
Re: RE: World Cup Thread
France were jammy in that Final.
Italy were winning 1-0 in the very last minute of the game. I remember that the Italian players on the bench started linking arms ready to run onto the pitch to celebrate. Then the fluky Frogs scored in the 90th minute to make it 1-1. The game went to extra time where they then went and scored a goal, a Golden Goal.
Toro said:
France were jammy in that Final.
Italy were winning 1-0 in the very last minute of the game. I remember that the Italian players on the bench started linking arms ready to run onto the pitch to celebrate. Then the fluky Frogs scored in the 90th minute to make it 1-1. The game went to extra time where they then went and scored a goal, a Golden Goal.
Re: RE: World Cup Thread
The Times July 07, 2006
I'm sorry but we shouldn't make Rooney apologise if he's not sorry
Notebook by Mick Hume
I MAKE NO apology for returning to Wayne Rooney and the World Cup. And Rooney should make no apology for getting sent off. Indeed, it would be better if others were to follow his lead and refuse to make empty public apologies.
As the big cheeses of world football at FIFA prepared to pass judgment on Rooney yesterday, it was reported that “senior figures” within the English Football Association wanted him to apologise for stamping on Portugal’s Ricardo Carvalho, in the hope of reducing his ban. Only when Rooney refused to play ball did the FA grudgingly go along with his denial.
Rooney insists “absolutely categorically” that he did not deliberately stamp on Carvalho. So why should he be expected to lie and say he is sorry for doing so? This puts him in a position a bit like those prisoners who, because they insist on their innocence, are refused parole for failing to show remorse — in effect punished once for what he was said to have done, and again for what he says about it.
No doubt he is sorry that he got sent off. But sorry he fought tooth and stud for the ball with Carvalho, or pushed away the interfering Cristiano Ronaldo? Hardly. Rooney says that players and fans know he is “straight and honest” (no Scouse jokes please). It is surely the honest choice to refuse to make a phoney show of remorse, and take the consequences.
The international football authorities might want Rooney to show his subservience in the public confessional — “Forgive me FIFA, for I have sinned”. But making somebody say sorry whether they mean it or not is what we should do with little children, not to grown men — even one who sometimes acts like an overgrown schoolboy.
It’s not just football. Public apologies are everywhere today, as sorry seems to have become the easiest word. People behave as if making a show of apologising means they are not really responsible for what has happened.
Thus in his post-World Cup press conference, the beaten England head coach, Sven-Göran Eriksson, said he was sorry no fewer than nine times, while insisting he had done nothing wrong.
Worse, ritual apologies have become a form of moral self-flattery. Making a song and dance of saying sorry is a way of displaying your emotional correctness, showing that you are a good soul really. Governments now routinely apologise for events in the distant past in an attempt to boost their image in the present. A youth worker from Cornwall — descendant of a British slaver who was the cousin of Sir Francis Drake — recently went to Africa to apologise for slavery, on his knees and in chains. He said this act of apologetic exhibitionism was “one of the most memorable things I have ever done”. He’s so vain, he thinks somebody else’s sorry history is about him.
It is time to end the sorry spectacle of ritualistic apologies. Instead of always being expected to say sorr-eee like infants, we should be free to stand by the truth as we understand it, and take what comes. Maybe Rooney has found his niche as a role model after all. To paraphrase Martin Luther, he should declare to FIFA: “Here I stand, I can do no other — even if there was a Portuguese groin in the way.”
WHILE we are talking about honesty, I better admit that I will not be joining in today’s two-minute silence to mark the anniversary of the London bombings. This is not because of any lack of respect for the dead, but because I have too much respect for life to want to see us submit to yet another stage-managed grief-fest by order of the Ministry of Mawkishness. A period of silence on their part would be welcome.
IT WAS not the fear of terrorism making commuters sweat on the London Underground during this week’s heatwave. Especially when we read the front-page warning from Ken Livingstone that, because of global warming (not to be confused with a dilapidated transport system), we are “getting to the point where if a train breaks down in those conditions you could have serious loss of life”.
As the sun went in last autumn, you may recall, Ken told us to expect a winter freeze to match 1963 — the worst in 200 years — with “quite severe loss of life”. Whatever the weather, it seems there is no situation so bad that it cannot be made to feel worse by a few sunny words from the Miserabilist of London.
thetimesonline.co.uk
Daz_Hockey said:
The Times July 07, 2006
I'm sorry but we shouldn't make Rooney apologise if he's not sorry
Notebook by Mick Hume
I MAKE NO apology for returning to Wayne Rooney and the World Cup. And Rooney should make no apology for getting sent off. Indeed, it would be better if others were to follow his lead and refuse to make empty public apologies.
As the big cheeses of world football at FIFA prepared to pass judgment on Rooney yesterday, it was reported that “senior figures” within the English Football Association wanted him to apologise for stamping on Portugal’s Ricardo Carvalho, in the hope of reducing his ban. Only when Rooney refused to play ball did the FA grudgingly go along with his denial.
Rooney insists “absolutely categorically” that he did not deliberately stamp on Carvalho. So why should he be expected to lie and say he is sorry for doing so? This puts him in a position a bit like those prisoners who, because they insist on their innocence, are refused parole for failing to show remorse — in effect punished once for what he was said to have done, and again for what he says about it.
No doubt he is sorry that he got sent off. But sorry he fought tooth and stud for the ball with Carvalho, or pushed away the interfering Cristiano Ronaldo? Hardly. Rooney says that players and fans know he is “straight and honest” (no Scouse jokes please). It is surely the honest choice to refuse to make a phoney show of remorse, and take the consequences.
The international football authorities might want Rooney to show his subservience in the public confessional — “Forgive me FIFA, for I have sinned”. But making somebody say sorry whether they mean it or not is what we should do with little children, not to grown men — even one who sometimes acts like an overgrown schoolboy.
It’s not just football. Public apologies are everywhere today, as sorry seems to have become the easiest word. People behave as if making a show of apologising means they are not really responsible for what has happened.
Thus in his post-World Cup press conference, the beaten England head coach, Sven-Göran Eriksson, said he was sorry no fewer than nine times, while insisting he had done nothing wrong.
Worse, ritual apologies have become a form of moral self-flattery. Making a song and dance of saying sorry is a way of displaying your emotional correctness, showing that you are a good soul really. Governments now routinely apologise for events in the distant past in an attempt to boost their image in the present. A youth worker from Cornwall — descendant of a British slaver who was the cousin of Sir Francis Drake — recently went to Africa to apologise for slavery, on his knees and in chains. He said this act of apologetic exhibitionism was “one of the most memorable things I have ever done”. He’s so vain, he thinks somebody else’s sorry history is about him.
It is time to end the sorry spectacle of ritualistic apologies. Instead of always being expected to say sorr-eee like infants, we should be free to stand by the truth as we understand it, and take what comes. Maybe Rooney has found his niche as a role model after all. To paraphrase Martin Luther, he should declare to FIFA: “Here I stand, I can do no other — even if there was a Portuguese groin in the way.”
WHILE we are talking about honesty, I better admit that I will not be joining in today’s two-minute silence to mark the anniversary of the London bombings. This is not because of any lack of respect for the dead, but because I have too much respect for life to want to see us submit to yet another stage-managed grief-fest by order of the Ministry of Mawkishness. A period of silence on their part would be welcome.
IT WAS not the fear of terrorism making commuters sweat on the London Underground during this week’s heatwave. Especially when we read the front-page warning from Ken Livingstone that, because of global warming (not to be confused with a dilapidated transport system), we are “getting to the point where if a train breaks down in those conditions you could have serious loss of life”.
As the sun went in last autumn, you may recall, Ken told us to expect a winter freeze to match 1963 — the worst in 200 years — with “quite severe loss of life”. Whatever the weather, it seems there is no situation so bad that it cannot be made to feel worse by a few sunny words from the Miserabilist of London.
thetimesonline.co.uk