Musing about sport

Image via WikipediaWhich is your big sport story (assuming you're bothered)? England playing well in the Ashes series, or the failure to bring the FIFA World Cup back to England in 2018? We probably ought to wait to the end of the series before saying anything too much about cricket, but it seems to be going well to date.

The World Cup bid debacle was fascinating. No-one ever thought it was in the bag, but the story goes that 7 votes were agreed on handshake, the technical report and presentations all went well, and all the big names were there. Whether it was Panorama, the wider British media, backroom deals or something more dishonest may never be know, but those votes evaporated. It did seem odd to do 2 bids at once - horsetrading was bound to result, rather than assessing each on its merits. And then, surprise, surprise, the idea of taking the World Cup to new countries was heralded. If we'd known that at the start, we wouldn't have bothered - it's a perfectly laudable aim, but you've wasted our time and money FIFA.

One question: if you discover allegations of corruption and make a programme about them, should you wait out of expediency or expose it immediately?

Meanwhile the domestic football action has had its moments. Chelsea wobble, other 'big 4' teams have their moments, Liverpool FC recover or do they, Blackpool entertain every time, and Bolton Wanderers start playing a passing game. After a poor start, Nottingham Forest have been moving up the table and acquire Aaron Ramsey for a loan period, but Morecambe look like they may be in a relegation battle.

In the FA Cup we nearly had Wimbledon vs MK Dons, and theoretically we could still see Man Utd come up against FC United of Manchester, the team formed as a protest against the Glazers. Now there's a game I want to see.

Related articles

• Afekafe upstages the 'Three Lions' (independent.co.uk)
• 'I want nothing more to do with Fifa' - acting FA chairman quits (guardian.co.uk)
• Arsène Wenger says Fifa World Cup decision was from 'middle ages' (guardian.co.uk)

Less than the sum of the parts

Half of me wants to avoid any further World Cup comment, but the other half needs to get it out my system, so apologies to the uninterested. Please feel free to ignore.

All of the English football following public are now trying to understand why it is that England fall short of expectations every time one of these major tournaments come around. Somehow when it comes to the crunch, we rarely witness a competent and confident performance. Qualification is frequently a trauma, and when we do eventually get through, there's usually a bit of craziness - whether the 'Hand of God' in '86, sendings off or the nightmare of a penalty shoot-out. Even in 1990, England's best result since 1966, the team started slowly, struggled to win, and had 3 games in a row go into extra time.

To put it simply, the England team is usually less than the sum of the parts, and many of our fellow competitors are the reverse - this year think Switzerland, Serbia and even North Korea to name a few.

Quite apart from my personal (but not very serious) theory that England play better in red than white (think '66) there does seem to be a long shadow over English football. Maybe some of that comes from the win in '66 - there is always something in the air that says we ought to be able to do it again, whereas if England had never won, a quarter-final would seem a pretty decent outcome. Whatever the cause, good and occasionally brilliant players become ordinary and passionate players go flat. Mind you, England did badly in 1950...

So is it the manager? In Capello, we've got an expensive manager with a very good club track record. As a technician he has been very capable through qualification, but I do wonder whether it gets harder for a foreign manager to motivate a team when that seems to be the relevant issue. His reputation is as someone distant, yet England looked like a team that needed a good talking to from someone who's been there. Of course Pearce is available...

He also has seemed to be quite inflexible. One issue that seems to blight a lot of managers is having the nerve to leave out big names if they're not performing well. Sven and McLaren had their favourites, and so does Capello. Even if the team sheet is a secret until 2hrs beforehand, we know some of the names that will be there, which presumably makes it all the harder for those in the dark.

Lots of people are commenting on the formation. England have been devoted to 4-4-2 for a long time (although they won the World Cup playing 4-3-3 and Robson changed things during Italia 90.) Perhaps the obvious thing to say is that a formation should be chosen which brings the best out in the players - didn't seem to be the case for the last 2 matches. Also worth noting that although 4-4-2 used to be standard British tactics, the "big 4" don't tend to use it. Interesting to think what a 4-2-3-1 (Liverpool's shape) England would look like.

And that 2hr notice thing. David James certainly seemed less than impressed with how the goalkeeper situation had been dealt with, and how can a defence prepare as a coherent unit and team if they don't even know who's playing.

Ah well, it's easy to criticise from an armchair. History would suggest that England will revive, win the next game, and go through to the knock-out stage, thus raising all kinds of ridiculous hope. They will then crash out with a sending off or losing on penalties in a subsequent round.

Not a great weekend to be English

A very lacklustre performance by the England football [soccer] team against Japan leaves me thinking that we stand very little hope of making significant progress in the tournament. 1/4 final would be good going on todays' showing. At least Joe Hart's a good goalkeeper.

Meanwhile the UK comes bottom in the Eurovision song contest. I didn't watch. My friend Steve did, so read his review here

The World Cup cometh

Image via Wikipedia

Taking a look at a little booklet about the FIFA World Cup (not other lesser sports), I thought I'd check if there was any chance of following England's progress. In fact it's looking quite good. (please check with other guides before finalising your arrangements!)

The 3 games we can be sure of are:

• England v USA. Sat June 12 @ 7-30pm
• England v Algeria. Fri June 18 @ 7-30pm
• England v Slovenia. Wed June 23 @ 3pm

If England win group C, the next game is Sat June 26 @ 7-30pm
If England are 2nd, the next game is Sun June 27 @ 3pm

Ok then it gets complicated if you're optimistic enough to think we might get this far. I think the following is correct, but please correct me if it's not.

If they play on Saturday and win, the 1/4 final would be on Friday July 2 @ 7-30pm.
If they play on Sunday and win, the 1/4 final would be on Saturday July 3 @ 3pm.

The July 2 match leads to a semi-final on July 6 at 7-30pm
The July 3 match leads to a semi-final on July 7 at 7-30pm

The World Cup Final is Sunday July 11 at 7-30pm. Should be back from Evening Prayer. Dream on...

Not now, George?

It's all a bit odd that England ended with George as its patron saint. After all, according to Wikipedia [so it must be true] we have to share him with: Aragon, Catalonia, Ethiopia, Georgia, Greece, Lithuania, Palestine, Portugal, Russia, oh and Preston... (yes, Preston, Lancs.) I have often thought that Saint Alban would have been better - the first British martyr, killed during Roman occupation. He would probably be rather more palatable to our Scottish and Welsh neighbours as he predates England as a nation. He also has a saint's day nicely parked in the summer (June 22) - good for parties and BBQs.

As an alternative, maybe England could share Saint Cuthbert with her northern neighbour. He was born in what was then Northumbria, but is modern-day Scotland. Or perhaps we could go for the Venerable Bede - for his scholarship and historical writing. I guess some would champion Thomas a Becket.

Anway, we're stuck with George. He has a few unfortunate associations - the Crusades being the obvious one. Richard the Lion Heart is said to have adopted St George for England, and the Crusaders wore his cross to identify themselves, not they tended to commend themselves to locals. He soon caught on and was England's patron saint by the 14th century, and therefore he's not seen as someone to celebrate by anyone the English have conquered or dominated over the subsequent centuries.

But maybe it's time to reclaim him from those who are jingoistic, prejudiced or crassly nationalist. After all, our patron saint was [probably] born in modern-day Israel towards the end of the 3rd century, grew up in modern-day Turkey, had a Greek name and his father was a Roman official. Not a great candidate for being the patron saint of xenophobia, and not very English. In fact he ought to remind us that we can be inspired, challenged and learn from the stranger, the foreigner, the person who is 'different'.

He didn't kill any dragons, as that was probably a mythological way of depicting his courage. It seems he may have been martyred for refusing to comply with the Emperor's ruling that all should show their devotion to the Roman gods by sacrificing to them. Maybe his memory ought to make us a little more sympathetic to those who come today to England to escape imprisonment, torture and even death for being true to their consciences.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Let's raise a glass to multicultural Saint George (guardian.co.uk)

Footie first thoughts

Phew, through the first match and three points on the board. What did you think?

"Well, it was a game of two halves." [it actually was - in both senses]

OK I'll stop the cliches there, but England have got off to their usual shaky start, this time a little more successfully. No doubt the media will be full of "why did he take Owen off, put Hargreaves on, we're a striker short..." talk until the next shaky performance. Still, it was a great free kick that earned the goal.

Wonder what difference it would have made to our prospects over the years to have had a UK team?

Ryan Giggs would be one name that springs to mind, and what about George Best on the field in that fantastic match against Brazil in 1970? We'll never know, but I suspect more success may have come our nation's way. After all, it's very odd that one sovereign state should have four (weakened) teams. The privilege of being first in the game, I suppose. Also means we can't enter the Olympic soccer tournament.

We'll have to settle for how things are, but let's hope they play a bit better next time.


PS 8750 words.