Stevie H Posted July 7, 2006 Posted July 7, 2006 interesting that he chooses not to draw similar conslusions from, say, the olympic 100m sprint final. silly fecker.
jimmylibel Posted July 7, 2006 Posted July 7, 2006 That article is complete cr*p. Could have found out more than that with 5 mins of research on the official FIFA website. And sure it should be about all the teams in the tournament, not the teams in the last 16.
cymrococh Posted July 7, 2006 Posted July 7, 2006 I haven't tried to make any precise statistical analysis of the European sides this time around but it feels that here again there has been a retreat. Genius.
Rich Gobey Posted July 7, 2006 Posted July 7, 2006 I'm not quite sure what point that patronising and condescending article is trying to make. 'The excellent Ian Wright and Marcel Desailly' - Really? i thought they were both crap. Not that I'm seeing their colour, they just happen to be members of the worst punditry team the beeb has ever put together. The traditionally strong African teams have had a shakey few years and Africa was represented by teams new to the tournement. Frankly, the fact that one of them made it to the knockout stages was a suprise to me. Asia is/was probably represented by its two strongest nations. The fact that they are both footie minnows must have escaped Mr Jaques notice. All in all the African and Asian teams did just about as well as could have expected. Now, maybe if they had a few more white guys in their teams....!
Stevie H Posted July 7, 2006 Author Posted July 7, 2006 desailly has often provided decent opinion and insight this world cup, and also knows whereof he speaks being a world cup winner. ian wright is a jingoistic gobsh*te who knows less than nothing about the game of football let alone what it is like to win a world cup.
cymrococh Posted July 7, 2006 Posted July 7, 2006 (edited) The comments are good - bobdoneyJuly 7, 2006 09:09 AMAnd where were all the women? And what about the disabled? Disgraceful! Edited July 7, 2006 by Paul Caruso
Hassony Posted July 7, 2006 Posted July 7, 2006 bobdoneyJuly 7, 2006 09:09 AMAnd where were all the women? And what about the disabled? Disgraceful! c ronaldo and Pauleta were there
Rimbeux Posted July 7, 2006 Posted July 7, 2006 You take a serious issue, then try and dress up an event like the world cup to somehow please or cast light on it, and you please nobody, but instead do damage. He's not even got the good grace to get his facts entirely straight. All he's done is throw out some bald and patchy numbers and expressed an opinion that they should be different, but not why or indeed how. interesting that he chooses not to draw similar conslusions from, say, the olympic 100m sprint final. silly fecker. But as he seems to see it, there is no issue there, and given the way he holds up the French team, is his eyes, that's the racial mix all teams should aspire to. very silly fecker
Zoob Posted July 7, 2006 Posted July 7, 2006 What a baffling load of turd that is. On so many levels, it's just plain dumb, lazy and often incorrect. Perhaps his next piece will be about the clear anti European racism which inevitably and cruely results in European teams never winning the world cup outside Europe. Or how unfairly Eurocentric it is that Asian and African teams aren't allowed into the European championships.
Elisha_Scott Posted July 7, 2006 Posted July 7, 2006 The comments are good - The comments are brilliant TrickyTree July 7, 2006 08:43 AMCambridge/gbr It's also incorrect to say that all the permanant fiixtures in the TV studio were white; El Tel was clearly orange.[Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment.]
aka Dus Posted July 8, 2006 Posted July 8, 2006 Allegedly, someone on BBC said that only Henry and Ballack out of the final 4 teams would get into the England side... I didn't know whether to laugh or join the IRA.
eth Posted July 8, 2006 Posted July 8, 2006 http://football.guardian.co.uk/News_Story/0,,1130119,00.html That's interesting, but the rest of the article really is awful. The suggestion that there are so many white managers because of racism is the most laughable. Couldn't be that football in European (and predominantly white) countries has had huge amounts of investment and greatly more developed leagues over the last fifty years (there being a delayed reaction to increases in funding due to the age of managers), resulting in large numbers of able managers.
eth Posted July 8, 2006 Posted July 8, 2006 Worth noting he's not a columnist, it's a blogging site on the Guardian site. I didn't realise.
Koller49 Posted July 8, 2006 Posted July 8, 2006 What a shocking f***ing article - It's just embarrasing. how can someone get paid to write that. Jesus.
Hassony Posted July 8, 2006 Posted July 8, 2006 What a shocking f***ing article - It's just embarrasing. how can someone get paid to write that. Jesus.do people get paid for writing a blog?
_00_deathscar Posted July 8, 2006 Posted July 8, 2006 do people get paid for writing a blog? Mickey Owen? Xabi Alonso? Their World Cup blogs...I doubt they were doing it 'out of goodwill'.
Des Posted July 8, 2006 Posted July 8, 2006 Worth noting he's not a columnist, it's a blogging site on the Guardian site. I didn't realise. He is a Guardian columnist.
Guest TanMan Posted July 8, 2006 Posted July 8, 2006 I've often wondered about the African sides in the world cup. They seem to come and go from one tournament to the next. I've often wondered if French and European based African players get together to decide which nation they are going to give their allegience to based on getting the chance to get to the finals. Or could it be that each country produces a clutch of decent players one year, get to the world cup finals and then fail miserably the following time.
smithdown Posted July 8, 2006 Posted July 8, 2006 I've often wondered if French and European based African players get together to decide which nation they are going to give their allegience to based on getting the chance to get to the finals. I reckon they all meet in a council flat in Hamburg. Or maybe Marseille, on a boat in the harbour.
DanielS Posted July 10, 2006 Posted July 10, 2006 Far too many white faces appearing next to columns in the Guardian. Why do they not have more black columnists? Guardian = Daily Mail wannabe.
aka Dus Posted July 10, 2006 Posted July 10, 2006 The Guardian is hideously white. The financial times is hidesouly salmon. etc etc
Guest Anders Honoré Posted July 10, 2006 Posted July 10, 2006 (edited) Without wanting to detract from the idiocy of the article it did prompt one question from me, reading the comments: Why aren't there are black managers around? Edited July 10, 2006 by Anders Honoré
Hassony Posted July 10, 2006 Posted July 10, 2006 Without wanting to detract from the idiocy of the article it did prompt one question from me, reading the comments: Why aren't there are black managers around?what about "el tel" and "big ron"
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now