Euro 2020, who's watching?
- Thread starter cushyno
- Start date
Help Support The Homebrew Forum:
Crappyfish
Landlord.
A few disrespectful "fans" again booing the Italian national anthem and fighting at the ground again. When will the FA clamp down on these fools?
Why don't the fans around them give them some stick especially when its racial abuse, if i was stood next to one of these idiots i would either tell them to shut the **** up or report them.
Because it's more than just a few unfortunately.
Brewnaldo
Landlord.
- Joined
- Nov 21, 2019
- Messages
- 1,700
- Reaction score
- 1,795
And as last night proved, stewards are pretty powerless to do anything other than finger wag the odd drunk.
Its all well and good saying you would stand up to these sorts in the stand, but real life experience says different. Its an extremely intimidating scenario in a lot of cases. Its one thing shouting down the odd awful shout. Quite another dealing with a gang of racist thugs, which they invariably are.
Im glad its not my problem (though actually the same principle applies in Scotland with 2 particular clubs) but I would not have my kids anywhere near an England crowd, which is pretty much my yardstick for decency.
I wouldn't get involved if it was a group but if it was a couple of **** heads shouting racist stuff i would like to think i would have the balls to say something and hope others around would join in, in reality i would probably do as most do and say nothing which is the problem.
It looks like there may be no answer to the problem of racist fans some have been on 5 live today saying its time social media got this sorted but with 55 millions of posts every second (facebook alone) i don't see how they can stop it, one hell of a moderating job.
This is how many posts are made every second -
| WhatsApp messages | 740,741 |
| Google Searches | 68,542 |
| Facebook posts | 54,977 |
| Tweets | 5,700 |
| SnapChat | 4,630 |
| SMS messages | 4,595 |
| Instagram Posts | 694 |
Last edited:
Brewnaldo
Landlord.
- Joined
- Nov 21, 2019
- Messages
- 1,700
- Reaction score
- 1,795
Theres undoubtedly more to do from the top down. Its already relevant to this thread in the context of the Euros since various publications, aswell as an excellent video I just seen from Gary Neville re the politicians that lead this country, their relentless dog whistling in recent years, and the wretching stink of hypocrisy that now fills the air when they decide to speak out.
Another despicable narrative I have seen is MPs and commentators lining up to tell Marcus Rashford to stay out of politics and concentrate on his football. How spiteful and poisonous must you be to have been waiting to score points off a young man who railed against kids going hungry.... Reeks of "know your place". I wont waste time speculating whether thats because of class or race.
The thing is a footballers career is fairly short and a politicians career can go one for donkeys years, i hope Rashford does carry on his fight and if he wants to go into politics i hope he does and gives all his haters a bloody nose and that's coming from a City fan.
VW911
Landlord.
I'm not a football fan (as previously stated!), but I am a fan of sport. I only watched a few minutes of the game.
Booing the Italians as they went up to take a penalty, booing their National Anthem, pretty much any time they got the ball... Totally un-sporting.
Frankly, it made me almost ashamed to be English.
As for all the tears at the end of the "game", - ever seen that in rugby, cricket, athletics? Pathetic!
Booing the Italians as they went up to take a penalty, booing their National Anthem, pretty much any time they got the ball... Totally un-sporting.
Frankly, it made me almost ashamed to be English.
As for all the tears at the end of the "game", - ever seen that in rugby, cricket, athletics? Pathetic!
A mural honouring footballer Marcus Rashford that was vandalised with graffiti has been covered in hearts and supportive messages.
The artwork in Withington, Manchester, was defaced following England's defeat to Italy in the Euro 2020 final.
Notes and drawings with the words "role model", "wonderful human" and "hero" have been attached to the wall.
Those who brought them said they wanted to show solidarity for Rashford and stand against racism.
Rashford missed a penalty in the 3-2 shootout loss, along with Jadon Sancho and Bukayo Saka.
All three players have since been targeted with racist abuse on social media.
Greater Manchester Police said an investigation had begun after the force received a report of racially-aggravated damage at the mural at 02:50 BST.
Several swear words were daubed across the mural alongside the word "Saka".
There has been an outpouring of support for Rashford on social media and people have also posted positive messages over the covered-up graffiti on the mural.
Children stuck up drawings and described Rashford, Sancho and Saka as "national heroes".
Others wrote cards to thank Rashford for his work to tackle child food poverty.
"Thank you for your passion, compassion and desire to change lives," one note said.
- Southgate, PM & FA condemn player abuse
- The story behind the Rashford mural
- MP apologises over Rashford penalty comments
"He was so brave taking that penalty.
"Seeing what people have done to the mural is so disgusting so I wanted to show our solidarity for him," she said.
At the scene
By Rumeana Jahangir, BBC News Online
Many Mancunians have expressed shock, disappointment and fury that the mural of a "local lad" who has made significant achievements on and off the pitch, despite only being 23 years old, was defaced.
Yet at the same time, many aren't surprised that racism has yet again surfaced.
A number of locals have been sticking up hearts, flags and notes expressing their support and admiration for Rashford.
Others watched in silence or took pictures while they tried to cover up the vandalism in the rain.
Not an anti football post here as I do enjoy watching these tournaments
But as like yourself someone from a rugby cricket and other sports background. Football really is in its own bubble with the problems it had surrounding it and whilst most fans are of course sound there are still way too many who are ville. We have way too many which support England. But the problem isn't just England its all over. My boss is from Poland he says it's horrific over there. We also had Hungary fans making racist chants this cup.
It's so deep in its tribalism I find it hard to see how these things can be eradicated from association with the sport because these scum gravitate towards it and the real fans get the tarnish.
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2019
- Messages
- 2,203
- Reaction score
- 2,096
You're ignoring history. For all the focus on the forwards, the top teams reach the top by having top defences. In the last 10 Euro finals going back 40 years, the champions have let in just three goals - yesterday and the two 1-1's in 1996 and 2000 that went to golden goals. In 6 out of the last 7 finals, the winners have scored just 1 goal after 90 minutes - the exception is Spain's 4-0 in 2012, who were a) a great team and b) defending champions, so had the experience of 2008 to fall back on.
Forwards make headlines, defences make champions.
There's a similar story in the Copa América - apart from the 2-2 in 2004, the winners have conceded just 1 goal in the last 9 finals. The "for" column is distorted a bit by the dominance of Brazil within the continent, but apart from Brazil, winning with a single goal has been more or less the norm. Or winning with no goals if you're Chile!!!
Braufather
Landlord.
You can’t compare football to other sports. Its on a whole different level. It’s so widely supported and culturally entrenched it’s essentially a mirror to society. Any problems with football fans reflect problems with society as a whole.
Vandalay
New Member
You're ignoring history. For all the focus on the forwards, the top teams reach the top by having top defences. In the last 10 Euro finals going back 40 years, the champions have let in just three goals - yesterday and the two 1-1's in 1996 and 2000 that went to golden goals. In 6 out of the last 7 finals, the winners have scored just 1 goal after 90 minutes - the exception is Spain's 4-0 in 2012, who were a) a great team and b) defending champions, so had the experience of 2008 to fall back on.
Forwards make headlines, defences make champions.
There's a similar story in the Copa América - apart from the 2-2 in 2004, the winners have conceded just 1 goal in the last 9 finals. The "for" column is distorted a bit by the dominance of Brazil within the continent, but apart from Brazil, winning with a single goal has been more or less the norm. Or winning with no goals if you're Chile!!!
I know history. I'm not asking for goals, I'm asking for goal options, I'm asking for well-executed attacks even without reaching the scoreboard.
It is true that a good defense gives you championships, but your final example contradicts that. In 2015 and 2016 Argentina´s defense works perfect, but our attack was neutralized. In the end the only thing that could have changed the result would have been a better attack. Or at least a more efficient one.
It is a pity that teams bet more on defensive strength (I´m not saying it´s not necessary) than on creating their own options. Now more than ever teams bet on the opponent's error (perhaps the exception is the Champions League, which is where you can see successful teams with a true vocation for attack).
We did that the other day against Brazil and it worked out well, but I would have liked to do it with more authority.
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2019
- Messages
- 2,203
- Reaction score
- 2,096
A map of all the goals in the tournament :
Interesting that there was only one goal from a direct free kick - suggests that defences are now so good that it's pretty much a waste of a good position to go direct for goal.
Interesting that there was only one goal from a direct free kick - suggests that defences are now so good that it's pretty much a waste of a good position to go direct for goal.
Well if the result wasn’t bad enough I’ve just found out that the two friends of ours, who’s house we were at watching the match, have both just woke up feeling a bit rough this morning and tested positive for COVID 
Well if the result wasn’t bad enough I’ve just found out that the two friends of ours, who’s house we were at watching the match, have both just woke up feeling a bit rough this morning and tested positive for COVID
Oh no! Hope alls ok!
I tested negative todayOh no! Hope alls ok!
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2019
- Messages
- 2,203
- Reaction score
- 2,096
Nice to have but not essential - Greece won in 2004 with 4 shots at goal, of which only one was on target. But in football, that's enough. Last time, Portugal beat France with just 9 shots with 3 on target. Obviously more is good, but in 2000 France had 19 shots and 12 on target, but didn't score until the closing minutes of injury time.
But the same is also true for Chile. In both cases the defences did enough to get their team to 90 minutes and still have a chance of winning. In the end, *one* of the things that could have changed the results is for Higuaín/Banega/Messi/ Biglia to be better at taking penalties. Another way for Argentina to win would have been for Romero to be better at saving penalties.
That's the trouble, when there is such a difference between the outcomes, of winning and losing, people like to make out something is hugely wrong or hugely right, when in reality the "inputs" rely on tiny differences. If the ball landed on a different bit of grass, or spun differently, then the Italian goal is in reach of Pickford or goes outside the post. If Rashford hits the ball a few mm to the left, it goes inside the post.
The reality is that overall, England were kind of lucky to have got as close as they did to lifting the trophy. There were maybe 5 teams who had a good chance of reaching the final if luck had gone their way, not many people would have put England in the top 2. England were lucky that with a young, improving team the tournament was delayed a year (whereas that worked against eg Belgium). They were lucky to play almost all their games at home (and eg didn't get them moved due to Covid like the Dublin games), they were lucky the way that the draw worked out. Obviously all that luck doesn't count for much if the team is no good, and who knows, maybe they could have beaten France, Belgium and Spain in the knockouts, but it's just nice for once to have England exceeding expectations for once. Bring on the World Cup!
Boris Johnson has promised to ban people guilty of sending racist abuse to footballers from attending matches.
The prime minister said he would ensure the "football banning order regime is changed" to crack down on racism.
Labour has been calling for the law to be changed after England players were subject to abuse on social media.
But Sir Keir Starmer said the PM's promise to take action "rings hollow" after his previous refusal to condemn fans who booed players taking the knee.
An online petition calling for the FA and the government to ban those who have carried out racist abuse to be banned for life has reached over a million signatures.
The prime minister said: "What we are doing is taking practical steps...so that if you are guilty of racist abuse online on football, then you will not be going to the match. No ifs, no buts, no exemptions, no excuses."
A football banning order is used to ban someone from attending matches for a set period of time, and can be imposed for offences such as throwing missiles onto the playing area or into the crowd, and racist or indecent chanting at a match.
Downing Street says there will be a 12 week consultation on changing banning orders to include online abuse offences. The government wants the changes to happen "as swiftly as possible" but has not given a precise timetable.
It comes as a 37-year-old man was arrested by Greater Manchester Police over social media posts directed at England football players after the Euro 2020 final.
FULL ARTICLE - Online racists to be banned from football matches, vows Boris Johnson - BBC News
The prime minister said he would ensure the "football banning order regime is changed" to crack down on racism.
Labour has been calling for the law to be changed after England players were subject to abuse on social media.
But Sir Keir Starmer said the PM's promise to take action "rings hollow" after his previous refusal to condemn fans who booed players taking the knee.
An online petition calling for the FA and the government to ban those who have carried out racist abuse to be banned for life has reached over a million signatures.
The prime minister said: "What we are doing is taking practical steps...so that if you are guilty of racist abuse online on football, then you will not be going to the match. No ifs, no buts, no exemptions, no excuses."
A football banning order is used to ban someone from attending matches for a set period of time, and can be imposed for offences such as throwing missiles onto the playing area or into the crowd, and racist or indecent chanting at a match.
Downing Street says there will be a 12 week consultation on changing banning orders to include online abuse offences. The government wants the changes to happen "as swiftly as possible" but has not given a precise timetable.
It comes as a 37-year-old man was arrested by Greater Manchester Police over social media posts directed at England football players after the Euro 2020 final.
FULL ARTICLE - Online racists to be banned from football matches, vows Boris Johnson - BBC News
Similar threads
