Well, if you're a Formula 1 fan, you'll already be well aware of the debate raging within the sport about Pirelli's current models of race tyres. (And if you're not a Formula 1 fan, you probably won't enjoy this post that much!) Red Bull's Dietrich Mateschitz claims that F1 has "nothing to do with real racing any more" and that too much emphasis on tyre-management is ruining the sport - and similar complaints have been heard from some drivers in the field, as well as many of the fans.
I actually raised this issue on this Blog two years ago, in May 2011. I didn't like the attempts to "engineer" more excitement in the sport, and I used the example of two teams mates - one qualifying in the Top 10, and one starting from the back of the grid, whose final positions in the race ended up almost reversed - to illustrate how I felt the high degradation of the Pirelli tyres were having too much influence on the results of races.
Although I still feel that way about the Pirelli tyres, I can't help but feel that Red Bull are just having a bit of a moan. For the past three years, Red Bull have had undisputedly the best car, designed by one of the best designers in the business, Adrian Newey. This year, their car (while still very, very good) comes in behind several of the other teams in a couple of keys areas - one of these areas in the way the car manages the tyres; Lotus, in particular, and also Ferrari to a certain extent, have managed to design a car which is kinder to the tyres than the Red Bull.
What we are seeing from Red Bull now, of course, is nothing less than the petulance and querulousness I would expect. Every team designs their car to the same set of regulations, so in that respect everybody starts from an equal footing - rather than accepting that, on this occasion, the chaps at Lotus have done a better job than they did, and trying to improve their own car through upgrades as the season goes on, Red Bull have demanded that the tyres which all the teams have to use be changed to suit them.
As far as I'm concerned, this cannot be allowed to happen. Much as I would prefer tyres which aren't so unpredictable, it would not be right to change things part-way through a season, just because one of the teams has thrown their toys out of the pram. By making the tyres more Red Bull-friendly, Pirelli will be effectively making life harder for Lotus and Ferrari - in this situation, it could be Pirelli who "choose" who they want to win the Championship this year.
No, having started out with these high-degradation tyres, we must stick with them for a whole season. By all means, change them for next season (when the regulations on engines and car design will be significantly altered anyway, and all the teams will be starting again from scratch) - but changing the tyres midway through the year would be like changing the rules of football to allow goalkeepers to handle the ball outside the penalty area, just because one of the Premier League teams reckon they'd have a better chance of winning if that rule were different. Red Bull need to be told that if you're not doing well enough within the current regulations to win, you simply have to try harder, or take a different approach - not ask the sport's governing body to change the rules to help make it easier for you!
If Pirelli do change their tyres, in response to Red Bull's complaints, how much more are we going to see of teams campaigning for changes to rules they don't like? In the end, Caterham will kick up an almighty fuss and demand that the points system be changed so that you can only score points if you drive a green car, meaning that they'll end up as Champions unless all the other teams repaint.
Tuesday, 14 May 2013
Monday, 29 April 2013
Is football better or worse?
The BBC Sport Twitter page is asking this question today: is football better or worse now?
What a bizarre question. Better or worse than what? Another sport? Or better or worse than it used to be? Whatever it's supposed to mean, it's totally unquantifiable anyway - not to mention subjective. In short, it's absolutely meaningless!
In my opinion, football is what it is. That may not sound terribly profound, but I find all this navel-gazing about 'the state of the sport' just a bit tiresome. There will always be doughy-eyed nostalgics who'll fervently declare that nothing is ever as good as it used to be - just as there will always be ruthless modernisers, looking out for the 'next big thing' and always trying to make everything better than ever before.
Football always polarises opinions, and sadly some people find themselves getting awfully worked up about it all. My advice to those people would be: if you don't like football the way it is, don't watch it - find a sport the state of which you do like, and watch that instead.
Whether football is 'better' or 'worse' is impossible to say, and frankly, doesn't really matter - it's whether you enjoy it or not that counts.
What a bizarre question. Better or worse than what? Another sport? Or better or worse than it used to be? Whatever it's supposed to mean, it's totally unquantifiable anyway - not to mention subjective. In short, it's absolutely meaningless!
In my opinion, football is what it is. That may not sound terribly profound, but I find all this navel-gazing about 'the state of the sport' just a bit tiresome. There will always be doughy-eyed nostalgics who'll fervently declare that nothing is ever as good as it used to be - just as there will always be ruthless modernisers, looking out for the 'next big thing' and always trying to make everything better than ever before.
Football always polarises opinions, and sadly some people find themselves getting awfully worked up about it all. My advice to those people would be: if you don't like football the way it is, don't watch it - find a sport the state of which you do like, and watch that instead.
Whether football is 'better' or 'worse' is impossible to say, and frankly, doesn't really matter - it's whether you enjoy it or not that counts.
Sunday, 28 April 2013
Reading and QPR sale?
With the news that both Queens Park Rangers and Reading have been relegated from the Premier League today, my thoughts have turned to the Summer Transfer Window, and which star players may well be shuffling out of the back door either at Loftus Road or at the Madejski. I have been trying to decide which current members of the QPR and Royals squads it would be worth having at Norwich next season - and, to be honest, not many spring to mind...
Just to be clear here, I'm talking specifically about which QPR or Reading players would enhance the Norwich City squad - not which players are good enough to play in the Premier League in general. I know both sides have goalkeeping talent, with both Alex McCarthy for Reading, and Rangers' Júlio César turning heads during this season, but I have faith in Norwich's current 'keepers of John Ruddy and Mark Bunn, so I have little interest in seeing McCarthy or César at Carrow Road next year, even though I think there's a strong chance that both will still be playing in the top flight.
So, who would I want to take from Reading?
Hardly anyone, frankly. However, considering that most of the problems we (Norwich) have had during this Premier League season have been to do with not being able to score enough goals, I wouldn't mind giving Adam Le Fondre an opportunity at Carrow Road.
And who would I want to take from QPR?
Again, keeping in mind the Canaries' goal dearth during the current season, I'd be more than happy to take Loïc Rémy on - of course, I feel sure that plenty of Premier League clubs (and their fans!) have been eyeing up Rémy for some weeks, and many more illustrious names will be chasing his signature in the summer, but that's not to say I wouldn't be happy to see him wearing yellow next season. Another QPR player who's caught my eye, though - particularly in the earlier stages of this season - is Jamie Mackie; I don't think Hoops' manager Harry Redknapp has given him a fair chance in the latter part of the season, but I was impressed by him at the start of their campaign, as he struck me as a hard-working, positive thinking footballer with a lot to give. I think Mackie could be an excellent addition to the current Norwich line-up, and I would be glad to welcome him here.
Sunday, 14 April 2013
Fixture pile-up
I can't fathom football teams complaining about 'fixture pile-up' when they have to play a lot of matches in quite a short period of time.
Quite frankly, if you're good enough to be at the business end of several cup competitions towards the end of the season, you should be good enough to cope with playing lots of games.
And remember, there are plenty of clubs who would give anything they have to be in that position!
Quite frankly, if you're good enough to be at the business end of several cup competitions towards the end of the season, you should be good enough to cope with playing lots of games.
And remember, there are plenty of clubs who would give anything they have to be in that position!
Here's a tip...
If there's one place which should be required by law to provide hand-washing facilities, that should be rubbish dumps. (Sorry, "Recycling Centres" - our local one has been "rebranded" as such, so I assume most of them have?!)
Who wants to get back in their car and drive home, after handling all their dirty, grimy rubbish, without being able to wash their hands first?! Not I!
Who wants to get back in their car and drive home, after handling all their dirty, grimy rubbish, without being able to wash their hands first?! Not I!
Sunday, 24 March 2013
#F1 - the latest 'team orders' controversy
Today's Malaysian Grand Prix ended in controversy and anger, as Sebastian Vettel took the win ahead of teammate Mark Webber, despite team orders from the Red Bull garage to hold station behind Webber in second place, following the team's final round of pit stops. The post-race interviews and analysis dwelt on the subject extensively, and almost 1500 people have posted comments on the BBC's post-race report, the vast majority of which are also concerned with the topic of team orders.
One of the interesting things about today's race was the stark contrast in the ways in which the 'team orders' situation was handled by the Red Bull drivers, when compared to Lewis Hamilton and Nico Rosberg at Mercedes.
But first, let's talk about team orders in general, for a minute...
Every time an issue like this rears its head, we (as F1 fans) have to put up with reading streams of Blogs, articles and comments about how team orders are "ruining the sport", and how F1 is "not real racing" because of team orders, and other things. Let's not forget that team orders are only of use to teams in a few specific situations - ie. when your team's cars are in adjacent positions in the race, and also on the same pit-stop strategies (two stop, three stop, etc). Red Bull's team orders came into effect around Lap 43/44, when Webber was leading the race, and Vettel was close behind him in second - but at the start of the race, Vettel started from Pole position, while Webber was fifth on the grid. How did they get from fifth and first to first and second without "real racing"?
Fans who claim to be fed up of "stage-managed" races seem to forget that team orders can only manage two of the twenty-two cars on the track. No amount of team orders can stop another car from another team putting a spanner in the works of your carefully-managed performance. (Unless you believe the conspiracy that F1 supremo Bernie Ecclestone stage-manages the performances of all the teams - in which case, why are you even watching the races at all?)
Formula 1 is an unusual hybrid of an individual and a team sport - and, in the end, there are trophies (not to mention significant financial rewards) for both. It is also a sport which is spread out over a period of many months, and divided into nineteen individual races, all of which contribute to the whole of the Championships; for the teams, and the drivers, it is important not to lose sight of the bigger picture - when the title is decided, it's the total points over the entire season which counts, not who won each individual heat.
Of course, as fans and spectators, we want to see close action, high drama and exciting wheel-to-wheel racing at every race. In my opinion, however, there is room in F1 for team orders and close racing to coexist. The close racing aspect, however thrilling, is only one side of the F1 coin; there is another side to F1 (which, for my part, I find equally gripping) - the intrigue of tactics and strategy, of design, and of two drivers (often with hugely contrasting styles or personalities) fighting for points not only for the team, but also within the team. Add to that the fact that the regulations state that a finite number of engines (eight) and gearboxes (one every five races) may be used by each car throughout a season, and it therefore necessary sometimes to conserve power in order to make these components last, rather than going all-out on track at all times. It is a fine balance, yes - but that's what makes this, in my opinion, one of the best sports in the world.
So how does this all relate to today's events...?
Well, let's talk about Mercedes first. Despite starting fourth and sixth, Mercedes drivers Lewis Hamilton and Nico Rosberg found themselves in a very strong position behind the two leading Red Bulls - indeed, for much of the race, they were keeping pace with Webber and Vettel, and looked like they may be able to challenge for a top-two finish. Unfortunately, the team had made a miscalculation regarding how much fuel to put in the cars at the start (possibly down to the belief that more of race would be run in wet weather conditions than actually ended up happening) and towards the end of the race Hamilton's car in third, especially, was running on less-than-maximum power in order to save fuel and ensure they didn't run out before the end of the race.
Rosberg, in fourth place behind Hamilton, was also saving fuel, although to a less critical degree, asked his team on the radio whether he should overtake his team mate, and was told "no". After remonstrating with the team, and being told "no" twice more, Rosberg accepted his fate, and cruised home in fourth place, behind Hamilton. Team Principal Ross Brawn's explanation on the radio to Rosberg was about fuel consumption (Rosberg would burn more fuel by the overtaking Hamilton - and both cars would burn more fuel by racing each other rather than cruising, and would risk not making it to the end of the race at all, effectively turning 27 points for the team into 0) and also about safety.
Whatever you think of this decision, and the way it affected the end result of the race (Hamilton and Rosberg finishing third and fourth, instead of fourth and third - and Mercedes getting 27 points, instead of 27 points), the way it was handled by the drivers showed maturity and class. Rosberg acted like a team player, and brought the car home in fourth place (which is still an excellent result, 12 World Championship points, and two places gained him his grid position) while Hamilton credited his team mate during his interview on the podium.
At Red Bull, however, it was a rather different story! After the final pit stops, Webber was ahead of Vettel, and the team instructed both their drivers to turn down their engines and bring the cars home safe and intact. Webber complied with this instruction; Vettel didn't.
Vettel attacked Webber, and passed him. Webber - understandably very angry about this - refused later to interact with Vettel, either before or during the podium ceremony. Vettel apologised during the drivers' press conference, but Webber refused to accept his apology. I'm not surprised.
As ever, the internet is awash with comments about this - and, as ever, a huge number of them are anti-team orders. "What's the problem?" people ask. "Vettel and Webber are racing drivers - we want to see them race, not just follow each other around!"
I want to see them race too - but not when one of them (Webber) has turned his engine down, under the impression that the other (Vettel) would do the same (as agreed), only to find he's being attacked and can't defend himself because he's running on less power. That's not fair - and it's not "real racing" either.
What Vettel did was not the "ruthless" drive of a Champion who "just wanted it do badly", as some people would have you believe - it was reckless, foolish, and above-all, disobedient. He gambled a guaranteed 43 points for the team on the chance that he might win it - as it happens, he did win, but if he had taken both the Red Bull cars out of the race (as in Turkey in 2010), the repercussions would've been huge.
Vettel, however, believed he had some sort of God-given right to win this race. Never was this more clear than when listening to his radio message to the team earlier in the race: "Mark is too slow - get him out of the way!"
He instructs the garage to issue team orders which work in his favour, yet petulantly ignores any that don't. He expects to be given a free pass to the lead of the race (which, in the end, was effectively what happened, as he made a pass on a team mate who was powerless to fight back) and he expects to be able to get away with disobeying his team boss, despite risking putting the whole dynamic of the team (and, therefore, their hopes of a fourth consecutive World Championship double) in jeopardy.
As I've said, Formula 1 is a long game. The race doesn't end at the Chequered flag in Malaysia - it ends in Brazil, in November. There are many, many factors to take into consideration during the season, and the fall-out from this incident is going to be one of them. Vettel may have grabbed the win here, but how will he feel in November if he watched another man walk away with the title of 2013 World Champion, and looks back at today's race thinking maybe this moment of hot-headedness was a turning point? Will it have been worth it? I doubt it.
I was never the biggest fan of Sebastian Vettel - but I have even less respect for him, after today's happenings. However, I won't deny that, from a fan's point-of-view, this certainly sets us up with a fascinating situation going into the Chinese Grand Prix in three weeks' time.
Unlike the Mercedes drivers, who handled their team orders with grace and maturity, and just knuckled down and got on with things, even if they weren't entirely happy about it, like true professionals, the Red Bull team is imploding in front of our eyes. It is impossible to know exactly how things will play out from here, but it looks as if the events of today's race will change the face of team orders at Red Bull for a good long time - possibly for the rest of the season. The consequences of this could be very far-reaching indeed. We could potentially end up with a situation where other teams are able to manage their cars to maximise their points haul, and to ensure the most efficient use possible of resources like gearboxes, fuel and tyres, while Red Bull are unable to do so. Yes, Sebastian Vettel's rashness today could come back to haunt him in a big way.
But back to the central issue - that of team orders - now...
Many people believe that without team orders, Formula 1 would be more exciting. Considering that they're all everyone's been talking about since this race, it seems that - on this occasion, at least - it was their very presence which has made it exciting.
Anyone who thinks that today's race was 'boring' because of team orders clearly didn't see the seemingly ongoing scrap for places between Lotus' Kimi Räikkönen and McLaren's Sergio Pérez, the drama of the front wing coming off Fernando Alonso's Ferrari on the first lap (and his inexplicable failure to come into the pit lane, resulting in a retirement from the race soon after), the chaos in the pit lane with Force India, Toro Rosso and McLaren all involved in some way or another, and the very promising showing from Jules Bianchi and his Marussia team.
The fact is that team orders are a part of the sport - whether you like it or not - but they are not a big enough issue on their own to "ruin" a whole sport. Formula 1 is a very complex business, and it has many elements which make it up - team orders are but one of these elements. My advice to anyone who hasn't been watching Formula 1 for very long, or who is thinking of watching it for the first time, is not to get too hung up on any one of these details in isolation, but to enjoy the glorious tapestry of the sport in its entirety.
Formula 1 may not be perfect - but, in my opinion, anyone who thinks it's boring must be watching with their eyes shut.
One of the interesting things about today's race was the stark contrast in the ways in which the 'team orders' situation was handled by the Red Bull drivers, when compared to Lewis Hamilton and Nico Rosberg at Mercedes.
But first, let's talk about team orders in general, for a minute...
Every time an issue like this rears its head, we (as F1 fans) have to put up with reading streams of Blogs, articles and comments about how team orders are "ruining the sport", and how F1 is "not real racing" because of team orders, and other things. Let's not forget that team orders are only of use to teams in a few specific situations - ie. when your team's cars are in adjacent positions in the race, and also on the same pit-stop strategies (two stop, three stop, etc). Red Bull's team orders came into effect around Lap 43/44, when Webber was leading the race, and Vettel was close behind him in second - but at the start of the race, Vettel started from Pole position, while Webber was fifth on the grid. How did they get from fifth and first to first and second without "real racing"?
Fans who claim to be fed up of "stage-managed" races seem to forget that team orders can only manage two of the twenty-two cars on the track. No amount of team orders can stop another car from another team putting a spanner in the works of your carefully-managed performance. (Unless you believe the conspiracy that F1 supremo Bernie Ecclestone stage-manages the performances of all the teams - in which case, why are you even watching the races at all?)
Formula 1 is an unusual hybrid of an individual and a team sport - and, in the end, there are trophies (not to mention significant financial rewards) for both. It is also a sport which is spread out over a period of many months, and divided into nineteen individual races, all of which contribute to the whole of the Championships; for the teams, and the drivers, it is important not to lose sight of the bigger picture - when the title is decided, it's the total points over the entire season which counts, not who won each individual heat.
Of course, as fans and spectators, we want to see close action, high drama and exciting wheel-to-wheel racing at every race. In my opinion, however, there is room in F1 for team orders and close racing to coexist. The close racing aspect, however thrilling, is only one side of the F1 coin; there is another side to F1 (which, for my part, I find equally gripping) - the intrigue of tactics and strategy, of design, and of two drivers (often with hugely contrasting styles or personalities) fighting for points not only for the team, but also within the team. Add to that the fact that the regulations state that a finite number of engines (eight) and gearboxes (one every five races) may be used by each car throughout a season, and it therefore necessary sometimes to conserve power in order to make these components last, rather than going all-out on track at all times. It is a fine balance, yes - but that's what makes this, in my opinion, one of the best sports in the world.
So how does this all relate to today's events...?
Well, let's talk about Mercedes first. Despite starting fourth and sixth, Mercedes drivers Lewis Hamilton and Nico Rosberg found themselves in a very strong position behind the two leading Red Bulls - indeed, for much of the race, they were keeping pace with Webber and Vettel, and looked like they may be able to challenge for a top-two finish. Unfortunately, the team had made a miscalculation regarding how much fuel to put in the cars at the start (possibly down to the belief that more of race would be run in wet weather conditions than actually ended up happening) and towards the end of the race Hamilton's car in third, especially, was running on less-than-maximum power in order to save fuel and ensure they didn't run out before the end of the race.
Rosberg, in fourth place behind Hamilton, was also saving fuel, although to a less critical degree, asked his team on the radio whether he should overtake his team mate, and was told "no". After remonstrating with the team, and being told "no" twice more, Rosberg accepted his fate, and cruised home in fourth place, behind Hamilton. Team Principal Ross Brawn's explanation on the radio to Rosberg was about fuel consumption (Rosberg would burn more fuel by the overtaking Hamilton - and both cars would burn more fuel by racing each other rather than cruising, and would risk not making it to the end of the race at all, effectively turning 27 points for the team into 0) and also about safety.
Whatever you think of this decision, and the way it affected the end result of the race (Hamilton and Rosberg finishing third and fourth, instead of fourth and third - and Mercedes getting 27 points, instead of 27 points), the way it was handled by the drivers showed maturity and class. Rosberg acted like a team player, and brought the car home in fourth place (which is still an excellent result, 12 World Championship points, and two places gained him his grid position) while Hamilton credited his team mate during his interview on the podium.
At Red Bull, however, it was a rather different story! After the final pit stops, Webber was ahead of Vettel, and the team instructed both their drivers to turn down their engines and bring the cars home safe and intact. Webber complied with this instruction; Vettel didn't.
Vettel attacked Webber, and passed him. Webber - understandably very angry about this - refused later to interact with Vettel, either before or during the podium ceremony. Vettel apologised during the drivers' press conference, but Webber refused to accept his apology. I'm not surprised.
As ever, the internet is awash with comments about this - and, as ever, a huge number of them are anti-team orders. "What's the problem?" people ask. "Vettel and Webber are racing drivers - we want to see them race, not just follow each other around!"
I want to see them race too - but not when one of them (Webber) has turned his engine down, under the impression that the other (Vettel) would do the same (as agreed), only to find he's being attacked and can't defend himself because he's running on less power. That's not fair - and it's not "real racing" either.
What Vettel did was not the "ruthless" drive of a Champion who "just wanted it do badly", as some people would have you believe - it was reckless, foolish, and above-all, disobedient. He gambled a guaranteed 43 points for the team on the chance that he might win it - as it happens, he did win, but if he had taken both the Red Bull cars out of the race (as in Turkey in 2010), the repercussions would've been huge.
Vettel, however, believed he had some sort of God-given right to win this race. Never was this more clear than when listening to his radio message to the team earlier in the race: "Mark is too slow - get him out of the way!"
He instructs the garage to issue team orders which work in his favour, yet petulantly ignores any that don't. He expects to be given a free pass to the lead of the race (which, in the end, was effectively what happened, as he made a pass on a team mate who was powerless to fight back) and he expects to be able to get away with disobeying his team boss, despite risking putting the whole dynamic of the team (and, therefore, their hopes of a fourth consecutive World Championship double) in jeopardy.
As I've said, Formula 1 is a long game. The race doesn't end at the Chequered flag in Malaysia - it ends in Brazil, in November. There are many, many factors to take into consideration during the season, and the fall-out from this incident is going to be one of them. Vettel may have grabbed the win here, but how will he feel in November if he watched another man walk away with the title of 2013 World Champion, and looks back at today's race thinking maybe this moment of hot-headedness was a turning point? Will it have been worth it? I doubt it.
I was never the biggest fan of Sebastian Vettel - but I have even less respect for him, after today's happenings. However, I won't deny that, from a fan's point-of-view, this certainly sets us up with a fascinating situation going into the Chinese Grand Prix in three weeks' time.
Unlike the Mercedes drivers, who handled their team orders with grace and maturity, and just knuckled down and got on with things, even if they weren't entirely happy about it, like true professionals, the Red Bull team is imploding in front of our eyes. It is impossible to know exactly how things will play out from here, but it looks as if the events of today's race will change the face of team orders at Red Bull for a good long time - possibly for the rest of the season. The consequences of this could be very far-reaching indeed. We could potentially end up with a situation where other teams are able to manage their cars to maximise their points haul, and to ensure the most efficient use possible of resources like gearboxes, fuel and tyres, while Red Bull are unable to do so. Yes, Sebastian Vettel's rashness today could come back to haunt him in a big way.
But back to the central issue - that of team orders - now...
Many people believe that without team orders, Formula 1 would be more exciting. Considering that they're all everyone's been talking about since this race, it seems that - on this occasion, at least - it was their very presence which has made it exciting.
Anyone who thinks that today's race was 'boring' because of team orders clearly didn't see the seemingly ongoing scrap for places between Lotus' Kimi Räikkönen and McLaren's Sergio Pérez, the drama of the front wing coming off Fernando Alonso's Ferrari on the first lap (and his inexplicable failure to come into the pit lane, resulting in a retirement from the race soon after), the chaos in the pit lane with Force India, Toro Rosso and McLaren all involved in some way or another, and the very promising showing from Jules Bianchi and his Marussia team.
The fact is that team orders are a part of the sport - whether you like it or not - but they are not a big enough issue on their own to "ruin" a whole sport. Formula 1 is a very complex business, and it has many elements which make it up - team orders are but one of these elements. My advice to anyone who hasn't been watching Formula 1 for very long, or who is thinking of watching it for the first time, is not to get too hung up on any one of these details in isolation, but to enjoy the glorious tapestry of the sport in its entirety.
Formula 1 may not be perfect - but, in my opinion, anyone who thinks it's boring must be watching with their eyes shut.
Saturday, 23 March 2013
San Marino Royale
England's chances of qualifying for the 2014 World Cup in Brazil were given a boost, following a good 8-0 win over San Marino last night. I remain, however, ashamed of the attitude of some England fans in the run-up to the game yesterday.
In sport, no one likes a sore loser - and no one likes a sore winner either. To be a sore winner before the game's even started is really bad. I found a lot of the comments about San Marino by English football fans to be incredibly arrogant, and also very unpleasant. Saying things like (for example) "we don't even need to play a goalkeeper tonight!" or "my mum could play for England tonight, and we'd still win!" is pretty poor, in my opinion.
I've met some considerable resistance in trying to explain this point-of-view over Twitter, with plenty of England fans not deigning to consider San Marino worthy of the England team's time. Believing others to be beneath you - and then pushing that view in their face - is not a nice way to behave, and certainly doesn't make England as a nation look good.
So, here's my take on things...
First of all - this is football, and anything can happen. Nothing is a foregone conclusion. Not to mention the fact that England tend to have a history of making rather a meal of matches which, on paper, they ought to win comfortably.
But most importantly, even you do think that England will walk it, and could win the game playing only eight players against San Marino's eleven (or something like that) you don't have to shout about it. How about staying classy, for once, and respecting the opponents? That kind of cocky strutting by fans before the game is exactly the kind of arrogance which makes England (and English supports) look bad to other footballing nations. There's simply no need for it.
The argument that "it's not arrogance if it's true" doesn't really hold water either. You could go to an ATM, withdraw £100 in cash, and then wave it in the face of the nearest homeless person, singing "I've got money and you haven't, ha ha ha ha ha!" - that would be true, but it would also make you come across as vulgar and gauche and generally quite an unpleasant person.
The fact that England did win 8-0 I can ascribe only to the fact that within the team the players and coaches were professional enough not to think they could beat San Marino even if they were on Space Hoppers, and still respected the game enough to play properly and do the basics right.
I'm proud of our team, of course, and I'm very glad we won. But English football fans who persist in such cockiness running up to a game do neither themselves, nor the team, any favours at all.
In sport, no one likes a sore loser - and no one likes a sore winner either. To be a sore winner before the game's even started is really bad. I found a lot of the comments about San Marino by English football fans to be incredibly arrogant, and also very unpleasant. Saying things like (for example) "we don't even need to play a goalkeeper tonight!" or "my mum could play for England tonight, and we'd still win!" is pretty poor, in my opinion.
I've met some considerable resistance in trying to explain this point-of-view over Twitter, with plenty of England fans not deigning to consider San Marino worthy of the England team's time. Believing others to be beneath you - and then pushing that view in their face - is not a nice way to behave, and certainly doesn't make England as a nation look good.
So, here's my take on things...
First of all - this is football, and anything can happen. Nothing is a foregone conclusion. Not to mention the fact that England tend to have a history of making rather a meal of matches which, on paper, they ought to win comfortably.
But most importantly, even you do think that England will walk it, and could win the game playing only eight players against San Marino's eleven (or something like that) you don't have to shout about it. How about staying classy, for once, and respecting the opponents? That kind of cocky strutting by fans before the game is exactly the kind of arrogance which makes England (and English supports) look bad to other footballing nations. There's simply no need for it.
The argument that "it's not arrogance if it's true" doesn't really hold water either. You could go to an ATM, withdraw £100 in cash, and then wave it in the face of the nearest homeless person, singing "I've got money and you haven't, ha ha ha ha ha!" - that would be true, but it would also make you come across as vulgar and gauche and generally quite an unpleasant person.
The fact that England did win 8-0 I can ascribe only to the fact that within the team the players and coaches were professional enough not to think they could beat San Marino even if they were on Space Hoppers, and still respected the game enough to play properly and do the basics right.
I'm proud of our team, of course, and I'm very glad we won. But English football fans who persist in such cockiness running up to a game do neither themselves, nor the team, any favours at all.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)