UKC

Well we're not letting that thread die now are we?

I'm glad England went behind yesterday almost as much as the rest of the performance. I think if we'd gone into the final without having had to fight back it would have been a massive question mark over the team's resilience. Passed with flying colours last night I reckon.

As an Aston Villa supporter, I feel for Grealish not getting as much game time as he might have expected, but positionally he's up against Sterling and I have to appreciate Southgate's ruthlessness in playing to a system rather than picking 11 players and hammering them into a team. That's how we used to end up with Scholes on the left wing and no cohesion. Southgate would have dropped 2 of Scholes, Gerrard and Lampard and played an actual left winger instead. It's actually refreshing.

In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:

It was a pretty disappointing performance really. For most of the second half and extra time we had all the possession and did nothing with it. Sideways passes between CBs and deep midfielders before eventually hoofing it up the pitch like good old England. 

There were a few moments when we got the ball out wide in advanced positions and there wasn't anyone within 18 yards of the goal to put it in to. 

We have got to be a lot better than that to avoid embarrassment in the final but Italy have been the team of the tournament and deserve to win it.

In reply to PaulJepson:

My Dad was ranting at the telly in extra time for all the back passing. Yes, we had scored and wanted to keep possession, but I was listening to the second half of normal time and the commentators were saying the same thing - Denmark looked knackered and spent but we lacked the killer instinct.

In reply to PaulJepson:

I thought we played well, especially extra time but from half time onwards. Schmeichel was their man of the match for a reason. We started off terrified and their goal helped settle the team down and just start playing.

re the penalty it wasn’t a dive. Sterling gets underneath players, he’s short and runs at players. I think it was soft but it was also never going to be overturned as there was certainly contact, minimal but there was clearly contact with the legs and then he’s knocked. Those are never going to be judged as clear errors by the VAR.

however I thought the earlier one on Kane was an obvious penalty, he played the ball, the defender didn’t.

In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:

I've no idea what makes a thread expire but there are 1 or 2 still going that could do with archiving. 

I didn't like Grealish in the Prem, felt he was a bit of a diva and selfish. But I've warmed to him here and would like to see more.

His sad little boyish face when he got subbed off last night after being subbed on......somebody needs to give him a hug and tell him it's not his fault

In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:

Yeah credit to Southgate, sterling was a big gamble but so was Sako. Sancho and Rashford has better domestic seasons but they’ve both been good. I thought Sancho was unlucky to not start after his Ukraine performance but likewise it would be harsh to have not started Sako after he missed a game for a Knock. Rashford plays too much so looked dead by the end of the season.

he may be a lucky manager but all his calls have come off. Maguire has been excellent since coming back in and Sterling has been England’s best player.

grealish and Foden both played well when they came on too.

In reply to MonkeyPuzzle: Really interesting interview with Rio Ferdinand, Frank Lampard and Steven Gerrard in here, and well worth 10 minutes of your time.  youtube.com/watch?v=kRdbUfcBPZw& . Comments from that are that Southgate has done a very good job - he's got a team that works as a team, and has a plan and that shouldn't be taken for granted.

To PaulJepson - maybe your dad doesn't like it but we're in a final.  If we went for the killer blow maybe we'd have conceded late and not be in a final.  Sometimes effective isn't pretty

In reply to PaulJepson:

I thought it was ok to be honest - I remember watching England in the past and being continually exasperated about cheaply giving the ball away. The penalty was soft but there were also a few other times where Denmark were a fingertip away from conceding a goal. 

As for Italy deserving to win, they will only deserve to win if they win the final! Part of being the best team is finishing the job when the pressure is at its highest. 

Maybe it will become known at the Covid-derby?

In reply to Richard Horn:

I think we're very unlikely to have the same amount of possession against Italy and we didn't look dangerous with what we did have. Against Ukraine we looked a lot better and took a more 'Man City' approach of running at them until they were terrified. The first 5 or 10 minutes last night we looked the same but then we took our foot off the gas and let them get back in to it. 

In reply to PaulJepson:

I don't know about disappointing, but it was certainly difficult to get into the game. The difference with this England side is I didn't find myself losing all hope when we went behind and sure enough the team kicked on from there.

I'd prefer Southgate to be less cautious (taking Grealish off when we were one up and completely dominant I thought was too negative) but he keeps getting the results, so that pretty much shuts me up.

Well, Italy more than anyone can appreciate learning how to win whether you deserve it or not. I expect us to match up their wing backs like we did the Germans and use Sterling and Saka to get after their older back line on the break.

In reply to Richard Horn:

That's the biggest difference for me. We look more like Spain than the hoofers of old. That 50+ pass sequence was terrific to see.

In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:

I think Sancho will get in ahead of Saka for a pair of fresh legs but I hope you're right re: a back 3/5. 

In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:

Actually look at all the opposition that Italy have faced in this 2 year unbeaten run of 37 games, mostly 2nd rate teams. They drew with Ukraine and other decent teams including Spain in their semi that needed penalties. So perhaps not so daunting as their reputation would suggest?

In reply to Sean Kelly:

Italy are definitely beatable. If Spain had a striker who could hit a cow's arse with a banjo we'd be playing them instead. They definitely play some lovely football though - watching them pass it out of defence again and again against the Spanish was a sight to behold, but every single England player will have played against a high press week in and week out in the Premier League. Both Italy and England have played possession and on the counter at times so I'm looking forward to an interesting game.

In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:

I'm quite hopeful our front players pace will trouble the old boys at the back for italy. It may benefit us to be under the cosh at times, and play on the break.

Kane was a lot better at holding the ball up and playing in others against Denmark than in previous games I thought, if he can do that again, I think we could do well.

Just need to limit the occasional slightly panicked errors at the back, we wont keep getting away with them forever. 

In reply to The Norris:

I agree. As others have said I think a starting line up similar to the one against Germany is likely. I would be concerned about the quality on the ball of Rice/Phillips and think that Mount/Foden is the future, but not for. Sunday. 

I think this is key. Before the Denmark game and given Spain's relative success will a false 9 I would have even considered dropping Kane. 

From. A Welsh perspective I don't understand the criticism of the controlled extra time percormance. Italy (granted not at full strength) didn't manage to score against a 10 man Wales for over half an hour, are they worried? Ask the French about how they should have played the last 15 minutes against Switzerland. 

As a City fan (as others have said) delighted by Sterling's performances. England fans must be delighted by both the strength in depth and the way players have not underperformed when given an opportunity. Similarly to what MP has said about Grelish, I didn't think Foden played poorly, but can't make a really strong case for him starting. In the last few weeks which defender has been most effective against Sterling,. Reece James CLF?

As a (relative) neutral,  I still hold the 1982 Italian side responsible for setting back the game I loved as a kid about 30 years, so would quite like to see England win. 

In reply to RobAJones:

Reece James was on loan at Wigan and was brilliant as I’m biased. But I wouldn’t pick him. 

On a separate note, my son has a better football analysis then me, he says:   Denmark played high up the pitch meaning it was very hard for us to pass out from the back, hence lots of long balls from Pickers. This meant we couldn’t get into our flow. Good strategy from Denmark. Italy love playing it out from the back and may not play as far up the pitch. This may be better for us. Denmark did a reasonable job of nullifying the Sterling/Shaw combo.  Italy will need to do this.  Sancho has more attacking skills etc than Saka.  So if Italy try and hound out Sterling/Shaw we can switch play over to Sancho.  So play Sancho and not Saka.

Kane actually looks rested. I wonder if he was under instruction to take it easy in those first few games. He was excellent last night, holding the ball well, drawing players onto him and drawing fouls. Pickers makes me panicky. But he puts a smile on my face!  

In reply to Toerag:

Denmark, quality side, forced us to play sideways and backwards - credit to them. The ITV commentators are shite and just say what they think the viewers want to hear. Standard practice I suppose, on TV channels are nearly as bad. 
 

In reply to Bottom Clinger:

Which highlights England's strength in depth, both CL final right backs and one who contributed to Athletico winning the Spanish league. 

Which is why I think the future is Foden/Mount partly because of their ability to receive the ball in tight spaces. They need to improve their defensive play, perhaps WC qualifying is their time to demonstrate it. 

The combativity of Rice/Phillips will be key to stopping them getting too far up field. The referee might have a part to play here. 

I tend to agree, but again, that both have made an impact, and can rightfully be disappointed to miss out, shows both England's strength in depth and that players have not underperformed when given an opportunity 

Hell of a call if that's correct, but it does fit with the evidence. 

But he is probably the weak link in your team. Now he'll probably make 3 saves in the shootout. 

In reply to RobAJones:

Re Pickers: you can see it now, he does some flippy flappy own goal to give them an equaliser, then as you say, saves 3!  

In reply to Bottom Clinger:

He has won the Golden Gloves of the tournament - so don't be too hard on him!

In reply to Babika:

Yep, he's been mostly excellent and he was probably our best passer of the ball in the first two games. He needs to have a quiet chat with himself I think before the final. We could do without a "Classic England Howler" on the biggest stage.

In reply to RobAJones:

Admittedly I am generally clueless, but I remember watching the Italy/Brazil semi-final, which I think goes down as one of the classics of end to end attacking football. Or were Italy forced to change their ways and attack because of repeatedly going a goal down?

In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:

OK I'm going to stick my neck out:

1 - 1 England win on penalties  

We score first, Italy make a very late equaliser taking it to extra time and pens. 

I may be thinking with my heart here but its definitely possible. 

In reply to Robert Durran:

If you are talking about the 3-2 from 1982, then Italy kept going ahead in that one and Brazil fought back until they ran out of time. I can't remember that much any more but I suspect the last 15 minutes were classic Italian defending against a team that had swept all before them up to that point in the tournament. In that sense, it was Italy as we know and love them.

Alan

In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:

One of the great media inspired myths of modern football is that Pickford's passing and distribution is good.

In reply to Bottom Clinger:

He's a lunatic and not in a nice way

In reply to Skip:

I watched it with my own eyes but maybe the media myths have made them go funny.

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

The 1982 Italy team stunk out the group stages, kicked Maradona around the park for 90 minutes, and then defeated the most joyous team that’s ever taken the field. 
Fair enough, they did beat Brazil in a stone cold classic, and had the decency to make sure Schumacher doesn’t have a World Cup winners medal. But they still killed the dream. 

In reply to stevieb:

Without winning a game against Cameroon and Peru

I was going to say that the "lesser" teams were much weaker then, but looking at the number of European /Cup Winners Cup winners in the Scotland team, that were lucky only to conceed 4, I'm not sure 

That is my memory. They were the last team (probably until Spain more recently) to turn up to a tournament with the belief that they were able to beat anybody else by scoring more goals than the opposition. 

In reply to stevieb:

So not all bad then ?

In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:

The CEDB has decided to fine the English Football Association €30,000 for the use of laser pointer, disturbances during the national anthems and setting of fireworks.

https://disciplinary.uefa.com/updates/

In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:

So long as they have ‘laser pen’ an own goal and a soft penalty again they should do fine ; )

In reply to Tobes:

Nearly 60% possession, more than three times the shots and more than three times the shots on target again will help as well.

In reply to Tobes:

Suprised England bashers keep going on about the own goal. It was obviously going to be put in the net by Sterling had the defender not stuck his leg out. There was nothing lucky about it.

Alan

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

Also we felt hard done by the soft FK against Luke Shaw leading to Italy's goal and the Kane penalty that wasn't awarded. Arguably England was denied not finishing the game in normal time. 

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

Lighten up ; )

i’ve heard plenty about the ‘soft penalty’ but very little about the own goal tbh - yes it was inevitable ‘probably’ - 

ah possession stats and technical break down ‘bants’ - and there’s still time to mentioned 1966!

In reply to Tobes:

Yeah, I could have said that if it wasn't down to an own goal and a soft penalty England would have lost but I don't believe that hence the stats.

Ultimately, I don't really give a shit because we're in the final!

In reply to FreshSlate:

Not forgetting that the referee should really have disallowed the Danish goal. As this excerpt from Rule 13 explains:

“If, when a free kick is taken, an attacking team player is less than 1 m from a ‘wall’ formed by three or more defending team players, an indirect free kick is awarded.”

In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:

First final in 55 years, in case you hadn't heard.

It's (1966) on Channel 4 at this very moment.

In reply to Maggot:

It's terrific to watch. Alan Ball is fantastic. We are 2:1 up and 10 minutes to go. We're surely there...

In reply to mbh:

Bugger! WG equalise with seconds to go. It's like watching Titanic. 

Great to watch these names from the past. They could play.

In reply to mbh:

I know the ball is bloody awful and the pitch is quite heavy, but watching this game really shows how much the game has moved on. What a howler for the first goal.

In reply to The New NickB:

I only saw the second half, from shortly before Martin Peters' goal that made it 2:1 to us. 

Perhaps you can enlighten me with detailed analytics and show me the error of my ways, but even if you do I still will have found this a thrilling match to watch, as an England fan who has watched half a lifetime of dross, with only occasional highlights (Netherlands 4:1, Germany 5:1 and now, our current team). Has it really moved on (Puskas & co weren't so bad, nor was Pele's side of 1970), or do we just now have a good team?

In reply to mbh:

In a purely physical sense yes, but probably less than other sports. Transport the Welsh Rugby team of the '70's into a modern match and I would fear for their wellbeing. With Cav"s exploits at the TDF, almost everyone is agreeing that Merckx was the greatest cyclist of all time, but his average speed was over 5kph slower than the current peleton. Not sure there is much point in making direct comparisons and certainly skill levels and entertainment value are much more subjective opinions. 

In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:

Very true. 

I had an Italian lunch today and spent a long time chatting to the waiters about tomorrow's footie. 

One quite wisely said "you have a very good team - but you also need to have luck"

I think England have everything in place to win tomorrow. We just need the luck as well. 

In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:

Ten

(someone had to do it)

In reply to Maggot:

And The Darkest Hour on BBC1. Coincidence?

In reply to Babika:

Spinazzola being out is a huge chunk of luck for us but not a very nice one for them. I genuinely don't mind too much if we lose but go toe-to-toe with the Italians all the way. To win would be beyond imagining. 

In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:

Nine

I will get bored doing this, but feel I should show the same level of dedication as the players. 

In reply to Bottom Clinger:

I don't believe you.

In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:

Eight

In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:

Seven (on time this time).

In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:

Six......

In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:

5

In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:

4....

In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:

3...

In reply to Bottom Clinger:

I think that "drawing fouls" is a shameful way of making progress in a game but then I'm not a football fan.

However I will still be watching. my main worry is that we lose because of a penalty award like the one which got us a place in the final, because the wave of hypocritical outrage will be mighty.

In reply to Bottom Clinger:

Come on willgriggsonfire we need your prediction! 

I'm going 1-1 with Eng win on penalties. We need more virtual bets as the countdown clicks on.... 

In reply to Babika:

2-1 England. Kane and Stones (header). In normal time. 

In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:

2..

In reply to Bottom Clinger:

I’m having my pre-match bath, that’s why I was late just then. Risky business hovering your phone over the soapy suds. 

In reply to Bottom Clinger:

Nearly missed it there, m'Lady.

In reply to Maggot:

Sorry Parker. 

In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:

1.

In reply to whoever:

Cooking tea whilst trying to coordinate the countdown ain’t easy.  Hope Southgate and his team appreciate what I’m doing. 

In reply to Bottom Clinger:

I'm pleased Trippier is starting.

But I'd really like a line up of 12 as I don't want to drop Saka

In reply to Bottom Clinger:

Yeaaaaah!!!

Forza Italia 😉 

In reply to Graeme G:

is it the blue shirts that confuse you?

In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:

Southgate birds are go !!!

C’mon England !!  

In reply to Bottom Clinger:

Bloody Hell!!

In reply to Graeme G:

Oh dear!!! 😆😆😆😆😆😆

In reply to Maggot:

All part of the strategy. Lull them into a false sense of security 

In reply to MonkeyPuzzle: is Jose commenting anywhere?  

Really be fantastic to win this and leave the ghost of 1966 behind 

In reply to Graeme G:

Is that Scotland's usual strategy? 🤔😆😆

In reply to Maggot:

😂

Although, still the only team unbeaten by England?

In reply to Graeme G:

We didn't want to leave you totally humiliated

In reply to Maggot:

Thanks. That’s appreciated. I doubt we’ll ever be able to return the favour

In reply to Graeme G:

I must say, Leeds strip really suits Luke Shaw.

In reply to Maggot:

Yeeeeeeessss!!! 

In reply to Graeme G:

Plenty of time and il Azzurri have just taken their biggest threat off, things are looking up!

In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:

Think the mafia has had a chat with the ref. 

In reply to summo:

Here we go, the refs fault already  

In reply to summo:

4 yellow cards for Italy - time to start dishing out the reds. That neck tackle on Saka was a shocker

In reply to JoshOvki:

I'll accept rough tackles, playing for the ball, jostling, mutual shoving... but blatantly pulling a player to ground? 

In reply to summo:

Yeah that was pretty rough, not sure what counts as a red in football though.

In reply to JoshOvki:

Something that just couldn't be construed as remotely accidental? 

In reply to summo:

Yeah. That was shocking. Can’t believe it wasn’t a red.

In reply to summo:

Be prepared for a 30 minute master class in cheating.

In reply to summo:

Just google it

 

Law 12 of the Laws of the Game lists the categories of misconduct for which a player may be sent off. These are:

• denying an obvious goal-scoring opportunity with a handball (this does not apply to a goalkeeper within their penalty area)
• denying an obvious goal-scoring opportunity with a foul (unless the referee awards a penalty and it was an attempt to play the ball)
• serious foul play
• biting or spitting at someone
• violent conduct
• using offensive, insulting or abusive language and/or action(s)
• receiving a second caution in the same match

I guess it is very close to serious foul play

In reply to Babika:

I agree, I wouldn't have been surprised with a red card for that one. Even the replay (when sometimes you see someone is actually making a meal out of it) looked bad.

In reply to JoshOvki:

Problem is if you let a few things go on both sides that could have been yellow, it kind of makes it harder to get the red out. 

In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:

Oops. A little squeak of excitement on the Italy goal means I’m in the spare room tonight. Should England win I might get a reprieve. Alternatively a good night’s sleep.

In reply to summo:

It could have easily been a red (I am surprised it wasn't). Also seems incredibly careless of the Italian player to let that happen that close to the end when the ball was going out and it was soon going to be extra time.

In reply to JoshOvki:

It was a pull of the shirt, it was always just a yellow. Bad but a pull of the shirt is never a red unless it's to prevent a goal scoring opportunity. It looked far worse than it was.

In reply to JoshOvki:

It would be close to a red in rugby

In reply to Dr.S at work:

More my kind of sport

What's wrong with the f*cking crowd?

Get some noise going!!!

In reply to Roadrunner6:

Can you explain why that was a yellow to Italy? I thought slide tackles were bad, and the other fella was going for the ball but the guys leg slid in, no sure how he could have avoided it

In reply to Maggot:

The crowd are nervous as hell. I’ve stopped enjoying it. That tackle on Grealish - red in Prem league. 
 

Oh, some subs coming up....

In reply to JoshOvki:

Probably because foot angled up, heading in with studs leading. 

In reply to JoshOvki:

Jorginho? Because he stepped in. Studs up, he bounced off the ball but you've no control so it's dangerous. Clattenberg actually says its not a yellow.

In reply to summo:

Thank you both (Summo + Roadrunner) makes sense

In reply to JoshOvki:

I’m nervous as hell.  Hate this. 

In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:

Good for fixing school meals, but what on earth was that rubbish. 

In reply to Bottom Clinger:

Rashford: you can’t bring players on just to score a penalty. 

In reply to Bottom Clinger:

Sancho as well. Mistake by Southgate, probs cost us the game p

In reply to Bottom Clinger:

Is that it coming home? 😮

In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:

Well done Italy!

In reply to Graeme G:

Been deported from the UK, had to go to Italy instead

In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:

Foolish mistake, putting the kid in, so much pressure on that young lad to live with. Kind of thing that sends them off the rails gazza style. 

In reply to Ridge:

Slightly phew. Just couldn’t face the crowing despite the class of the team.

In reply to Bottom Clinger:

Three young uns taking penalties in a bug final?. Bad mistake. 

Italy probably edged it. Southgate has been great but got his subs wrong. England’s strength is its bench, but you can’t bring them on right at the end. Oh well. World Cup next......  

In reply to Bottom Clinger:

I don't know why they bring them on with seconds to go. At least give them some time to get into it.

But tbf they deserved that over 120 minutes. ET was pretty even but England scored and got dictated to for the rest of the 90 minutes - well until Chiesa's injury.

In reply to Bottom Clinger:

Forget the penalties... that's a lottery. Just like the World Cup... someone needs to tell Southgate the game is longer than 45 minutes. One shot after 2 minutes and that was it until Kane took his penalty.

In reply to Bottom Clinger:

Bring on Qatar! 

At least its only 1 year not 2 to wait

In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:

I feel sorry for the English Team because they played really well and did a great effort all the way through. But I am glad they didn't win otherwise we would be hearing about this forever.

In reply to Bottom Clinger:

I agree. Man U are going to be the pariahs next year. What was he doing dicking about and hit the post and 73 million well spent. Rubbish

In reply to Babika:

Southgate should’ve brought Ben Watson on. He scored against Mancinis side at Wembley...

Italy played really well.  Hard pressing, great passes. If they had a player like Kane they’d have thrashed us 4-1 or summat  

In reply to JoshOvki:

I'm gutted but amused that all the moaning whingeing anti-football anti-England crowd are going to have to put up with this all again next year. 

Positivity is so much nicer

In reply to Maggot:

Their players dicked about.. when it comes off nobody minds.

In reply to Babika:

Looks like trouble is Leicester Square..

Mates sent pictures of people hammered in pubs at 1pm. It's going to be a messy night..

In reply to Babika:

I am neither anti-English or anti-Football, I am anti-overhyped and hearing about the same stuff again and again #2worldwars1worldcup 

I am REALLY happy for Italy, they also played fanstatic games and won with a hostile crowd 

In reply to Maggot:

I do get a bit pissed off when a saved penalty is described (by commentators) as a missed penalty. A missed penalty is when the ball is off target, otherwise it's a goal or a saved penalty. There was only 1 missed penalty (which hit the post), but out of the 10, 4 were saved. Neither side did a good job of penalty taking, Italy just happened to be slightly less worse than England's.

In reply to Roadrunner6:

I've been in central London all day and it was just loudness, not aggression or violence anywhere. 

Seems pretty subdued now

In reply to JoshOvki:

I think England should make finals every time. 65k on the bike and I only encountered 5 cars. If they could make the finals every weekend that would be great.

In reply to JoshOvki:

Would you have been REALLY happy if England won? 

I believe the best team won (though 5 yellows v zero yellows suggests the dirtiest team also won). 

I enjoy good football - just hate whingeing by people who want to spoil enjoyment of others

In reply to Babika:

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/carnage-fights-wembley-bottles-leicester...

A welsh mate posted this.

In reply to Babika:

I would have been REALLY happy for the English players if they had won. Are you a little bit upset your team lost?

In reply to JoshOvki:

I'm gutted. I said that earlier. 

In reply to Babika:

You’re right. And I am so utterly positive that Italy won 😀

In reply to Michael Hood:

I was behind the goal at the 96 euro semi final Czech v France at Old Trafford, when you see it in real time and are there, not scoring is for numbties. It's an open goal.

Rashford f*cked up ponsing about

In reply to Roadrunner6:

You’re right. Most commentators have banged on about our bench but Southgate got that wrong- bring them in earlier like Mancini did. 
And Italy had some of their best players injured. 

In reply to Babika:

It is one of the best teams England has put forward in a long time, and they played a cracking game (from someone that only watches World Cups/Euros etc, I am not a football buff). I don't take joy that they lost, but I am glad the "British" press won't be harping on about this for the next year

In reply to Maggot:

Well that makes you experienced!

some of the greatest players in the game have missed penalties. Maybe it’s harder than you think..

In reply to Graeme G:

FTFY.

In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:

I made the mistake of thinking after the first half that this was in the bag. Unfortunately they did exactly what they did against Croatia in the WC semi-went ahead early then went out to lunch.

In reply to DaveHK:

The very worst thing about the whole affair, is that we're going to have to put up with listening to THAT sodding song again, for Christ knows how long, over the next bunch of tournaments. 

In reply to Roadrunner6:

Their centre backs were brilliant, through the tournament. So whilst our young uns will improve, be great to see Stones and Maguire and others with rugged and scared bald heads gained through battling games, and age. 

In reply to Maggot:

A really well taken penalty doesn't get saved, period. Kane and Maguire's were of that order 

Pickford saved two fairly well taken penalties, which was a mixture of skill and luck.

The Italian keeper saved two poorly taken penalties (or was one reasonable, can't remember, but at least one was poor).

The miss against the post was embarrassing. If you're going to dick about to make the keeper commit themselves, then at least get the ball in the f***ing net. 

In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:

498 days.........................................................

In reply to Roadrunner6:

Pressure with a capital P.

However much people might complain about penalties being a lottery, you've got to admit that it's an exciting spectacle.

In reply to Roadrunner6:

Obviously there is a chance the goalie will get the occasional save, basically by pure chance. Otherwise it's an open  goal. I'm talking about fannying about like Rashford, just boot it as hard as you possibly can.

Correction: it was Saka, Arsenal are pariahs as well !

In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:

I didn't end up seeing the game after all.

I am a dad now though.

What a day...

In reply to JoshOvki:

Italy were better. Beat team of the tournament. I’ve heard none of this two world wars (what radio station do you listen to? Must be shite). 
And hostile crowd?  You’re have a laugh.  Italians are world leaders at hostile crowds. Apart from X, Y and Z countries. 

In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:

Woooooaaaawww !!!!

Massive congratulations. 

In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:

Fantastic news - huge congratulations

In reply to squarepeg:

The ManU fanbois don't like us riff-raff criticising their glory boys.

In reply to Michael Hood:

Someone’s got to lose.

sports great for those moments because people crumple under pressure. Rugby kickers, snooker players, tennis players.  

I doubt it helped being brought on so late, Rashfords a decent penalty record. 
 

but England were dictated to. They settled during Chiesa’s injury and it was more even. We should have changed it and got fresh legs on and gone for it. It reminded me of watching United when you can see what’s wrong but Solskjaer is too slow to change. First half was ok but the second half they just had us pinned in attack v defense. It’s hard to make changes when you’re winning but that goal was a matter of time.
 

In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:

Welcome to hell! 🙂🙃🙂

I'm outnumbered 4 to 1 F to M

In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:

Congratulations!

In reply to Michael Hood:

Pressure could have been reduced by bringing them on 15 mins before the end. England had failed to score after that first goal, there was nothing indicate they were likely to score in extra time. 

The potential penalty takers would have had some ball time and settled into the on pitch atmosphere more. 

Penalties are a partial lottery. But as a few proved, if the ball has the speed even if the keeper goes the same way, they'll be too late. 

In reply to Michael Hood:

I agree with all this, but in terms of the penalty shootout I think Southgate has to take the responsibility, not the players. Putting Rashford and Sancho on in the last minute just to take a penalty heaped miles of extra pressure on them. Especially in the final after both have played a bit part piece throughout. He effectively defined their sense of worth for the entire tournament in that one kick before they stepped up, far more so than for a player who had been on the pitch for longer. It put masses of extra pressure on them in that situation.

Anyway, nice to get to the final and he did a good job for most of the tournament. It felt like a game of two halves that all depended on Mancini working out how to control and counter our wing backs. They couldn't deal with the. For much of the first half but whatever he changed at half time (partly a roaming Chiesa) worked  and they were the better team overall. We were lucky not to lose in the 90 minutes really.

In reply to Bottom Clinger:

It was a classic display of our old Bumkick Spirit

In reply to Si dH:

Agree completely, I really felt for sancho and rashford, and saka having to take the last pen at such a young age seems quite heartless. I'm sure Henderson can hit a penalty and has the experience to deal with the consequence of a big miss you would imagine. 

Very sad to hear about all the racist abuse of the 3 that missed. 

In reply to Maggot:

Christ. I feel bad winding you up about last nights game. I’m outnumbered 3 to 1, and that’s bad enough. You clearly need some joy in your life, I almost wish England had won. 

In reply to The Norris:

Where exactly did the abuse occur?

Looking at Twitter I see a lot of activist-sorts claiming racist abuse and shit behaviour was rife. 

The main evidence doing the rounds last night was footage of English supporters brawling with Italian fans trying to leave the stadium....except it wasn't, and was instead English fans attacking a crowd of non-ticket holders (white and likely also English) prior to the game who stormed and broke through the gates.  Yet the footage has been used extensively online accompanied by claims it shows evidence of just how terrible England is and that fans are racist little thugs. 

Likewise, if it is screen shots from snapchat or Twitter of people making racist comments then I also remain sceptical there is a notable racism problem here.  Given these are online platforms it could be any one of 6 billion people on the planet making these comments and could just as easily emanate from Russian troll farms, already known to be rife and hellbent on stirring up division.

There's a risk that in trying to take a high minded stance here you actually feed the problem; stirring up distrust, leading people to think the country is against them, that the world is a far worse, hate-filled and antagonistic place than it really is.  Fvck England, fvck whites and fvck the English being the sorts of refrains in response to this.  If only 0.0001% of 6 billion people have malicious intent online, the equivalent of scrawling a message on a toilet wall, and there is a corresponding competitive rush by another group of folks online to seek this stuff out, screen capture it before it is deleted, and disseminate it with the claim this is evidence of England being a racist, nasty and unpleasant place, then it's not altogether clear to me who is more guilty of spreading hate. 

In reply to Graeme G:

Chill yer boots dude, I've  got my furry feline friends that keep me at peace! 😀

I get more upset seeing Leeds getting a nil nil draw on a drizzly November evening.

Oh, and see my other thread 😀

In reply to The Norris:

Since he insisted on taking one in the friendly against Romania and missed it, while Rashford scored one, I know who I'd want first in the queue.

In reply to Andy Clarke:

Didn't Rashford try some party trick that time? 

In reply to RentonCooke:

"Looking at Twitter I see a lot of activist-sorts claiming racist abuse and shit behaviour was rife."

As opposed to the racist-sorts claiming it wasn't? 

Not much point commenting on the rest of your apologistic twaddle, other than to point out the absurd deflection and transference in your rant.  What's that expression regarding certain individual's that doth protest too much?

In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:

Blessing in disguise, the loss. We don't want to peak too soon. The WC is the real prize, the Euros merely some fancy decoy. The trajectory is clear. Semis, 2018; final, 2021; winners, 2022. 

In reply to Blanche DuBois:

I can always count on you for those sorts of comments.

This morning I have to console my step-son who was of the apparent belief "this f*cking country hates us".  All a result of what he was seeing on Twitter. 

We essentially had to have another of those birds-and-the-bees conversations about social media, me trying to explain, mostly unsuccessfully, how its operates and that it isn't reality. 

As what he is seeing on his Twitter feed, trending under the tags #disgusting or #racists?

We both looked at it together.  It isn't a stream of racist abuse targeting black people. 

Rather it is people like David Lammy, and thousands of others like him, resending the same small number of screen grabs, taken from mostly unverified Twitter accounts that posted racist comments, and accompanying them with claims that this is why we all have to support BLM and the insinuation that racism is rife.

What is f*cking up my son right now, filling him with resentment at the world and a desire to give up on it, is not the small number of racists that exist in this country, whom he never actually meets, never actually sees, and who are almost entirely marginalised. 

It is the race-baiting arseholes, determined to stir up a problem of racism, determined to tell him it is everywhere.  Telling him it is hopeless and he is doomed to failure, always going to be at a disadvantage because the entire system is aligned fully against him and racism is rife.  That he might as well give up now.

These people are no different to me than the ones claiming every act of crime from a migrant or minority is evidence of something far deeper.  No different.  Exactly the fvcking same.

They're not making those claims for my son's good.  They're doing it for their own political gain.  Or, perhaps in the case of people like yourself, as performative virtue signalling - whatever the cost.  To the point that politicians, in turn, need to make a scene about a small number of Twitter posts because if they don't, then that will be seized upon as more evidence of racism.

I see first hand that the narrative, rather than the problem itself, is where the problem is and the direct impact it is having on a kid's life chances.  But knock yourself out if going around trying to highlight racism everywhere you look makes you feel like a do-gooding crusader - even if you are just creating the problem rather than solving it.

In reply to RentonCooke:

Do you think the racists are regular readers of David Lammy's Twitter feed? 

In reply to RentonCooke:

Given that post, your small number of racists clearly aren't that marginalised.

In reply to GrahamD:

?

In reply to RentonCooke:

This wasn’t on David Lammy’s Twitter feed.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-manchester-57803161
 

are the BBC ‘race baiting’, or ‘virtue signalling’ by running this story?
 

should they not be reporting this?

In reply to RentonCooke:

I'm saying your post reads like an attempt at un marginalising racists.

In reply to summo:

Not really. Just a bit of a shuffle.

In reply to no_more_scotch_eggs:

By all means, report it.  But contextualise it; single, sporadic, events in a country of 50+ million people, accompanied by overwhelming levels of support for the players...but I guess those headlines don't make waves. 

Don't though, tout every single scrawl on Twitter as proof of endemic racism.  Nor every time someone graffitis some profanity on a bus-shelter or billboard as evidence of endemic hatred against some aspect of someone's genetics.  There must be short memories here, but Beckham, and images of him, were trashed after he was seen to have lost England the trophy.  The world is full of idiots, especially when people are blind-drunk and angry, and it only takes 1 in a million.  Extrapolating out from that that we have some nationwide problem, especially as that seems to go hand-in-hand with pointing fingers at large swathes of the population (amazing how often Brexit, Tory voters, and "little Englanders" were being piled on last night as the culprits) is stupid and divisive itself. 

In reply to GrahamD:

My posts are my experience of raising a black son. 

I have zero interest in un-marginalising any racist.

What I do have an interest in is giving my son the best chance in life possible.  Chances that in the last two years have been thoroughly undermined by people, predominantly white and middle class, determined to appear virtuous and, more cynically, by people pushing a political agenda.

In reply to Lankyman:

"Pugna Magna Victi Sumus"

In reply to Andy Clarke:

I'm not arguing that rashford was a good pick to take a pen. Penalties are a lottery and taking the last of the 5 is an immensely high pressure situation. 

To me, I thought it was a lot to put on a 19 year old (saka). He is very capable and I'm sure he scores more than he misses, but I'm sure the same can be said for most players, hence why I think the last pen would've been better given to someone who may have more experience of extremely high pressure situations, and who you would hope has more mental strength to deal with the potential consequences of missing.

Maybe I'm over-sympathising! Maybe saka feels fine!

In reply to RentonCooke:

If I were you or your son I’d try not to be angry at the overt racists on Twitter. Nor the ‘race-baiting arseholes’ who are trying to call them out on it.

I’d be angry at the Tory politicians who, despite being fully aware that BAME people have far worse life outcomes (even though they largely out-perform their white counterparts at school), chose to endorse a report claiming that the UK should be regarded as a ‘model’ country.

Your son probably “never actually sees” the racists because they’re the ones (consciously or unconsciously) chucking his CV in the bin if his name doesn’t fit. Unfortunately the statistics don’t lie, and all the metrics show that there are large discrepancies between real-world outcomes for black and other ethnic minority people vs white people. If you and your son don’t want to be exposed to it on Twitter and other social media at least you can just disengage from it if you choose. You can’t do that with every other aspect of life.

In reply to ali k:

Who are the overt racists on Twitter?  

Here's a decent example of some of the evidence (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9779863/Its-not-stand-Gareth-South...). 

Unverified individuals with the user names like "Rigober24042520" and "Sarah04717001", plus an assortment of randoms without profile photos who could be from anywhere on the planet.  

Yet the narrative becomes "we have a problem with England fans and racism in our country".

No, we have a problem with social media allowing anyone in the world to post anything they want without any verification, and these posts then being captured and distributed widely by people wanting to use this as evidence of an endemic problem with British society, that invariable results in fingers being pointed at swathes of otherwise innocent people in that society with resulting distrust. 

Perhaps we are getting played here?  Mainly by the well-documented nefarious actors who use these platforms to stir up division?  We don't have a moral panic every time someone writes "I hate blacks" on the toilet cubicle wall but seem to have one here about an issue that barely exists outside of social media.

As to the disadvantages my son faces, it is the hopelessness he has only recently started to believe will result from his skin colour.  Where any interaction going wrong for him is now automatically taken to be a result of his race; every bad grade, every criticism, every look, every insecurity that is normal for a teenager.  Who would blame him when he is incessantly being told his "CV will be chucked in a bin" because of his name?  Or that he has to fear for his life around police?  Despite being a decently educated, middle class, kid from Cambridgeshire.  Despite him having travelled to the Congo and Ghana just a few years ago and seeing first-hand what real hopelessness is.

Sadly, the statistics do lie, and the issues with race metrics, outcomes and causes are well documented.  My son, as his mother has often pointed out to him in the last two years as his race-resentment has grown, has only ever been let down by the black people in his life; his black father who walked out on him and his mother, and the assorted uncles and aunts who covered-up his father's lying and cheating.  

In reply to RentonCooke:

No one can argue with your family’s lived experiences. But are you in danger of projecting that onto society at large?

I’m not sure which statistics you’re suggesting do lie? Which metrics are you referring to?

‘White-sounding’ names on CVs increasing your chance of being called for interview has been proven time and time again. I’m not bringing it up to make your son feel ‘hopeless’, but it can’t be ignored or dismissed as people ‘pushing a political agenda’ or ‘virtue signalling’. It’s racism, whether conscious or unconscious, and it’s having a real-world effect on your son and many others - whether they directly “see it” or not.

In reply to RentonCooke:

I suppose it's Russian bots that have defaced a mural of Rashford...?

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/07/12/marcus-rashford-mural-defaced-m...

In reply to ali k:

Names on cvs these days are often just blank.

Just like age and gender  

You would often struggle to identify much allowing you to “ bin” a cv for all those reasons. 

In reply to neilh:

When you say "often", what do you mean? How often is "often" and what are you basing that on?

In reply to ali k:

It is far more complex than that.  Most application process these days are blinded, minority candidates are actively encouraged or mandatory, and it isn't unusual to rejected shortlists where they contain insufficient numbers of minority CVs. 

The issue of names on CVs tends to cite US studies with the obvious criticism that they mistake class bias for race bias.  "Tyrone", "DeShawn" and "Shanquai" carry overt connotations of class in the US, the same way "Cleetus" would, and any study that seeks to compare "black-sounding" names with white-sounding ones is going to emphasise those differences; something like "Victor" isn't going to be used as an example of a black-sounding name.  The largest differences I've seen from the UK seemed to imply 20% v 13% response differences from most to least favourable.  This hardly amounts to CVs being thrown in the bin.  

Likewise, some of the studies pointing to biases, that then get accepted as fact, are downright shoddy (as the blinding effects on sex showed - https://reason.com/2019/10/22/orchestra-study-blind-auditions-gelman/). 

You can't look at negative instances without also looking at where positive discrimination has been beneficial and, more than that, there are so many confounding variables that they are very difficult to control for.  The classic example is where looking at attainment, earning or crime (particularly in the US) and where the entire age profile skews young as a result of urban focus, and where once comparing age-year for age-year differences frequently almost vanish.  

The overarching scepticism I have with a lot of these purported findings is they attach very big claims to very small statistical differences. It's ironic really as we go to great lengths to argue that tiny population differences between genders or races shouldn't be taken as signs of difference or assumed to be a hindrance, yet when it swings the other way we seize on any population differences where racism or bias may be the cause and attach huge significance to them.

In reply to The Norris:

Most teams get their best penalty takers to take the first ones on the basis of, if you were to miss the first one or two, then it could be all over before the fifth penalty

In reply to RentonCooke:

As neilh didn't reply I'll ask the question again to you. When you say "most", where are you getting that data from?

I'm not really clear what your overall argument is. That there are only a handful of racists online, most of them are bots in Russia anyway, and that we can't read anything into all the metrics that point to black people and other minorities having worse outcomes in life in the UK? And that 'racism' is only in the minds of black people or social justice warriors like David Lammy? Is that basically it?

In reply to Si dH:

To his credit, he did take responsibility.

Regardless of whether we agree or disagree with Southgate's decisions throughout the competition, I think his behaviour has been exemplary. And he's also the ideal person to have as a manager for those who failed to score their penalty since he can truly empathise with them and his comforting will be more effective because they know this.

In reply to RentonCooke:

Quite right, Twitter isn’t the UK but equally what rears it’s head on Twitter is not the full extent of racism in the UK. We have a PM and Home Secretary who have said it’s ok to boo a team making a 5 second gesture against racism, we’ve had a reasonably well known comic say it was only the black players who missed their pens, we have people put their actual names to posts using the n word as they think they are free from consequence of doing so and we have intelligent posters on hobbyist forums deny any of this happens or else is not significant - none of this has been perpetrated by Russian bot farms. My question to you is, is the documented level of racism we have seen acceptable to you? If so, should it also be acceptable to black people in the UK?

In reply to RentonCooke:

You’ve  missed the point. The experiment was to prove (or otherwise) whether there was bias in the recruitment process and by extension whether there are rasict  attitudes in the work place. It was not to prove or otherwise the effectiveness of measures to prevent the bias manifesting itself.  Wearing a seat belt does not mean crashing a car is not dangerous, it just means you can mitigate some of that danger. 

In reply to RentonCooke:

The applications I review are "blinded". Name, age, gender & ethnicity are kept separate so that the reviewers cannot access them. Conscious or unconscious bias can appear when choosing between candidates who graduated from Bristol vs Bangalore, or who's work experience was with a firm in Nairobi vs Nottingham. I've never seen an application process that manages to avoid this.

In reply to ali k:

Being an employer.

Is that good enough or will you just fail to understand that in this day and age cv’s are generally stripped out of this information ( as a legal requirement) . 

Of course there are always exceptions. 
 

And more importantly employers recognise the importance of diversity. It’s good in any business.  Whether it’s race or gender or age. 

The  days of binning a cv like you describe are from the last century. Get upto speed.  
 

In reply to neilh:

Data doesn’t suggest otherwise. Plenty of studies show how a name sound does affect things. 
 

In reply to Michael Hood:

I would be disappointed if a lot of thought hadn't gone into the penalties. Gone are the Keegan day of "there is no point in practise" I'm not sure bringing Rashford and Sancho on earlier would have helped its mental not physical, not sure the odds of Shaw striking his half volley as well as he did would have improved as the game went on. At the end of the day all you can ask is that they had prepared thoroughly, the result is a lottery, being the first to take them probably has more influence than anything else.

Given that some people like the excitement of penalties and most extra time have not matched the preceeding 90 minutes, I quite like the idea of the penalties being taken before the game to determine the result if the scores are level after 90 minutes. 

In reply to neilh:

If you’re going to respond condescendingly then at least reply with a statement of fact. Can you point to the legal requirement to remove names from CVs? (beyond just referencing the Equality Act 2010).

As pointed out above - even after removing names or photographs from CVs there are ways to discriminate based on other information if you’re so inclined. And the name-‘whitening’ research indicated there were people inclined to do this, whether consciously or not. Which was the whole point - not having a discussion about employment law.

In reply to ali k:

 Most people are employed via Agencies these days. 

Employment  agencies automatically take names off cv’s to protect their interest in case you did not know this  

Of course there are always ways of discriminating but I would suggest your view is totally out of date.

And it is about employment law whether you like it or not. 

In reply to JoshOvki:

Surely both the stranglehold  aggression displayed when Bukayo Saka was violently dragged to the ground by Giorgio Chiellini, and that by Jorginho who added insult to injury by faking an injury in order to escape a possible red card for an incredibly dangerous foul on Jack Grealish. Both incidents deserved much harsher treatment from the referee. What happened to VAR? Surely we were all told if there was an obvious mistake or wrong decision, VAR would be activated. Well, that could not be more blatant! Extra time with 9 players on the park could have been had a different outcome... It should not have come down to penalties. I didn't wait to witness that fiasco and went to bed.

In reply to neilh:

No, it really isn’t. From my post discussing some of the huge disparities in outcomes between black people (and other ethnic minorities) and white people in this country and the metrics that indicate as such, you chose to pick up on whether it’s accurate to say that names are or aren’t being removed from CVs.

In reply to ali k:

I am correcting your view that cv’s are dumped in the bin based on race. Its almost impossible to do these days alongside gender( so dumping a cv because it’s a female candidate is equally as difficult ) and I am explaining why and how it works.

In reply to Sean Kelly:

I thought the stamp could get looked at. I think he was reckless but it was an accident so I see why it was a yellow.

the pull wouldn’t. It’s just a shirt pull. In soccer it’s not seen as violent. In rugby it is but unless it’s a goal scoring opportunity it wouldn’t be a red. Honestly I think it looked far worse than it was.

In reply to neilh:

Thank you. That is so helpful. I had no idea how recruitment works. Next you’ll be telling me people don’t actually send physical CVs that can literally be thrown in the bin any more.

If that’s all you have to say on the subject of racism then I’ll leave it there.

In reply to ali k:

Rarely people send hard copy cv's in via the post these days. Few and far between, its not the way the market operates.

Nothing to do with racism, just clarifying how job applications work or where people send them in enquiring if there are jobs available.

There are plenty of other horrendous metrics on racism, stop and search etc, but binning cvs is not one of them.

In reply to neilh:

I am pretty sure ali knows that, but you are obviously struggling to comprehend what he is saying, probably in your rush to be right.

The idea that most U.K. workers are employed through agencies or get their introduction to employers through agencies is pretty absurd and the ONS agrees. Agency workers in terms of both appointments and search and selection make up a growing but tiny proportion of the workforce.

Of course, the agencies themselves are not beyond prejudiced practices as well.

Once you accept that the bin is probably electronic, which you seem to be struggling with. The evidence suggests that you are wrong.

In reply to neilh:

A few groups have done research in sweden and having a swedish or European sounding last name matters. They've sent in identical cvs with different surnames, or just middle Eastern sounding names on email addresses or covering letters and there was clear difference in invitations to the next stage.

Some employers responded off record and said they don't have spare time and capacity to wait for their language skills to catch up, others said they deliberately didn't want eu migrant workers as they often didn't stay long term, wanting to go to another eu country 3 or 4 years later (Swedes don't do change). 

In reply to The New NickB:

I am not talking about Agency workers. I am about the employment market in general.

Do you know what the ONS reports say about other disadvantaged groups in the employment market such as the disabled, those over 50( ageism) and women for example. 

I see cvs ( and I get on average 5 a day sent to me from a variety of sources). These cover a range from unskilled to people seeking Non-ex board type roles. Most come from Agencies. Very few come direct. The one real area you can pick up on is Age.

And yes  I also estimate that virtually all cvs end up in the bin anyway . That is self evident.Very few anyway go onto the next stage. 

I am not trying to prove I am right. Just saying I can see too many flaws in saying they are binned.
 

One hell of alot of peoples cvs are binned for a  job. 
 

In reply to summo:

You also get the same sort of feedback when people do research into disabilities, different universities ( employers wanting one graduates form specific Unis), woman of a certain age and so on.Its not just race which has these issues in the UK employment market.

In reply to neilh:

Yes, I covered that.

Yes.

You are not the whole job market. I get lots of unsolicited CVs from agencies. I employ people directly via an application process when I have a job available. I’m not the whole job market either.

That is why I look more broadly than my own experience and use the data available.

Anyway, agencies are another opportunity to discriminate.

In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:

I wanted to 'share' this for the benefit of anyone who missed it but might appreciate it.  The other football thread auto-archived, but I wasn't keen to start a new thread so I'll just leave it here..

Marina Hyde on absolutely top form:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/jul/16/england-arse-flare-se...

In reply to deepsoup:

I read about arse flare guy in the mirror the other day and if I’m honest struggled not to lmfao. Total idiot all the same. He’d drank 20 cans of strong bow and possibly a tonne of coke, and said this:

“The flare burnt for about ten seconds or so around the cheeks, I didn’t feel a thing because I was highly intoxicated. No one dared me to do it. It was a very irresponsible thing to do.”

I challenge anyone not to laugh reading that. But he is a high order bell end. 

In reply to deepsoup:

A really boring point of fact. The security arrangements at Wembley are the responsibility of Wembley not the police. I heard the police basically complaining that the Wembley so-called-security should have called for assistance way before they did. So the Guardian writer is wrong to pin blame on the police. 

And she says: ‘this simply does not happen in other countries’. God she’s talking some shit. Don’t get me wrong, last Sunday was a cock up in many ways, but if she thinks it’s better everywhere else she is delusional. 

In reply to Bottom Clinger:

That’s brilliant, both. She should go to games in other countries. I think she’d be shocked.

Hooliganism seems to be coming back though. I have ‘mates’, well educated, who follow away games and look for trouble.like a badge of honor. They’d be the ones stood at the back throwing bottles though. It’s cowardice, safety in groups. I played with them for years, when it got nasty on a field they were nowhere to be seen. Put them in a group of 200 and they are suddenly a lot braver..

In reply to Roadrunner6:

As a general rule: UK clubs fans are good, but the England team fans have a higher % of nutters than club teams. Reverse seems true for lots of Europe.  Been chatting to some Man Utd season ticket holders and they are confident that when they take the knee there will be massive support. First game is against Leeds I think, hope Leeds fans do the same and I hope the Guardian journo reports on how supportive if the anti racist message our fans are. 

Interesting that Rugby Union had mixed support for taking the knee, Scotland especially so, but that gets glossed over. 

I think every team should have an Arse Flare Guy, to parade around at half time, with Catherine Wheels and Roman Candles shoved up there. 

In reply to Bottom Clinger:

I had an interesting conversation with a security supervisor yesterday who was pitchside at the Final in charge of a team of 80. She said the start should have been delayed. She also said Wembley were reluctant to involve the police earlier and more forcefully as (a) it costs money to use police inside the stadium and (b) they were dead scared of the reputational damage if loads of pictures of police with batons dragging people around appeared. 

Interesting take from someone actually involved.

I wanted to ask her if it was true that half her staff were likely on the take letting people bribe their way in - but she looked a bit scarey so I didn't follow up on that point.

In reply to Babika:

For a sport so loaded with cash then they should pay whatever it takes. When Dave Wheelan owned Wigan Latics there was an on going court case over policing fees which he refused to pay. The ‘police with batons’ - as a general rule the sheer presence of a tonne of police nips most things in the bud. 

Whilst there is a % of dick head England fans, one of the unanswered questions is ‘why on Earth have an 8 pm kick off?!’  That’s 9pm for most of Europe. On a Sunday. Weird. 

In reply to Bottom Clinger:

Yes. Yes. And yes especially to the last point. 

3pm would have made shed loads more sense on every front. 

In reply to Babika:

Except that there would have been a significant risk of it clashing with the Wimbledon Men's Final, which started at 2pm.

In reply to Bottom Clinger:

I wonder how much money Wembley have now missed out on by screwing the World Cup bid? Maybe a false economy. All those officials will not look kindly on the chaos. 
And re kick off time, maybe it could have been an hour earlier, but clearly UEFA want the maximum tv audience which will mean an evening kick off. 

In reply to Babika:

It's all down to tv rights, sponsors and money. Nothing to do with the sport or the supporters, they are least important. 

In reply to neilh:

I'm a bit puzzled by all this stuff about how CV's are normally anonymised these days, let alone the suggestion that this is a legal requirement (spoiler alert; it isn't). My firm has received literally thousands of CVs over the past thirty years. I don't recall one that was anonymised. My wife's university seems to recruit some kind of administrator about once every six months. None of those are anonymised. Nor are the ones she sees as governor of a couple of local schools. I struggle to believe anonymised CVs are the norm in any of those fields  .

jcm

In reply to summo:

Well yes, but given this was the Euros, not the World Cup and the furthest east nations competing were Turkey by the time it got to penalties it was well past midnight. 

I understand it will have been syndicated over the globe but I can't help thinking an earlier kick off might have gained a greater audience on a Sunday.

My football loving Czech friends went to bed before the end as they had to be up early for work. I'm sure they weren't the only ones!