SF: July 11 Croatia vs England [R]

This wasn't spoken in public, because they could get boos from Russian fans. For sure, there are some geopolitical antagonisms. At the end it would be: "You took the World Cup hosting from us but at the end, we won the title where it belonged - at home."

 

Really not an issue at all. We're petty but not that petty. There has been no mention of it at all for years. The Qatar World Cup is a lot more controversial. I think everyone realised that Russia had a good claim to host the tournament. They've surpassed expectations and done a very good job.

The trouble in Marseilles two years ago was mentioned a lot in the build up. Understandably so because it was brutal. However, it was also mentioned that Putin would not allow hooliganism to impact Russia's image when hosting a World Cup. We all know that image and pride are import to Putin and Russia generally so it was thought to be credible that it would be safe. However, there was a lot of media saying it wouldn't be welcoming and zero fun. That has turned out to be nonsense, which is a good thing as the media lie to us about a lot of other things. Perhaps more people will realise that now.

Politically our Government has got itself into a mess regarding Russia and a few other things. Our politicians not going over to Russia is a good thing. They're embarrassing. That was never going to impact on football fans. Generally the English public dislikes our politicians intensely. I believe Brazilians holds your politicians in similar low regard.

The English view on this World Cup is that it has been the most enjoyable tournament for us for a long time. We have finally got a team that has played as a team. We can feel proud of them because they did their best and didn't bore us to tears. Football came home to us in the way that the national team resumed its central importance to the nation for the first time since 2006,

That said I certainly want to host the World Cup in 2030. It would be absolutely fantastic.

 

Cool. Then do not over-analyze it when a phrase gets flipped either. Jeezz.

 

Old match so won't go into details but the ref had a thankless task that day. Particularly in light of the apparent edict from FIFA to minimise the number of yellow and especially red cards issued. Have we still had only four red cards all tournament? 16 in 1990. 14 in 1994. 22 in 1998. 17 in 2002. 28 in 2006. 17 in 2010. 10 in 2014. Four so far this time. Remarkable there have been so few complaints about player conduct and referees when they have issued so few red cards and the players must have worked out their reluctance to do so.

 

"A certain American" Huh, since when is refering to ONE individual blaiming a whole nation?

He didn't have a decent first or second half. He was terrible from the get go. And in the first half most 50/50 calls favored the English.

 

In the immediate aftermath of the vote, yes, it was talked about a lot. There was of course a lot of sour grapes journalism around it but there was plenty of serious, in-depth journalism pointing out the rampant corruption that brought the World Cup to Russia and Qatar. Yet Qatar is the one that is still talked about, for three reasons I think.

One, it is four years away. There is still plenty of stories to come out and time for campaigners to pressure FIFA into removing Qatar as a host. Secondly, Russia has committed far more serious crimes since the vote that the British media can focus on. The Sergei Skripal case and the murder of a British citizen here, the US election meddling, homophobia in areas like Chechnya etc. Thirdly, its not as if the English bid was whiter than white itself. David Cameron himself was at meetings were vote swapping was discussed and advocated.

And once the football started, as is always the case, football is the many issue. Not a single TV pundit, commentator etc has talked about how the hosting rights were stolen from England here, not a single member of their team or back room staff. No papers have given it large coverage in their pages. It really is a complete non-issue.

Maybe its a thing people outside the UK expect to be a problem?

 

Modric is the one who said it in his post game press conference.I mean it's all over the freaking internet. There is this thing called Google you know. You think Modric was making it up lol. Let the English do there own research I'm not doing it for anyone.

 

Another interesting potential affair...political declaration.

https://www.express.co.uk/sport/football/986593/Eden-Hazard-Belgium-World-Cup-Semi-Final-France

​

"With my brothers, we have always been more supporters of France than Belgium because we grew up with ‘98," said Hazard.

"At the time, there wasn’t the jersey of Belgium, that's why we wore the one of France.

"I do not want to denigrate the Belgium team of the time, there were very good players, but at that time, it was France."

Belgium was not that bad, like he said...4th place at 1986 World Cup...
The founding members of FIFA were the national associations of Belgium, Denmark, France, the Netherlands, Spain (represented by Madrid Football Club; the Spanish Federation was not created until 1913), Sweden and Switzerland. Also, that same day, the German Association declared its intention of affiliating through a telegram.

His statement passed under the radar. Is Belgium only Flemish (Dutch) desire...their players always had stronger influence, than French.
Strange statement. Even if someone's team is among last ones on FIFA ranking, they still support their team.

 

It's not overanalyzing to point out that someone is over-analysing something. Chances are you only notice because the English fans sing in a language you understand. For all we know, the Croats are doing the same.

Its all in good fun though. In 2014, the Argies had a song that directly insulted Brasil. But even after losing 7-1 fans from both sides were still joking around with it (see video below taken exactly 4 years ago today). No big deal.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/watch-argentina-fans-take-over-3851242

 

In Europe, many football clashes are inspired with the historic - political relations among two countries. There are social consequences, in higher traces, sometimes in lighter shades, because of the WWII.
Croatia is motivated always in outplaying someone, especially if some team has stronger reputation in some sport. All great results were inspired with political sentiments. Germany - unification in 1989. brought the title in 1990.
I feel that there is still too much of antagonism in Europe, among many teams. South American derbies are much more sports derbies, than political, that's why Argentines and Brazilians can "joke" after the match, no evil blood.
Croatia never had problems with France. Croats even started to motivate French resistance in Villefranche.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Villefranche-de-Rouergue

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/13th_...lefranche-de-Rouergue_Mutiny_(September_1943)

Rivalry exists because of that match in France 1998, 2-1, when Thuram scored his only two goals for his NT. Also, because of EURO 2004, when Trezeguet played with his hand which influenced on that result directly, it was 2-2 at the end.

Croats fought with Napoleon Bonaparte.
http://www.napolun.com/mirror/web2.airmail.net/napoleon/infantry_Napoleon_3.htm

BocaFan, Europe is a complicated continent. Many people left Europe and formed new lives in American continents, Australia, Africa, Asia...too many wars shaped rivalries that we know today. Brazil and Argentina derby is different than England - France derby. People get a long today, but they don't forget.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_Croatia

 

You my friend, might need to take a stroll down the Andean derby matches. There are always media ready to exploit historical/political backdrops in such matches.

 

I know about problems between Chile and Peru, Chile and Bolivia because of territory. Also, Argentina and Chile had war. Lets not include groups who seek the violence in every aspect no matter are they friendly or not.

 

Yep, South America is not a happy-go-lucky place after all.

 

Do you really need all of this explained to you? Are you new to football? England are not a bad side, but not a great side. We could write the same thing at every World Cup. It never changes.

France and Croatia are the best sides in the tournament. This doesn't need to be explained to most people.

 

Can

But people can wear football uniforms normally? For example, River Plate jersey in Bolivia, Brazil, Uruguay, Colombia?
In Europe, this is not always possible. I experienced verbal problems with three CLUB uniforms, not national team uniforms.

Paris St. Germain - one person asked me: "How can you wear PSG jersey? It makes me sick, how can you do that, there is nothing worse than PSG jersey or people who wear it"

I was surprised. Through conversation, I noticed that he adores Marseille. He became critical, because PSG has excellent financial background. But my jersey was from 2001. when they had OPEL sponsor. I would never place negative comments if someone wears Marseille, Lyon, Monaco jersey...so what, people watched matches...got in love with their style. PSG was fifth, sixth or even lower back then.

Manchester United uniform - one person said, how can I wear anything that comes from England...because England hurt his nation through history.

Bayern Munchen uniform, from 1996 or 1998 edition. He said to me: Bayern Sh*t. I walked away.

It would be interesting to walk in Bilbao with Real Madrid uniform, or PSG in Marseille...Fenerbahce in Athens...Glasgow Rangers in Ireland, Olympiakos in Istanbul.

Now you see, how bad is in Europe, if you want to follow football.

 

You were talking about animosities between NT fans, now you shifted to clubs.

Just as Europe has idiot fans for national/club teams, so does South America.
It is nothing to proud of, obviously. Unfortunately, it is a reality on both sides of the Atlantic. That was the point.

 

In which universe did people think it was?

 

Must be that alternate reality where South American fans dance to tropical rhythms and have a carnival festival before+after each football match.

Very useful imagery for past military dictatorships, though: "the poor masses are happy, look at them dance their hunger away".

Maybe this is a remnant of that era.

 

Can you walk with jersey of Uruguay, Chile, Argentina in different South American countries? Uruguay and Argentina are very friendly countries.

 

Yes, you can

 

Not sure why you extrapolate URU-ARG to the whole of South America.
Multiple countries, multiple silly rivalries.

There are idiots fans in every corner of the world.

 

This will be a chess match. France are younger and fresher. Croatia will have to be careful. Croatia must be careful not to overcommit and to look for that one mistake which will create a goal scoring opportunity.