PBP: O39: D1.England - Cameroon.E3

Discussion in 'Women's World Cup' started by Gilmoy, Jun 23, 2019.

  1. marco gabbiadini

    Sunderland
    England
    Jul 7, 2018
    Nat'l Team:
    England
    Oh yeah. My mistake.

    To be honest, from my vague memories, that side used to surround the ref en masse. I'd be amazed if Cantona stayed out of it.
     
  2. KimLittle#Magic

    Arsenal
    England
    Jun 16, 2019
    I think that era of surrounding the ref came after Cantona retirement.
     
  3. fire123

    fire123 Member+

    Jul 31, 2009
    How many players would have been sent off in this version?
     
  4. fire123

    fire123 Member+

    Jul 31, 2009
    How many would have been sent off in this version?
     
  5. fire123

    fire123 Member+

    Jul 31, 2009
    What about this version?
     
  6. fire123

    fire123 Member+

    Jul 31, 2009
    What did really happen was much better than the Cameroon players leaving the pitch, the match terminated ...
    If you have to ask that question, then you clearly do not work in the real world.

    As it happened, there was nothing wrong with the image of women's football. Women's football does not have be responsible for Cameroon. They will have to answer for what they did.
     
    JimWharton repped this.
  7. blissett

    blissett Member+

    Aug 20, 2011
    Italy
    Club:
    --other--
    Nat'l Team:
    --other--
    Ok, goodbye from Neverland.
     
    Hayaka repped this.
  8. JimWharton

    JimWharton Member+

    Feb 25, 2017
    Not looking for a long back and forth on the thread (happy to discuss anything with people in DM), but just to clarify a couple of things. 1) The entire first paragraph of my post was dedicated to stipulating that the game and the calls were fair. My post was is about empathy, which seemed to be in short supply. 2) The whiteplaining note was not necessarily directed to any specific person on this board (as you say, that information is not readily available). It was a broader statement of tendency that could apply here for sure. I’ve been guilty of it before without realizing it. 3) Thank you for your clarification on your victimism comment.
     
    soccernutter and blissett repped this.
  9. FanOfFutbol

    FanOfFutbol Member+

    The Mickey Mouse Club or The breakfast Club
    May 4, 2002
    Limbo
    Nat'l Team:
    --other--
    That depends on if my belief that cards make people think and calm down is true.

    I think that the total sent of for the match would be one, the elbow at the first part of the match. There also may have been one or two yellows later.
     
    M and blissett repped this.
  10. Kakeru

    Kakeru Member+

    Manchester United
    Japan
    Feb 22, 2016
    Montréal, QC, Canada
    Club:
    Manchester United FC
    Nat'l Team:
    Japan
    According to what official media reports said, at least 3.

    What I pointed out about the reaction from the susbtitutes, it's not one of those 3 instances. However, I have seen male substitutes getting sent off for going over the line with dissent before.
     
  11. Crawleybus

    Crawleybus Member+

    Oct 18, 2013
    Club:
    Chelsea FC
    You can correct me if Im wrong but I don't remember any Manchester United team refusing to kick off because they didn't like a decision!? Besides what difference does it make? The behaviour of the Cameroon women was a disgrace end of, the fact that Nevile has pointed out the 'bleedin obvious' is neither here nor there!
     
  12. soccernutter

    soccernutter Moderator
    Staff Member

    Tottenham Hotspur
    Aug 22, 2001
    Near the mountains.
    Club:
    Tottenham Hotspur FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Let me put a final few thoughts on this, particularly because this discussion has been respectful for the most part.

    First, I think is necessary to separate out a few things: the behavior of the Cameroon players on the pitch, the behavior of the Cameroon manager, what Neville said, and what is in Neville's past (specifically regarding ManU). And then there is the history of colonial Africa/

    Regarding the behavior of the players, I don't see anybody condoning what they did, but there is a disagreement regarding the aforementioned empathy. I'll talk a bit more about this below.
    Regarding the manager, he must be a some fault for setting the tone, but again, there is that history which I understand and there is some empathy which should be considered. A bit on this below.
    Regarding how ManU and how Neville behaved during that time is really a distraction to the current incident, and distracts from the larger point several of us are trying to make.
    Regarding what Neville said is really the key to this, and while he is in his right to make his statements, and while Cameroon did lash out (and really could have gotten at least 2 red cards), the issue is not just what he said, but how he said it.

    Historical Context, in brief

    As much as we want to try and keep sport and politics separate, that is really impossible. So let me build a greater context than has previously been mentioned by the likes of @JimWharton. Up until the mid to late 1400s, sub-Saharan Africa (Black Africa) was largely isolated from others, Europe in particular. Yes, along the west coast there were the Arab traders, and there is evidence that the Chinese landed somewhere along Kenya or Tanzania. And yes, there were the Muslim traders, but sub-Saharan Africa was almost entirely isolated from Europe.

    In the 1400s, Europeans started to explore outward, and one of the directions was along the coast of Africa, which began the multi-century slave trade and colonization run by Europeans. And there were many things the Europeans did, not only running the slave trade, but also raping the land of resources and ruling by force. Also at that time was the European idea of Divine Right of Kings, which literally meant that the royals were royalty because of directive from God. And, of course they were White and Christian. That leads to the the 3 Cs of Africa - Conquer, Colonize, and Christianize. Everybody who was doing that was under some direction of the Royals, therefor they believed they were directed by God to perform the 3 Cs.

    And this European superiority is something which lasted up to and even beyond WWII.

    Of course, after a few centuries, this superiority doesn't exactly get turned off. Much of it got ingrained in our culture and our language. Black Africans were wild and "uncivilized." They were hunters and warriors, not thinkers and developers of business or industry. They needed to be told what to do, or if they did not, they were considered terrorists (Kenya, Tanzania, South Africa, etc). But when post WWII occurred, and the great colonial powers had to give up their conquests, what followed was more colonialism, this time in the form of support of dictators who punished their people, or aid which required Western standards. In short, it was the rare county in Sub-Saharan Africa which developed it's own way and were making their own choices without threat or coercion from the White colonialists.

    As it comes to football, the same mentality is applied. Because there has been a lack of economic development, the means to develop football players and clubs and national teams was hindered. Most had to play in Europe, if club would take such players because of the systemic racism which existed. Slowly that changed, but the players which developed needed to be from Europe and in Europe. Half of Cameroon's team in 1990 was European based. Yet they still made the quarterfinals. But they played a very rough and physical style. They didn't play the beautiful game, the European or Brasilian game, according to many watching and reporting. Thus, in the eyes of many they were still savages despite many playing in Europe. Yet in every WC since 1990, A Sub-Saharan Africa team performed better than more than 1 European team, yet little respect was given by FIFA, and there are even many reports of the racism which FIFA executives have even to the current day.

    So bring that to the events of this match- England v. Cameroon - and the team from Cameroon are playing in a tournament founded by Europeans (the World Cup in general) and run by Whites (males mostly), primarily. In this tournament, as has occurred for decades, decisions were made either against Cameroon or in favor or the Europeans. As a neutral observer, that might not be the case, the centuries of systemic racism from Europe appeared in every decision, and the frustration which boiled over was not about England, but about trying their best, and being punished for it. And the comments by Neville, while understandable, were the ingrained language of the "superior" Europeans which has been ingrained in society and not considered to be changed, except when confronted. Neville put those stereotypes on display with not just his words, but his tone.

    ---------------------------

    None of this is meant to be an excuse for the actions of the Indomitable Lionesses, or their coach. I do say they were wrong, but I understand why the players acted the way they did because what occurred, to them, could easily be taken as another example of the European powers not treating them as equals.

    With all that said, the one area I will criticize Cameroon for is their coach. And I specifically criticize him for stepping right over Houghton from that one tackle right as the match was about to end which could have earned Engolo a straight red. He is the leader, and it is his responsibility to bring the team under control in a situation like this. Stepping over Houghton, while understandable, to me was wrong.
     
    Romario'sgurl and JimWharton repped this.
  13. M

    M Member+

    Feb 18, 2000
    Via Ventisette
    Decisions that, in this game, were actually correct. Add to this that three decisions went grossly in favor of Cameroon (lack of red cards for elbow, spitting and stamp) and I think your premise is plain silly. Note that two of those potential red cards were before the aforementioned correct decisions you mention.

    You're seeing what you want to see. I thought Neville comported himself superbly, both during the game and after. His team were a credit to him in not once responding to the huge provocation that was on exhibit from Cameroon. Also his calm demeanor on the sideline is to be commended. Many coaches would have steamed in during several of those incidents, especially the horrific injury-time tackle on Houghton. He didn't. And finally, huge kudos to him for calling out Cameroon's behavior that reduced a knockout phase World Cup game to the level of farce. Hopefully FIFA and/or CAF will take action against Cameroon. I see a CAF official is already talking about it.
     
    blissett and Crawleybus repped this.
  14. M

    M Member+

    Feb 18, 2000
    Via Ventisette
    Exactly.
     
  15. KimLittle#Magic

    Arsenal
    England
    Jun 16, 2019
    If this was a factor in their behaviour then the manager missed a huge trick. "the whole world is against us" is a ploy SAF most notably used his entire career to drive performance, create team unity, deflect criticism from the outside.
     
  16. Smallchief

    Smallchief Member+

    Oct 27, 2012
    Club:
    --other--
    #293 Smallchief, Jun 25, 2019
    Last edited: Jun 25, 2019
    I don't question that there is implicit racism and, more than that, cultural superiority in the minds of all of us. That the Cameroon players are more sensitive to what they regard as racial or cultural snubs is certain. (Look at the election of populist candidates around the world as examples for the deep-seated animosity many people have for the elites in their own culture.)

    However, I don't perceive Neville's comments as racist. I think he would have said the same thing had it been the U.S. that misbehaved.
     
    blissett repped this.
  17. blissett

    blissett Member+

    Aug 20, 2011
    Italy
    Club:
    --other--
    Nat'l Team:
    --other--
    This is the only point where I just can't follow you. What do you mean by "the centuries of systemic racism from Europe appeared in every decision", if you're still referring to the England-Cameroon game? Sounds as you want to imply that the decisions that were made trhoughout the game were actually motivated by implicit racism towards the Cameroon team. I frankly found technically correct most of the decisions that were made against Cameroon, i.e. no matter how the Cameroonian players could have perceived them as "punishing", they're the decisions I would have expected the referee to make in any game and against any team.

    In short: "systemic racism" surely exists, and it didn't need your historical recap to convince me about that, but frankly I can't see it in action here. I just see some harsh but technically correct decisions taken against Cameroon, that were, understandably but mistakenly, perceived by the Cameroonian team as motivated by racism.
     
  18. fire123

    fire123 Member+

    Jul 31, 2009
    https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...vestigating-cameroon-womens-world-cup-england

    An excerpt from the article above:
    "It is also believed Fifa has officially adjudged the performance of the referee, China’s Qin Liang, as good and found “every decision and the use of VAR was correct, using the protocols” and were applied to the letter. Officials also think Qin did all she could to ensure a prompt restart after the VAR delays.

    It is understood that Fifa accepts mistakes do happen and the referee’s decisions to overrule VAR advice on Fran Kirby’s penalty appeal and a possible Takounda red card incident late in the game were the best ways to make certain the game came to a conclusion with both teams on the pitch."
     
    blissett repped this.
  19. M

    M Member+

    Feb 18, 2000
    Via Ventisette
    blissett repped this.
  20. lil_one

    lil_one Member+

    Nov 26, 2013
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    This might be answered later in the thread, but I'm behind so I'm commenting anyway.

    Offside is different than other VAR calls. Its objective and factual (you're off or you're not), whereas others like penalties or possible red cards are subjective. The AR on the field gives the initial call, but offside rulings are not sent down for the on-field review but are always just the VAR giving the ruling: offside or onside.
     
    William49, MiLLeNNiuM and blissett repped this.

Share This Page