The deeper England get into the Euro finals the bigger the risk of mindless thuggery from their supporters win or lose.

Edited July 1, 20213 yr by John Crow Batty

2 hours ago, roy11 said:

Italy will beat England in the final.

Not sure what that means for us :(

Agree with this. Italy's main striker Immobile moves very well

25 minutes ago, DubDee said:

Agree with this. Italy's main striker Immobile moves very well

Ha Ha I see why you have done there. Immobile translated to English means immobile and vice versa in Italian.

Edited July 1, 20213 yr by John Crow Batty

1 hour ago, Rab D Nesbitt said:

Hi Skuit. An ex GF of mine is from Eindhoven so I have a big soft spot for the dutchies and PSV. I'm familiar with the hooligan element over there as well. 

Being a Scot there are a hundred reasons why I won't support our southern neighbours in international football. Some political, some historical, some media related. Having lived in England for a number of years though it has always puzzled me why so many genuinely lovely, funny and welcoming individuals turn into such a grotesque collective every two years for the Euros or World Cup. It's the only time I wished I was somewhere else and brexit unfortunately has only emboldened them. 

I think that there has been a deliberate attempt by both the media and political class over many years to airbrush the deeds and consequences of the English empire to the effect that it was at worst benign. As a result their people have been fed a deluded sense of place and entitlement in the world that the tories used to their benefit to get elected back in 2010 and continues today with their union jackery flag waving nationalism. 

lol, rab - english empire - love it

oddly though i've read many scots arguing how scots were at the forefront of building the err... british empire as well as their many other contributions to the human race  

not looking for an argument - just amused and joshing

also agree how welcoming, polite, intelligent poms can turn into ugly hooligans. suspect it more tied up with the still pervasive class structure remnants

there again it could be blamed on the nature of soccer itself, surely a sport created in hell. scottish soccer violence included

2 hours ago, daisycutter said:

lol, rab - english empire - love it

oddly though i've read many scots arguing how scots were at the forefront of building the err... british empire as well as their many other contributions to the human race  

not looking for an argument - just amused and joshing

also agree how welcoming, polite, intelligent poms can turn into ugly hooligans. suspect it more tied up with the still pervasive class structure remnants

there again it could be blamed on the nature of soccer itself, surely a sport created in hell. scottish soccer violence included

Hi Daisycutter. No doubt there were plenty of Scots, Welsh & Irish individuals only too happy to take part in proceedings and reap the benefits for their own gain BUT the empire was entirely an English driven concept as none of the other nations have had any form of home government since the act of union in 1707 when we were all swallowed up by Westminster and the English crown. 

Football is a wonderful game, particularly at the lower levels and the term soccer should only be used when speaking about the game in the US. 

23 minutes ago, Rab D Nesbitt said:

Hi Daisycutter. No doubt there were plenty of Scots, Welsh & Irish individuals only too happy to take part in proceedings and reap the benefits for their own gain BUT the empire was entirely an English driven concept as none of the other nations have had any form of home government since the act of union in 1707 when we were all swallowed up by Westminster and the English crown. 

Football is a wonderful game, particularly at the lower levels and the term soccer should only be used when speaking about the game in the US. 

but the scots didn't need a home government to be at the forefront of empire. by all accounts their role was substantial.

39 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

but the scots didn't need a home government to be at the forefront of empire. by all accounts their role was substantial.

Again, yes on an individual level. Plenty of Scots were slave owners for example. Others became wealthy industrialists. It was still a concept driven by the English crown / government, initially to find trading routes to compete with the likes of Spain. 

These days most of us that are from the other home nations know that the term British is only ever used when it's expedient for England to use it. Usually in sports where England don't have anyone that's any good at that particular time. It's why Tim Henman and Damon Hill are English but Andy Murray and David Coulthard are British. It was only a couple of years ago when commentating for the BBC that Sue Barker said on live tv that Andy and Jamie Murray had just sent ENGLAND into the Davis Cup final after winning their doubles match. 

Must admit it is amusing to watch the poms going bat shizen crazy every time some one has the temerity to score.

36 minutes ago, Rab D Nesbitt said:

Again, yes on an individual level. Plenty of Scots were slave owners for example. Others became wealthy industrialists. It was still a concept driven by the English crown / government, initially to find trading routes to compete with the likes of Spain. 

These days most of us that are from the other home nations know that the term British is only ever used when it's expedient for England to use it. Usually in sports where England don't have anyone that's any good at that particular time. It's why Tim Henman and Damon Hill are English but Andy Murray and David Coulthard are British. It was only a couple of years ago when commentating for the BBC that Sue Barker said on live tv that Andy and Jamie Murray had just sent ENGLAND into the Davis Cup final after winning their doubles match. 

Users Without A Subscription Are Not Able To See The Full Content.

• Find In Worldcat

Scotland and the British Empire

John M. MacKenzie and T. M. Devine

ABSTRACT

The extraordinary influence of Scots in the British Empire has long been recognised. As administrators, settlers, temporary residents, professionals, plantation owners, and as military personnel, they were strikingly prominent in North America, the Caribbean, Australasia, South Africa, India, and colonies in South-East Asia and Africa. Throughout these regions they brought to bear distinctive Scottish experience as well as particular educational, economic, cultural, and religious influences. Moreover, the relationship between Scots and the British Empire had a profound effect upon many aspect ... More

Keywords: British Empire, Scots, Scottish experience, Scotland, India, East India Company, missionary, ethnic identities

BIBLIOGRAPHIC INFORMATION

Print publication date: 2011	Print ISBN-13: 9780199573240
Published to Oxford Scholarship Online: January 2012	DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199573240.001.0001

AUTHORS

Affiliations are at time of print publication.

John M. MacKenzie, editor
Professor Emeritus of Imperial History, Lancaster University; Honorary Professor, University of Aberdeen; Honorary Professor, University of St. Andrews; Honorary Fellow, University of Edinburgh

T. M. Devine, editor
Sir William Fraser Professor of Scottish History and Palaeography and Director of the Scottish Centre of Diaspora Studies, University of Edinburgh

• Print
• Save
• Cite
• Email this conteSha

6 hours ago, Mazer Rackham said:

This will only get worse as a result of Brexit. The empire is shrinking inwards, until all they'll have left is England. And they'll be loving it.

Hi Mazer. The thing is that so many of the population south of the border are now conditioned to believe that foreigners are stealing their jobs, europeans are stealing their freedoms and the other home nations are subsidy junkies that they haven't noticed that the English elites, who despise the working and middle class, are literally selling the ground they walk on and the institutions they cherish (NHS) so much and they're not going to realise it until it's all gone. 

 

16 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

Users Without A Subscription Are Not Able To See The Full Content.

• Find In Worldcat

Scotland and the British Empire

John M. MacKenzie and T. M. Devine

ABSTRACT

The extraordinary influence of Scots in the British Empire has long been recognised. As administrators, settlers, temporary residents, professionals, plantation owners, and as military personnel, they were strikingly prominent in North America, the Caribbean, Australasia, South Africa, India, and colonies in South-East Asia and Africa. Throughout these regions they brought to bear distinctive Scottish experience as well as particular educational, economic, cultural, and religious influences. Moreover, the relationship between Scots and the British Empire had a profound effect upon many aspect ... More

Keywords: British Empire, Scots, Scottish experience, Scotland, India, East India Company, missionary, ethnic identities

BIBLIOGRAPHIC INFORMATION

Print publication date: 2011	Print ISBN-13: 9780199573240
Published to Oxford Scholarship Online: January 2012	DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199573240.001.0001

AUTHORS

Affiliations are at time of print publication.

John M. MacKenzie, editor
Professor Emeritus of Imperial History, Lancaster University; Honorary Professor, University of Aberdeen; Honorary Professor, University of St. Andrews; Honorary Fellow, University of Edinburgh

T. M. Devine, editor
Sir William Fraser Professor of Scottish History and Palaeography and Director of the Scottish Centre of Diaspora Studies, University of Edinburgh

• Print
• Save
• Cite
• Email this conteSha

Hi again Daisycutter, 

Thanks for the googled cut and paste job. You didn't need to send it though as it's not really any different to what I said in my last post. Scotland as a nation had no say in the empire because we had no government. Tom Devine is a fantastic Scottish historian who I remember hearing talk at the time of our last referendum. 

 

 

13 minutes ago, Rab D Nesbitt said:

Hi again Daisycutter, 

Thanks for the googled cut and paste job. You didn't need to send it though as it's not really any different to what I said in my last post. Scotland as a nation had no say in the empire because we had no government. Tom Devine is a fantastic Scottish historian who I remember hearing talk at the time of our last referendum. 

 

 

no sweat rab......just thought ye were a wee bit naughty calling it an english empire when the scots were quite prominent in it

but i do understand your sentiments, so let us not split any hairs, we can both hope the poms don't make the euro final.....they would be insufferable if they pulled it off 

3 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

no sweat rab......just thought ye were a wee bit naughty calling it an english empire when the scots were quite prominent in it

but i do understand your sentiments, so let us not split any hairs, we can both hope the poms don't make the euro final.....they would be insufferable if they pulled it off 

Agreed. To be honest I'm starting to feel a bit uncomfortable about potting the English on this thread as like most things it's complicated and I genuinely love all of the friends I've made from living there. I just hope someone can knock them out before the final though!

I've never believed in history repeating.

My favorite example of how this can be debunked was during the World Cup in 1998. Looking at the patterns of champion nations since 1966, there was a school of thought at the time that  '98 was to be the year England finally broke through. The rationale was as follows

1966: England
1970: Brazil
1974: West Germany
1978: Argentina
1982: Italy
1986: Argentina
1990: West Germany
1994: Brazil
1998: England? (In reality, France won).

A droll English wag retorted to said historical pattern as prediction of winner with a compelling historical pattern of his own.

1966: Won **** all
1970: Won **** all
1974: Won **** all
1978: Won **** all
1982: Won **** all
1986: Won **** all
1990: Won **** all
1994: Won **** all
1998: Won **** all

In hindsight, the latter body of evidence was more compelling!

Edited July 1, 20213 yr by Colin B. Flaubert

17 hours ago, Bring-Back-Powell said:

I’d take more pleasure in Collingwood’s demise if we were one of the long list of clubs to have actually beaten them this year.

Unfortunately, we won't get to do it in the finals. 

Prefer the Poms over those diving cheats Italy.

 

On 7/1/2021 at 9:10 AM, demonstone said:

There are other compelling reasons in play as well.

1.  The last time we won the flag, the Olympic Games were held in Tokyo.

Make of that what you will, numerologists!  

Fwiw, on the Olympics front, Tokyo was chosen for the 1940 Olympics, and guess who won the flag that year. Lock it in!

(Btw, the IOC was on a roll pre-war: Berlin followed by Tokyo.)

12 hours ago, Colin B. Flaubert said:

I've never believed in history repeating.

My favorite example of how this can be debunked was during the World Cup in 1998. Looking at the patterns of champion nations since 1966, there was a school of thought at the time that  '98 was to be the year England finally broke through. The rationale was as follows

1966: England
1970: Brazil
1974: West Germany
1978: Argentina
1982: Italy
1986: Argentina
1990: West Germany
1994: Brazil
1998: England? (In reality, France won).

A droll English wag retorted to said historical pattern as prediction of winner with a compelling historical pattern of his own.

1966: Won **** all
1970: Won **** all
1974: Won **** all
1978: Won **** all
1982: Won **** all
1986: Won **** all
1990: Won **** all
1994: Won **** all
1998: Won **** all

In hindsight, the latter body of evidence was more compelling!

Classic example of the problem with the English language. 'All' or 'nothing' are often considered to be opposites. But would you rather win [censored] all or [censored] nothing?

1 hour ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

Classic example of the problem with the English language. 'All' or 'nothing' are often considered to be opposites. But would you rather win [censored] all or [censored] nothing?

Considering it was most likely written by a football yob, I'm not sure he was overly concerned. ?

It’s coming home…????????

I feel very sorry for everyone living in the other three home nations having to live through wall to wall coverage of Ingerlund on the BBC, ITV & Sky right now. I've been there and feel your pain. Forza Azzurri!

11 minutes ago, Rab D Nesbitt said:

I feel very sorry for everyone living in the other three home nations having to live through wall to wall coverage of Ingerlund on the BBC, ITV & Sky right now. I've been there and feel your pain. Forza Azzurri!

I feel sorry for the Irish, Welsh and Scots living in England. And God forbid if they actually win the thing.

Who do you think England will bring into the team to replace Sterling?

Surely he's now on the plane to Tokyo to compete in the diving for England.

By default, it's Forza Azzurri! for me.

3 hours ago, 3183 Dee said:

It’s coming home…????????

To Rome Forza Azzurri?⬜??

6 minutes ago, demonstone said:

Who do you think England will bring into the team to replace Sterling?

Surely he's now on the plane to Tokyo to compete in the diving for England.

By default, it's Forza Azzurri! for me.

You talk about diving, and then want to support a team who stole our 2006 World Cup dream :.)