England: Historical arrogance why?

England: Historical arrogance why?

Post by Mark Coh » Fri, 19 Jun 1992 22:30:10


I reckon that Englands (piss) poor showing in the championships had
nothing to do with the fact that they can't play football (hell, they're
all much better than me) it was a result of bizarrely high expectations.
Everyone especially the English always seem to think we should do much better
than we do despite the fact (66 aside) that we never seem to have done
anything.  Probably a result of a "we invented it we must be good" attitude

I have a question, did we (the English) ever have any real reason to believe
we were good in the first place.  I don't think that England even reached
the world cup finals before the war why?  Did they compete or were they
simply too arrogant even then.

Is England's apparent arrogance based in historical reality or is it just
self delusion?

Any comments.

Mark Cohen

 
 
 

England: Historical arrogance why?

Post by Colin Morr » Sat, 20 Jun 1992 02:41:37


Quote:

>I reckon that Englands (piss) poor showing in the championships had
>nothing to do with the fact that they can't play football (hell, they're
>all much better than me) it was a result of bizarrely high expectations.
>Everyone especially the English always seem to think we should do much better
>than we do despite the fact (66 aside) that we never seem to have done
>anything.  Probably a result of a "we invented it we must be good" attitude

Arrogance from those closely associated with the game maybe, but I
don't think there's much arrogance from your average  English soccer
fan in this newsgroup. With a few exceptions, ever since Taylor
announced his squad for Sweden I've seen a steady flow of criticism of
his selections, tactics etc. If anything, I'd say the team's
performance matched r.s.s's expectations as far as England fans go.

Quote:
>I have a question, did we (the English) ever have any real reason to believe
>we were good in the first place.  I don't think that England even reached
>the world cup finals before the war why?  Did they compete or were they
>simply too arrogant even then.

England never played in the World Cup until 1950 (and then they lost
to the U.S. :-)). They weren't alone in this, but I'm sure arrogance
had at least something to do with this. I don't think it was until the
Hungary debacle in '53 (6-3 home defeat) that England finally woke up
to the fact that others could play the game rather better than they could.

Quote:
>Is England's apparent arrogance based in historical reality or is it just
>self delusion?

A mixture of both I expect. They're hardly the worst team in the world
even if they're not one of the best. For all the criticism of Taylor,
they only lost a single game (against Germany) under his command
before the European Championships. Now I'm not going to defend Taylor
and his bizarre selections/tactics, but one defeat in almost two years
is non too shoddy a record. So on the surface, I don't think high
expectations were particularly outrageous. It's only when you look a
little closer and remember how Ireland really chucked away their
qualifying chances, and how England played poorly against the likes of
Turkey and Poland but still managed to eke out results, that you start
to realise that all is not what it should be.

--

Congratulations to Burnley, Fourth Division Champions, and Bromsgrove
Rovers, Beazer Homes League Champions.

 
 
 

England: Historical arrogance why?

Post by Garry Arch » Sun, 21 Jun 1992 03:47:24

Quote:


>>I have a question, did we (the English) ever have any real reason to believe
>>we were good in the first place.  I don't think that England even reached
>>the world cup finals before the war why?  Did they compete or were they
>>simply too arrogant even then.

>England never played in the World Cup until 1950 (and then they lost
>to the U.S. :-)). They weren't alone in this, but I'm sure arrogance
>had at least something to do with this.

England, the Football Association --- as well as the other British
associations, I might add, have had a stormy love-hate relationship with
FIFA ranging decades in the past.

FIFA was founded in 1904.  The FA rebuffed an invitation to join, dismissing
the notion of an international governing body as an unattainable dream.
Actually the FA was fearful that the new organisation would tamper with the
authority of its own International Football Association Board.

The FA had a change of heart when it became apparent that the seven charter
members of FIFA were serious in their intent, and at the same time respectful
of British authority on matters relating to rules and regulations.  The FA
became affiliated with FIFA in 1905.  In 1906, D.B. Woodfall of the FA
Council was elected President of the world body.  The International
Football Association Board was acknowledged as the sole authority over
the Laws of the Game and in 1913 FIFA was given two seats on the Board.

In 1920, England as well as the other British associations, withdrew from
FIFA, declaring that they would not intermingle with their former enemies
of the Great War.

They rejoined in 1924, but four years later all four withdrew again over
FIFA's sanctioning of part-time wages for amateur players at the 1928
Olympic Games.

Hence England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland all missed the World
Cups of 1930, 1934 and 1938.  All the British associations were reaffiliated
in 1946.

        - Reference: Encyclopedia of World Soccer

--

3M Health Information Systems,  Wallingford, Connecticut, U.S.A.

"An Englishman never enjoys himself, except for a noble purpose." - A.P.Herbert