THE Diary, being an even-tempered and placid kind of a chiel, does not get too perturbed by English pundits referring to their national team as “we”. It’s easy to indulge them these little caprices when you know that when they eventually fall to a grown-up team that it’ll be back to “they” before you can say “I blame the foreign imports to our game, Gary”.
Even so, we can’t help notice the way English commentators and studio pundits are fond of disparaging the efforts of some overseas players who clearly aren’t up to the lofty standards of Wrighty, Shearery, Lampardy and Ferdinandy. We’ll politely overlook these chaps’ own tournament records which, despite being hailed as England’s “Golden Generation” endured World Cups that were about as useful as the proverbial two blaws on a ragman’s trumpet.
During the Uruguay v Russia match yesterday we were reminded early on that the home nation were building some momentum with two wins in their opening two games. And then came this little gem: “Russia’s two victories have come against two teams they would be expected to beat: Saudi Arabia, with all respect probably the worst team in the tournament. Egypt held them [Russia] at bay until midway through the second half and then collapsed after a sluggish own goal.”
If you substitute England, Tunisia and Panama for Russia, Saudi Arabia and Egypt, the same sentence could have described Harry Kane’s boys’ start to the campaign. The only difference was that Panama collapsed after about 10 minutes. Kane is of course a splendid player who may well yet finish as the tournament’s top scorer … but only if England keep facing teams who give away penalties like confetti and who are so deferential to the great English talisman that they allow him to score with the heel of his boot when he isn’t even looking.
Nevertheless we congratulate England for getting their World Cup off to a flyer with victories against the 23rd ranked team
in the FIFA world rankings
and the 55th.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here