WE can’t be the only ones who have noticed the multitudes of apparently healthy and affluent supporters that are attached to some of the poorest nations on the planet. You might expect it of say, the Scandinavia countries and nations with well-established industrial and technological economic frameworks like Belgium, Germany, Japan and South Korea, maybe even Australia. 

But when England played Colombia last week in their last-16 tie it seemed that there were more than 20,000 Colombians at the match. If you factor in the massive distance between Colombia and Russia as well as the hotel bills and tickets that were being exchanged for around 200 dollars a pop then you wouldn’t get much change out of a couple of years’ salary for many Colombians. In fact, there wouldn’t be much left either from the average westerner’s salary. 

According to the World Food Programme 23 million Colombians are poor and 6 million in extreme poverty. Last year the National Administrative Department of Statistics stated that 27% of the population were living in poverty of which 7.4% were in extreme poverty. 

According to the World Bank, Colombia ranked alongside countries such as Panama and Brazil as the most unequal Latin American countries in wealth distribution. In Africa more than one third of the population are considered poor, despite Nigeria being the continent’s biggest economy.

Yet these countries were the best supported at perhaps the most expensive sporting event in the world and made even more pricey by the increase in the duration of the World Cup caused by all the extra competing nations. 

Look, we know that football is for all and that it’s unwise to describe it as a working-class sport. But it would be equally foolish to assert that football’s roots aren’t still largely working-class. The World Cup though has been designed to ensure that very few working-class people will ever be able to attend. The duration of the tournament, unfair ticketing arrangements and exploitative pricing strategies by airlines and hotels have seen to that. 

Perhaps some governments are subsidising multitudes of supporters to get to the World Cup. 

This could be regarded as an investment because of the marketing opportunities from thousands of happy, shiny citizens painting their faces in the national colours and showcasing their country’s traditions with elaborate fancy dress displays.

If so, then I think the Scottish Government ought to consider subsidising Scottish football fans who want to travel abroad to support the national team. 

For starters, it might give our players a wee boost and it would help market brand Scotland. Think of the joy of 20,000 See You Jimmy hats and people dressed up to look like a human fish supper and a bottle of

Johnny Walker Black Label (other brands are available).
And for anyone who thinks that this is vile stereotyping then have a look at the list of our chief exports.

The diary has some questions

AS we move towards the conclusion to one of the most memorable World Cups in history The Diary has a few niggling and, as yet, unanswered questions. Some of them, we suspect, are being asked by many football aficionados around the globe, such as: why does the country with the worst record in recent World Cup history amongst the four semifinalists sing constantly about the certainty of the trophy “coming home”?

In Scotland the most obvious one is: if VAR was introduced here would all our games last for an extra half an hour because of all the “honest mistakes” our referees make?

As a public sector employer shouldn’t the BBC be made to carry out a robust recruitment and selection process when spending so much public money on its football pundits?

And if so, why are attributes such as semi-literacy; an absence of objectivity; ignorance about the history of the game and the host nation all deemed to be advantages?

Why are so many stars who are either guilty of or under investigation for criminal tax evasion permitted to showcase their wares in the world’s biggest shop window?

What percentage of the hundreds of millions FIFA will make from the entire tournament (including qualifying) will be ploughed back into grass-roots football development?

And how does this compare with the quantum that will be spent on corporate hospitality for sponsors, government officials, politicians, super-rich industrialists, not to mention criminals, gambling cartels, gangsters and money-launderers?

World's top chib merchants #5

The countdown continues on our all-time favourite merchants of World Cup mayhem (of whom we thoroughly disapprove and wish to distance ourselves from).

In 1986 Scotland found themselves in a mouth-watering group comprising West Germany, Denmark and Uruguay. It was named the Group of Death. Yet, if we were to exit the tournament prematurely then at least we’d get to measure ourselves against some brilliant sides.

Sadly, the Uruguayans in particular seemed to take the Group of Death sobriquet seriously as they kicked Scotland out of the tournament in the last group match. Yet, rough as the South Americans were, we still maintain that Denmark’s tactics in securing a 1-0 victory against us were of the worst kind.

The Danes were much fancied yet Scotland matched them for skill and poise and none more so than Charlie Nicholas who was enjoying his best match in a Scottish jersey. That was before he was taken out by a vicious challenge by the Danish midfielder, Klaus Berggreen. Nicholas was carried off and was never quite the same player again. Many years later Berggreen acknowledged the brutality of his tackle on Nicklaus. “I did it for Denmark,” he said.