Team GB

Should I try to be less controversial today?

I reckon I got a taste of what it is like to be a non-Nat in the blogosphere at the weekend and I have much more respect for those opposing voices now. Apparently nothing critical of the SNP Government will be allowed in an independent Scotland.

Anyway, I see Sepp Blatter has approved the "Team England" for the 2012 Olympics. That'll help the US commentators, who seem to confuse "England" and "Britain" anyway.

Although this is being touted as an "ideal solution" I really don't think it is. Mind you, a number of teams at various Olympic events have been made up specifically of athletes from a single component part of the UK - curling, rowing, cycling, sailing etc. So it is not without precedent. But this is slightly different. I wonder - are proponents and opponents of the idea happy with this fudged solution?

Read more...

Quote(s) of the day (yesterday)

Former Scotland football manager Craig Brown on the Politics Show yesterday:

"The GB team...Quite clearly, being very patriotic and Scottish I am bitterly opposed to that because I don't trust FIFA's assurance that this thing won't be binding for the future..."

"There is not one genuine football - Scotland - supporter that I know who's in favour of this."

Guess he will be berated from all sides as a closet "bigot" Nationalist...

Incidentally, the MSPs' favourite sporting pundit - one Charles "Chic" Young - also appeared on the Politics Show yesterday. The following statement (at 30.10 on the film) is attributed to him:

"I think its one thing politicians sticking their noses into football in the first place. But sticking their boots into it - and me in particular - is another thing altogether."

"If I had the slightest excuse, I would be the 'Guy Fawkes' of Holyrood and I'd try to blow the place to smithereens."

Surely the counter-terrorism police must be called regarding this very public threat on an established democratic institution?!

Read more...

Squaring an egg-shaped circle

What is the difference between this:


and this?
I mean, don't get me wrong, I'm very much against the idea of a British football team competing at the London Olympics in 2012. But I am very aware of the claim of hypocrisy which may well be levelled at me when I support the British and Irish Lions as they take the field against World Champions South Africa at rugby union next summer.

So, why do I feel that I am able to support a team which is put together once every four years to compete against some of the best in the world at one sport but not another?

To be honest, I'm not sure. And I don't know how smart it is of me to try to offer an explanation without resorting to some distasteful comments about sport and class. But I'll try.

First up is, I guess, the historical aspect of it. The Lions have toured either Australia, New Zealand or South Africa on a four-yearly basis since the 1950s, with their first test match played as far back as 1888. The Lions tradition is something I've grown up with. I can remember watching Jeremy Guscott (an Englishman my father loathed when playing in a white shirt) slot over a drop goal which won the series against South Africa in 1997. And, I guess, there's a point to be made there about drawing people together from each of the "home" nations (for the purposes of rugby union "Ireland" competes as one entity) and overcoming rivalries - despite knocking seven colours of s*** out of each other during the Five (now Six) Nations each year, the teams united to take on southern hemisphere opposition. Equally, the Lions tour has been a part of the rugby calander for such a long time. It is an established event and presents no risk to the independent rugby unions.

The same thing I do not think can be said of football. There is no historical precedent. Yes, GB has competed at Olympic Games but not since the 1960s. By the time 2012 comes round, that will be nearly 50 years. Also, and this is where I'll try not to play a class card, there is something more of an understanding among rugby fans than football fans. Go to any rugby game (as I will on Saturday, to watch Scotland v South Africa) and you can sit with opposing fans, enjoy the banter and generally get on fine - and no more so than in the pub pre- and post-game. Go to a football match, and you'll be segregated from fans of the opposing time for fear that rioting will break out. It is hard not to suggest that this is related to class, though I guess there's an aspect of the mindset that Scottish Unionist so easily finds on newspaper comments.

So what is my point? Well, I'm certainly not trying to say that rugby fans are better than football fans. What I guess I'm trying to legitimise is my view that it is fine to support a British and Irish side at rugby - but that a football side should not take the field. Of course there are many sides to this argument, but this is mine.

In the meantime, I'll hope Scotland can prove once again that they can do themselves proud in the coming week, competing against South Africa at rugby on Saturday and Argentina at football next Wednesday.

Read more...