Why I'll never support England

Tuesday, 15 June 2010 14:30

User Rating: / 7
PoorBest 

They may wave the Union Jack, but England are not representing us in South Africa

By Andrew Southwick

The clock has crept into the early hours of Sunday morning. The dust has now settled and vuvuzelas quietened after England finally opened their World Cup campaign. As a Scotsman quite unashamedly on the "Anyone but England" bandwagon, I'm fairly contented at Robert Green's mistake gifting the USA what was a deserved point.

Driving home, BBC's Radio Five Live are hosting a rather animated discussion on whether the rest of Britain should be supporting England or not. The conversation ends with the suggestion that "Anyone from Britain not supporting England is an idiot."

It is rather depressing that any Scot who has the audacity to not wish England the best of luck has to at this point argue that they are not racist, bitter, jealous or an idiot. They have friends who are English, family from down south, a decent education and they deplore racism.

Is that really what the world has come to, that a Scotsman has to justify why he doesn't support the Auld Enemy in a sporting event?

There are many reasons not to cheer our arch rivals on, and you don't need to be boiling with hatred towards anyone south of the border either.

Personally, I just find any England success as mindnumingly boring. In fact, I find anything they do as fairly mundane.

In the lead up to this World Cup, numerous programmes have been commissioned to celebrate the history of the football feast. Be it "50 Greatest World Cup Shocks" or "100 Greatest World Cup Moments", it does not matter how the programme is dressed up. For these programmes all share a common bond:-

a) They will never be a celebration of what the world has brought to the World Cup. They will be a celebration of what England has brought to the World Cup.

b) Almost certainly anything acheived by Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland or the Republic of Ireland will either be an after thought or something to laugh at, to remind the English that it could be worse.

England have made it abundantly clear that they are not representing Britain. The adverts, the pre-tournament hype, the football songs, the tv shows, the Mars wrappers - its all about England.

There's nothing wrong about that, they are the only home nation to qualify, and personally I've never minded a bit of patriotic pride for your national team. I however, and five million other Scots, prefer to put our effort in our own national team, rather than being caught up in the hysteria of another country.

And make no mistake, had Scotland qualified, our own build-up would have been enveloped by England's. Who can forget the build up to the Euro 2008 qualifying tie with Italy, as the week in Scotland felt like a year waiting for our biggest match in a decade. The "national" press barely gave two hoots, instead focussing on Israel against Russia because the result affected England's progress.

How many times do we need to see Gazza's tears at Italia 90? Is there anyone who is not aware of what happened yet? He fouled someone, got deservedly booked for it, cried like a bairn, became a national hero. Is that really the moment that defined a tournament when my generation first fell in love with the World Cup?

Mexico 1986. A poor England side were beaten by Maradona's two goals. One of them was handball. Yes he cheated, yes he had the audacity to celebrate it. Correct me if I'm wrong though, did England not celebrate a Geoff Hurst goal that almost certainly led to them winning the 1966 World Cup, despite it not being over the line?

In addition, was Gary Lineker pilloried back home for falling over in the box to win a crucial penalty against Cameroon at Italia 90? Has Michael Owen ever been labelled a cheat for two dives against Argentina - the World Cups of 1998 and 2002 - to win two more undeserved penalties? Or can England just continue to cheat because they were once the victims of injustice?

These are overlooked in favour of an outrage against Maradona that has lasted 24 years now, in a World Cup England were never good enough to win anyway. That does not even come close to the xenophobic hatred they reserve for Germany.

And yet we're called the bitter ones? But here's the thing; the two world wars that were fought against Germany, they included Scotland aswell. So did the Falklands war against the Argies.

Scotland have forgiven and forgetten though. England havn't. The USA, should they face Germany in South Africa, will no doubt spare us a sing song about 1945 too. And yet people want to paint us as British, all united under one flag?

Not when that is how you're representing us.

We're not the same. When Scotland are at the World Cup, we don't spend our time dismissing our opponents; we appreciate the different cultures, styles and abilities 31 other nations are bringing to the event. Its a privilege for us to be playing against them, not the other way around.

We go there to make friends, whether they be Brazilian or German, not to wage war and sing about how many German bombers your grandparents shot down.

We also don't spend our time worrying about the injustices that denied us our rightful tournament win. 

Back to the original point though, what makes England so boring?

1966 needs no explanation, but thats fine. They won the World Cup, of course they should mention it, just like we would have had we won it. We have a DVD out celebrating the 1967 showboating exericise performed by Jim Baxter, Dennis Law and co as the World Champions were easily defeated at Wembley.

What irks with us Scots, is that 1970 is a celebration of how brave England narrowly lost to Brazil and Germany, yet 1974 you would be forgiven for failing to realise that a World Cup actually took place, and that in it Scotland were undefeated in a group that included Brazil.

1978 wasn't the best of campaigns for Scotland, but at least we had a campaign to fail in while England were sat at home. Archie Gemmill's solo goal against Holland plays on a permanent loop within the Scottish Football museum, where visitors will never merely watch it once, with the need to watch it a few times until the magic of the goal truly sinks in.

It was a great World Cup goal. Michael Owen's effort v Argentina wasn't. It was a long ball, he shrugs off one man and the second doesn't have the pace to get near him. No prizes for guessing which goal "Britain" celebrates the most.

Gazza's tears at Italia 90? Personally my heart breaks more watching the solemn face of Jim Leighton before he beats the ground in frustration when Scotland were within just nine minutes of a draw with Brazil and the second round.

Heartbreak at Euro 96, we would feel your pain but we suffered plenty of our own. World Cup dreams ending in St Ettiene at France 98 - snap.

The point is, we have our own football team who break our hearts often enough, we don't need to share the burden of England's demise. 

And in South Africa, as a non participating nation, we're entitled to support whoever we want. Brazil are there, Argentina have brought along the best player in the world, the French could implode at any minute which makes them watchable. Portugal are a dangerous dark horse, while Germany, Holland and Spain are all capable of much more than England.

It actually takes a lot of effort to want England, who the majority of the time are about as exciting to watch as a snail attempting a marathon, to win. Especially when this team includes players like Ashley Cole and John Terry, two fellas who have not exactly covered themselves in glory with their off the field antics this year. Who wants to see them two hailed as World Cup winners, as legends, as heros?

England fans always point out that they are happy to support Scotland when we qualify. It is easy to cheer on Scotland because we are neither offensive or likely to actually win the tournament. If that was to become a real possibility, I wonder how the support from down south would change.

Lets roll back the years to Euro 96. Had Gary McAllister put his penalty past David Seaman, almost certainly earning Scotland a point and no doubt putting Scotland into the second round, suddenly them plucky Scots would have done rather well for themselves.

Second round, Scotland would have been up against France, who of course in 1996 managed two 0-0 draws in the knock-out stages and relied on the luck of penalties. Lets imagine that Anfield, already the scene of a famous Scottish success against Wales, again witnesses another Scotland moment to remember. If we could draw with England and Holland then why couldn't we nudge past the French?

The fact that most England fans would read the above paragraph and chuckle at the mere notion of Scotland winning through the to the semi-finals says it all for their disdain of Scottish football.

Into the semi-finals, and this time Old Trafford is transformed into a home from home for Scotland, and bouyed by the extra support Scotland book their place in the final at Wembley, patiently waiting for the dream rematch against England.

That final never happens. Germany knock out England, and Terry Venables men are powerless to stop Scotland winning Euro 96, their tournament, at Wembley stadium. And if we won, make no mistake, we would never shut up about it - it would be bigger than 1966.

I wonder, just how many England fans would have ditched the Union Jack for one night, and wished anyone but Scotland would win.  

Should Scottish fans be cheering on England at the World Cup? Let us know on The Away End forum