5 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Strawman.

There's nowhere near the level of corruption in the British game compared to Africa. Totally incomparable.

(PDF) THE PROBLEM WITH AFRICAN FOOTBALL: CORRUPTION AND THE (UNDER)DEVELOPMENT OF THE GAME ON THE CONTINENT

Hence, nowhere near the success.

Jonny, the strawman is you claiming that corruption is the reason for African teams not winning the World Cup.

2 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Given that France are through to the Semi Finals and the outright bookies favourite to win, it might be your claims of the DEI (you fixate on) might be a thing of your own imagination.

Nice deflection. But you deliberately missed the point. Allow me to make it again.

It appears you support DEI when non-whites are under-represented, but you champion meritocracy when whites are under-represented.

Care to explain the hypocrisy?

3 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Jonny, the strawman is you claiming that corruption is the reason for African teams not winning the World Cup.

Corruption is indeed the main reason for the lack of success of African teams.

Did you even read the articles?

1 minute ago, JonnyF said:

Corruption is indeed the main reason for the lack of success of African teams.

Did you even read the articles?

I like links Jonny, have you got one?

5 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Nice deflection. But you deliberately missed the point. Allow me to make it again.

It appears you support DEI when non-whites are under-represented, but you champion meritocracy when whites are under-represented.

Care to explain the hypocrisy?

I absolutely did not miss the point.

The French team are through to the Semi Finals and are favorites for the outright win.

There’s no proof whatsoever of your DEI thing.

Edited July 14Jul 14 by Chomper Higgot

5 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I like links Jonny, have you got one?

Clearly you like them more than you like reading.

I already linked it in my post 20 minutes ago.

4 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I absolutely did not miss the point.

Clearly you either missed it or deliberately chose to ignore since it highlights your hypocrisy.

4 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

The French team are through to the Semi Finals and are favorites for the outright win.

There’s no proof whatsoever of your DEI thing.

The point is not about how good the team is. They are an excellent team.

The point is that you are not calling for DEI when there is a clear under-representation of a certain group in the team. The reason you are not calling for DEI in this case is because the group that is under-represented is white players.

For the third time, do you care to explain the hypocrisy in your position? If not I will just assume it's simply another case of anti-white racism from you.

8 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Clearly you either missed it or deliberately chose to ignore since it highlights your hypocrisy.

The point is not about how good the team is. They are an excellent team.

The point is that you are not calling for DEI when there is a clear under-representation of a certain group in the team. The reason you are not calling for DEI in this case is because the group that is under-represented is white players.

For the third time, do you care to explain the hypocrisy in your position? If not I will just assume it's simply another case of anti-white racism from you.

You once again imagine why I’m not calling out DEI within the French team.

You claim the DEI but you’ve presented zero evidence to support your claim.

Your claim of hypocrisy is based on your assumption why I’m not calling out this DEI within the French team which you have failed to demonstrate exists.

I’m beginning to doubt that ‘First Class Honours Degree’ of which you have boasted. You don’t seem able to construct a coherent and logical argument.

Edited July 14Jul 14 by Chomper Higgot

18 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Clearly you like them more than you like reading.

I already linked it in my post 20 minutes ago.

Your link presents no statement that Africa hasn’t won the World Cup due to corruption, it does outline multiple systemic problems hampering the Development of Football in Africa, of which corruption is only one.

A report on corruption in football that omits corruption within FIFA is a chuckle.

Thank you for sharing.

1 hour ago, save the frogs said:

Bromance?

That game between England and Norway almost got annulled and replayed. The ball hit a cable and the play should have been stopped, but it lead to an England goal.

FIFA missed it.

No, the ball didn't hit a cable and the game didn't nearly get annulled and replayed .

Just post match sensationalism

17 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

A report on corruption in football that omits corruption within FIFA is a chuckle.

I wonder if FIFA deliberately does not allow African teams to win.

Well, power to African dudes in the France team. It's the next best thing to an African team winning. I'm rooting for France-Africa.

One reason Brazil got good has nothing to do with development by the government.

They played on tiny pitches that were not real football fields and had to learn to maneuver that ball in tight spaces.

22 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

You once again imagine why I’m not calling out DEI within the French team.

You claim the DEI but you’ve presented zero evidence to support your claim.

Your claim of hypocrisy is based on your assumption why I’m not calling out this DEI within the French team which you have failed to demonstrate exists.

I’m beginning to doubt that ‘First Class Honours Degree’ of which you have boasted. You don’t seem able to construct a coherent and logical argument.

Just as I suspected. Another dodge. Your hypocrisy is clear to see, as is the reason for it.

Double standards. 2 tier application of DEI. Anti-white racism.

4 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

I wonder if FIFA deliberately does not allow African teams to win.

Well, power to African dudes in the France team. It's the next best thing to an African team winning. I'm rooting for France-Africa.

One reason Brazil got good has nothing to do with development by the government.

They played on tiny pitches that were not real football fields and had to learn to maneuver that ball in tight spaces.

Brazilian football, massively corrupt and yet five times winners of the World Cup.

5 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Just as I suspected. Another dodge. Your hypocrisy is clear to see, as is the reason for it.

Double standards. 2 tier application of DEI. Anti-white racism.

You need to present evidence of the DEI you claim to exist.

Stop swerving, give your evidence.

20 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Your link presents no statement that Africa hasn’t won the World Cup due to corruption, it does outline multiple systemic problems hampering the Development of Football in Africa, of which corruption is only one.

You're the one who mentioned "not winning the world cup" not me. You don't need to win the World cup to be considered successful.

I have been talking about the lack of relative success in African football compared to the massive talent pool. It's down to massive levels of corruption in Africa when compared to far, far lower levels of corruption when African players come to play in other leagues in places like Europe.

That's the main reason why a group of Africans can have success in the French side but not in an African side.

20 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

A report on corruption in football that omits corruption within FIFA is a chuckle.

The report was about corruption in African football so it's not really a chuckle, it's common sense it would focus on corruption in African football. I know you wish it would focus elsewhere but that was the topic so you're out of luck.

20 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Thank you for sharing.

Always happy to educate.

4 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Brazilian football, massively corrupt and yet five times winners of the World Cup.

look how they practice.

barefoot

favelas, tiny pitches

1 minute ago, Chomper Higgot said:

You need to present evidence of the DEI you claim to exist.

Stop swerving, give your evidence.

Are you drunk or something Higgot? Or just being deliberately annoying?

You are a supporter of DEI when non-whites are under-represented in a field. Are you denying that now?

13 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

I wonder if FIFA deliberately does not allow African teams to win.

Yes I bet it's all a racist conspiracy in cahoots with Trump. 😄

18 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Are you drunk or something Higgot? Or just being deliberately annoying?

You are a supporter of DEI when non-whites are under-represented in a field. Are you denying that now?

Jonny, you’ve presented zero evidence of DEI in the French team.

What’s your evidence?

33 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Jonny, you’ve presented zero evidence of DEI in the French team.

Stop being silly, Higgot.

There is no DEI in the French team. Because it is white people that are under-represented.

39 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Stop being silly, Higgot.

There is no DEI in the French team. Because it is white people that are under-represented.

So there we have it, Jonny got triggered into making a baseless claim of the DEI that rattles around constantly in his head.

What an embarrassment.

39 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Stop being silly, Higgot.

There is no DEI in the French team. Because it is white people that are under-represented.

It's a ridiculous argument. The reason that black players are in the majority in the French team is because the white coach, Didier Deschamps, picks what he considers to be the best XI/XVI to win a game and, so far, his choices have proven to be correct.

It would only be necessary to even consider implementing a 'DEI' measure if there is evidence that white French players do not have the same opportunity as black players to be considered for selection for the national team (squad) and/or you can prove that Deschamps deliberately discriminates against white players/ favours black players.

So, where's the evidence?

1 hour ago, Nick Carter icp said:

No, the ball didn't hit a cable and the game didn't nearly get annulled and replayed .

Just post match sensationalism

Bull. The ball certainly hit the wire. Everyone on the Norwegian team saw it. I saw it.

Why on earth would the players protest to an absurd thing like that, if it didn't hit it? Makes no sense. Even the BBC had an article of an expert who used a method to determine the change of ball direction. It just died and dropped straight down. The ball should have been dropped.

End of story.

I'm not saying England wouldn't have won it anyway, but that goal shouldn't have been allowed.

5 minutes ago, thaibreaker said:

Bull. The ball certainly hit the wire. Everyone on the Norwegian team saw it. I saw it.

Why on earth would the players protest to an absurd thing like that, if it didn't hit it? Makes no sense. Even the BBC had an article of an expert who used a method to determine the change of ball direction. It just died and dropped straight down. The ball should have been dropped.

End of story.

I'm not saying England wouldn't have won it anyway, but that goal shouldn't have been allowed.

Bullsiit ?

End of story ?

OK then

3 hours ago, JonnyF said:

They are not "ethnically" English. That is not my opinion, that is a fact that your attempts at ethnic erasure cannot overcome.

They can qualify to play for England through nationality though. They can do this even if not born in England, like Marc Guehi who was born in Ivory Coast and came here as a child. He isn't ethnically English either.

It's really not complicated Higgot, I've explained it to you enough times you should understand it by now. 😄

Is there no end to the number of times that you will peddle this nonsense? (rhetorical question: answer is clearly 'No').

I have explained to you countless times, the concept of English ethnicity today is essentially a theoretical one: There are an infinitesimally small number of pure-blooded indigenous Englishmen alive today i.e. individuals descended purely from the original English tribes such as the Picts. Almost all of us white Englishmen without exception are a combination to varying degrees of Roman, Viking, Anglo-Saxon, Norman, etc heritage. We are a nation of mongrels. Those are the facts.

Now if you consider the descendents of the groups of immigrants/ invaders detailed above to be "ethnically" English, it begs the question, why then can't the descendents of more recent immigrants - for example, those individuals of African, Asian blood - also be considered "ethnically" English?

We all know your answer: It's as clear as 'black and white (and brown)'.

3 hours ago, save the frogs said:

Team sports are good for human beings.

You need to challenge yourself physically. And there's a bit of mental component, outwitting your opponent.

Sports are useful. Thats why they have endured since the Greeks invented them.

but but but what about the children? if they were to experience defeat it could scar them for life,

So everybody gets a prize these days and the prize for simply taking part and coming last is just as important as the one for winning. Or so some would have our kids believe, hardly worth the effort of training or practising really is it

1 hour ago, RayC said:

Is there no end to the number of times that you will peddle this nonsense? (rhetorical question: answer is clearly 'No').

I have explained to you countless times, the concept of English ethnicity today is essentially a theoretical one: There are an infinitesimally small number of pure-blooded indigenous Englishmen alive today i.e. individuals descended purely from the original English tribes such as the Picts. Almost all of us white Englishmen without exception are a combination to varying degrees of Roman, Viking, Anglo-Saxon, Norman, etc heritage. We are a nation of mongrels. Those are the facts.

Now if you consider the descendents of the groups of immigrants/ invaders detailed above to be "ethnically" English, it begs the question, why then can't the descendents of more recent immigrants - for example, those individuals of African, Asian blood - also be considered "ethnically" English?

We all know your answer: It's as clear as 'black and white (and brown)'.

Is Erling Haaland ethnically English then? He was born in England. It sounds like you wish to deny him his Norwegian heritage which sounds a bit bizarre to me. Not as bizarre as throwing around the term "pure-blood" though, as that is just plain bonkers and best reserved for use in vampire movies.

21 minutes ago, James105 said:

Is Erling Haaland ethnically English then? He was born in England. It sounds like you wish to deny him his Norwegian heritage which sounds a bit bizarre to me. Not as bizarre as throwing around the term "pure-blood" though, as that is just plain bonkers and best reserved for use in vampire movies.

He’s Norwegian, born in the UK to Norwegian parents, raised and educated in Norway.

He holds Norwegian nationality.

He might pass for a Yorkshireman, many believe this to be the greatest birthright, surpassing all others.

1 hour ago, James105 said:

Is Erling Haaland ethnically English then? He was born in England. It sounds like you wish to deny him his Norwegian heritage which sounds a bit bizarre to me. Not as bizarre as throwing around the term "pure-blood" though, as that is just plain bonkers and best reserved for use in vampire movies.

I'll let Haaland speak for himself: "I lived in England for 3½ or four years. I lived in Norway for such a long time, so it was natural for me to choose Norway. Maybe if my father had played longer in England or whatever, maybe I would be English -- I don't know".

No, like the rest of +/-56m English, Harland is not 'ethnically' English because, as I explained, it is a phrase which is effectively meaningless in the modern day. It is being used in this forum by @JonnyF simply as a way to try and justify his racism.

You call my use of the phrase "pure blood" to define 'ethnic English' "bizarre": Why? How else would you define the phrase then?

What's the criteria for being considered English? Length of heritage? Both of Jude Bellingham's parents were born in England as was he. Harry Kane was born in England but his parents were born in Ireland. Are neither 'English'? Is Bellingham, 'English' and Kane, not? Does that make Bellingham 'more' English than Kane? If so, that's going to cause some people to choke on their cornflakes.

45 minutes ago, RayC said:

I'll let Haaland speak for himself: "I lived in England for 3½ or four years. I lived in Norway for such a long time, so it was natural for me to choose Norway. Maybe if my father had played longer in England or whatever, maybe I would be English -- I don't know".

No, like the rest of +/-56m English, Harland is not 'ethnically' English because, as I explained, it is a phrase which is effectively meaningless in the modern day. It is being used in this forum by @JonnyF simply as a way to try and justify his racism.

Forummoderation services

You call my use of the phrase "pure blood" to define 'ethnic English' "bizarre": Why? How else would you define the phrase then?

What's the criteria for being considered English? Length of heritage? Both of Jude Bellingham's parents were born in England as was he. Harry Kane was born in England but his parents were born in Ireland. Are neither 'English'? Is Bellingham, 'English' and Kane, not? Does that make Bellingham 'more' English than Kane? If so, that's going to cause some people to choke on their cornflakes.

Now it's all the rage to have your DNA tested for ethnicity.

A very English friend of mine, Guildford born, father an MBE recipient, found her DNA was a mixture of English, Finnish, Syrian and Spanish blood.