Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Soccer' started by Europe, May 16, 2010.
MICHEL PLATINI (Juventus) vs Ascoli - Serie A, 1982-1983:
GIANFRANCO ZOLA (Chelsea) vs Norwich City - 2001/2002 F.A. Cup, Third Round Replay:
DAVID GINOLA (Newcastle United) vs Ferencvaros - 1996/1997 UEFA Cup, Second Round, 2nd Leg:
ROBERTO DI MATTEO (Chelsea) vs Middlesbrough - 1997 F.A. Cup Final:
1997 already saw many foreigners playing in the Prem. Middlesbrough even had 2 Brazilians.
The 1990 FA Cup had 26 players: 23 from England; 2 Wales; 1 Scot. There was at least 1 black playing for England. Things changed quickly. Some of that may have been the Bosman ruling which affected European players.I wonder who made the decision to bring in Brazilians and what kept them out. Did the FA just have a rule prohibiting non-Europeans before the mid 90's because the Bosman ruling had nothing to do with non-Europeans or was it the league itself that kept them out?
Non-European players (especially Africans) were a comparative rarity in European football until the beginning of the 1990s. From 1990 onwards, however, several factorswhich contributed to alter the composition of playing personnelin England arose in rapid succession.
Firstly, the five-year post-Heysel ban was lifted at the very beginning of the decade, which meant that foreign players would no longer be put off from potentially signing for top English clubs given that they could once again compete in Europe.
Secondly, the formation of the Premier League injected previously unimagined money into the top tier of English football. The TV and sponsorship deals, the aggressive marketing resulting in a massive global fanbase and the concomitant increase in prestige made English clubs exceedingly more attractive propositions for the new breed of mercenary footballer. With the recognition of the potential of football to become a dizzyingly money-spinning "commodity" came the inevitable involvement of wealthy businessmen, who invested additional millions into their clubs, culminating in Roman Abramovich's purchase of Chelsea in 2003. If the Premier League was to be the most watched domestic competition in the world, then the rationale behind the phenomenal increase of its black component requires no explanation. This leads us into the next point...
The Bosman case was decided a couple of years after the Premier League was launched. The Bosman ruling blew things open as it stated that a footballer, like any worker, could ply his trade unrestricted in any EU member state. This automatically meant that the previous UEFA restrictions on foreign players in clubs within the EU were deemed discriminatory and hence abolished.
Prior to the Bosman ruling, clubs were permitted to play three non-nationals, plus two non-nationals who had played in the given country for an uninterrupted five years, including three years in junior teams. In England, of course, things were always a bit different as players from Scotland,Wales, Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland were never regarded as "foreign" - except in the context of European competitions, where UEFA regulations naturally took precedence. That is why English managers often had to alter, and thus generally weaken, their sides for the European Cup, etcetera.
Following the Bosman decision the only restrictions which could be imposed were those on non-EU players. But as we know, Brazilian, Argentine and Uruguayan players were already gaining entry into European clubs by claiming Portuguese, Spanish and Italian passports on the basis of ancestry, thus freeing non-EU places which were increasingly filled by Africans. Many of these Africans were also counted as Europeans as they entered the French football system at an early age - the same went for Brazilians being signed as teenagers by Portuguese clubs. Once the EU expanded, so did the number of available players.
In an English context, clubs now had a very large new pool of relatively cheap players to choose from - in the world of business, "cheap" isn't exactly a dirty word, so the cheaper option was eagerly embraced. Given the generous salaries available in the Premier League, which meant that English players were unlikely to move abroad, a side-effect of the importation of cheap foreigners was that top-quality English players became progressively more expensive - this, in turn, completed the circle by making foreigners an even more attractive option. That's before the anti-White agendas are even considered.
I often wonder about the timing of the Bosman case, which was suspiciously beneficial to the greater scheme of the spread of "multiculturalism" - and the accompanying dilution of White national identities - in European football. The avarice-spawned English Premier League had just been launched in 1992, while in the same year the European Cup became the Champions League with an initial small group stage that would progressively evolve into an income-generating bonanza, both for the biggest, richest clubs and for UEFA. In order to ensure the predominance of these "super clubs" the criteria of qualification for this new Champions League were conveniently altered so that more than one club from the major domestic competitions could gain access to the millions on offer each year, leading to the situation in which an English club can now finish fourthin the Premier League and still participate.
The 1994 World Cup had been held in the United States, with FIFA openly declaring that it was part of an effort to spread the popularity of the sport in North America - of course, all of our forum members are only too aware that the way to interest the United States' public is to showcase black players, whom they associate with sporting excellence. I recall that the studio backdrop to the Australian SBS coverage of the 1994 tournament featured an opaque silhouette of a player striking a spectacular volley - and it was abundantly obvious from the telltale shape of the shaved head that the silhouette depicted a black player...
When one takes into account the beginnings of truly fast-paced mass immigration into Europe in the 1990s and the convenient "softening" of the White populations' possible reaction to this via "visible minority football heroes", the timing of the Bosman ruling becomes even more dubious...
Right, after all of that, it's time to get back to a bit of on-topic content .
IAN RUSH (Liverpool) vs Manchester United - Premier League, 1992/1993:
Great summary Rebajlo.
I recall some sort of challenge to the Bosman ruling about 7 or 8 years ago.
A sort of reverse discrimination suit of some kind. Of course it was never termed this.
The sheer number of nonwhite foreigners in the top European leagues is just sickening. Truly takes away from the game.
Yet, most fans are imbeciles and support 'their' nonwhite players.
Rebajlo, Nice summary.
Borussia, Europe - Thanks lads.
The only thing which shall prevent the further "blackening" and "browning" of European football is drastic political change within European societies themselves, for both UEFA and FIFA are organisations filled with the same leftists who sit in parliaments and boardrooms throughout the Western world.
The mentality of the population from whence the fans are drawn must be radically altered and that can only occur if their overall worldview is recalibrated through the medium of "traditional" political nationalism. Only when the natural desire to support one's own people is reawakened and consequently enshrined - thus consigning the poisonous and self-destructive myths of "political correctness" and "tolerance" to the garbage heap of history - shall change spread from the bottom up. Just as they always were prior to the fateful 1960s and 1970s, blacks, Arabs, Asians, mestizos and all mongrel breeds thereof would again be viewed as the undesirable, backward scum that they are, as opposed to the current fashionable image of exciting, vitally "enriching" spices enlivening the stolid stew of "boring" European non-culture as conveniently determined by White-loathing Jews and self-loathing Whites.
The alliance of the media, the "entertainment" industry, sports governing bodies, "academics" and politicians which buttresses today's anti-White "system" cannot be destroyed other than by ruthless political force, for it is so powerful - and its means of manipulating sports are so entrenched - that anything else is destined to fail. For sport to change, society must change first. Otherwise, I'll still hear ridiculous statements from die-hard fans such as: " 'E may be schwartzer, but 'e's our schwartzer... "
Bloody hell, I forgot to post the goal. Well, here it is:
GRAEME SHARP (Everton) vs Liverpool, First Division, 1984-1985:
Wow, Sharp's on the full speed athleticism and skill there was insane. This wasn't the milk cup final, was it?
There is a kind of gritty documentary style early-mid 80s 2 part clip series on the Liverpool-Everton Milk Cup final at wembley. you can search for it and check it out. Interesting
This was a key time for both clubs, as Liverpool at the time was arguably the strongest team in European football. They won in Roma vs a very capable AS Roma side (in their home ground no less) the year before.
Heysel happened probably a few months later then this match you posted Rebaljo. Everton was on the rise and the consequences for them were brutal.
Everton never got the chance to reap the rewards of European club tournament football. Someone once told me that around '85, '86 Everton were 'heir apparent' for top English club once Liverpool started aging a bit and some players left for other clubs.
Was Sharp ever a England International? I'll wikipedia his career.
You really summed it up nicely Rebaljo. That post can be written as a feature article in a European Nationalist magazine of some kind.
Look how the below comment on the BBC by a fan relates to Rebajlo's mention of the mind set of people. The fan talks about racism I guess against a white American owner by Englishman if that's possible. It's more like being anti-American. He said England was too insular-meaning too English I suppose.
"The latent racism evident in so many articles in the media is astounding. Firstly, what does the nationality of the owner matter? Would Manchester prefer Peter Swales to the current owners? Would Villa prefer Doug Ellis to Randy Lerner? Indeed, for all the Glazer-bashing that occurs, I - as a United fan - still often wake up grateful for the fact Michael Knighton's purchase never happened... English ownership certainly doesn't guarantee anything better - arguably the opposite.
Secondly, how English-owned were Arsenal? Kroenke and Usmanov have been in the driving seat for three years now anyway - the English contingent of owners were nothing more than influential minority shareholders.
Hill-Wood's 'American sort' comment is no different from the unworldly fans who once booed black players or the sarcastic 'Arsene who' headlines that greeted Wenger's arrival. Its all down to an old fashioned form of insularity that football, and England generally, will be far better off without.
Borussia - Thank You for the kind words. If You looked Graeme Sharp up on wikipedia, Younowknow that he was a Scottish international .
You're not wrong about the effects that the European ban had on Everton, mate.The Heysel disaster occured at the end of the season in which Sharp scored that goal (1984-1985) so Everton, havingfinally won the Championship again,were denied a place in the European Cup - a trophy which they had a sterling chance of lifting the following season. Who knows how history would have changed if Everton had been able tooperate in a normal footballing environment?
As things went, Manchester Unitedrose to prominence at just the right time. The ban on English clubs competing in Europe was lifted, the Premier League was launched and United consequently reaped (and continue to reap) all of the associated financial benefits.
Europe - Isn't it strange that the English (and other Whites) are conveniently labelled as "insular" if they wish to retain their own football players, club ownership, culture, and civilisation, while Asians or any other "coloured" grubs are euphemistically referred to as "traditional" if they wish to do the same...
Now, time for another goal . Check this one out:
ERNIE HUNT (Coventry City) vs Everton - First Division, 1970-1971:
"You're not wrong about the effects that the European ban had on Everton, mate. The Heysel disaster occured at the end of the season in which Sharp scored that goal (1984-1985) so Everton, having finally won the Championship again, were denied a place in the European Cup - a trophy which they had a sterling chance of lifting the following season. Who knows how history would have changed if Everton had been able to operate in a normal footballing environment?"
It seems odd they banned all English clubs from Europe instead of just Liverpool. I wonder if that had anything to do with the English clubs dominating the European Cup and UEFA just decided to eliminate the competition when they had a chance. I wonder if there was any protest about the entire league being banned.
Europe -I was always of the opinion that only Liverpool should have been banned. As things went, the sole difference between Liverpool's "punishment"and the unwarrantedsanctions imposed uponallof the other clubs was that Liverpool's exile lasted for an extra season.The blanket banon English clubs not only hurt Everton but had a deleterious effect on the entire league, as some of the top British players of the time moved abroad to gain the chance of playing European football. Gary Lineker and Mark Hughes both signed for Barcelona in 1986, while Glenn Hoddle left Spurs for Monaco a year later.
For the sake of dialectic balance , if we look at things from UEFA's perspective the English hooligans of the 1980s did cause plenty of problems - one must remember that the Kenilworth Road riot had taken place only a couple of months before the Heysel disaster. English fans still travelled to national team matches and precipitated their fair share of aggro.
I recall that the first time Polish hooligans gained publicity in the West was in 1989 when England arrived for a World Cup qualifier in Chorzow. The English had the reputation of being the hardest hooligans around, so the Poles were itching to take them on. Organised hooliganism was beginning to take its currentshape in Poland and nutcases from all over the country converged upon the venue. As this was a only a month or soafter the first non-Communist Prime Minister was sworn in, the old totalitarian riot police were still a tool in the hands of the authorities and, with the nation's "reputation" in mind, were deployed to protect the English fans. This stuff even made the television news here in Australia. The English weren't accustomed to this type of reception, whichinvolved a crowd of snarling goons hurling bricks and other debris at their buses and daring them to come out and have a go. Thevisiting fanshad to be escorted in and out of the stadium while the police fought the Polish hooligans. Incidentally, the match finished 0-0.
When all is done, I wouldn't be surprised if UEFA deliberately banned all English clubs in order to break the English dominance. Funnily enough, the first team to benefit from the English absence was not one of the big "glamour" clubs but Romania's Steaua Bucharest, who upset Barcelona on penalties the following season . In fact, the next two seasons saw two more first-time winners: FC Porto and PSV Eindhoven...
Now, here's another goal from that fateful 1984-1985 season:
NORMAN WHITESIDE (Manchester United) vs Everton - 1985 F.A. Cup Final:
This is a very skilful strike, as evidenced by the replay...
PAUL EVANS (Swindon Town) vs Wrexham - Football League Two, 2006-2007:
DEAN WINDASS (Bradford City) vs Liverpool - Premier League, 1999-2000:
DEJAN SAVICEVIC (AC Milan) vs Barcelona - 1994 Champions League Final:
It appears that the above video defies embedding. Well, here is the link instead. It doesn't appear to open in a separate window (for some reason the Youtubevideos I wish to post no longer do, hence the embedding... ), so You shall have to copy and paste it into Your browsers:
DEJAN SAVICEVIC (AC Milan) vs Barcelona - 1994 Champions League Final:
Check out thesorcerous close control of Fernando Llorente, who beat two defenders along the back line to set up Fran Yeste for the goal.
FRANCISCO YESTE (Athletic Bilbao) vs Real Zaragoza - La Liga, 2005/2006:
Here is another angle:
CARLOS MANUEL (Portugal) vs West Germany - 1985, World Cup Qualifier:
PAUL MARINER (England) vs Norway - 1980, World Cup Qualifier:
PAULO FUTRE (Atletico Madrid) vs Real Madrid - 1992 Copa del Rey Final:
maxi makes gallas look like a 10 years old girl
Edited by: frederic38
TERRY MCDERMOTT (Liverpool) vs Everton - F.A. Cup Semi Final, 1976/1977:
nowadays, you almost never see a player "chip" the ball like that (i don't know if you say it like that)
this is evidence that soccer became less skillfull
players like ronaldinho did it all the time, crespo, totti, countless players
now messi does it
but you don't see this kin of goals as often as before