“Toughâ€￾ dudes in football

[Giles Daldanus]

Do you consider football to be a "macho" sport and do you believe that most players try to project a “tough guyâ€￾ image?
I am completely opposed to footballers who attempt to hurt their opponents (i.e. those who are not averse to bone-crunching tackles or engage in violent conduct), but I don’t mind “pestsâ€￾ like Van Bommel and Dario Silva who are difficult to play against due to their ability to break up play and uncompromising demeanour, as they are not brutal and have no intent to injure others.
Do you have any favorite players who could be considered “hard menâ€￾ (in a positive sense)?
Are there any footballers whom you find annoying due to their dangerous/overly physical play and wish that they could tone down their act?

 

[frederic38]

i understand (from the cultural products from america that we get here) that soccer is seen in the USA as a sport for girls and homosexuals

it's not the case here, and soccer is seen as a "macho" sport

insulting the other player is totally part of the game, from the lowest level (the amateur matches on sunday) to the french ligue 1 and the world cup
everybody saw this during the materazzi-zidane incident


my favourite though men are jaap stam

[video=youtube;Z8wJ4EI7uXg]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z8wJ4EI7uXg&feature=related[/video]

diego lugano

[video=youtube;qDWu3tV5Ty8]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qDWu3tV5Ty8&feature=related[/video]

and almost every player from paraguay, peru, uruguay
these guys would do anything for their team
juan manuel vargas for example

[video=youtube;PhFmZmcfiac]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PhFmZmcfiac[/video]

or dario silva ofcourse, diego perez also

schmeichel the danish goalkeeper also

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oeeUNbFTE24&feature=related

inzaghi is a real "pest" also (or was)


the ones that i consider have gone too far are roy keane when he injuried another player on purpose
joey barton and a few others in premier league currently
they give a bad name to premier league
pepe from real madrid has gone too far also in my opinion, when he deliberately tried to injury players from barcelona
but when defending against barcelona , a thing that every team must do is do a big first tackle on messi (without trying to break his leg though) as a way to say him "this match is going to be a nightmare for you"
a lot of teams from south america did this, and it worked pretty well

i don't like van bommel, i don't know why, maybe because of what he did against uruguay....but i hate him


jorge valdivia also, from palmeiras, a real "pest", the kind of player i like

[video=youtube;sx5L8HUrFYg]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sx5L8HUrFYg[/video]

 

[Giles Daldanus]

Thanks for the feedback! Some great examples, I like Lugano’s style of play and Stam was an amazing player (I remember him almost neutralizing another giant – Jan Koller – during Euro 2000). Yes, Roy Keane, Duncan Ferguson, Patrick Vieira, Vinnie Jones, etc. did go overboard on quite a few occasions and menaced their opponents. In addition to dangerous tackles, they were willing to pick fights with other footballers.

i don't like van bommel, i don't know why, maybe because of what he did against uruguay....but i hate him

I don’t remember much from the Netherlands vs. Uruguay match, but there may have been a lot of time wasting and Van Bommel could have played a part in that (it was an ill-tempered affair, almost like the Netherlands vs. Brazil encounter).

Olof Mellberg (Sweden) – imposing physique and wouldn’t look out of place as a member of a Viking marauding party , but a fair player, very few red cards in his career.

[video=youtube;vG-a2MWsk4c]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vG-a2MWsk4c[/video]

Nikola Zigic (Serbia) – not the most technical player, but good at creating chances for his teammates by winning headers, also useful when defending corners. Good-natured footballer, but capable of holding his own in a fight and intimidating others due to his sheer size.

[video=youtube;e-zqHcPtKa4]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-zqHcPtKa4[/video]

Dimitar Petkov (Bulgaria) – promising defensive midfielder, excellent tackler and good at badgering the opposition. However, he does not start fights and is not a trash talker.

[video=youtube;IrwFl_uD3iA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IrwFl_uD3iA[/video]

Jerko Leko (Croatia) – versatile player, tidy when it comes to his defensive duties and also has an eye for goal. Capable of getting under the skin of the opposition and could be considered an enforcer (I remember that Schweinsteiger was sent off during Euro 2008 for pushing Jerko Leko after a rough foul by the Croatian). Has earned close to 60 caps for Croatia.

[video=youtube;M3WBP0YU4xg]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M3WBP0YU4xg[/video]

I think that footballers like Lucas Leiva and Nigel de Jong also fall into this category (defensive midfielders who play with a lot of grit and determination, but also possess good passing skills).

 

[Porthos]

... when defending against barcelona , a thing that every team must do is do a big first tackle on messi (without trying to break his leg though) as a way to say him "this match is going to be a nightmare for you"
a lot of teams from south america did this, and it worked pretty well

That is one of the reasons I still think Maradona was a superior player vs. Messi today. Maradona was a fearless player, almost impossible to intimidate even after they broke his leg. Messi not so much.

However, Messi is lucky that he almost never gets injured... It's like he's made out of rubber.

 

[frederic38]

I don’t remember much from the Netherlands vs. Uruguay match, but there may have been a lot of time wasting and Van Bommel could have played a part in that (it was an ill-tempered affair, almost like the Netherlands vs. Brazil encounter).

i won't talk too much about it, because it was my worst experience while watching sports
i should be happy that uruguay reached the semi finals, but i know that they should have won the world cup
holland and spain were inferior to uruguay
spain even lost to switzerland during this world cup, uruguay is like switzerland but with a lot more talent
spain shouldn't have won against paraguay also

i did a video a while ago about the uruguay-holland match (the subtitles are in french though)
http://rutube.ru/tracks/4029333.html
it was the worst refereeing i ever saw

the paraguay-spain match might be even worse, because the referee applied different rules for paraguay and spain

the foul by pique was an obvious “Denial of a goal-scoring chance” so it should have been a very obvious red card:

http://youtu.be/iiJ6QBE-TNE

that's the rule, but it seems that when a little country plays in quarter finals of a world cup, the rules are different
at that point, paraguay looked better than spain, and a penalty+red card would have killed spain
but there was no red card, and cardozo missed the penalty kick

after this world cup, it took me more than 1 year to be able to watch soccer again
it took me 1 year to be able to watch again the uruguay-holland match
and i didn't watch the second semifinal of the 2010 world cup (germany-spain)
i forced myself to watch the final though


regarding mellberg, he's an excellent tough defender, maybe he should have played for a bigger club in england

That is one of the reasons I still think Maradona was a superior player vs. Messi today. Maradona was a fearless player, almost impossible to intimidate even after they broke his leg. Messi not so much.

However, Messi is lucky that he almost never gets injured... It's like he's made out of rubber.

another reason might be the fact that maradona won a world cup, maybe messi could win one too, but argentina would have to put him in better conditions, similar to barcelona
i think they should play with german denis or maxi lopez and messi as strikers, and the rest of the players should be middlefielders and defenders

while we speak about tough defenders and maradona, i must mention luis reyna, a peruvian middlefielder

he is the main reason why maradona never managed to beat peru

he played against peru on 3 occasion, 3 very important matches

-first in lima, for the qualification to the 1986 world cup
luis reyna spend the whole match next to maradona, he did a lot of fouls, including pulling his hair at one moment
peru won 1-0

-then the revenge took place in buenos aires
reyna once again spent the whole match next to maradona, but this time he avoided fouls, because he was afraid of the refereeing (it's different when you play in lima or in buenos aires, given the pressure on the referee from the audience)
he defended with his hands in his back
[video=youtube;T1xaxAU5FEs]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T1xaxAU5FEs[/video]

the result was a draw 2-2

-then during the copa america 1987, in argentina
this time luis reyna wasn't asked to watch closely maradona, so this time maradona scored
but reyna scored too, and the result was a draw 1-1

another example of special treatment for maradona in the same copa america, by uruguay this time

[video=youtube;2tgO3mnj7to]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2tgO3mnj7to&feature=related[/video]

uruguay managed to beat argentina in argentina and won the copa america 1987

 

[Matra2]

i understand (from the cultural products from america that we get here) that soccer is seen in the USA as a sport for girls and homosexuals

it's not the case here, and soccer is seen as a "macho" sport

In all the Anglo-Saxon countries except Britain soccer has always had an image problem. I recall in New Zealand, where I spent a couple of years at school, it was nicknamed "hugsy kissy" as it was seen as a sissy sport. But I don't think that's the case anymore. I used to laugh when American fans of basketball would call soccer a sissy sport. What's so tough about basketball? Of course, virtually all British people make fun of American football - "girl's rugby" being one of the expression they use.

As to Van Bommel he should've been red carded against Brazil. His persistent fouling ruined the 2nd half.

In Britain the footballer with the most famous reputation for being a "hard man" was Vinny Jones:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P6vm0x8JpBU&feature=related

 

[Rebajlo]

Let's be honest: the traditional "hard man" has virtually disappeared from the top-level game. In the current low aggression climate a bloke like Mark van Bommel may be hailed as some sort of "hard tackling" ogre, but the so-called "enforcers" of today are pitifully tame in comparison to that which could be seen up to the tail end of the nineties. Van Bommel is a cream-puff wimp who dives the moment anyone touches him...

Now, before anyone gets the wrong end of the stick, permit me to clarify that I'm not an advocate of dirty play nor do I condone on-field violence. However, to quote Graeme Souness, "intimidation is part of the game" and that aspect of the sport has largely been excised, especially in the last decade, through a combination of rule changes and the omnipresence of cameras which cover every blade of grass in the stadium leaving nothing that happens on the field unnoticed.

Regulations dictate that tackling is now far less ferocious than it once was: goalkeepers are highly protected from all manner of challenges, while the coddling of forwards has made life a lot more difficult for defenders. The sheer volume of cameras constantly focused on all angles of the ground mean that players can no longer unobtrusively sneak in an elbow, a head butt or a sly kick somewhere off the ball and safely out of the officials' view. If, for some reason, the cameras manage to miss such an incident, however trifling it may be, there are always plenty of digital devices in the crowd which quickly remedy this and bring the evidence to worldwide light. As recent events have amply illustrated, even selected forms of verbal badinage come under microscopic scrutiny in this ultra-sanitised, made-for-television environment. After all, football is now primarily a form of money-generating mass entertainment, not the sport of old.

To further my point, it is interesting to note that some of the hardest players of the past weren't defenders of central midfielders, but strikers.

Billy Whitehurst, whom I've mentioned in other threads, is universally regarded as the toughest player of the 1980s and early 1990s. Notorious football psychopath Vinnie Jones said that Whitehurst was definitely the hardest player he had ever encountered (they were briefly teammates at Sheffield United) - it was rumoured that Whitehurst fought bareknuckle bouts against gypsies to supplement his income from football (he sure as hell wouldn't have to do that if he played these days...).

Whitehurst looked (and still looks) like the kind of geezer one would expect to see grinning menacingly while slowly pulling a pair of pliers out of a brief case in preparation for a bit of sans anaesthetic non-National Health dental work on behalf of some over-Brilliantined East End loan shark. I could relate a few episodes about Whitehurst, but the following link pretty much sums him up:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2009/may/18/seven-deadly-sins-hard-man-billy-whitehurst

I like his final statement in which he says that he'd love 10 minutes against Rio Ferdinand...

Another noted 1980s / 1990s hard man was Scottish midfielder Chic Charnley. Everything You need to know is in the link below:

http://www.thesun.co.uk/scotsol/homepage/sport/leaguedivision1/2727596/Blade-runner.html

Here are a few other enforcers of days gone by, when the game was still played as it should be.

Julian Dicks:

[video=youtube;9dl9SlgSFlw]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9dl9SlgSFlw[/video]

Note Dicks' comments (0:55 - 1:07) about the traits of a genuine hard man: the importance of having the ability to give it out and to also take it.

Sorry frederic38, but this automatically rules out South Americans, who are all for kicking opponents yet instantly crumple in a heap and theatrically roll for metres when someone merely glances in their direction. How about Diego Simeone versus England in the 1998 World Cup?

[video=youtube;0Rsc-7TZ9T8]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Rsc-7TZ9T8[/video]

Look at those scheming Argentine poofters swarming around the referee, pressuring him to send Beckham off. Batistuta's smug smirk at 1:03 typifies the perenially cheating, win-at-all-cost attitude of South American footballers who, despite their ubiquitous gold crucifixes and hypocritical gestures of religious piety, are bereft of all sense of honour.

Pardon the mini-rant, but this constant eulogising of South Americans is getting on my nerves. You do realise that up until comparatively recent times Uruguay was regarded as the dirtiest (in terms of diving and general cheating) national team on the planet, don't You? Oscar Tabarez himself admitted this prior to the 1990 World Cup. Anyway, back to the subject at hand...

"Psycho" Stuart Pearce. Here's a clip of the man in characteristically vertebrae-rattling action:

[video=youtube;dgzd7oHyeBY]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dgzd7oHyeBY[/video]

Note how Pearce walks straight off when shown the red card - no histrionics, no shouting at the referee, no bull****...

Graeme Souness - in this instance dishing out a bit of "retribution" against Steaua Bucharest:

[video=youtube;ygVgxYa3mlo]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ygVgxYa3mlo[/video]

Andoni Goikoetxea Olaskoaga, a.k.a. "The Butcher from Bilbao". Here we have his most famous exploit: breaking Maradona's ankle in 1983:

[video=youtube;N8_JYHtvTS8]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N8_JYHtvTS8[/video]

As a "bonus", here is Goikoetxea cleaning up Bernd Schuster in 1981:

[video=youtube;PF5DmWQAyIQ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PF5DmWQAyIQ[/video]

Despite all of his faults, Maradona displayed an admirably stoic attitude towards the constant threat posed by aggressive opponents. Maradona was the most kicked player of his era, taking enormous amounts of bone-crunching punishment, yet always maintained that "football is a man's game" and that tough defending was simply part of the package.

Tommy Smith, the "Anfield Iron":

As an interesting aside, Smith famously made derogatory comments about blacks when he was interviewed for a book about John Barnes.

Norman "Bites Yer Legs" Hunter, whose aggression ensured that he even managed to stand out in the infamously dirty Leeds United sides of the late 1960s and early 1970s. In this vdeo, Hunter flattens future Everton and Athletic Bilbao manager Howard Kendall:

[video=youtube;kbPPtca6ulY]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kbPPtca6ulY[/video]

Ron "Chopper" Harris. His very name and sobriquet are bywords for the legendary football thuggery of the 1960s and 1970s:

Dave Mackay, renowned hard nut of the 1950s and 1960s:

What better way of concluding this delightful parade of the goons of yesteryear than with a photo of Vinnie Jones doing his best to twist Gazza's goolies off...

 

[frederic38]

Sorry frederic38, but this automatically rules out South Americans, who are all for kicking opponents yet instantly crumple in a heap and theatrically roll for metres when someone merely glances in their direction. How about Diego Simeone versus England in the 1998 World Cup?



Look at those scheming Argentine poofters swarming around the referee, pressuring him to send Beckham off. Batistuta's smug smirk at 1:03 typifies the perenially cheating, win-at-all-cost attitude of South American footballers who, despite their ubiquitous gold crucifixes and hypocritical gestures of religious piety, are bereft of all sense of honour.

Pardon the mini-rant, but this constant eulogising of South Americans is getting on my nerves. You do realise that up until comparatively recent times Uruguay was regarded as the dirtiest (in terms of diving and general cheating) national team on the planet, don't You? Oscar Tabarez himself admitted this prior to the 1990 World Cup. Anyway, back to the subject at hand...

the funny thing is that it's the oposite in this case

beckham was a low class man of mixed background
he showed short temper, probably because of his jewish origin, since jews are the most short tempered people in the world (with arabs)
he did what zidane did in 2010, showed short temper because he wasn't strong enough mentally to play against a team like argentina or italy, with intelligent and crafty players

despite their ubiquitous gold crucifixes and hypocritical gestures of religious piety

when was the last time you saw lugano or forlan doing this?
forlan never does this, yet he's a practicing christian

bereft of all sense of honour

they always talk about honor, lugano especially

this constant eulogising of South Americans is getting on my nerves

well, thanks for posting these videos showing tough players from england, but i can only post about what i know
so you know english premier league, you post about english players
and i post about what i know

You do realise that up until comparatively recent times Uruguay was regarded as the dirtiest (in terms of diving and general cheating) national team on the planet, don't You? Oscar Tabarez himself admitted this prior to the 1990 World Cup

please provide a quote, i can understand how he would have mentioned that uruguay had a bad image, but i doubt that he said that uruguay was the dirtiest team in the world
yet, the only player nowadays who never complains to the referee is forlan

hypocritical gestures of religious piety

they are not hypocritical
religion is a way to keep in touch with reality for players who grew up extremely poor and became god-like
for example taffarel almost became mentally challenged when he became a god in brazil after stopping italian penalty kicks in 1994, while he was just a poor gaucho before that
he became very religious because of that

kaka also is hardly hypocritical (he was rich but became religious after almost dying)

Batistuta's smug smirk at 1:03 typifies the perenially cheating, win-at-all-cost attitude of South American footballers

the win-at-all-cost attitude is typically european, it applies only to argentines
brazilians and uruguayan might cheat, but they do nothing on purpose
sometimes it looks like they don't even try to score



lugano giving this dutch b**** a reason to whine this time:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n_6ZjfGp9wE

and vargas in the last copa america:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rEzpcxY5Sf4

he never apologised for this, never complained to the referee
he said that he would do it again, that he did it as an answer to the uruguayan fouls

 

[Matra2]

Uruguay's reputation for dirty play does indeed go back decades. I remember it being discussed at Mexico 86. Suarez's "best save of the World Cup" played into that image - however on this occasion I was all for it as got rid of everyone's favourite African heroes. There's also no doubt about South Americans being poor losers. I've lost count of how many times they won't shake hands, surround the referee and get into a hand-bags fight after losing - Argentina in 2006 against the Germans, Uruguay in SA after losing to Holland, both Chile and Uruguay at the Under 20 World Cup in Canada, etc.

Personally I think the sport is better without the hard men. I watch football for the skills displayed not those who just interfere with that. It's the same with ice hockey. I remember when I first watched it in Canada in the 80s every time a skillful player got the puck he was body checked out of the play. It made (still makes) the sport less interesting than it would be if it were all about skill.

 

[Matra2]

BTW I agree with frederic on Kaka and Forlan. They aren't phonies but a lot of the players who cross themselves are. (Same with in American sports).

 

[Rebajlo]

well, thanks for posting these videos showing tough players from england, but i can only post about what i know
so you know english premier league, you post about english players
and i post about what i know

frederic38 - What I was getting at was Your constant complaining about how Uruguay / Paraguay / Brazil (and probably Chile as well) were cheated out of winning the 2010 World Cup, a point which You belaboured once again in this thread which is supposed to be about "tough dudes". Then there are Your claims that Peru is better than Spain, Germany, et cetera. In that case, why don't we simply scrap the participation of all of these patently inferior European nations and let the world championship be contested solely between the stratospheric elite of South American teams? After all, according to Your analyses, South Americans are head and shoulders above Europeans in absolutely every facet of the game. Once we get the institutional "pro-European" skulduggery out of the way, I'm sure Peru shall be a shoe-in for regular World Cup semi-finals berths...

I don't wish to appear supercilious nor is it my intention to harangue or argue with another racially aware White bloke on a pro-White forum, but that's exactly it: this is a pro-White site, yet You constantly laud South American teams like Brazil, Paraguay, Chile and Peru (who are all packed to the gills with blacks, mulattoes, mestizos, Amerindians, and every unholy garlic-breathed combination thereof) or particular non-Whites like Paolo Guerrero or Juan Manuel Vargas. In response to my last post, You replied with a video of Vargas elbowing the White Sebastian Coates in the face, as if this is a good thing.

Let's use the apparent football superpower of Peru (who've obviously been biding their time, carefully preparing for three decades to massacre everyone in sight at a World Cup) as an example. I've already mentioned the mestizos Guererro and Vargas, so who else do we have? Well, here are a few names: the ugly Amerindian Walter Vilchez; the equally arse-faced blacks Alberto Rodriguez and Jefferson Farfan; mestizos Rinaldo Cruzado (whose experience in Iran is doubtlessly invaluable...) and Victor Yotun; plus the mirror-shattering black-Amerindian cross Adan Balbin. Need I say more? I must say, that's exactly the type of team to heap praise upon in a pro-White environment...

When You make statements such as "I think about supporting Fenerbahce next year if they buy more South Americans" (in the "Which are Your Favourite European Clubs and Why?" thread) what kind of reaction do You expect? In case some of our non-soccer-oriented American members aren't aware of this, Fenerbahce is a Turkish club. Later in that thread, You replied to Europe (the forum member, that is) that You agree there are too many South Americans plying their trade in the Old World, yet You bang on about following clubs with a high South American contingent! So, what is it: one or the other?

please provide a quote, i can understand how he would have mentioned that uruguay had a bad image, but i doubt that he said that uruguay was the dirtiest team in the world
yet, the only player nowadays who never complains to the referee is forlan

I've searched the Internet for a couple of minutes and haven't found any relevant quotes but, as You'll probably appreciate, not every piece of information is available in cyberspace. The 1990 World Cup was held in the pre-Internet days when my knowledge of football was gleaned through watching matches and discussion shows and via magazines and newspapers. Unfortunately, when I was away at university, my mother inadvertently threw out most of my football magazines (the earliest of which dated back to 1981), including the material which covered the 1990 World Cup (incidentally, my vintage copies of The Beano also disappeared, so I was even less impressed...). One item which survived, however, was the SBS (Special Broadcasting Service) World Cup guide, from which the following passage is quoted:

"It doesn't say much for Uruguay's reputation that many soccer commentators reckon that the team's greatest achievement at the last World Cup was to finish a game without having a player sent off!

Unkindly nicknamed the "Germans" of South America, the Uruguayans arrive in Italy determined to be cleansed of their bad image.

Indeed, manager Oscar Washington Tabarez claims that winning the World Cup is secondary to changing his country's reputation for violence."

It is significant that this was written by Les Murray (real name: Laszlo Urge. No he isn't Jewish...), the SBS football "guru" whose borderline homoerotic enthusiasm for South Americans, particularly Brazilians, makes You look like a hardline Eurocentric (his entry for Brazil begins with "Brazil are the team everyone wants to watch. And no wonder...").

If anyone is wondering about the phrase "the Germans of South America", German teams were also traditionally renowned for kicking opponents and engaging in spoiling tactics.

the win-at-all-cost attitude is typically european, it applies only to argentines
brazilians and uruguayan might cheat, but they do nothing on purpose
sometimes it looks like they don't even try to score

As Matra2 stated, the South Americans have never been noted for their sportsmanship. For example, Uruguay's performances at the 1986 finals were a heinous disgrace and provided a repulsive display of anti-football, having one player sent off in both their matches against Denmark and Scotland.

If You care to look back at the threads devoted to the 2010 World Cup, You may notice that although many of our members applauded Luis Suarez for his handball in the final stages of extra time in the quarterfinal against Ghana, I did not figure among such gleeful enthusiasts. Why? Well, here's the answer: sure, his "save" may have led to the Aftrican team's elimination but that's not how one is supposed to play the game. Such a blatant act of foul play, complete with subsequent shameless bragging about it, is sadly what one expects from South American players.

Call me a purist, but that kind of "anything goes" attitude has no place in football or wider sport. Before anyone decides to label me a Communist arsehole, accuses me of being a wigger, a poofter or some kind of crypto-Jew, I'll ask everyone the following question:

what if Suarez had committed that deliberate handball in extra time of a World Cup quarterfinal against, let's say, Germany?

Would it still be "heroic" and eminently laudable? Or would he just be brazenly cheating? I guess that we know the answer to that one, don't we...

 

[Giles Daldanus]

i won't talk too much about it, because it was my worst experience while watching sports
i should be happy that uruguay reached the semi finals, but i know that they should have won the world cup
holland and spain were inferior to uruguay
spain even lost to switzerland during this world cup, uruguay is like switzerland but with a lot more talent
spain shouldn't have won against paraguay also

i did a video a while ago about the uruguay-holland match (the subtitles are in french though)
http://rutube.ru/tracks/4029333.html
it was the worst refereeing i ever saw

Thanks for the video! I agree that Uruguay could justifiably feel that they were hard done by on a number of occasions (especially some of the offside calls are rather dubious and a foul should have definitely been awarded to Uruguay just before Van Bronckhorst’s goal). I don’t think that there is necessarily a bias against the “small” countries. I remember many refereeing decisions going against Russia in important matches vs. the national teams of Slovenia and even Andorra. Also England, have recently borne the brunt of bad refereeing decisions, e.g. against Portugal (2006) and Romania (2000). I do believe that most referees have integrity, but the number of game-deciding refereeing errors appears to be increasing, so I am now of the opinion that video replays should definitely be introduced.
Spain are a fantastic team and I think that they were worthy winners in South Africa (the Spaniards’ match vs. the Paraguayans was probably their toughest test)... Paraguay have been extremely unlucky in the past – in 1998 the first golden goal in history was scored against them, though Laurent Blanc deserves praise for that as it was an excellent strike; in 2002 they lost to Germany (Neuville scored in the 88[SUP]th[/SUP] minute of the game).....their matches frequently have a nail-biting finish to them.
To look on the bright side, I think that Paraguay would have had an extremely difficult time neutralizing Germany (the German side contained a number of naturalized footballers like Cacau) if they had advanced at the expense of Spain and wouldn’t have managed to overcome them even if the game had hypothetically gone to a penalty shootout. Spain were probably better poised than Paraguay to inflict a defeat on this German side. In a previous thread you mentioned that Paraguay’s goalkeeper was not very reliable, while Casillas is usually solid when representing the national side.
Luis Reyna – wow, that’s what I call a man marker! Argentina vs. Peru matches from that period certainly looked like quite a treat for the spectators.
As for the image of soccer, it’s indeed very context-dependent (and varies with country)...for instance, in Canada, soccer tends to be lower on the totem pole than hockey, American football and maybe basketball...few people are outright dismissive of it, but it’s not seen as a physically demanding sport and there is usually no soccer equivalent to the “enforcer” position in hockey.

@Matra2, thanks for that! Vinnie Jones is certainly one of the more recognizable footballers worldwide. He is widely remembered as a key member of the “Crazy Gang” (proved that he can play well even without the excessive physicality) and of course as an actor in films like “Snatch”.
I agree with you that intimidation and especially hard tackles should not be a major component of the game and ruin the beautiful displays. Hockey is indeed a good example. Fighting in hockey during the Olympics results in an automatic ejection, but Olympic matches do not lack dynamism and still attract many spectators.

@Rebajlo, excellent and very thorough post like always, thanks for the great photos as well!

Regulations dictate that tackling is now far less ferocious than it once was: goalkeepers are highly protected from all manner of challenges, while the coddling of forwards has made life a lot more difficult for defenders. The sheer volume of cameras constantly focused on all angles of the ground mean that players can no longer unobtrusively sneak in an elbow, a head butt or a sly kick somewhere off the ball and safely out of the officials' view. If, for some reason, the cameras manage to miss such an incident, however trifling it may be, there are always plenty of digital devices in the crowd which quickly remedy this and bring the evidence to worldwide light. As recent events have amply illustrated, even selected forms of verbal badinage come under microscopic scrutiny in this ultra-sanitised, made-for-television environment. After all, football is now primarily a form of money-generating mass entertainment, not the sport of old.

I concur with you that many of the recent regulations try to turn players into automatons and reduce passionate displays (when it comes to both players and supporters). Btw, it seems as if the adoption of rules like the mandatory bookings for provocative goal celebrations or the removal of shirts have been partly influenced by the demands of sponsors.
I am personally a softie on the football pitch, but I don’t mind rough play (as long as there is no intention to inflict an injury) and I like English clubs like Stoke City who are still exponents of the typically British brand of football – they have their share of tough tacklers, but are at the same time quite fair, as they rarely exaggerate physical contact and do not brandish imaginary yellow cards to try to get opponents sent off and refrain from crowding the referees.
Haha, the last photo really cracks me up! Gazza was not afraid of the physicality, but he was nonetheless no match for Vinnie Jones.

"Psycho" Stuart Pearce. Here's a clip of the man in characteristically vertebrae-rattling action

Stuart Pearce is exactly what I had in mind (he is a “tough” guy I have a lot of respect for) – at times “Psycho” was overly enthusiastic, but was generally not a liability and as you pointed out he was not the type to get into the face of the refereeing crew. I remember that he was headbutted by Basile Boli in a match vs. France, but did not complain to the referee and simply got on with the game.
You mentioned that forwards featured prominently in the ranks of these hard men players....this reminds me that Duncan Ferguson, who is very popular with Everton fans, was another temperamental footballer who has been described by defenders as a nightmare to play against. Unfortunately, Ferguson crossed the line in a number of instances, as he has an assault conviction on his records (for a clash with a fellow footballer) and he has also been involved in other fracas unrelated to football.

Maradona was indeed rather brave and did not simulate...though he did have a mean streak, i.e. he started a major fight in a match vs. Bilbao (not sure whether it was for the purpose of seeking revenge against Goikoetxea):

[video=youtube;nEeMSBy8EW0]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nEeMSBy8EW0[/video]
I do think that Goikoetxea was excessively physical and should have toned it down (players like Schuster never fully recovered from their injuries).

As for the least disciplined football teams – I have to agree that it’s generally easier to officiate matches between Northern European countries, as there aren’t too many off the ball incidents.

South American sides do engage in gamesmanship on a frequent basis, though when it comes to game-changing moments (like admitting a handball), rather few footballers (no matter the cultural background) will own up to their transgression and ask the referee to alter a decision.

[video=youtube;VEHbCfMuAE4]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEHbCfMuAE4[/video]

Anyone know who the commentator is? He talks of South Americans in general, but am not sure whether he is an American or a complete neutral with regard to the match in question.

However, over the last decade European countries like Portugal have also embroiled themselves in a number of unsavory incidents – the crowding of Slovak linesman Igor Sramka (Euro 2000), the Battle of Nuremberg vs. the Netherlands (2006 with Figo giving a headbutt to Van Bommel and a lot of argy-bargy between the players), the incidents in the match against South Korea (Joao Pinto tried to attack an Argentine official). Uruguay and some of the other South American teams certainly need to clean up their act...on the plus side, they are generally not as physical as their compatriots from the 1970s and 1980s. Skillful players are usually allowed to show their worth when playing against South Americans.

How about Diego Simeone versus England in the 1998 World Cup?

My personal opinion is that the referee should have awarded a yellow card to each player. Beckham’s kick was petulant (rather than violent) and Simeone embellished (to put it mildly), so while it’s a red card if we go by the book, the game may have been better served by two cautions. However, I may be missing something...perhaps it was not an isolated incident and there may have been instances of previous altercations between the two. Of course what was worse from Beckham’s perspective is that he couldn’t count on the support of his own fans - he was vilified for a number of years due to this red card.

beckham was a low class man of mixed background
he showed short temper, probably because of his jewish origin, since jews are the most short tempered people in the world (with arabs)
he did what zidane did in 2010, showed short temper because he wasn't strong enough mentally to play against a team like argentina or italy, with intelligent and crafty players

I didn’t know about Beckham's Jewish heritage...to be honest most Jews I have encountered in Balkan countries have been quite mild-mannered and they are not always physically distinguishable from the rest of the population, but I guess that behavior could be partly conditioned by aspects like social class and cultural background or degree of religiosity.

As for Simeone – I guess he has Italian roots (judging by the family name)?

To be fair to Beckham he doesn’t seem to hold grudges:

Btw, why was Lugano angry with Van Persie? Is there a history between the two of them?

@Frederic, correct me if I am mistaken, but I am guessing that part of the reason you really appreciate South American national squads is because (unlike most European national sides) they haven't changed much in terms of ethnic/racial composition since the 1970s and 1980s. There is a degree of continuity to them ...Of course their players are usually possess good technique as well and tend to be passionate.

 

[frederic38]

frederic38 - What I was getting at was Your constant complaining about how Uruguay / Paraguay / Brazil (and probably Chile as well) were cheated out of winning the 2010 World Cup, a point which You belaboured once again in this thread which is supposed to be about "tough dudes". Then there are Your claims that Peru is better than Spain, Germany, et cetera. In that case, why don't we simply scrap the participation of all of these patently inferior European nations and let the world championship be contested solely between the stratospheric elite of South American teams? After all, according to Your analyses, South Americans are head and shoulders above Europeans in absolutely every facet of the game. Once we get the institutional "pro-European" skulduggery out of the way, I'm sure Peru shall be a shoe-in for regular World Cup semi-finals berths...

i don't like chile
during the 2010 world cup at one point one of their players got a red card for nothing against spain, torres
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uxydvtu9UsM&feature=related

i don't think that the referee would have given a red card to a spanish player for this
but chile was inferior to spain, and they were defeated by a better team (brazil)

When You make statements such as "I think about supporting Fenerbahce next year if they buy more South Americans" (in the "Which are Your Favourite European Clubs and Why?" thread) what kind of reaction do You expect? In case some of our non-soccer-oriented American members aren't aware of this, Fenerbahce is a Turkish club. Later in that thread, You replied to Europe (the forum member, that is) that You agree there are too many South Americans plying their trade in the Old World, yet You bang on about following clubs with a high South American contingent! So, what is it: one or the other?

if i remember right, i posted this in the champions league thread
fenerbahce is a turkish club, so it's not damaging the white world to have south americans and blacks there
they had lugano, and they loved him, so i respect their suporters
taffarel also spent most of his european career in turkey
i repeat that i would like the european teams to have 0 non-europeans

I've searched the Internet for a couple of minutes and haven't found any relevant quotes but, as You'll probably appreciate, not every piece of information is available in cyberspace. The 1990 World Cup was held in the pre-Internet days when my knowledge of football was gleaned through watching matches and discussion shows and via magazines and newspapers. Unfortunately, when I was away at university, my mother inadvertently threw out most of my football magazines (the earliest of which dated back to 1981), including the material which covered the 1990 World Cup (incidentally, my vintage copies of The Beano also disappeared, so I was even less impressed...). One item which survived, however, was the SBS (Special Broadcasting Service) World Cup guide, from which the following passage is quoted:

"It doesn't say much for Uruguay's reputation that many soccer commentators reckon that the team's greatest achievement at the last World Cup was to finish a game without having a player sent off!

Unkindly nicknamed the "Germans" of South America, the Uruguayans arrive in Italy determined to be cleansed of their bad image.

Indeed, manager Oscar Washington Tabarez claims that winning the World Cup is secondary to changing his country's reputation for violence."

It is significant that this was written by Les Murray (real name: Laszlo Urge. No he isn't Jewish...), the SBS football "guru" whose borderline homoerotic enthusiasm for South Americans, particularly Brazilians, makes You look like a hardline Eurocentric (his entry for Brazil begins with "Brazil are the team everyone wants to watch. And no wonder...").

If anyone is wondering about the phrase "the Germans of South America", German teams were also traditionally renowned for kicking opponents and engaging in spoiling tactics.

thanks for the quote
uruguay is a violent team, but they are not cheaters
argentina, italy, these are teams that cheat in order to win

uruguay has a bad image, and they don't get the respect they deserve
in a radio show in 2010, before the world cup, i heard a french coach (who is currently coaching a team in this year's african cup of nations) say that uruguay would place between the 12th and the 14th place in french ligue 1
and everybody agreed
but it was clear that uruguay was one of the best teams in the world
it's the same with peru now
they did very well at the last copa america, they have world class players, but nobody believe that they can do well in a world cup
when you're south american and not brazilian or argentine, you get no respect
i'm pretty sure though that the "european" teams will understand soon enough that peru is far superior to them
it doesn't make me happy, but it's what you get when you decide to promote soccer exclusively in the poor and uneducated areas of europe


as for the suarez hand-ball, i don't get why it's so controversial
it's something that every defender in the world should do in the same situation
you must stop the ball with your hand, and then leave the field, so that your team still has a chance to win
scoring a goal with the hand is different, because when you do this you try to mislead the referee
a similar situation involving germany in 2002: in semi final in 2002, south korea was about to score, but ballack commited a foul on purpose, to prevent south korea from scoring
he missed the final because of this, but was praised for his heroic behaviour

 

[frederic38]

As for Simeone – I guess he has Italian roots (judging by the family name)?

To be fair to Beckham he doesn’t seem to hold grudges:

Btw, why was Lugano angry with Van Persie? Is there a history between the two of them?

simeone is from southern italy

and about lugano i guess it was because of the multiple hand-balls by van persie, plus his offside on the second goal, plus his ridiculous dive against maxi perreira

@Frederic, correct me if I am mistaken, but I am guessing that part of the reason you really appreciate South American national squads is because (unlike most European national sides) they haven't changed much in terms of ethnic/racial composition since the 1970s and 1980s. There is a degree of continuity to them ...Of course their players are usually possess good technique as well and tend to be passionate.

exactly

(the teams are changing though

rio grande do sul used to be 100% white, it's no longer the case

also argentina and uruguay have a lot of inmigrants from non white south american countries)

what are the odds of having one day a player like forlan in europe? educated, intelligent, white, with great sportmanship, and talented


in recent years, i never saw a player in europe that was as likeable as lugano, who likes his country so much ect

there are also other reasons, i guess i am multicultural (i had a multicultural an international education)

 

[Porthos]

I like English clubs like Stoke City who are still exponents of the typically British brand of football – they have their share of tough tacklers, but are at the same time quite fair, as they rarely exaggerate physical contact and do not brandish imaginary yellow cards to try to get opponents sent off and refrain from crowding the referees.

While I do appreciate corageous and tough players (see my comment about Maradona), I personally never particularly liked the "British brand" of football, with emphasis placed on size, speed ("pace") and physicality over technique and finesse. This is the reason why PL over and above has the largest number of highly paid blacks "athletes" (with the possible exception of France where football/soccer is not even a viable sport for a white person anymore). And g*d - do the fans love these big Negroes!
I find their playing style rigid, schematic, even boring, still based on long balls (I recently witnessed an under 10 kids game in the UK and even at such tender age the coaches already shouting to the kids to "lump the ball forward" to the big kid in attack...). For years now, England's inferior passing, touch and skill has been exposed on the international stage with very modest successes on the international stage. Only one World Cup won almost 50 years ago (in 1966 under suspicious circumstances), no WC finals, one fourth place in 1990, no Euro titles and no Euro final ever...
And it's not that they didn't have talented players. It's the emphasis on the tough guy image (personified by Terry Butcher playing with the bloodied yersey against Sweden) and physicality that lead England to waste an incredible number of talented players, even in times when football was still a white sport. Yes - England has a history of wasting talent - Peter Osgood, Glen Hoddle, Stan Bowles, Frank Worthington, Matt Le Tissier etc. Although there are tough dudes in football, I see football/soccer primarily as skill based sport. It's footballers like these that can make the difference and win you games, not "athletes". Athlets can keep you afloat at times and this is about as far as it gets...

 

[Rebajlo]

i don't like chile

Glad to hear it...

if i remember right, i posted this in the champions league thread
fenerbahce is a turkish club, so it's not damaging the white world to have south americans and blacks there
they had lugano, and they loved him, so i respect their suporters
taffarel also spent most of his european career in turkey

Yes, You did post the potentially pro-Fenerbahce statement in the Champions League thread. My mistake...

Yes, I know that the presence of South Americans and blacks in Fenerbahce constitutes a different kettle of fish, but I was referring to the concept of "supporting" (or being even remotely sympathetic to) a Turkish club (something I could never bring myself to do...).

i repeat that i would like the european teams to have 0 non-europeans

This may come as a bit of a shock, but I don't wholly agree. I have nothing against a few South Americans playing in Europe (solely on merit, of course) and believe that UEFA should impose a strict "three foreigner" rule. By this, I mean that each top division club could only have three foreigners (European or non-European) on their books at any one time.

thanks for the quote

No problem, mate. It's really too bad that all of my pre-1991 magazines were slung out...

uruguay has a bad image, and they don't get the respect they deserve

In my opinion, Brazil were always (and still remain) the dirtiest team in South America, committing countless niggling (and not-so-niggling) fouls, yet generally getting away with things to the point of winning fair play awards.

as for the suarez hand-ball, i don't get why it's so controversial
it's something that every defender in the world should do in the same situation
you must stop the ball with your hand, and then leave the field, so that your team still has a chance to win
scoring a goal with the hand is different, because when you do this you try to mislead the referee
a similar situation involving germany in 2002: in semi final in 2002, south korea was about to score, but ballack commited a foul on purpose, to prevent south korea from scoring
he missed the final because of this, but was praised for his heroic behaviour

We'll have to disagree on that one.

As for Ballack's yellow card in the 2002 semifinal, this was completely different. The Korean player (stuffed if I can remember who he was) remained on the ball for far too long and hadn't looked like releasing it to his unmarked teammates when Ballack fouled him. In other words, he didn't prevent a 100 % goal. Anyway, I always thought Ballack was a bit of a prick and never liked the bloke's general attitude...

 

[frederic38]

and believe that UEFA should impose a strict "three foreigner" rule. By this, I mean that each top division club could only have three foreigners (European or non-European) on their books at any one time.

i think to ensure that the foreigners are bought because of their accomplishments, maybe there should be a minimum age, maybe like 25 years old, to avoid european clubs buying very young foreign players

It's really too bad that all of my pre-1991 magazines were slung out...

indeed...my oldest magazines are from 1998, when i started watching soccer


but i have a very old book about soccer, that is from 1960
it's very refreshing
the best part is when they start comparing the diferent countrie's style of play
they mention that the french talk and write about soccer more than they play it, which totally applies to me
there is also a discussion between a stereotypical english man and a stereotypical frenchman
they say the same things that porthos said about english soccer
but for me it's important that every nation keep their own style

Anyway, I always thought Ballack was a bit of a prick and never liked the bloke's general attitude

i never really got interested in one of the teams he played for, so i don't really know enough to judge, but it wouldn't surprise me that he is a prick
classy german players are a rarity, i heard that most of their players are historically low-class

 

[Giles Daldanus]

@Frederic, nice avatar! If Montpellier manage to win Ligue 1, they will mostly have Giroud to thank for it.

simeone is from southern italy

Thanks, he may also have some Native American heritage, though phenotypes can be misleading at times.

and about lugano i guess it was because of the multiple hand-balls by van persie, plus his offside on the second goal, plus his ridiculous dive against maxi perreira

Van Persie also drew the ire of Portuguese players in the closing stages of the "Battle of Nuremberg" (2006) match :

[video=youtube;epoF_2H__fQ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=epoF_2H__fQ[/video]

While I do appreciate corageous and tough players (see my comment about Maradona), I personally never particularly liked the "British brand" of football, with emphasis placed on size, speed ("pace") and physicality over technique and finesse. I find their playing style rigid, schematic, even boring, still based on long balls (I recently witnessed an under 10 kids game in the UK and even at such tender age the coaches already shouting to the kids to "lump the ball forward" to the big kid in attack...).

@Porthos, very good point. I have to admit that I am sort of on the fence when it comes to these matters. I watch many of the Balkan leagues (Serbia, Croatia, Bulgaria & Romania) and most of the tough defenders and uncompromising tacklers are usually local players, while the Brazilians, Africans and other foreign footballers tend to play in midfield. There are of course plenty of skillful local lads who are midfielders and able to dictate the pace of games, but it seems as if the foreign players are usually chosen for their finesse and technical ability rather than physicality. So, this focus on the "lesser leagues" may have clouded my perceptions.
I agree with you that the fans’ faithfulness to the “British brand” of football may be doing them a disservice when it comes to the representativeness of their teams, especially in the long-term.

For years now, England's inferior passing, touch and skill has been exposed on the international stage with very modest successes on the international stage. Only one World Cup won almost 50 years ago (in 1966 under suspicious circumstances), no WC finals, one fourth place in 1990, no Euro titles and no Euro final ever..
And it's not that they didn't have talented players. It's the emphasis on the tough guy image (personified by Terry Butcher playing with the bloodied yersey against Sweden) and physicality that lead England to waste an incredible number of talented players, even in times when football was still a white sport. Yes - England has a history of wasting talent - Peter Osgood, Glen Hoddle, Stan Bowles, Frank Worthington, Matt Le Tissier etc. Although there are tough dudes in football, I see football/soccer primarily as skill based sport. It's footballers like these that can make the difference and win you games, not "athletes". Athlets can keep you afloat at times and this is about as far as it gets...

Yes, England's record on the international stage does not really seem to reflect the country's passion for the game and the quality of the individual players produced (it's such a shame that excellent footballers like Le Tissier and Gascoigne never lifted a major trophy in an England shirt). The English managers' emphasis on "power" and "athleticism" is generally part of the problem, but there could be other explanatory factors as well (and I do believe that the "British style" could be effective under certain circumstances, especially if there is tactical discipline and the team is well-organized).

Germany is arguably a good example of a historically very successful national side that is relatively physical and relies on the power/tall stature of the forwards and their ability to head the ball (i.e. Miroslav Klose and Oliver Bierhoff are good examples of footballers who have these attributes). I think that the German soccer players tend to be mentally strong and thus possess clinical finishing, but the English have often failed at the last hurdle – e.g. the penalty shootout. They have also suffered defeats due to their players losing the plot in crucial moments or harsh yellow/red cards (like Rooney's sending off vs. Portugal in 2006 and Gascoigne's booking in the 1990 World Cup semi-final against Germany).

[video=youtube;hH_Yt0K3tZA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hH_Yt0K3tZA[/video]

Southern European teams like Spain (relying on a tiki-taka style of play) have been dominant in world football (especially since the early 2000s), but (generally) less technical sides like Sweden (1930s and 1990s), Chile (1960s) and Czechoslovakia (1960s) have also enjoyed some notable successes.

 

[Rebajlo]

i think to ensure that the foreigners are bought because of their accomplishments, maybe there should be a minimum age, maybe like 25 years old, to avoid european clubs buying very young foreign players

frederic38 - The initial step in the imposition of our notional tighter limits on foreigners would perforce have to involve a stricter definition of the term "foreigner". The ludicrously wide-ranging "grandparents" rules and their like, which ensure that certain players are "eligible" to represent several nations, should be scrapped immediately.

I'd say that the only circumstances under which a player could represent a nation other than that of his birth would be if:

(a) both of his parents were born in that second nation. This allows for the vicissitudes of employment, especially in a place like the United Kingdom where couples may relocate from, let's say, north Wales to England in order to work but eliminates, for instance, the Brazilian or Argentine of distant or partial Italian origin from representing Italy; or

(b) his parents migrated to the nation. In this latter case, a ten-year "moratorium" on national representation at any level (commencing from the date of acquisition of citizenship) would be enforced. To cite a relatively familiar scenario, some poxy Albanian's family worms its way into Switzerland. If an unwashed Shqiptar arrived as a small child and gained citizenship at the age of ten, he would be barred from being picked for Switzerland at any youth level or senior level until he was twenty. If the said Shqiptar's older brother gained citizenship at fifteen, he wouldn't be eligible for any national team selection until he was twenty five, which is well into a footballer's career and would probably encourage him to opt to represent Albania. Such a "moratorium" would prevent the use of "naturalised" Brazilians, Africans, et cetera, especially when combined with the age restrictions binding international transfers which I shall outline below.

Top tier clubs (i.e. English Premier League, Italian Serie A, et cetera) would be permitted a maximum of three foreigners on their books at any one time (including players they have loaned out), while second tier clubs (i.e. English League Championship, Italian Serie B, et cetera) would be limited to a single foreign player. Lower tier clubs would be foreigner-free. The aforementioned migrants subject to the ten-year "moratorium" would naturally be counted as foreigners until their decade had expired. Sounds harsh, but there it is.

Clubs would consequently have to choose their foreign contingent very carefully, with all of the resultant effects on transfer fees in an environment in which the value of top-class imports instantly rises. All of this, of course, only applies to professional and semi-professional football.

In my opinion, players should only be able to move abroad from the age of twenty. Any form of pre-contract or "payment in advance" pertaining to such "under age" individuals negotiated between international clubs would therefore be banned. This would still allow the finest talent to turn out for the most powerful clubs for the bulk of their careers, but without the poaching, pressuring, and bribing of teenagers and their families.

Here's something to ponder. One can only speculate about the progress of Lionel Messi if my proposed system was in place, for Messi had already moved to Barcelona at the age of thirteen. Would the Catalans have paid for Messi's hormone treatment while he was with Newell's Old Boys and without an iron-clad guarantee that he would sign for Barcelona at twenty? I think not...

Ah, yes, I almost forgot: I'd also outlaw foreign ownership of clubs and foreign coaches would not be permitted to manage national teams.

 

[Porthos]

...
I don't wish to appear supercilious nor is it my intention to harangue or argue with another racially aware White bloke on a pro-White forum, but that's exactly it: this is a pro-White site, yet You constantly laud South American teams...

As far as South American players playing in Europe I am OK with them as long as the following simple framework is observed:

1 - They should be White.

2 - They should "add value", elevate the game level of the team, and be the ones local talents can learn from... NOT be cheap mediocre replacements for locals.

3 - There should be a limit on their numbers per team, so they don't crowd out local talent. As far as I am concerned, 2 per team is sufficient. I think this rule would take care of #2, to a large extent.

I do like White South American sides like Argentina and Uruguay, much less Brazil (although I am OK with their White players) .

 

[frederic38]

the sad thing is that even these rules wouldn't stop them from having imported players
they would increase their "partnerships" with african "talent factories" and make the africans come in the country while younger
this is happening right now in italy, the africans come in italy at a very young age

and these rules would be illegal for players from the european union (so it's impossible to stop the invasion by "french" players in the rest of europe for example) , and most african countries
(the countries in green: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...acific_Group_of_States_member_nations_map.svg)

 

[Porthos]

the sad thing is that even these rules wouldn't stop them from having imported players
they would increase their "partnerships" with african "talent factories" and make the africans come in the country while younger
...

Well, rule No.1 is "They should be white", which excludes Africans except Boers from South Africa which I am OK with.

 

[Porthos]

frederic38 - The initial step in the imposition of our notional tighter limits on foreigners would perforce have to involve a stricter definition of the term "foreigner". The ludicrously wide-ranging "grandparents" rules and their like, which ensure that certain players are "eligible" to represent several nations, should be scrapped immediately.

I'd say that the only circumstances under which a player could represent a nation other than that of his birth would be if:

(a) both of his parents were born in that second nation. This allows for the vicissitudes of employment, especially in a place like the United Kingdom where couples may relocate from, let's say, north Wales to England in order to work but eliminates, for instance, the Brazilian or Argentine of distant or partial Italian origin from representing Italy; or

(b) his parents migrated to the nation. In this latter case, a ten-year "moratorium" on national representation at any level (commencing from the date of acquisition of citizenship) would be enforced. To cite a relatively familiar scenario, some poxy Albanian's family worms its way into Switzerland. If an unwashed Shqiptar arrived as a small child and gained citizenship at the age of ten, he would be barred from being picked for Switzerland at any youth level or senior level until he was twenty. If the said Shqiptar's older brother gained citizenship at fifteen, he wouldn't be eligible for any national team selection until he was twenty five, which is well into a footballer's career and would probably encourage him to opt to represent Albania. Such a "moratorium" would prevent the use of "naturalised" Brazilians, Africans, et cetera, especially when combined with the age restrictions binding international transfers which I shall outline below.

Top tier clubs (i.e. English Premier League, Italian Serie A, et cetera) would be permitted a maximum of three foreigners on their books at any one time (including players they have loaned out), while second tier clubs (i.e. English League Championship, Italian Serie B, et cetera) would be limited to a single foreign player. Lower tier clubs would be foreigner-free. The aforementioned migrants subject to the ten-year "moratorium" would naturally be counted as foreigners until their decade had expired. Sounds harsh, but there it is.

Clubs would consequently have to choose their foreign contingent very carefully, with all of the resultant effects on transfer fees in an environment in which the value of top-class imports instantly rises. All of this, of course, only applies to professional and semi-professional football.

In my opinion, players should only be able to move abroad from the age of twenty. Any form of pre-contract or "payment in advance" pertaining to such "under age" individuals negotiated between international clubs would therefore be banned. This would still allow the finest talent to turn out for the most powerful clubs for the bulk of their careers, but without the poaching, pressuring, and bribing of teenagers and their families.

Here's something to ponder. One can only speculate about the progress of Lionel Messi if my proposed system was in place, for Messi had already moved to Barcelona at the age of thirteen. Would the Catalans have paid for Messi's hormone treatment while he was with Newell's Old Boys and without an iron-clad guarantee that he would sign for Barcelona at twenty? I think not...

Ah, yes, I almost forgot: I'd also outlaw foreign ownership of clubs and foreign coaches would not be permitted to manage national teams.

This would be a good start - see my previous post along similar lines ... However, this would still leave countless "homegrown" Africans in, so the English national team (and the PL teams) would still play with, for example, Ashley Young, Darren Bent, Danny Welbeck, Fraizer Campbell, Ashley Cole and countless others.
If I were English, I personally would then prefer - by far - to play with naturalised "bloody foreigners" like the Argentine Maxi Lopez or Uruguayan Diego Forlan instead of the above mentioned "Englishmen".
In these times, the purely "national" perspective is becoming increasingly antiquated when you have European born "Englishman", "Frenchmen", "Dutchmen" etc. who are Black, Asian, Arab or any nightmarish combination thereof.
For example, I would rather see the naturalized (via grand-grand parents) Brazilian Thiago Motta play for the Italian National Team than the "Italian born and raised" Mario Balotelli.
To sum it up, I think a more racially aware, blood based, ancestry based approach is necessary.

 

[frederic38]

Well, rule No.1 is "They should be white", which excludes Africans except Boers from South Africa which I am OK with.

oh, i was referring to rebajlo's rules
your rules are obviously perfect, but it would be impossible to apply them right now, whites must take control of europe first

and as somebody who lives in a non-white country, i can tell that yes, the concept of nationality is a thing of the past
for example i would be as eligible to play for italy as most of the brazilians
and i would accept playing for them, even though i don't speak italian, i never lived there,i don't feel italian , and i am mainly french and have a french name
i would do it because france is a joke,a shame, and because italy is not a real country, it's a frankenstein monster, artificially created relatively recently
like i said here multiple times, i am extremely disillusioned about nationality

i would prefer tribes like in ancient rome

 

[Rebajlo]

the sad thing is that even these rules wouldn't stop them from having imported players
they would increase their "partnerships" with african "talent factories" and make the africans come in the country while younger
this is happening right now in italy, the africans come in italy at a very young age

and these rules would be illegal for players from the european union (so it's impossible to stop the invasion by "french" players in the rest of europe for example) , and most african countries

The efficacy of my proposed scenario was predicated on the existence of a "saner environment". In such a "saner environment" governmental impositions which serve to escalate the "cosmopolitanism" of football, such as free movement of workers within the European Union and the Cotonou Agreement, would be eradicated or at the very least curbed in their scope. In order for Porthos' golden rule of "They should be White" to be applied, we require a "sane" environment - which at this juncture is about as likely as Congolese scientists finally managing to split an atom using a junior stamp collector's magnifying glass in conjunction with a claw hammer...

I've said this before and I'll say it again: the solution is laughably simple. If White fans are disillusioned with their clubs' playing personnel they should pull the financial plug by not purchasing tickets, by cancelling their cable subscriptions, by boycotting sponsors, and refusing to purchase replica shirts, merchandise, magazines, newspapers, and everything else which feeds the football industry. This isn't exactly difficult to do. If an ex-hard-core fanatic like me can manage it, why can't anyone else? Imagine if there were a couple of million Rebajlos in the UK alone, who packed in their season tickets and didn't buy singles, emailing their clubs to inform them in no uncertain terms exactly why they were taking such drastic action. Forget the inevitable talk of "racism", "intolerance", and "bigotry" - once their pockets were hit, the "powers that be" would be forced to pay attention quick smart. The same holds for the NFL, NBA, and MLB.

The main hitch, of course, is that the overwhelming majority of geezers are (a) abysmally stupid, which condemns them to remain eternal slaves to propaganda and marketing hype, and (b) absolutely chicken ****, which ensures that they possess a herd mentality, making the propaganda and media hype even more potent. Just look at politics and fashion - enough said...

Please pardon my atrabilious cynicism, but I have little faith in the cognitive powers of most of my fellow human beings, who might not currently live in caves but aren't far removed from their grunting, bollock-naked Stone Age ancestors.

The aforementioned stupidity and herd mentality means that a site like Caste Football is of paramount importance in raising awareness of and subsequently explaining facts which one would otherwise expect to be plain as the nose on one's face to anyone with even a couple of brain cells to rub together - yet such facts manage to elude entire generations of teeth-picking, arse-scratching, cheap-booze-swilling, shag-anything masses clad in ill-fitting Chinese-produced rags.

Speaking of low-intelligence throwback cavemen who blindly support their club "to the death", here's a little anecdote from my last trip to England. We had just loaded up the car and were departing from a seaside bed-and-breakfast in West Somerset when I heard the proprietor talking football with a Mancunian guest in his fifties, who was obviously a Manchester City supporter because he cheerfully boomed "Man Citee t'win tha' Premier League!" over and over, each of these apparently penis-engorging proclamations being followed by a series of wheezing guffaws indicative of the classic beer-stained-armchair football fanatic.

I glanced at the pot-bellied ass and felt an overwhelming urge to get out, stride over and sink a casual left-right wrist-deep into his kidneys, then allowing him a few moments to collect his limited faculties before politely enquiring as to the number of Mancs who turn out for his beloved club and how can he stand to watch all of those poxy schwartzers running about in the sky blue shirt. That particular moustached slob was representative of the species of blinkered fan who has blithely allowed the game to go to seed over the past three decades...