The England Thread

[kmk]

I’m not sure which virtue is being signalled with this idea
Can someone signpost it, or point me in the right direction?

Is it this?

Bisexual flag - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

 

[littlewilly]

Or £10.82 + P&P on soccer03.
I’m not buying another shop shirt ever again after seeing how good the one I got come through was!

Found this so interesting that I ordered a shirt for my daughter as soon as I read your post.

I guess what I should have done first was to google soccer03 and look for reviews. Did so after ordering and horrified to see the plethora of negative reviews regarding scams, selling card details etc.

Now, I am easily scared so I rang my bank to cancel my card. The payment couldn’t be stopped but my card’s cancelled. I await the arrival of the shirt and hope nothing further goes wrong.

You’ve obviously had good experiences with this company so would be interested to hear more from you, and others. Cheers.

 

[McFlash]

I take your point.

People are entitled to care about what they want.

I'm just tired of how much oxygen is taken up by relatively minor or trivial issues, at the expense of critical ones.

Particularly by the media and major political parties.

I think it's because the critical issues are too hard, or expensive to solve, so our focus gets shifted to the trivial ones.

Plus, sometimes it's nice to forget about your worries and rant about something that doesn't really matter.

 

[UncleBuck]

Found this so interesting that I ordered a shirt for my daughter as soon as I read your post.

I guess what I should have done first was to google soccer03 and look for reviews. Did so after ordering and horrified to see the plethora of negative reviews regarding scams, selling card details etc.

Now, I am easily scared so I rang my bank to cancel my card. The payment couldn’t be stopped but my card’s cancelled. I await the arrival of the shirt and hope nothing further goes wrong.

You’ve obviously had good experiences with this company so would be interested to hear more from you, and others. Cheers.

Blimey mate don’t cancel cards, I can honestly say I only ordered off the site because enough friends had recommended it otherwise I wouldn’t have!
A couple of them have said their orders have been a bit delayed but none of them have any issues apart from that

 

[joey.leone]

For the last 20-odd years, Brazil's team's been living on the achievements of its predecessors. I haven't seen anyone recently to mention in the same breath as Zico, Socrates and Ronaldo, let alone Pele or Garrincha (a name I only know by his great reputation).

Oh yeah, I agree completely but it's still a fixture he'd want to play in I'm sure.

The World Cup is only two years away… I imagine he’ll still be playing then.

I agree it's likely he'll be playing at the World Cup, but it's not a given that the two sides will face each other. Let's see what the future holds.

 

[McFlash]

Is it this?

Bisexual flag - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Blimey, everyone has a flag these days.
I want a flag!

 

[Bluto Blutarsky]

Blimey, everyone has a flag these days.
I want a flag!

 

[McFlash]

I mean, it's a bit shit but I'll take it!

 

[rossdapep]

For the last 20-odd years, Brazil's team's been living on the achievements of its predecessors. I haven't seen anyone recently to mention in the same breath as Zico, Socrates and Ronaldo, let alone Pele or Garrincha (a name I only know by his great reputation).

Kaka was the one but he faded when he went to Madrid.

Neymar is up there for talent but fucked all that up with his ego and moving to PSG and thinking more about his brand.

But yeah, it really is odd that the talent just isn't developing in the way it used to.

Brazil have had numerous potential generational talents come through in this time but they don't make the step up to reach the greatest of heights. Ganso and Gabigol both couldn't hack Europe and Gabriel Jesus hasn't fulfilled his true potential.

In fact, they are producing better defenders than attackers.

There is potential now. Endrick, Luis Guilherme, Estavão, all have something although I'd be inctedibly surprised if they ever reached Ronaldo heights.

I can also see Brazil struggling to win a WC for many years to come as they are in a real difficult spot. They can't play the typical Brazilian way because all their players play in Europe and are part of tactical systems which rely less on individuality, they play a more European style and they don't have the game plan to outsmart a European team.

 

[littlewilly]

Blimey mate don’t cancel cards, I can honestly say I only ordered off the site because enough friends had recommended it otherwise I wouldn’t have!
A couple of them have said their orders have been a bit delayed but none of them have any issues apart from that

I was being perhaps over cautious but you should google “ is soccer03 legit”.

 

[DJS]

Bet if he was still with us he’d have been available…

 

[RuskyM]

I’m not sure which virtue is being signalled with this idea
Can someone signpost it, or point me in the right direction?

It's just a catch-all term used to assume any form of "political correctness" is only done to appear noble rather than out of empathy or consideration of changing times.

What's frustrating is at its base level, I could agree - like most companies, Nike do a lot of terrible things and try to seem balanced by doing these acts, that don't mean anything but *sounds* good - but the discourse is such that agreeing that companies are "virtue signalling" basically aligns you with weirdo xenophobes, who don't think the issue is companies eating the world but instead the gays taking our jobs or something.

 

[Timbo Tottenham]

If someone who is more tech savvy can copy/paste, good article in the Athletic:
https://theathletic.com/5360479/2024/03/22/england-nike-collar-flag/?source=user_shared_articleNike, England, and a shirt-collar culture war that really shouldn’t have existed

 

[dontcallme]

If someone who is more tech savvy can copy/paste, good article in the Athletic:
https://theathletic.com/5360479/2024/03/22/england-nike-collar-flag/?source=user_shared_articleNike, England, and a shirt-collar culture war that really shouldn’t have existed

One of the issues with the modern England team, or maybe even with football in general, is that almost anything can become a battleground in the culture war. In a world already dominated by symbols and gestures, it does not take much for people to turn things into a profound matter of identity, belonging; ‘us against them’.

But not many would have expected before this week that the launch of a new England home shirt would be weaponised in this way.

It all started on Monday morning when Nike revealed the new England home and away kits, which the men’s team will be wearing at Euro 2024 in Germany this summer. The home shirt is a more traditional design than the blue-shouldered jersey the men’s team wore at the 2022 World Cup in Qatar. The most obvious difference was the red and blue trim on the cuffs of the shirt and the hem of the shorts, evoking memories of the England kits from World Cups gone by.


Under normal circumstances, it would have passed without excessive commentary, before people returned to the more pertinent matters of who would play in midfield alongside Declan Rice and Jude Bellingham, or whether Ollie Watkins or Ivan Toney was a better backup to Harry Kane. But we do not live in normal times.

What set off this week of noise and anger was a tweet issued by the @nikefootball account at 8:41 on Monday morning. It showed the back of the collar of the home shirt, where the St George’s cross had been altered: the vertical bars were three different shades of red, the horizontal ones red, blue and navy. The tweet read: “A playful update to the (England flag emoji) of St. George appears on the collar to unite and inspire.”

That was all it took. That tweet has — at the time of writing — been viewed 23 million times. It has thousands of replies and quote-tweets. The view, in broad terms, is that this was an attempt to re-draw the cross of St George in a political way, to make it look like the rainbow flag associated with LGBTQ+ people. (Never mind the fact that this new cross did not contain any orange, yellow or green. Some argued it must therefore be the pink, purple and dark blue of the bisexual pride flag instead.)

Some people simply do not like the design, as is always the case. Some people would rather the flag was kept in its traditional colours, quite understandably. But for another group, this was something else. It was an insult, a betrayal, an example of a woke agenda being forced upon England fans. A petition on Change.org entitled ‘SAVE ST GEORGE’S CROSS IN ENGLISH FOOTBALL’, started by one ‘Alfred Ramsey’, argues that the tiny motif on the back of the shirt’s collar is “political”, “divisive” and “damaging”. It calls on the similarly-minded to sign the petition to show the FA and Nike that “the English people and our ancient affinity for football refuse to be erased”. So far, almost 11,000 people have done so.

But what if those who view these colours as a statement are seeing something that simply isn’t there? What if the intention with these kit designs was not politics but history? Nike claim the introduction of purple was meant to be a nod to the training kit that England wore during their victorious 1966 World Cup campaign. Not everything has to be a political statement.

“The England 2024 Home kit disrupts history with a modern take on a classic,” said a Nike spokesperson. “The trim on the cuffs takes its cues from the training gear worn by England’s 1966 heroes, with a gradient of blues and reds topped with purple. The same colours also feature an interpretation of the flag of St. George on the back of the collar.”

Assuming we accept this, the next question is why so many people looked at this and saw an LGBTQ+ symbol that was never intended. Perhaps it was the wording of the initial tweet, “a playful update… to unite and inspire”, that gave people the wrong idea, words which in a certain light look gently political. (On the @nikefootball Instagram page it was merely described as a “modern interpretation of the St. George flag”, prompting far less reaction.)

Could it be that people associated the motif with the ‘OneLove’ armband that England (along with other countries) talked about wearing at the Qatar World Cup, before being blocked by FIFA? (That armband, you will remember, was also not a complete rainbow, but rather coloured bars across a heart.) Possibly, but not everyone has clear memories of an ultimately brief pre-tournament controversy from almost 18 months ago.

Or maybe this goes deeper than that. For some people, there is a suspicion that Southgate is trying to impose what are assumed to be left-liberal politics via the Trojan horse of his England team. Remember that when England took the knee in their friendlies before the last European Championship they were booed by some of their fans. Southgate lost a small implacable minority of the England support that day and has never been able to win them back. (On the other side of the fence, he retains the adoration of huge swathes of the English public, as the success of James Graham’s play about him, Dear England, proves.)

As much as Southgate might want to focus on his job, preparing his team to win the Euros, he must know that he has been politicised to the point of no return. He cannot escape his fate as the Rorschach test of the English culture war. What you see on the back of the collar determines which side you are on.

 

[dontcallme]

One of the issues with the modern England team, or maybe even with football in general, is that almost anything can become a battleground in the culture war. In a world already dominated by symbols and gestures, it does not take much for people to turn things into a profound matter of identity, belonging; ‘us against them’.

But not many would have expected before this week that the launch of a new England home shirt would be weaponised in this way.

It all started on Monday morning when Nike revealed the new England home and away kits, which the men’s team will be wearing at Euro 2024 in Germany this summer. The home shirt is a more traditional design than the blue-shouldered jersey the men’s team wore at the 2022 World Cup in Qatar. The most obvious difference was the red and blue trim on the cuffs of the shirt and the hem of the shorts, evoking memories of the England kits from World Cups gone by.


Under normal circumstances, it would have passed without excessive commentary, before people returned to the more pertinent matters of who would play in midfield alongside Declan Rice and Jude Bellingham, or whether Ollie Watkins or Ivan Toney was a better backup to Harry Kane. But we do not live in normal times.

What set off this week of noise and anger was a tweet issued by the @nikefootball account at 8:41 on Monday morning. It showed the back of the collar of the home shirt, where the St George’s cross had been altered: the vertical bars were three different shades of red, the horizontal ones red, blue and navy. The tweet read: “A playful update to the (England flag emoji) of St. George appears on the collar to unite and inspire.”

That was all it took. That tweet has — at the time of writing — been viewed 23 million times. It has thousands of replies and quote-tweets. The view, in broad terms, is that this was an attempt to re-draw the cross of St George in a political way, to make it look like the rainbow flag associated with LGBTQ+ people. (Never mind the fact that this new cross did not contain any orange, yellow or green. Some argued it must therefore be the pink, purple and dark blue of the bisexual pride flag instead.)

Some people simply do not like the design, as is always the case. Some people would rather the flag was kept in its traditional colours, quite understandably. But for another group, this was something else. It was an insult, a betrayal, an example of a woke agenda being forced upon England fans. A petition on Change.org entitled ‘SAVE ST GEORGE’S CROSS IN ENGLISH FOOTBALL’, started by one ‘Alfred Ramsey’, argues that the tiny motif on the back of the shirt’s collar is “political”, “divisive” and “damaging”. It calls on the similarly-minded to sign the petition to show the FA and Nike that “the English people and our ancient affinity for football refuse to be erased”. So far, almost 11,000 people have done so.

But what if those who view these colours as a statement are seeing something that simply isn’t there? What if the intention with these kit designs was not politics but history? Nike claim the introduction of purple was meant to be a nod to the training kit that England wore during their victorious 1966 World Cup campaign. Not everything has to be a political statement.

“The England 2024 Home kit disrupts history with a modern take on a classic,” said a Nike spokesperson. “The trim on the cuffs takes its cues from the training gear worn by England’s 1966 heroes, with a gradient of blues and reds topped with purple. The same colours also feature an interpretation of the flag of St. George on the back of the collar.”

Assuming we accept this, the next question is why so many people looked at this and saw an LGBTQ+ symbol that was never intended. Perhaps it was the wording of the initial tweet, “a playful update… to unite and inspire”, that gave people the wrong idea, words which in a certain light look gently political. (On the @nikefootball Instagram page it was merely described as a “modern interpretation of the St. George flag”, prompting far less reaction.)

Could it be that people associated the motif with the ‘OneLove’ armband that England (along with other countries) talked about wearing at the Qatar World Cup, before being blocked by FIFA? (That armband, you will remember, was also not a complete rainbow, but rather coloured bars across a heart.) Possibly, but not everyone has clear memories of an ultimately brief pre-tournament controversy from almost 18 months ago.

Or maybe this goes deeper than that. For some people, there is a suspicion that Southgate is trying to impose what are assumed to be left-liberal politics via the Trojan horse of his England team. Remember that when England took the knee in their friendlies before the last European Championship they were booed by some of their fans. Southgate lost a small implacable minority of the England support that day and has never been able to win them back. (On the other side of the fence, he retains the adoration of huge swathes of the English public, as the success of James Graham’s play about him, Dear England, proves.)

As much as Southgate might want to focus on his job, preparing his team to win the Euros, he must know that he has been politicised to the point of no return. He cannot escape his fate as the Rorschach test of the English culture war. What you see on the back of the collar determines which side you are on.

TLDR: new design of the St George flag on an England shirt. Bunch of people have random, sometimes ludicrous opinions on it.

 

[FibreOpticJesus]

One of the issues with the modern England team, or maybe even with football in general, is that almost anything can become a battleground in the culture war. In a world already dominated by symbols and gestures, it does not take much for people to turn things into a profound matter of identity, belonging; ‘us against them’.

But not many would have expected before this week that the launch of a new England home shirt would be weaponised in this way.

It all started on Monday morning when Nike revealed the new England home and away kits, which the men’s team will be wearing at Euro 2024 in Germany this summer. The home shirt is a more traditional design than the blue-shouldered jersey the men’s team wore at the 2022 World Cup in Qatar. The most obvious difference was the red and blue trim on the cuffs of the shirt and the hem of the shorts, evoking memories of the England kits from World Cups gone by.


Under normal circumstances, it would have passed without excessive commentary, before people returned to the more pertinent matters of who would play in midfield alongside Declan Rice and Jude Bellingham, or whether Ollie Watkins or Ivan Toney was a better backup to Harry Kane. But we do not live in normal times.

What set off this week of noise and anger was a tweet issued by the @nikefootball account at 8:41 on Monday morning. It showed the back of the collar of the home shirt, where the St George’s cross had been altered: the vertical bars were three different shades of red, the horizontal ones red, blue and navy. The tweet read: “A playful update to the (England flag emoji) of St. George appears on the collar to unite and inspire.”

That was all it took. That tweet has — at the time of writing — been viewed 23 million times. It has thousands of replies and quote-tweets. The view, in broad terms, is that this was an attempt to re-draw the cross of St George in a political way, to make it look like the rainbow flag associated with LGBTQ+ people. (Never mind the fact that this new cross did not contain any orange, yellow or green. Some argued it must therefore be the pink, purple and dark blue of the bisexual pride flag instead.)

Some people simply do not like the design, as is always the case. Some people would rather the flag was kept in its traditional colours, quite understandably. But for another group, this was something else. It was an insult, a betrayal, an example of a woke agenda being forced upon England fans. A petition on Change.org entitled ‘SAVE ST GEORGE’S CROSS IN ENGLISH FOOTBALL’, started by one ‘Alfred Ramsey’, argues that the tiny motif on the back of the shirt’s collar is “political”, “divisive” and “damaging”. It calls on the similarly-minded to sign the petition to show the FA and Nike that “the English people and our ancient affinity for football refuse to be erased”. So far, almost 11,000 people have done so.

But what if those who view these colours as a statement are seeing something that simply isn’t there? What if the intention with these kit designs was not politics but history? Nike claim the introduction of purple was meant to be a nod to the training kit that England wore during their victorious 1966 World Cup campaign. Not everything has to be a political statement.

“The England 2024 Home kit disrupts history with a modern take on a classic,” said a Nike spokesperson. “The trim on the cuffs takes its cues from the training gear worn by England’s 1966 heroes, with a gradient of blues and reds topped with purple. The same colours also feature an interpretation of the flag of St. George on the back of the collar.”

Assuming we accept this, the next question is why so many people looked at this and saw an LGBTQ+ symbol that was never intended. Perhaps it was the wording of the initial tweet, “a playful update… to unite and inspire”, that gave people the wrong idea, words which in a certain light look gently political. (On the @nikefootball Instagram page it was merely described as a “modern interpretation of the St. George flag”, prompting far less reaction.)

Could it be that people associated the motif with the ‘OneLove’ armband that England (along with other countries) talked about wearing at the Qatar World Cup, before being blocked by FIFA? (That armband, you will remember, was also not a complete rainbow, but rather coloured bars across a heart.) Possibly, but not everyone has clear memories of an ultimately brief pre-tournament controversy from almost 18 months ago.

Or maybe this goes deeper than that. For some people, there is a suspicion that Southgate is trying to impose what are assumed to be left-liberal politics via the Trojan horse of his England team. Remember that when England took the knee in their friendlies before the last European Championship they were booed by some of their fans. Southgate lost a small implacable minority of the England support that day and has never been able to win them back. (On the other side of the fence, he retains the adoration of huge swathes of the English public, as the success of James Graham’s play about him, Dear England, proves.)

As much as Southgate might want to focus on his job, preparing his team to win the Euros, he must know that he has been politicised to the point of no return. He cannot escape his fate as the Rorschach test of the English culture war. What you see on the back of the collar determines which side you are on.

I don’t know where the athletic get their view on what the majority of England football fans think of Southgate. Unless they sit in the same media cess tank of writers who believe their own hype. The majority of England fans I’ve spoken to think he is a melt who has cost us two cups with his negative approach .

 

[dontcallme]

I don’t know where the athletic get their view on what the majority of England football fans think of Southgate. Unless they sit in the same media cess tank of writers who believe their own hype. The majority of England fans I’ve spoken to think he is a melt who has cost us two cups with his negative approach .

A lot of the media now just quote random views from Twitter/X. Then make a story out of it.

 

[absolute bobbins]

A lot of the media now just quote random views from Twitter/X. Then make a story out of it.

Vox populi has always been a huge part of news gathering. It is just easier now

 

[Rocksuperstar]

I was listening to Max + Charlie baker on talksport earlier, pair of them joking that Max was wearing full chain mail and Charlie had an England flag stapled to his face and had got someone to shoot him in the eye with an arrow to demonstrate how patriotic they were

They interviewed... I dunno, someone, about the team and and they also said they thought Southgate had done an incredible job and it struck me: it's all about "managed expectations". No matter how hyped some fans get, it'll never be as rabid as it was during the late 90s - early 00s, where we expected to win everything, England songs were charting, the whole country would be up for it, then we'd all be very English about it when we didn't win anything.

Southgate has lowered the bar significantly, he's made the team so vanilla that any mention of potentially doing well now comes across as hopeful optimism rather than fan driven confidence.

 

[Timbo Tottenham]

I don’t know where the athletic get their view on what the majority of England football fans think of Southgate. Unless they sit in the same media cess tank of writers who believe their own hype. The majority of England fans I’ve spoken to think he is a melt who has cost us two cups with his negative approach .

I actually think the vitriol that Southgate gets is over the top and unjustified and I struggle to understand it. So maybe they’re writing articles specifically for me now