The World Through the Eyes of the Insane

Today, 16th February 2012 An article was released on a public forum. The article, entitled; 'Us and Them, Time to Pull the Drawbridge' has been the subject of much debate on the social networking site twitter, and I have been involved in a lot of it. This is my attempt to set the record straight in a manner more fitting than Twitter. (i.e. in more than 140 characters)

The article is written by a fan of Liverpool football club and it describes two seperate events, first of which happened in 1985, some five years before my birth. I am talking about the Heysel disaster, and I confess that I am not the most knowledgeable on the subject, knowing only that Liverpool fans were blamed for the deaths of thirty-nine people before a European Cup Final. However my lack of knowledge as we will see is irrelevant. The second even in question is the long running feud between Luis Suarez and Patrice Evra regarding the racist comments made to Mr. Evra by Mr. Suarez, and, as anyone of my fifty something twitter followers could tell you, is a subject I have taken an interest in. 

In this article the author talks about the comparisons of the two events, this on the face of this is ridiculous and downright offensive to the families of the people that died. This is something That I would agree with. I do not think that racism is comparable to death, especially on such an enormous scale and it may have been for this reason that people have condemned this man and his article (and here I might suggest that many of the condemners are Liverpool fans). The problem here is that although the article mentions both the Heysel disaster and the Evra/Suarez row at no point does it say that the crimes are the same, at no point does the man say that there are any similarities in the events of 1985 and 2011/12, and it is for this reason that I believe this man is being unfairly prosecuted.

At this point I would like to go on record as saying that I neither agree or sympathise with the man. In particularly because he goes on to defend Luis Suarez and call Evra a cheat, he is far to biased towards Liverpool football club and he seems unable to take a step back and see what everybody else can see with regards to Suarez's and Dalglsih's behaviour, but it is not this that anyone seems to have an issue, it is the alleged comparison between two events and here is where the problem lies. 

People seem unable to read what is right in from of their eyes. This man, however foolish, he may be at does not compare the severity of the two events. In fact quite the opposite, stating; "Heysel was about life and death. It was more important than an argument between two millionaire athletes, and the loyalties of two warring tribes". This is not the only instance where he states that the two incidents are not the same; "Again, albeit in clearly less serious circumstances (so don’t shoot me for the analogy), they want to shame us all again." It seems pretty clear that the man thinks that the incidents in question are not comparable in terms of the scale of the events, and it is for this reason I feel he has been misrepresented in the social media, and I will now attempt to digest the article and analyse the conclusions that I believe the author is attempting to make.

As I have said, and as the author has said, the events are not the same, they are in fact worlds apart in regards the severity of the people affected, and this is not what the article argues. In fact for such a long article (most of it drones on about the 'greatness' of Liverpool Football Club) the alleged Heysel comparrison takes up a very small part. The man is arguing, and now we come to the point of both articles, that the club has been victimised by the media. He is saying that in both instances HE has felt (not us) that the media circus has condemed his club. That the majority of innocent supporters have been forced to walk away with their tails between their legs and have been labelled. He feels that his beloved club, and I will not deny a man passion for a football club, have been the victims of "shame" by the footballing world. He states that after Heysel the club and it's fans were treated as a 'cancer' and that Liverpool FC was taboo and he is stating that HE once again feels like this is how the world is viewing the club. 

What I hope people understand from this article is that I do not agree with the man in question, I, like him, see no comparrisons to the tragic death of thirty nine victims and the current climare surrounding Liverpool Football Cub. I do not believe there will be one single person that does. However this man has been prosecuted for doing just this and, as I hope I have shown that he does not feel this way. This man has simply said that he feels that the club has not been shamed by the media, this strongly, or with as much universal condemn since 1985, and quite frankly who are we to tell him how he feels, they are after all his feelings. His opinions. I hope this is enough to show people that his opinions on Heysel and Suarez/Evra are different and that the context in which he mentions both are indeed different. Personally I do not agree with the article as I have mentioned, but I hope I may have made people see that the article is not about the severity of the events in question but the vindication that this one man has felt from the world for both of them. Any readers are welcome to disagree with me, I just hope that people have the decency understand my viewpoint on the matter.

In this post I plan to outline what I view to be the biggest mistakes in football. Have a look see if you agree.

10. Foreign Investors

This is at 10 because it isn't always a bad thing. I'm sure Blackburn and Portsmouth fans would demand this to be higher on the list, whereas Fulham, Manchester City and Liverpool fans would argue that Foreign owners have improved their recent fortunes. The fact is, however, that if it goes wrong it goes very wrong.

9. Mike Newell - bungs in football

The former Luton boss sensational outburst in 2006 made everybody sit up. Newell claimed that there was bungs in football. This outburst was certainly shocking and Newell's stock rose rapidly as many people applauded him for exposing these most heinous of crimes. How did he know this? Well he was taking them. Now unemployed Newell himself might be inclined to admit this was a mistake.

8. Diego Marradonna

Great player. However, if you are stupid enough to take narcotics then all of your achievements must will be questioned. I am of course talking about this goal celebration from USA 1994. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XJ4qF0QkcT4&feature=related Idiot.

7. Jimmy Bullard's transfer in 2009 to Hull City.

30 year old Jimmy Bullard was arguably in the form of his life. Back from a career threatening injury, Bullard was in the process of firing Fulham to their highest ever finish, whist he had broken into the England set up. Yes Bullard was on the up and was offered a new two year contract. This was not enough for Bullard and he promptly up and left for Hull City, claiming he had joined a "bigger club". Now 33 Bullard is playing for Ipswich Town after being released by Hull. And Fulham have enjoyed their greatest success to date appearing in a European cup final. Nice one Jim.

6. Mike Ashley

Take over one of the most well supported world. Check.                                   Interfere in transfer proceedings and force out one of the clubs heroes. Check   Relegate said club. Check

5. Sing on the pitch

Delia Smith, Phil Brown come on down. Phil Brown sang on after his Hull City team avoided relegation on the final day of the 2009/10 season. But it was Delia's almost drunken rant that has become a cult classic. During a half-time in a match against Manchester City Smith came onto the pitch with a message for the fans, asking them "Where are you?" and "Let's be having you" Norwich were relegated that season and personally I remember beating them 6-0 on the last day of the season and singing (to the tune of Go West) 6-0, let's be having you. Classic.

4.Wear boots - tell the Indians

India one of the many nations not to have entered in a World Cup but how things could have been different. In 1950 they qualified, all be it by default but they would have been in a World Cup. That is if they wore boots. They didn't FIFA would not allow them to play barefoot they withdrew. They have yet to appear at a World Cup. Sad times.

3. Refereeing Decisions

One in particular springs to mind. Watford vs. Reading and the phantom goal. Honestly do not know what any of the officials saw. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O0YiuSbBdaQ

2. Sepp Blatter

Tis man is despicable. There is no doubt in my mind that he has taken bribes and his idea of taking the World Cup to countries with no footballing info structure will undoubtedly cripple the national game. His ideas were bad and he doesn't listen. Anyone can tell you that the 5th and 6th official doesn't work but the project has been extended

1. Jimmy Hill's tirade on the minimum wage

In 1957 Jimmy Hill campaigned for the minimum wage scraped. At the time this seemed like a good idea and it enabled Johnny Haynes to become the first £100 (approximately £40,000 today) per week footballer in 1961. Fast forward forty years and Samuel Eto'o signs for Anzhi in Russia for a reported £20,000,000 per year contract. Too far? Well how about this; in 2006 Arsenal handed captain Cesc Fabregas a five year contract with an option of a further three years. This despite having six years remaining on his contract. My point. Player power has gone too far and Fabregas is by no means the only player to add weight to this opinion. Take Winston Bogarde, 9 games in four years for Chelsea and he refused to leave because he could not get a contract as good as his current one. The point is Where Hill's intentions were well intentioned at the time. It has now undoubtedly gone too far in that players these days are mercenaries.  

Hold up play is an art, not my words, but those of former England International Stan Collymore. A point that leads me nicely onto the subject matter of this article. Bobby Zamora. He made his full England debut on Tuesday (15th November) evening and played quite well. He was by no means spectacular but a solid seven out of ten from my perspective.

I am writing this firstly because I have ran out of people that I have not told my opinion too, and secondly, I am hoping that tool of a Derby County fan who described Bob as a 'run of the mill league one striker' sees it and realises that the 'run of th mill league one striker' is a, better than anything Derby have produced in the last ten years and b, a top quality England international. In this article I will attempt to persuade a few of the doubters wrong in describing just why England needs Bobby Zamora.

Firstly, I put it to anyone reading this the following point: Bobby Zamora is the best English target man at the moment. We find ourselves without a classic number nine. A player that can hold onto the ball for three or four seconds. The only other players able to do this at the moment are Carlton Cole, Kevin Davies and Andy Carroll. I believe that Davies is too old and Cole, well, too shit. This just leaves Andy Carroll and the stats there speak for themselves. Zamora, in a team struggling to make an impact on the league, boasts three goals and four assists in eight games. Carroll, who cost £35m has managed just two goals in ten appearences for Kenny Dalglish's highly regarded side.

Shall we ask Fabio Cannavaro whether Zamora is a poor player, after the Italian World Cup winning captain was humiliated by Zamora and Fulham in 2010. This is not enough for some doubters. They still believe Zamora and Fulham to be small time. I will therefore use history to show Zamoras worth.