Good point^^^

I never thought about it that way, the whole casuals/firms movements make a lot of sense in that context.

I see your friends in Somalia feel much the same way about the World Cup:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/10307512.stm

Laurie: The problems with this article boil down to this bit:

"I despise the World Cup."

No-one cares how you feel about the World Cup. That's nothing personal, no-one cares about how any journalist feels about anything.

This includes whether you feel something is the last best hope for mankind vs whether it's morally repugnant. Those are feelings too.

It's not about you, a phrase I believe you're fond of.

What people want are to be told stuff they didn't know or to be given new ways of thinking about stuff they did know. That is, ideas. Sure, you can write some emotion into the piece if it helps to convey the ideas, but only if it helps, and very often it doesn't. Just because you feel an emotion doesn't mean it has a right to be written down.

Your post has some ideas, although generally bad ones, e.g. you accuse football of being "quasi-xenophobia"; I hate football, but it really isn't. You can root for your team without thinking everyone else is evil. You make matters worse by bringing up the EDL. I'm still not sure what point you were trying to make with that.

The article would have been a good one if you'd junked everything about misogyny - football is no more male dominated than rugby cricket or baseball, so whether or not your point is valid, it has no place in an article about football - and focussed on the politics e.g. you could examine why it is that the World Cup seems to be able to unite the country whereas Cameron & Clegg (surely the most "united" government one could ask for) may not be able to unite the country behind their cuts agenda, and how the left could benefit from this -

although first you would need to explain what the "left's" stance on these cuts is, because Labour were proposing almost exactly the same level of cuts, and if you don't agree that reducing the deficit is urgently necessary to prevent a sovereign debt crisis you are wrong, like it or not.

Here's an idea - you could argue that instead of loads of cuts we should tax the super-rich to raise the cash. that would unite the country, well 99% of them. Then you could...hey, I'm not writing your next piece for you. You can do the rest.

Well, I guess even Somalia has their Lauries who despise the World Cup. And unfortunately they are more powerful down there.

Cricket fans are always eager to know the world cup history. It is always exciting to know the records made by the players and the fans too are anxious to the details about the records. Thanks for your info.

news

"Britain itself is a shuffling, gloriously dissipated nation that also includes many people from Scotland, Ireland and Wales."

Unfortunately they were unbelievably hopeless at this game and therefore did not qualify.

"The fact remains, however, that there are more pressing things to worry about over the soccer season than the state of Frank Lampard's admittedly shapely calves."

That's a blatantly sexist remark and I can only imagine the state of your personal outrage had a *male* made a comment about a female footballer.

"The problem with football as commodified nationalism is that it leaves the left wing entirely undefended."

Not as undefended as if Capello played 3-5-2 but then you'd not be bothered to understand that.

I whole heartedly agree, the level of banal patriotism I saw while down in England for a few days is insane! I have never seen anything like it and I hope I don't. England flags stuck to pre-packaged sanwiches, chocolate bars, sweets, beer, coaches. Everywhere.

I was even insulted and intimidated for stating that I don't support England to someone who then proceded to make what I would consider racist comments because I am from Scotland.

"wealthy misogynist jocks"?
If I was a footballer I'd sue

Dopey Laurie Penny looks about 12.

Laurie - I have read most of your entries on here recently, and have found them to be informative and I agree with you on most of your arguments.

But this article I have found offensive. Easy generalisations are surely the last resort of lazy journalism but you have fallen prey to them here. Some football fans are members of the EDL? Doesn't mean you can tar us all with the same brush. Some of the most passionate supporters of the game that I know are asian, african etc. So your arguement is simply retarded in that aspect.

I have a few female friends who love watching the male Wales rugby team, another male dominated sport. Explain that please.

Are you also claiming male football fans are happy to rape and murder female football players?

I am as left wing as you can get within my social group, i dislike the mass commercialism that goes with the game, but at the end of the day I love football, be it the world cup final or having a kick about in the park with my mates, as it is FUN.

This is just lazy, offensive and downright tawdry journalism. It's the standard of a Daily Mail article.

I'm not sure if this is being ironic or not...either way this will amuse plenty of the Tory bloggers pointing to the 'humourless po-faced lefties'

God, what a ridiculous article by someone utterly clueless about the game.

Thanks for letting me know exactly why I was dreading it! There's nothing I disagree with, although I can't say I've noticed those shapely calves!

Jocks? At a World Cup?? My my you really don't follow football do you?

One thing I will suggest: the women's world cup should be played at the same time and venues as the men's competition, and the stars that national football associations place above their crest should be for both male and female victories.

That would do more for the women's game than Sepp Blatter's rediculous tight kit suggestion, or your anti-football "Ya boo it's sexist!" rubbish.

As for the contempt of the police for fans, what about the contempt of certain fans for the police? Or for other fans?

They're not 'misogynist jocks' - Scotland didn't make it to the World Cup.

@dandelion

Cat got your tongue??

''Younge is right to celebrate that race is no longer an impediment to his young niece's and nephew's vision of football as a world "in which they have a reasonable chance of succeeding" -- but unfortunately, his niece can forget about it. Even if she were to make it to the big leagues, she would be forbidden to play in the World Cup: the women's league, held separately next year, garners barely a fraction of the media coverage devoted to proper football, where the only significant female figures are footballers' wives.''

Just to point out the obvious here - there is quite a thriving womens league here with most of the premier league teams supporting it.

Secondly, Younge's neice wouldn't so much be forbidden to play in the World Cup as that it would be highly unlikely that she would have the strength or pace to make it into the team. There's nothing mysoginistic about that. It's a fact. Soccer is a sport that isn't very suited to mixed gender participation at the highest levels. If you want to have a go at something have a go at darts or snooker who have separate leagues for no good reason I can think of.

Thirdly as you point out, women have their own soccer world cup, if it is poorly covered in the media (though I recall watching it on the BBC) then perhaps you could big it up a little through your coloumn? It would be something positive to write about.

Go and stick the kettle on and cheer up love, it's just a game after all :)