The Staggers

The New Statesman’s rolling politics blog

England v Germany: a historic sporting conflict

On the football field, England and Germany truly are “the best of enemies”.

By Sunder Katwala Published 24 June 2010 15:36

England may be the only "90-minute nation" at the World Cup but, with Slovenia vanquished, we get to keep the St George's flags out for a fourth game at least. Against Germany, too, with the winners likely to play Argentina (unless Mexico spring a surprise on Maradona and co).

Yet the fear is that England v Germany brings out the worst in our footballing and media cultures. We should be more confident that this time may be different. There is no need to deny that there is something very special about England v Germany. Surely, all that we need to do is to embrace this football rivalry, along with cricket's Ashes -- and since the virtual disappearance of England-Scotland from the football calendar -- as one of the great enduring contests in our sporting history.

On the football field, England and Germany have long been, in the title of David Downing's splendid history, "the best of enemies". So we should embrace our obsession with 1966 and all that as an inevitable, and fairly harmless, feature of national sporting folk memory.

Indeed, across British sports, we have a deep commitment to passing on and revisiting the shared knowledge that keeps enduring traditions alive. (This is in large part now underpinned by the BBC: a great example was its showing footage last weekend of North Korea's 1966 World Cup adventure in Middlesbrough by way of previewing their game with Portugal. It is part of what makes Wimbledon and the Six Nations special, too.)

English football's shame in the hooligan-dominated 1980s was that our peculiar need to link that rare sporting triumph with the Second World War seemed to define England's refusal to join the same fans' festival as most other nations -- chanting not just "Two world wars and one World Cup" at the Germans but "If it wasn't for the English, you'd be Krauts" at the rest of our bemused fellow Europeans.

Given that England's away support was strongly National Front-infiltrated in the 1980s -- the lurking menace and the policing response driving many normal supporters away -- there was always an element of cognitive dissonance in this curious expression of national pride at the defeat of their own fascist ideology.

But we have moved on. After all, the Daily Mirror found itself rather out of time with its embarassing comic-book "Achtung Surrender!" caricatures of the Germans at Euro '96. (Haven't we been laughing at, as much as with, Basil Fawlty since 1975?)

The 1996 tournament restored to the English a positive football identity. "Football's Coming Home" was still very much rooted in 1966 and all that, but it was now recaptured as a positive founding myth for a nation ready to choose hope over experience, by collectively agreeing to suspend our disbelief until the penalty shoot-out at least.

It was still about national pride, but with an internationalist expression in hosting the world having done much to give it the cast of a global game. We even had the right flags, if still the wrong anthems, and what remains the sole month every four years when no St George's flag carries any hint of menace.

Yet Germany is not short of great footballing rivalries. Do England risk being cast here in the role of the Scots, with a deep rivalry no longer reciprocated, perhaps barely even remembered? The Dutch-German rivalry simmered from Cruyff's 1970s up to the 1990s. Simon Kuper's marvellous Football Against the Enemy opens by focusing on just how much the Euro 1988 semi-final victory meant to the Dutch, 60 per cent of whom took to the streets to celebrate.

There were also Germany's epic defeats of Michel Platini's mercurial French in two consecutive World Cup semi-finals, assisted by one of the great World Cup crimes of the villainous German goalkeeper in 1982.

Clash of the titans

Yet perhaps none of this mattered quite as much to Germany as their opponents. With three World Cup victories, no fewer than seven World Cup finals, and three European championships, too, they have every reason to focus less on the decisive moments and near-misses of each tournament as their enduring battle with Italy to be Europe's leading footballing power.

The long view of Germany v England would suggest that it is different. This has been very much a rivalry of two halves. It was only beating England that first established Germany's claim to be the major European footballing nation, something they could not achieve for the first 38 years. It was beating Germany again that became central to England's quest to reclaim a place among football's elite.

When Germany came to Wembley for the 1966 World Cup final, they had never beaten England at football. (They had become unlikely World Champions once, though, beating Puskas's mighty Hungarians in the 1954 miracle of Berne). The greatest day in England's football history was also the last time they would defeat Germany in a competitive football match in the 20th century; a 34-year drought followed, which dragged on until Euro 2000.

Germany's first victory over England -- at the ninth attempt -- came only in 1968, setting up the dramatic World Cup quarter-final in Mexico in 1970, in which England were desperately unlucky to lose a two-goal victory and their world title. "Even the Scots had tears in their eyes", reported Hugh McIlvanney for the Observer the following weekend.

"I had a lump in my throat. I had to get out of the stadium before anybody noticed tears in my eyes," said one Scottish international player. "You just had to be affected when you saw a team with all those qualities -- fellows like Moroo and Ballie and the big Geoff and Mullers -- getting the message like that. I'm telling you this competition lost something special when it lost them. Anybody who calls it nobility isn't far wrong." Those who wince at that as soggy chauvinism should have heard it delivered in a west of Scotland accent.

Yet the real turning point in the rivalry came at Wembley two years later, as a Günther Netzer masterclass dumped England out of the 1972 European Championship, giving Germany their first ever victory in England.

The comprehensive defeat of Alf Ramsey's side was perhaps as great a wake-up call for English football as the Hungarian defeat of 1953. It would be another decade before once-mighty England even qualified for the World Cup finals, though Alan Hudson sparkled to defeat the German world champions at a 1975 Wembley friendly that proved a false dawn.

The reprise of the great clashes of 1966 and 1970 came in the World Cup and European semi-finals of 1990 and 1996. The footballing order had shifted. It was very clear that England were now cast as underdogs, taking pride in magnificent defeat from the penalty spot on both occasions.

And England v Germany now takes a much less central place for the rest of the footballing universe than it did in either of those periods. The Euro 2000 match was a dire slugfest between ageing heavyweights, though it ended England's 34-year Germany jinx.

Local bragging rights have mattered -- Germany's victory in the last game at the old Wembley made Kevin Keegan realise he was not cut out for international football management; England's 5-1 triumph in Munich in the return provided the most glorious of all of the false dawns of the Sven era.

Cherish the misery

We may find that this has finally become a more evenly balanced rivalry. Perhaps this talented young German team have the potential to begin a new era of greatness. Perhaps this generation of English players could finally realise their potential when it matters. Neither side is likely to begin as favourites if they play Argentina in the quarter-final.

(Curiously, England have played Germany or Argentina at the World Cup just about every time we have made the finals since 1966. The sole exception was in 2006, with England downgraded to our new grudge rivalry with Cristiano Ronaldo's Portugal. Those encounters have usually proved fatal to our World Cup prospects. Optimists can note that only in 1966 did we meet them both!)

So, there is still everything to play for on Sunday, as long as it does not go to penalties. Only the English (and the Dutch) really know how silly it is to refer to the penalty shoot-out as a lottery. England -- with one victory (17 per cent) and five defeats -- and Germany with five wins (71 per cent) and two defeats have the worst and best records in the world from the penalty spot.

That, too, has now become a central cherished misery in our national sporting narrative.

Yet, once we realise that the rivalry really matters precisely because this is (only) about football, surely hope can still triumph over experience this time around.

Sunder Katwala is general secretary of the Fabian Society. He blogs at Next Left.

Tags: World Cup 2010

More from Sunder Katwala

View the discussion thread.

44 comments

Thu, 2010-06-24 19:23 — Nick (not verified)

@jeremihah england look to the past because of how tight it was that we would have been in these finals,If we won the penalties the germans would have the same reason to look back,they got there on holding their nerve not better fottball

Thu, 2010-06-24 19:25 — nick (not verified)

@jeremiah 10 million in the uk who are not english wtf that is your problem pal if you don't like it get out of england,what a cheek

THIS IS ENGLAND

Sat, 2010-06-26 13:28 — jie4v7i14

jeremiah, but it is bleeding the Great Britain of Us, pal, and if I 'appen to slip a swareword in, see, give me some slack mate... UP THE 'AMMERS
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oo1Sve32KDk

Sat, 2010-06-26 13:36 — jie4v7i14

and sunder above, Jim Baxter playing keepy-uppie on the left wing in 1967 is a true classic memory. Scotland - the true footie World Champions, 1967. They tore England apart that day in Wembley, made them look like players from Berwick.

Thu, 2010-06-24 22:22 — jie4v7i14

if it the krauts, this the clip, and film, you need to see ,my friends, englishpersons,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oo1Sve32KDk

Thu, 2010-06-24 22:17 — jeremiah

@Nick. No this is the internet and i'm not in England, Thank God! :p

Thu, 2010-06-24 22:25 — jie4v7i14

someone is fucking my postings about here, I repeat,
if it is the krauts, as it is, this the clip, and film, you need to see, my friends, englishpersons,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oo1Sve32KDk
up the bleeding 'ammers, ain't it?

Mon, 2010-06-28 22:08 — jeremiah

@sunderkatwala. Of course the game mattered to the Germans. Football is a religion in Germany.

England are a medium sized football power. They are not Brazil or Argentina or even Germany.

Perhaps if the English accepted their status it would insulate them against the regular defeats they suffer against the true powers in football.

Mon, 2010-06-28 22:18 — clem the gem (not verified)

Why are we all so collectively bothered bout 22 silly men with good muscular co-ordination kicking a bladder around for 90 minutes?
Surely we could all just go and read a book, or have a swim?

Thu, 2010-06-24 23:28 — sunderkatwala

David Wearing - thanks for your positive comments and engagement with the piece.

One of the things that has changed is that I think the idea that we have a sense of entitlement or expectation that we will win it is out-of-date or a bit of a myth. Most people would be pleased to get to the semis, or the final, and would be thrilled if we were to win it precisely because it still feels pretty unlikely.

jeremiah - OK, I can see why some people would say we hear too much from England about 1966. But I think all of Britain's sporting nations have a broadly similar (somewhat reverent) approach to national memory and myth: Welsh rugby and JPR Williams, the great Northern Irish (beating Spain in 1982, Pat Jennings, Mary Peters) or Scottish sporting moments and heroes. Many of these resonate across Britain too (again, thanks to the BBC perhaps).

And 1966 itself has a very important place in Scotland's sporting memory too. I wonder what would win a greatest Scottish football moments poll (somebody may know if one has been done recently). Perhaps it would be Archie Gemmill's goal against Holland, or Wembley 1977, but I bet beating England's world champions at Wembley in 1967 would feature strongly too. 1967 and all that, so to speak.

Mon, 2010-06-28 22:36 — jeremiah

@clem the gem. Go have a swim and then take a nap.

The rest of us will enjoy the World's greatest sporting event.

Thu, 2010-06-24 23:29 — sunderkatwala

Here's a Scotland 1967 link for balance.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/scotland/sportscotland/asportingnation/article/0022...

And a more sceptical view about the mythology of the match

http://sport.stv.tv/football/148933-scotlands-1967-wembley-win-only-a-tr...

Sat, 2010-06-26 16:02 — Thomas (not verified)

I still love how the English focus on the rivalry and put so much emphasise on it. Fact is, that Germany doesn't share this attitude, as they don't really care for England at all, but have their major rivalry with the Dutch

Sat, 2010-06-26 18:01 — jie4v7i14

a message to the lads and listen to it,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=02S9i0Kal2Y

Sat, 2010-06-26 18:03 — jie4v7i14

remember Coventry, where the above lads are from.

Sat, 2010-06-26 18:08 — jie4v7i14

and the german canutes started it after all, ww1 and ww2.

Sat, 2010-06-26 18:19 — jeremiah

@EhtchTee. Read a book. Germany did not start World War I.

The fact you would bring up the war in a discussion about the World Cup shows what a div you are!

Sat, 2010-06-26 18:31 — sunderkatwala

There is a wikipedia entry on the Germany-Holland rivalry

href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germany_and_Netherlands_football_rivalry

And the intensity of it does somewhat dent the british liberal-left fear that the English are uniquely juvenile about international football. But I would have thought (especially as post-2006 we seem in a different era, in German football) some of the heat may have gone out of Germany-Holland in terms of the intensity of 1974 and 1988-90, where both very much felt they could be the dominant European team.

Fri, 2010-06-25 03:29 — jeremiah

@sunderkatwala. I take your point about previous victories by the "Home Nations".

However speaking as someone who does not live in England I am tired. Tired of the same crap trotted out every 4 years. Tired of England Expects, 1966 "and all that".

As I previously stated there are 10 Million people in the UK who do not live in England.

If the situation was different and Scotland or Wales had qualified instead of England (this has happened before), you can bet it would not get the same coverage at a national level.

The English seem to lose all perspective during a World Cup. The BBC turns into the EBC.

The English have every right to support their team.

However we Non-English should have a right not have to hear it through a Corporation we pay for as well!

Fri, 2010-06-25 06:49 — Hans-Heinrich (not verified)

What would you poor pommie bastards do if you didn't have the Jerries to complain about. You are forever reliving World war II. Get over it, you poor sods.

Fri, 2010-06-25 09:55 — sunderkatwala

Jeremiah

Thanks. I am not sure I agree about that. I remember the 1982 and 1986 World cups, and there was very extensive BBC coverage ahead of and between games of Scotland and Northern Ireland as well as England.

I wasn't old enough to watch 1974 or 1978 when Scotland qualified and England didn't. But perhaps somebody else can report on that.

I do remember 1994, when none of the British teams qualified. There was still enormous World Cup coverage on the BBC as well as ITV as well as in the press. To some extent, Ireland were a focus of coverage as an almost 'home nation' (with the players at English clubs and, of course, a chance to reflect back on Jack Charlton's role in 1966!!). Beyond that, it was also a bit like the Wimbledon tennis in that we were watching every kick of the tournament as neutrals.

I am also not that interested in 'reports from the team camp' on days England aren't playing. I think the BBC especially (perhaps ITV is less good at a sense of perspective) does a good job in covering the whole World Cup, beyond England, from the point of view of the football. Certainly its one of the best things you get for the licence fee. (I understand the World Cup is on cable/satellite channels and not free to air in some European countries).

Fri, 2010-06-25 11:52 — ROBERT TAGGART (not verified)

England's footy renaissance has to begin sometime ? somewhere ? somehow !
Fabio has the best chance for too many years to mention to bring out the best of an otherwise ordinary squad. No Englishman since Ramsey has ever managed that.
Lets hear it for Ingerland this sunday.

Fri, 2010-06-25 14:28 — sunderkatwala

David Wearing was spot on with this: "Problem is, jeremiah, you're talking about history. It plays a small part, but what really matters is the quality of the two sides that are playing tomorrow. In those terms, its a fairly even match between two good-but-not-great sides. Germany are in much the better form. They looked very fluent yesterday. But we have more experience in the squad, and a coach that is amongst history's greats. Its the fact that you don't know how all this will balance out on the day that makes it such an interesting match-up".

The long history is now very even. 12 wins for us; 10 wins (plus two penalty-shootouts) for them. More relevantly, we won the last friendly in Berlin and lost the won before that at Wembley. We have more experienced players at league and European level; they have played better so far at this World Cup, though we improved in the 3rd game. Both sides will know they could win.

Fri, 2010-06-25 15:17 — jeremiah

@sunder. England may have a reasonable record against Germany in recent matches.

However compare the record of England and Germany in the World Cup and the European Championship.

As I indicated before England could beat Germany. However one second round match win does not equate with seven finals appearances and three wins.

Germany does not consider England as one of their main rivals. The games they consider most important are with the Netherlands, France and of most importance Italy.

Sun, 2010-06-27 18:41 — jeremiah

The better team won. Nuff said.

Fri, 2010-06-25 16:07 — Rob (not verified)

The people who keep on talking about '66 are the English media. NOT English fans. The people who bring up WW2 references again is the Engish media. I'm sick and tired of foreigners making negative comments about England every time there is a World Cup.....Just because of our MEDIA.

Fri, 2010-06-25 16:10 — Rob (not verified)

And jeremiah, I've heared your comments all before all you are doing is repeating anti-English or negative-English related comments that everyone like you seems to enjoy doing on the internet since the internet began. Get a life dude.

Fri, 2010-06-25 16:41 — jeremiah

@Rob. So its the media that makes England fans shout "Two World Wars and one World Cup" then?

Fri, 2010-06-25 17:17 — sunderkatwala

jeremiah

Perhaps we don't disagree much then.

The piece itself writes about the Dutch and French as well as English rivalries, and says of all of them:

"Yet perhaps none of this mattered quite as much to Germany as their opponents. With three World Cup victories, no fewer than seven World Cup finals, and three European championships too, they have every reason to focus less on the decisive moments and near misses of each tournament as their enduring battle with Italy to be Europe's leading footballing power".

But it would be interesting to hear from any German voices about what relative weighting these different games have. Despite the 1980s, I'd be a bit surprised if the French rivalry mattered more than that with England.

Fri, 2010-06-25 17:45 — swatantra

As usual, England will have alacklustre game and the Germans will hope for penalties as the decider. Adventurous Football is not in Englands vocabulary.
1966 is ancient history, or time immemmorial.

Fri, 2010-06-25 17:52 — ROBERT TAGGART (not verified)

re: jeremiah @ 14.17... agreed, sadly !
One has the answer to an England victory... declare WAR on Germany... we always beat them !

Fri, 2010-06-25 18:39 — sunderkatwala

There is a good Jonathan Wilson piece on Sports Illustrated, which backs up my argument that the key turning-point in the Germany-England rivalry comes not in 1970 but with Netzer at Wembley in 1972, and which has quite a lot of detail about the game.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/soccer/world-cup-2010/writers/jona...

Mon, 2010-06-28 01:08 — sunderkatwala

jeremiah - They certainly did.

Though reports on the German reaction before and after the match suggests it mattered a fair bit to them too!

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2010/jun/27/world-cup-germany-rejoice...

There could be shades of the 1972 match, and for both sides, since that win looked to me like it could be the making of this very promising German team which is not the finished article; and it does similarly demand a deeper inquest into why England are consistently a medium-sized power who do routinely lose whenever they meet one of the tournament contenders and footballing powers in the finals.

Thu, 2010-06-24 23:26 — jeremiah

@EhtchTee. Language! This ain't Youtube you know!

Fri, 2010-06-25 21:03 — jeremiah

@ROBERT TAGGART. Perhaps but i'm not sure about trusting Terry or Rooney with firearms!

@Sunderkatwala. Perhaps England is more important than France. Germans see themselves as being in a duel with Italy to be the best European team in the World Cup. Current score 4-3 to Italy.

Most Germans will be cock-a-hoop at Italy being knocked out in the 1st round.

The national team that most Germans dislike is the Netherlands. Germany-Netherlands is one of the great grudge matches in world football.

England-Germany is of course important, but it will always play second fiddle to the Germans when playing the Netherlands or Italy.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/10412377.stm

Thu, 2010-06-24 16:53 — jeremiah

England needs "wake up call". England has this idea that they are a match for Germany, which is a joke.

Germany has made it to the World Cup Final seven times, winning three times. They have also got to the European Championship Final six times, also winning three times.

The sole time England got to the Final of a major competition was in 1966. Then they had the advantage of being hosts and playing all games at Wembley.

England could get a result but it is unlikely. Germany always looks to the next competition or tournament, so you do not hear Germans shouting 1974 or 1990 the same way the tiresome English shout 1966.

England is a prisoner of the past and of their arrogant view of the game.

Thu, 2010-06-24 16:54 — David Wearing1

Top article. And turned out impressively quickly given that we didn't know this was on til last night.

They're a good side, the current German team. But hopefully our experience (and superior coach) will be the deciding factor. Should be close, although I can't help but nurture the faint hope of us giving them an absolute shoeing. If we can't win the tournament, it'd be a nice second prize to turn out at least one really great performance.

Thu, 2010-06-24 17:03 — David Wearing1

Problem is, jeremiah, you're talking about history. It plays a small part, but what really matters is the quality of the two sides that are playing tomorrow. In those terms, its a fairly even match between two good-but-not-great sides. Germany are in much the better form. They looked very fluent yesterday. But we have more experience in the squad, and a coach that is amongst history's greats. Its the fact that you don't know how all this will balance out on the day that makes it such an interesting match-up.

I don't think England are complacent abut their history any longer. We know we're underachievers and have been for a long time. I think even the sense that we're "due" another tournament win has gone. People will be happy if the team just does the country proud, which seems fair to me.

Thu, 2010-06-24 17:04 — David Wearing1

"the two sides that are playing on Sunday" that should've read obv

Thu, 2010-06-24 17:19 — jeremiah

@David. As I live in the UK but not in England I am heartily sick of hearing - England Expects, 1966, Bobby Moore, They think its all over....

The English during a World Cup show their true colours. English commentators and presenters are the most arrogant and distatsteful you can find anywhere in the world.

I would have less problem with all that if England had the record to back it up. You show the same arrogance with your reference to being "underachievers".

Bottom line is England aren't good enough.

There are nearly 10 Million people in the UK who are not English, and I for one are tired of the bias and bluster.

God help us if England won again. D:

Fri, 2010-06-25 23:57 — sunderkatwala

I guess part of the difference with Italy is that, at the World Cup, Germany have never beaten Italy, including losing the semis in 1970 and 2006, and the final in 1982. (Which may be why Italy may, in turn, usually focus less on Germany and more on Brazil!).

Whereas the games with Germany 1966, 1970, 1990 and 1996 may well be four of the most important five or six (certainly top 10) games in England's international football history. I suppose the 1966 semi-final would be there too, while the 1970 quarter-final, as holders, is probably a bigger game than other world cup quarter-finals.

Mon, 2010-06-28 14:30 — jie4v7i14

The english footie players don't have the balls, like the mainman party in this country runing institutions in this country, the bleeding oxbridge fanitisising tories.

Thu, 2010-06-24 18:10 — David Wearing1

alright, pal. Keep your shirt on.

All I meant by "underachievers" was that a country with one of the best leagues in the world, with the game massively popular amongst the public, and with the resources to invest in coaching and youth development, ought to have managed better than one major tournament win and 2 top four finishes over the past 60 years. Probably only Spain historically have done less with more, and they now have a team that's far better than ours.

By the way, I'm only quarter English by background - though I was born and brought up here, and support the team. There is or at least often was in the past a nasty side to England-fandom, as Sunder points out in the article. In 1990 I went as far as supporting Cameroon because the anti-black racism I was hearing got too much to bear. But Sunder's right to say that much of the fan base has moved on since then. That's true of the xenophobia, and I think its true of the sense of expectation as well. There are obviously still some idiotic elements, but that's true of most countries. Its unfair of you to tar everyone with the same brush.

Sat, 2010-06-26 01:23 — jeremiah

@sunder. Yes that is right. You could compare Germany/Italy to Argentina/Brazil. The winner sees themselves as not just the winner of the game but the best team in their respective continent.