Spotlight

[cheifo]

Well said Gspain and this is my main issue with some of the posts of this thread.Why do some people like to concentrate on the minority instead of crediting the fantastic strides achieved by the majority.Its so pointless and negative that unless you have an agenda to stereotype people it does not make sense.
The success of the Seatanta cup is imo vital to football Noth and South and I have very respect for supporters of Glens & Linfield who spend their money and time following their local team.
The supporters of these teams and of NI deserve huge credit for working hard to oust sectarian elements who they clearly dont want at their matches.

[lopez]

I disagree. The monarch was King/Queen of England and Scotland before the two Kingdoms merged. Therefore if the Union split she'd still be the Queen of Scotland. So as the anthem represents Scotland, Wales and NI too, England doesn't have it's own anthem. Hence why the English nationalists want Jerusalem or some other song at England games instead of GSTQ. They don't see Englishness and Britishness as the same thing.

I don't think you know how close Englishness as an identity and culture is associated with Britishness. Twenty years ago, England matches would have been decorated with UJs. The fact that this is now uncommon has less to do with any independence movement than a dislike of the other countries seeking to move away. In a nutshell, the view is, you go your way, but we'll keep everything we hold dear - the queen, cult of war, hating everybody else - the same.

As for 'Jerusalem'? I'd put more money on the Soldiers Song being played as the home anthem at Windsor Park.

LOPEZ

She's the queen of England and the rest of Britain is her domain.

Nonsense. The Kingdom of England ceased to exist on 1st May 1707. You’re only 301 years out of date.

The two royals were joined in 1603 not 1707 when the King or Queen of England became head of states over the whole of the southern end of the Atlantic Archipeligo. The 'British' royalty is still deemed a descendent of the line from William the Conqueror - although not by blood - hence we have QE2 and not a new second QE1. Basically new name, same old monarchy. There is also the small matter of her role as head of the church of England and not the church of Scotland, which also brings her closer to Englishness than Scottishness.

Thanks for the history lesson though. I'll direct your post to the many muppets in this country that actually believe England is still a country which as you rightly say, has ceased to exist since 1707.

[Hibernian]

"Cheers for the english lesson. You sound just like my old school teacher fool of s*it"

It wasn't a lesson, it was a suggestion. And if the teacher to whom you refer was your English teacher, you might have been better advised to listen to him/her, since your original post was illiterate to the point of being incomprehensible.

Speaking of which, have you any comment on the reported remarks by Neil Lennon, or do you not consider these relevant to the point which (I think) you were making about, ahem, Neil Lennon?[/QUOTE]

there is no ahem about it, it was about Neil Lennon so I am not sure if you actually did read my post which you seem to have considered incomprehensible (nice big word from you fair play)

Anyway, Neil Lennon only made those comments so too make peace he did not mean those lets be honest and bigger picture is not expressed in what he said.

Just cause it is improving don't expect to get a round of applause. Your national following has a major disease which is a pity but it is around and that's sad that Norn Iron have been this way for so long and will for some time.

[lopez]

...Consequently, I wasn't in the Bot. However, having seen an account which I trust by someone who was there, it seems that the overwhelming majority of people were having a great time - especially when the girl with the mighty bazookas finally "got them out for the lads" (and the TV cameras!) - only for the atmosphere to be temporarily spoiled when a couple of ****ed-up wee spides seized their opportunity to achieve their 15 seconds of fame by singing their sectarian filth. I say "temporarily" since, as I understand it, they were chucked out by the bouncers almost straightaway...

I was in the Bot after the game in 1994 and before the NI v Spain game of 2003. It struck me as a nationalist pub back then as during the latter there were just people getting ready to watch the Ireland v Georgia game.

While we're getting all self righteous in redefining the meaning of 'bigot', 'bazookas' and getting 'them out for the lads' might be found more offensive by women supporters than some w*nk Rangers 'sectarian filth'.

Well said Gspain and this is my main issue with some of the posts of this thread.Why do some people like to concentrate on the minority instead of crediting the fantastic strides achieved by the majority.Its so pointless and negative that unless you have an agenda to stereotype people it does not make sense...

As been done to death before, the sectarianism of a minority, no matter how small, no matter how long ago, is a reason cited for many NI nationalists prefering to support Ireland.

I would take the sectarianism or bigotry within a minority of our fans if I could get Croke Park, Lansdowne Road or our away games rocking like the Kop was when I was last at Windsor Park. But then the FAI's only worries about offending and alienating a minority the size of what nationalists are in the 6C is currently whether any Northern Unionists would be put off from playing for them because of this.

[RogerMilla]

While we're getting all self righteous in redefining the meaning of 'bigot', 'bazookas' and getting 'them out for the lads' might be found more offensive by women supporters .

agreed i much prefer to use the word "bazumbas" myself.

Thread involving NI descends into finger pointing and "clarification" again.

Brilliant.

[Blanchflower]

The two royals were joined in 1603 not 1707 when the King or Queen of England became head of states over the whole of the southern end of the Atlantic Archipeligo.

No, no, no. The two crowns were united in one person (James VI of Scotland) but remained separate titles and separate kingdoms. In 1707 the two kingdoms were united and the separate kingdoms of England and Scotland ceased to exist.

and the The 'British' royalty is still deemed a descendent of the line from William the Conqueror - although not by blood - hence we have QE2 and not a new second QE1.

It's also descended from the Scottish line!

She's called QE2 because the numbering of titles is taken from the English line. That does not mean that the kingdom of England still exists.

Basically new name, same old monarchy.

Except it was actually the Scottish line that took over the English line!

There is also the small matter of her role as head of the church of England and not the church of Scotland, which also brings her closer to Englishness than Scottishness.

Oh dear. She's actually head of the Church of Scotland, too!

[EalingGreen]

Anyway, Neil Lennon only made those comments so too make peace he did not mean those lets be honest and bigger picture is not expressed in what he said.

So Lennon is basically a liar, then? Even if you think this to be the case, what reason would he have for doing so? Why would he need "to keep the peace?" - especially with those who formerly abused him? He was long since retired from international football when he said this and was living in GB, so the "war" was long over - he didn't have to say anything.

The facts are these. Lennon was abused by a minority, then threatened by an individual. It must have been a very worrying time, but it was years ago. In the intervening period, things have improved enormously, which he generously acknowledged in a tape which he made specially for the IFA (afaik, he couldn't attend because he was on Celtic duty).

For you to harp on about the original offence, then try to discredit the evidence which demonstrates that things have moved on, indicates to me that you are not interested in progress; rather, you are stuck in the past with your petty prejudices. Just like the people who booed Lennon, in fact.

Just cause it is improving don't expect to get a round of applause.

No-one is expecting applause. But we don't expect - and won't accept - criticism which is unfair, misrepresentative, out-of-date and frankly prejudiced, either. And certainly not from people who clearly have little or no knowledge of what is really going on.

Your national following has a major disease which is a pity but it is around and that's sad that Norn Iron have been this way for so long and will for some time.

Nor do we need the likes of you to tell us what is wrong with our sport. We are well aware of it and are doing our utmost to deal with this "disease". Speaking of which, following events in Dublin in the years since the Lennon incident - e.g. the booing of Rangers players, or the anti-semitism when Israel came to town - I might point out that your team is hardly immune from the disease, either.

Yet I have no doubt that those actions were those of a tiny and unrepresentative minority, abhorred by the overwhelmingly decent majority. Consequently, I am more than happy that the FAI and fans will deal with it, without benefit of my less than informed opinion.

[RogerMilla]

or the anti-semitism when Israel came to town .

Give me quotes from a reputable news paper about anti-semitism from Irish Supporters during that game or take back this bull**** statement.

No He said She said, show me a quote , or apologise immediately.

[EalingGreen]

While we're getting all self righteous in redefining the meaning of 'bigot', 'bazookas' and getting 'them out for the lads' might be found more offensive by women supporters than some w*nk Rangers 'sectarian filth'.

I'd have thought the young lady in question, who appeared to need little encouragement to expose her breasts, is the one who should be explaining herself to her feminist sisters. At the very least, I am quite certain that she won't have been offended by my terminology!

Besides, if the worst we can be accused of is sexism, then I'd have to say that that's an advance over the usual criticism we receive...

As been done to death before, the sectarianism of a minority, no matter how small, no matter how long ago, is a reason cited for many NI nationalists prefering to support Ireland.

Now we are at the nub of the whole issue. There is no doubt that sectarianism is a reason (the chief reason?) why many NI Nats choose ROI over NI.

However, there are two qualifications which I think need to be made which are at least as important, but invariably get overlooked against the complaints of the "Whatabout Neil Lennon Brigade" (e.g. Hibernian or Kingdom Kerry).

First, at least some of those NI Nats are unaware of the massive improvements which have been made in recent years, which if they were, might cause them to change their stance. (I say "at least some", since others may be aware, but either refuse to accept it or they are using "sectarianism" as a pretext to conceal the fact that they still wouldn't support NI even if the sectarianism and politics - flag, anthem etc - were completely removed)

Second, whatever vestigial sectarianism remains, it is now so reduced and contained as not to be serious enough to prevent any NI Nat from attending and supporting the team entirely without fear or alarm. Yet when even neutrals like Gspain with direct and up-to-date experience point this out, their testimony gets drowned by the chorus of naysayers and begrudgers.

[Which incidentally may also serve to explain to ROI fans - especially those actually from the Republic - why "Not Brazil" and myself and others spend so much time on forums like this "fighting the good fight". We're proud that things are much better and we want more people from all backgrounds to be aware of it and join us. Above all, we're sick to death of being demonised as bigots etc by people whose own ignorance and denial in the face of the facts actually marks them down as more deserving of such an epithet than us.]

[Stuttgart88]

EG, while you tend to write well and offer sensible rebuffal to some of the antagonism shown to you here I think you've really let yourself down on the charges of anti-semitism. There was booing (at Awat's cheating for example) and there was whistling (like home supporters do when the opposition is in possession), just like you get at all football matches and yes, there was even an organised political demonstration in town before the game, but only a crank intent on besmirching our good name could offer a charge of anti-semitism.

Regarding the booing of Rangers players it's sad that the younger element in our support boo players because of which British team they play for. It happens to Liverpool and MUFC players in Dublin too. However, I would say that in no way was this booing related to the religion of the players in question, it was just because they played for Celtic's rivals, a club with a past of anti Irishness and sectarianism, and we all know that an element in our support wrongly see Celtic and Ireland as interchangable. Anyone present at the Denmark game (Peter Madsen being mistaken for Lovenkrands) will tell you that it was pantomime booing, with little or no real intensity. The booing was wrong but not least because it gave those who would be so inclined a stick to beat us with.

Even if you don't gree with my second point (many don't) you've stepped right out of line with the anti-semitism charge and you'd be well advised to return to offering your frequently interesting football insights if you're to retain my respect on this forum.

[citizenerased]

Why is it when Im reading EGs post the voice of Ian Paisley is narrating them in my head?

[lopez]

...Oh dear. She's actually head of the Church of Scotland, too!

Funny the Church of Scotland has not been told this.

http://www.churchofscotland.org.uk/o...n/orgqueen.htm

'The Queen is not the supreme governor of the Church of Scotland, as she is in the Church of England. The sovereign has the right to attend the General Assembly, but not to take part in its deliberations.' doesn't sound much of a head of church.

Actually, I didn't know she had any role in the church. As a presbyterian church, with my lack of religious knowledge, I bleived that preachers etc. are elected from bottom up, by the 'presbytery' and therefore a lack of bishops. Also I would have thought the difference in the religions, the fact that dissenters were discriminated until the mid 19th century by the established church, would have excluded any role in this church from Brenda apart from some form of 'patron'. TBH, her own religion is closer to mine than it is to theirs. Incidentally, is she head of the Church of Wales and the Church of Ireland?

Anyway, I've little time to be discussing Britain's number one family on benefits on a thread devoted to North-South(sic.) footballing relations.

[ifk101]

Why is it when Im reading EGs post the voice of Ian Paisley is narrating them in my head?

And why is that when I read your posts that the voice of a ignorant, spoilt, teenager comes to my mind? My friend's, sister's flatmate's mother's lover told me that he thinks the same.

[lopez]

Now we are at the nub of the whole issue. There is no doubt that sectarianism is a reason (the chief reason?) why many NI Nats choose ROI over NI...

After 800 odd posts, a very sensible one at last...Especially as it follows a post - regarding the anti-semitism of Irish fans - that charachterises so much of your bullsh*t.

[tetsujin1979]

lock it up lads

[Wolfie]

Ealing Green et all should be along any minute now for yet another entertaining cross boarder debate we all know and love.................................

Could I change my username to Nostrodamus?

[Blanchflower]

'The Queen is not the supreme governor of the Church of Scotland, as she is in the Church of England. The sovereign has the right to attend the General Assembly, but not to take part in its deliberations.' doesn't sound much of a head of church.

Actually, I didn't know she had any role in the church. As a presbyterian church, with my lack of religious knowledge, I bleived that preachers etc. are elected from bottom up, by the 'presbytery' and therefore a lack of bishops.

Well, as you point out, the nature of the CofS (presbyterian) means that the Queen is not its "supreme governor", but the point is that the CofS is the established church in Scotland like the CofE is established in England. Each church has equal status and her greater role in the English church is because of how that church is governed.

"In the United Kingdom, The Queen's title includes the words 'Defender of the Faith'.
This means Her Majesty has a specific role in both the Church of England and the Church of Scotland.
As established Churches, they are recognised by law as the official Churches of England and Scotland, respectively. In both England and Scotland, the established Churches are subject to the regulation of law."
http://www.qmmemorial.gov.uk/output/Page4697.asp

Also I would have thought the difference in the religions, the fact that dissenters were discriminated until the mid 19th century by the established church, would have excluded any role in this church from Brenda apart from some form of 'patron'.

Er, in Scotland the established church was and is presbyterian!

Incidentally, is she head of the Church of Wales and the Church of Ireland?

No - the former was disestablished in 1920 and the latter in 1871. So you're only 88 years and 137 years out of date on those ones.

[EalingGreen]

Give me quotes from a reputable news paper about anti-semitism from Irish Supporters during that game or take back this bull**** statement.

No He said She said, show me a quote , or apologise immediately.

OK, I will apologise and withdraw what was a lazy piece of shorthand and replace it with "politically motivated anti-Israeli abuse", if you prefer.

And if you want evidence of this "politically motivated anti-Israeli abuse", I don't need to point to "a reputable newspaper", I can do even better than that, namely this very forum!

Or have you forgotten "Today I'm ashamed to be Irish"?
http://foot.ie/archive/index.php/t-25941.html

Indeed, before I came to that thread in the Archive, I also came across references to abuse on separate occasions of (Rangers) Flo, Lovenkrands and Arvadladze, the latter causing Fran Rooney to state:
"But I have also received letters from people in the North of Ireland [sic] who are Protestants who were personally abused for asking people to stop booing. We've got a situation that is racist but also bigoted and sectarian"
(I believe there was also a complaint ot UEFA about somesuch?)

Now before this thread degenerates even further into a pointless "you're worse than us" slanging match, I make these points not in order to tarnish the reputation of the vast majority of decent ROI fans, or to denigrate the efforts of the FAI to stamp it out.

Rather, I was attempting to make the point that every team has its minority of meatheads and hangers-on, but just as they need not deter anyone of any background from safely attending ROI games, then neither need our particular problems further North deter anyone from NI from following OWC, home or away. Which is a long away away from the rubbish which is being posted on this forum by certain individuals.

[gustavo]

lock it up lads

Agreed , Every time this issue comes up , The usual suspects on both sides come out and the same points get repeated over and over again.