Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Whos sick of hearing about the '66 World Cup?

RubberBuccaneer said:
Well it wasn't England, which is the point I was trying to make to the englander


i wouldn't bother tryin to make any point to anyone so far beyond the point of no return as that melt tbh
 
isvicthere? said:
So your nostalgia comes with a cut off date? "Yester year" is fine by you as long, or so it seems, as it wasn't filmed in black and white?

Maradona, 20 years ago = OK.

Cruyff, 32 years ago = OK

But 40 years ago = "irritating"

Why? :rolleyes:

Because if your going to repeat stuff from history then chose something different rather than going on and on and on about the same old shit.

How often do you get to see the skills that made Johan Cryuff world famous. Can I ever get tired of watching Maradonas skill? Try me.

The world cup archives are huge, all those great games and great players that I'd love to be reminded of and rarely get a chance to see. But no, they play the one world cup event that i've seen played so often its worn a furrow in my skull.
 
Chorlton said:
i wouldn't bother tryin to make any point to anyone so far beyond the point of no return as that melt tbh

Says Mr Reasonably minded lol.

Nice use of the wannabe England football factory speak btw.

Why not put me on ignore?
 
RubberBuccaneer said:
Write it off, but it's a good work out for you lot isn't it - not a walk over for you.

Bar a one off at Windsor Pk, no not really. Wales were pretty tame in both games v England and N Ireland capitulated at Old Trafford. Maybe the non English competitors would do better treating games like Macedonia away like the 'battle of Britain' and raise their game accordingly.

And the only time it would be played would probably be squashed between internationals or preparations for major tournaments.

Not really selling it to me.
 
irish / scottish insult shortened form of "whores melt" as found in Brendan Behans "Borstal Boy" (1958) i'm afraid that i haven't read Footaball Factory do the "top lads" in call each other that then harry?
 
jammer said:
the problem is that the BBC is based in ENGLAND, so when the world cup is shown on TV viewers in every other part of britain are forced to listen to the crap coming out of the mouths of motson,linekar and the sorts,constantly rubbing it in about 66 and how wonderful they think england are and believe me,this really pisses everyone off no ends
I actually think this is the root of all the bullshit..
jimmy hill set the ball rolling when he called david nareys amazing strike against brazil in 74 " a toe poke"

You'd have more of a point aboput Motson and Lineker** if they actually had been going on (this time) about 1966. At a guess, the number of times I've heard Lineker and Motson even mention 1966, this time, and I've seen a lot of matches? About twice, in passing.

**And I'm no great fan of either, but for very different reasons

As has been said earlier in this thread, ITV has been quite a bit worse about the 1966 thing.

Inconveniently for your kneejerk 'all England fans never ever have any criticism ever about England/the media coverage of them and lap it all up uncritically' preconceptions, you could make many more telling criticisms. EG I'd agree with you, it must be bloody annoying in Scotland and Wales, to get all this England-centric WC coverage, and I fully understand that -- for instance it's bloody annoying to ME even, that so many commentators/summarisers see other matches far too much through a 'how would they get on against England?' prism.

But at least be accurate??
 
Rasberry Nipple said:
I noticed before the Ecuador match at the weekend, someone was interviewing Alan Ball and they kept bringing up the '66 WC.
Alan was trying to talk about playing Brazil in 1970, but still the interviewer went back to talking about '66.

May be my imagination, but I thought it looked like Alan Ball wanted to get away from talking about 1966, and wanted to talk about another experience. He seemed a bit irritated.

1966 was a great achievement, but now lies long in the past and needs to be laid to rest.

(oops! Forgot about that! :o )

I do agree with you ...

My general point still stands though.
 
Sunray said:
Because if your going to repeat stuff from history then chose something different rather than going on and on and on about the same old shit.

How often do you get to see the skills that made Johan Cryuff world famous. Can I ever get tired of watching Maradonas skill? Try me.

The world cup archives are huge, all those great games and great players that I'd love to be reminded of and rarely get a chance to see. But no, they play the one world cup event that i've seen played so often its worn a furrow in my skull.

I agree with your general point (show more a much more varied range of old games) but actually, I'm really not aware of TV showing snips from the 1966 World Cup, that often. At least not recently, and certainly not on the BBC's main coverage.

(posting now cos I can't get to the Brazil game til after the second half has started!! I'm avoiding the thread too .,.. )
 
jammer said:
the problem is that the BBC is based in ENGLAND, so when the world cup is shown on TV viewers in every other part of britain are forced to listen to the crap coming out of the mouths of motson,linekar and the sorts,constantly rubbing it in about 66 and how wonderful they think england are and believe me,this really pisses everyone off no ends
I actually think this is the root of all the bullshit..
jimmy hill set the ball rolling when he called david nareys amazing strike against brazil in 74 " a toe poke"


hansen. famously english.

leonardo. english as the day is long.

desailly. an illustrious career at centre half for england.

martin o'neill. might as well be called john bull.

mick mcarthy. is actually irish but played for and managed the english side.

gordon strachan. need I say more?
 
Chorlton said:
irish / scottish insult shortened form of "whores melt" as found in Brendan Behans "Borstal Boy" (1958) i'm afraid that i haven't read Footaball Factory do the "top lads" in call each other that then harry?

Yawn.
 
William of Walworth said:
. EG I'd agree with you, it must be bloody annoying in Scotland and Wales, to get all this England-centric WC coverage, and I fully understand that -- for instance it's bloody annoying to ME even, that so many commentators/summarisers see other matches far too much through a 'how would they get on against England?' prism.

But at least be accurate??

Tough shit. English people were listening to the media rave about Scotland in the 70s and how Ally McCleod would bring the cup home. English media can be as biased as they like as far as I'm concerned. If people don't like it they can use interactive.

William I wish you would stop trying to reason with them. The stupid cunts could turn the commentators off if they wanted. easy to avoid 66/Hand of God boretalk if you really want to.
 
Harold Hill said:
You sound like you're trying to be Donna Ferentes.

i struggle with ludo never mind chess.


Now, tell me more about these football factories.... did you have to read them before you got onto bravo two zero?
 
Harold Hill said:
The stupid cunts could turn the commentators off if they wanted. easy to avoid 66/Hand of God boretalk if you really want to.


similarly you could avoid the greater problem of all this whining about whining about 1966 by using ignore, no?
 
Teadious as fuck. Think this will be the last time it's really mentioned though. I hope. A, because I hoep we win. Failing that. B. It will have gone 40 years, and there won't be the same coincidences like the hostes playing the first game for a long time.

The 66 players themselves are getting bored with being wheeled out every 4 years as well.
 
Back
Top Bottom