:clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :hehe: :hehe: :hehe: :hehe: :hehe: :hehe:

[Burney]

Part of the 'charm', if one might use that word, of international football is precisely that it does, or should, allow the tribal rivalries to dissolve for a short while and for fans of the game to be united behind a team which is local to all of them.

Perhaps deep down we tire of the compulsory hatred for people who follow a team with a different colour shirt from another part of town. I met a bloke at the cricket last week - a fellow Middlesex fan watching them play the Surrey rivals - who was Spurs, and as he said: "It's ok - it's the summer".

The other thing is that World Cups are a chance for non-football fans to experience, and maybe enjoy, the ups and downs of football.

I admit to having my doubts about the Spurs component of this team, but eventually decided it was actually preferable to the collection of supposedly word-class thundercùnts of previous years who achieved rather less than this group of more modest abillity.

One way of measuring 'passion' is how hard it hurts to lose and long it hurts for. It hurt quite a bit last night, but not much, if any today. So I care a lot less than the two days of hurt I expect when Arsenal go out of something, which I would expect, but others might feel differently.

What is notable is that the people who hate England the most here are perhaps the three with the most proudly and robustly held right wing views, with a strong sideline in misanthropy. Interesting, that, should they ever question anyone's patriotism.

All very nice, a, but you fail to spot the glaring contradiction at the heart of your argument.

You admit that you find this England team preferable to its predecessors containing said ‘thùndercûnts’. In doing so, you concede that your affection or otherwise for England teams is negotiable based on the individuals they contain. Which means that, in essence, you concede that the principle underpinning my distaste for this England team is valid. You are, in other words, no different to me in principle, we just happen to have different criteria.

Speaking personally, though, what really bothers me about England football teams is the sheer level of conformity they tap into. I’ve always despised unthinking, reflexive conformity and that is at the heart of what you choose to call my misanthopy. That isn’t to say I’m not outwardly conformist in many respects, but I can say with my hand on my heart that where I conform, it is as a consequence of thought and self-examination. So for instance, I am patriotic because there are many things about this country which are admirable and worth defending. However, those things do not include a mediocre football team teeming with Spurs shítcùnts. And, if I may say so, I find the notion of assessing patriotism based on support for a sports team patently ludicrous. And it’s no less ludicrous when you propose it than when Norman Tebbit does.

For natural-born conformists who have never examined an idea in their lives, of course, England supporting in World Cups is second nature. They are quite able to reconcile hating Spurs 204 weeks out of 208 and then cheering on ‘Harry’ and ‘Alli’ the other four because they’ve never actually bothered thinking about it. Confront them with the parent absurdity of their position and they become enraged and start indulging in convoluted post-rationalisations for their own intellectual inconsistency and reflexive conformity. They will attack you because you have not done the same and use as justification for their attacks that millions of people agree with them and not with you. Because, to the conformist, if everyone’s doing it, it must be right.

I’m afraid I’m just not built that way.

[Luis Anaconda]

All very nice, a, but you fail to spot the glaring contradiction at the heart of your argument.

You admit that you find this England team preferable to its predecessors containing said ‘thùndercûnts’. In doing so, you concede that your affection or otherwise for England teams is negotiable based on the individuals they contain. Which means that, in essence, you concede that the principle underpinning my distaste for this England team is valid. You are, in other words, no different to me in principle, we just happen to have different criteria.

Speaking personally, though, what really bothers me about England football teams is the sheer level of conformity they tap into. I’ve always despised unthinking, reflexive conformity and that is at the heart of what you choose to call my misanthopy. That isn’t to say I’m not outwardly conformist in many respects, but I can say with my hand on my heart that where I conform, it is as a consequence of thought and self-examination. So for instance, I am patriotic because there are many things about this country which are admirable and worth defending. However, those things do not include a mediocre football team teeming with Spurs shítcùnts. And, if I may say so, I find the notion of assessing patriotism based on support for a sports team patently ludicrous. And it’s no less ludicrous when you propose it than when Norman Tebbit does.

For natural-born conformists who have never examined an idea in their lives, of course, England supporting in World Cups is second nature. They are quite able to reconcile hating Spurs 204 weeks out of 208 and then cheering on ‘Harry’ and ‘Alli’ the other four because they’ve never actually bothered thinking about it. Confront them with the parent absurdity of their position and they become enraged and start indulging in convoluted post-rationalisations for their own intellectual inconsistency and reflexive conformity. They will attack you because you have not done the same and use as justification for their attacks that millions of people agree with them and not with you. Because, to the conformist, if everyone’s doing it, it must be right.

I’m afraid I’m just not built that way.

At least Monty was concise in showing himself to be a ****. Waffling with no point but to bore the reader into submission is the tactic of a arrogant cad

[Burney]

At least Monty was concise in showing himself to be a ****. Waffling with no point but to bore the reader into submission is the tactic of a arrogant cad

It’s OK if you didn’t read it all, la. That’s why I utterly destroyed a’s argument in the first two paragraphs - so that those with short attention spans got the gist and didn’t have to bother with the rest.

[Luis Anaconda]

It’s OK if you didn’t read it all, la. That’s why I utterly destroyed a’s argument in the first two paragraphs - so that those with short attention spans got the gist and didn’t have to bother with the rest.

I'm still pissed from last night, b (in a proper British sense not an American one) so I'll just stick to being abusive is that's all right with you

[Peter]

All very nice, a, but you fail to spot the glaring contradiction at the heart of your argument.

You admit that you find this England team preferable to its predecessors containing said ‘thùndercûnts’. In doing so, you concede that your affection or otherwise for England teams is negotiable based on the individuals they contain. Which means that, in essence, you concede that the principle underpinning my distaste for this England team is valid. You are, in other words, no different to me in principle, we just happen to have different criteria.

Speaking personally, though, what really bothers me about England football teams is the sheer level of conformity they tap into. I’ve always despised unthinking, reflexive conformity and that is at the heart of what you choose to call my misanthopy. That isn’t to say I’m not outwardly conformist in many respects, but I can say with my hand on my heart that where I conform, it is as a consequence of thought and self-examination. So for instance, I am patriotic because there are many things about this country which are admirable and worth defending. However, those things do not include a mediocre football team teeming with Spurs shítcùnts. And, if I may say so, I find the notion of assessing patriotism based on support for a sports team patently ludicrous. And it’s no less ludicrous when you propose it than when Norman Tebbit does.

For natural-born conformists who have never examined an idea in their lives, of course, England supporting in World Cups is second nature. They are quite able to reconcile hating Spurs 204 weeks out of 208 and then cheering on ‘Harry’ and ‘Alli’ the other four because they’ve never actually bothered thinking about it. Confront them with the parent absurdity of their position and they become enraged and start indulging in convoluted post-rationalisations for their own intellectual inconsistency and reflexive conformity. They will attack you because you have not done the same and use as justification for their attacks that millions of people agree with them and not with you. Because, to the conformist, if everyone’s doing it, it must be right.

I’m afraid I’m just not built that way.

I think there are millions of people whose loyalties to the england team are negotiable. This is why we keep hearing about the team 'reconnecting' with the fans. You have chosen to remove yourself from this because there are Spurs players in the team. I think your reason is a bit ****tish but I understand where you are coming from.

What I dont understand is why you are here issuing warnings to those who have gone the other way and embraced the side. Within the context of an AWIMB that you tend to dominate, THEY are the non-conformists. Bravo tot hem- and to me for being one of them.

I dont think an englishman supporting england at a world cup is a particularly good example of rank, unthinking conformity. Ash describes the benefits of being part of something bigger and it is tempting to get caught up in it rather than to sneer on the sidelines. I have tried both and dont feel terribly comfortable with either.

It can also be due to something more than your place of birth. I have a natural affinity to an english style of football as I think most of us do. I quite like seeing lads from Rotherham crashing into silky Colombians. Its fun!

I will give you the Norman Tebbit bit. Glad to see that even you are finally realising what a complete and utter ****ing **** Norman Tebbit was

[Burney]

I think there are millions of people whose loyalties to the england team are negotiable. This is why we keep hearing about the team 'reconnecting' with the fans. You have chosen to remove yourself from this because there are Spurs players in the team. I think your reason is a bit ****tish but I understand where you are coming from.

What I dont understand is why you are here issuing warnings to those who have gone the other way and embraced the side. Within the context of an AWIMB that you tend to dominate, THEY are the non-conformists. Bravo tot hem- and to me for being one of them.

I dont think an englishman supporting england at a world cup is a particularly good example of rank, unthinking conformity. Ash describes the benefits of being part of something bigger and it is tempting to get caught up in it rather than to sneer on the sidelines. I have tried both and dont feel terribly comfortable with either.

It can also be due to something more than your place of birth. I have a natural affinity to an english style of football as I think most of us do. I quite like seeing lads from Rotherham crashing into silky Colombians. Its fun!

I will give you the Norman Tebbit bit. Glad to see that even you are finally realising what a complete and utter ****ing **** Norman Tebbit was

The ‘warning’ was by way of a joke, p. Exaggeration for comic effect, sort of thing. I do it rather a lot - I’d have thought you might have noticed by now.

And I’m afraid that when I hear people go on about a desire to ‘be part of something bigger’ I tend to think it’s just a touchy-feels way of saying that they like to go along with the crowd. Fair enough and good luck to them, but I don’t and never have. I’m not one of life’s joiners, p. By which I don’t mean I’m bad at carpentry - although I am that, too.

[Peter]

The ‘warning’ was by way of a joke, p. Exaggeration for comic effect, sort of thing. I do it rather a lot - I’d have thought you might have noticed by now.

And I’m afraid that when I hear people go on about a desire to ‘be part of something bigger’ I tend to think it’s just a touchy-feels way of saying that they like to go along with the crowd. Fair enough and good luck to them, but I don’t and never have. I’m not one of life’s joiners, p. By which I don’t mean I’m bad at carpentry - although I am that, too.

The perennial voice of dissent. You are so important to us all, b. You remind of that we must question everything, that we must take nothing for granted, that might is not always right.

Still, you must be a ****ing drag at parties

[Burney]

The perennial voice of dissent. You are so important to us all, b. You remind of that we must question everything, that we must take nothing for granted, that might is not always right.

Still, you must be a ****ing drag at parties

I avoid parties like the plague, p. Awful things full of dreadful people.

[Peter]

I avoid parties like the plague, p. Awful things full of dreadful people.

Oh good god, so do I. The veryword brings me out in a rash. I would only go to a party to get out of going to a wedding.

[Burney]

Oh good god, so do I. The veryword brings me out in a rash. I would only go to a party to get out of going to a wedding.

My wife occasionally requires me to attend social events and I’m afraid it now causes me to behave quite badly. I will sulk for days beforehand, building to a crescendo of petulant resentment that almost always culminates in a row. And then we’ll get there and I’ll be sweetness and light, of course, as the muscle memory of sociability kicks in.

I’m not proud of it, but I do just hate it so much these days.