521 posts
|
Post by danielwhit on Jul 22, 2023 21:58:42 GMT
Saw this today, really nothing fundamentally new I can add to the choir here praising it.
Not surprised given James Graham's history that the politicians had a quick run out.
As others have said, this surely has to have a future life. There's too much potential for this to punch through to audiences the NT (and heck, most theatres) do not normally reach for it to not have that opportunity.
If it wasn't running for just a couple weeks more I'd be tempted to return.
|
|
301 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by properjob on Jul 24, 2023 18:55:49 GMT
It is a great show and the very model of what the national theatre should be doing. It is a proper state of the nation show but that is also a creative ( football on stage could have been a disaster ) and commercial ( massive cast) risk. It clearly has the potential to reach out beyond the normal audience so I assume they will NTLive it at some point and if they don't do it soon I assume it is because they are planning to revive/transfer it.
|
|
|
Post by capybara on Jul 25, 2023 9:08:05 GMT
Saw this on Friday evening and thought it was excellent. As someone who goes to both the theatre and football every week, I was admittedly a little nervous about how many two passions would combine - football strikes me as very hard to replicate on stage - but it was managed very well.
Dear England does a really good job of capturing the moods of the times, be it around post-Euro 2016 and the short-lived Allardyce reign or individual tournaments. The choreography of the penalty shoot outs is spot on, while the mannerisms and characteristics of each real life role is captured well. Fiennes absolutely embodies Southgate to the point I couldn’t quite remember the real GS’s face in the immediate aftermath!
The only improvement that could have been made would be more of a nod to the unsavoury side of England fans during Southgate’s tenure. The rioting and violence of thousands who forced their way into Wembley for the Euro 2020 final, for example (I was there - it was appalling). Also the fact that while more level headed football fans totally acknowledge the progress made, even after the France defeat, he receives a huge amount of criticism and calls to go from people who despise him for his political and moral views as much as anything else.
Southgate decided to stay on as England manager but the crowd’s reaction during and after the 4-0 home defeat vs Hungary (again, I was there - it was an embarrassing response from the fans) really hurt him and almost led to him walking away.
But that aside, this is one of the most intriguing and uplifting plays I’ve seen in a very long time. I’ll be going again if it comes back, which I’m certain it must do.
A contender for my play of the year and five big fat stars from me.
|
|
649 posts
|
Post by theatremiss on Jul 26, 2023 9:25:53 GMT
Saw this on Friday evening and thought it was excellent. As someone who goes to both the theatre and football every week, I was admittedly a little nervous about how many two passions would combine - football strikes me as very hard to replicate on stage - but it was managed very well. Dear England does a really good job of capturing the moods of the times, be it around post-Euro 2016 and the short-lived Allardyce reign or individual tournaments. The choreography of the penalty shoot outs is spot on, while the mannerisms and characteristics of each real life role is captured well. Fiennes absolutely embodies Southgate to the point I couldn’t quite remember the real GS’s face in the immediate aftermath! The only improvement that could have been made would be more of a nod to the unsavoury side of England fans during Southgate’s tenure. The rioting and violence of thousands who forced their way into Wembley for the Euro 2020 final, for example (I was there - it was appalling). Also the fact that while more level headed football fans totally acknowledge the progress made, even after the France defeat, he receives a huge amount of criticism and calls to go from people who despise him for his political and moral views as much as anything else. Southgate decided to stay on as England manager but the crowd’s reaction during and after the 4-0 home defeat vs Hungary (again, I was there - it was an embarrassing response from the fans) really hurt him and almost led to him walking away. But that aside, this is one of the most intriguing and uplifting plays I’ve seen in a very long time. I’ll be going again if it comes back, which I’m certain it must do. A contender for my play of the year and five big fat stars from me. This year many plays have been great. But this is my favourite amongst many good ones ie seen. I love this play so much I’m back agai in this afternoon and have one more trip booked before it closes.
|
|
3,475 posts
|
Post by showgirl on Jul 26, 2023 14:35:01 GMT
Agree: it's superb.
|
|
|
Post by orchidman on Jul 26, 2023 14:53:51 GMT
The only improvement that could have been made would be more of a nod to the unsavoury side of England fans during Southgate’s tenure. The rioting and violence of thousands who forced their way into Wembley for the Euro 2020 final, for example (I was there - it was appalling). Also the fact that while more level headed football fans totally acknowledge the progress made, even after the France defeat, he receives a huge amount of criticism and calls to go from people who despise him for his political and moral views as much as anything else. No, football fans who like winning don't like Southgate because he has an incredible track record of losing going back to 1996. After that he then lost the two major finals he reached as a player, one as captain. Then as England manager he has had a very strong squad at his disposal with players drawn from the best league in the world under the best club managers and he has had incredibly good luck with the opposition he has faced and the good fortune to effectively be the host nation of the 2021 Euros. And yet he always finds a way to lose. In the knock-out stages of the 2018 World Cup the first decent side he faced was Croatia and he managed to lose despite taking the lead and despite having a much stronger bench when it went to Extra Time. In the knock-out stages of the 2021 Euros he is lucky enough to play an even poxier side in the semi-finals, Denmark, and at home, and still can't beat them in normal time. Then facing a very average Italy side and despite again taking the lead he manages to lose a final at Wembley, despite again having a much stronger bench when it went to Extra Time. Then in the 2022 World Cup he finally faces a decent side earlier in the Quarter Finals and despite France missing key players they get him beat in normal time with that 36-year-old superstar of world football Olivier Giroud landing the killer blow. Some sportsmen are winners and some are losers. Southgate is a loser. He has always been a loser. But he has done a great PR job to convince the FA to continue to pay him £5 million a year to lose. It is a sign of the decline of our country and its spirit that we champion a guy for being nice despite him being the exact opposite of what is needed in his role. Because the purpose of sport is to win. And winners win and losers lose. That's the brute truth which a nice boy like James Graham can't or won't tell you.
|
|
|
Post by capybara on Jul 26, 2023 15:26:06 GMT
The only improvement that could have been made would be more of a nod to the unsavoury side of England fans during Southgate’s tenure. The rioting and violence of thousands who forced their way into Wembley for the Euro 2020 final, for example (I was there - it was appalling). Also the fact that while more level headed football fans totally acknowledge the progress made, even after the France defeat, he receives a huge amount of criticism and calls to go from people who despise him for his political and moral views as much as anything else. No, football fans who like winning don't like Southgate because he has an incredible track record of losing going back to 1996. After that he then lost the two major finals he reached as a player, one as captain. Then as England manager he has had a very strong squad at his disposal with players drawn from the best league in the world under the best club managers and he has had incredibly good luck with the opposition he has faced and the good fortune to effectively be the host nation of the 2021 Euros. And yet he always finds a way to lose. In the knock-out stages of the 2018 World Cup the first decent side he faced was Croatia and he managed to lose despite taking the lead and despite having a much stronger bench when it went to Extra Time. In the knock-out stages of the 2021 Euros he is lucky enough to play an even poxier side in the semi-finals, Denmark, and at home, and still can't beat them in normal time. Then facing a very average Italy side and despite again taking the lead he manages to lose a final at Wembley, despite again having a much stronger bench when it went to Extra Time. Then in the 2022 World Cup he finally faces a decent side earlier in the Quarter Finals and despite France missing key players they get him beat in normal time with that 36-year-old superstar of world football Olivier Giroud landing the killer blow. Some sportsmen are winners and some are losers. Southgate is a loser. He has always been a loser. But he has done a great PR job to convince the FA to continue to pay him £5 million a year to lose. It is a sign of the decline of our country and its spirit that we champion a guy for being nice despite him being the exact opposite of what is needed in his role. Because the purpose of sport is to win. And winners win and losers lose. That's the brute truth which a nice boy like James Graham can't or won't tell you. As someone who follows England home and away, all I can say is I’m glad you spend your time posting on a theatre forum rather than about football. I suppose we shall have to agree to disagree! He has the backing of England’s travelling fans who actually spend money to follow the team, that’s the main thing.
|
|
486 posts
|
Post by wiggymess on Jul 26, 2023 15:57:40 GMT
The only improvement that could have been made would be more of a nod to the unsavoury side of England fans during Southgate’s tenure. The rioting and violence of thousands who forced their way into Wembley for the Euro 2020 final, for example (I was there - it was appalling). Also the fact that while more level headed football fans totally acknowledge the progress made, even after the France defeat, he receives a huge amount of criticism and calls to go from people who despise him for his political and moral views as much as anything else. No, football fans who like winning don't like Southgate because he has an incredible track record of losing going back to 1996. After that he then lost the two major finals he reached as a player, one as captain. Then as England manager he has had a very strong squad at his disposal with players drawn from the best league in the world under the best club managers and he has had incredibly good luck with the opposition he has faced and the good fortune to effectively be the host nation of the 2021 Euros. And yet he always finds a way to lose. In the knock-out stages of the 2018 World Cup the first decent side he faced was Croatia and he managed to lose despite taking the lead and despite having a much stronger bench when it went to Extra Time. In the knock-out stages of the 2021 Euros he is lucky enough to play an even poxier side in the semi-finals, Denmark, and at home, and still can't beat them in normal time. Then facing a very average Italy side and despite again taking the lead he manages to lose a final at Wembley, despite again having a much stronger bench when it went to Extra Time. Then in the 2022 World Cup he finally faces a decent side earlier in the Quarter Finals and despite France missing key players they get him beat in normal time with that 36-year-old superstar of world football Olivier Giroud landing the killer blow. Some sportsmen are winners and some are losers. Southgate is a loser. He has always been a loser. But he has done a great PR job to convince the FA to continue to pay him £5 million a year to lose. It is a sign of the decline of our country and its spirit that we champion a guy for being nice despite him being the exact opposite of what is needed in his role. Because the purpose of sport is to win. And winners win and losers lose. That's the brute truth which a nice boy like James Graham can't or won't tell you. Who would you have appointed instead, and who would you rather appoint now?
|
|
|
Post by sfsusan on Jul 26, 2023 16:52:42 GMT
Because the purpose of sport is to win. I gather you're not a proponent of "it's not whether you win or lose, it's how you play the game"?
|
|
649 posts
|
Post by theatremiss on Jul 26, 2023 16:52:43 GMT
As someone who follows England home and away, all I can say is I’m glad you spend your time posting on a theatre forum rather than about football. I suppose we shall have to agree to disagree! He has the backing of England’s travelling fans who actually spend money to follow the team, that’s the main thing. I last saw England play earlier this month. Away to Malta. I was sat close enough to see Southgate and Fiennes is so spot on with his mannerisms and movements. I think he’s worked hard to “be more Gareth”
|
|
5,588 posts
|
Post by lynette on Jul 26, 2023 17:25:49 GMT
The only improvement that could have been made would be more of a nod to the unsavoury side of England fans during Southgate’s tenure. The rioting and violence of thousands who forced their way into Wembley for the Euro 2020 final, for example (I was there - it was appalling). Also the fact that while more level headed football fans totally acknowledge the progress made, even after the France defeat, he receives a huge amount of criticism and calls to go from people who despise him for his political and moral views as much as anything else. No, football fans who like winning don't like Southgate because he has an incredible track record of losing going back to 1996. After that he then lost the two major finals he reached as a player, one as captain. Then as England manager he has had a very strong squad at his disposal with players drawn from the best league in the world under the best club managers and he has had incredibly good luck with the opposition he has faced and the good fortune to effectively be the host nation of the 2021 Euros. And yet he always finds a way to lose. In the knock-out stages of the 2018 World Cup the first decent side he faced was Croatia and he managed to lose despite taking the lead and despite having a much stronger bench when it went to Extra Time. In the knock-out stages of the 2021 Euros he is lucky enough to play an even poxier side in the semi-finals, Denmark, and at home, and still can't beat them in normal time. Then facing a very average Italy side and despite again taking the lead he manages to lose a final at Wembley, despite again having a much stronger bench when it went to Extra Time. Then in the 2022 World Cup he finally faces a decent side earlier in the Quarter Finals and despite France missing key players they get him beat in normal time with that 36-year-old superstar of world football Olivier Giroud landing the killer blow. Some sportsmen are winners and some are losers. Southgate is a loser. He has always been a loser. But he has done a great PR job to convince the FA to continue to pay him £5 million a year to lose. It is a sign of the decline of our country and its spirit that we champion a guy for being nice despite him being the exact opposite of what is needed in his role. Because the purpose of sport is to win. And winners win and losers lose. That's the brute truth which a nice boy like James Graham can't or won't tell you. Have you seen the play? If you have, then I respectfully suggest you have missed the point.
|
|
|
Post by observing on Jul 26, 2023 19:24:02 GMT
No, football fans who like winning don't like Southgate because he has an incredible track record of losing going back to 1996. After that he then lost the two major finals he reached as a player, one as captain. Then as England manager he has had a very strong squad at his disposal with players drawn from the best league in the world under the best club managers and he has had incredibly good luck with the opposition he has faced and the good fortune to effectively be the host nation of the 2021 Euros. And yet he always finds a way to lose. In the knock-out stages of the 2018 World Cup the first decent side he faced was Croatia and he managed to lose despite taking the lead and despite having a much stronger bench when it went to Extra Time. In the knock-out stages of the 2021 Euros he is lucky enough to play an even poxier side in the semi-finals, Denmark, and at home, and still can't beat them in normal time. Then facing a very average Italy side and despite again taking the lead he manages to lose a final at Wembley, despite again having a much stronger bench when it went to Extra Time. Then in the 2022 World Cup he finally faces a decent side earlier in the Quarter Finals and despite France missing key players they get him beat in normal time with that 36-year-old superstar of world football Olivier Giroud landing the killer blow. Some sportsmen are winners and some are losers. Southgate is a loser. He has always been a loser. But he has done a great PR job to convince the FA to continue to pay him £5 million a year to lose. It is a sign of the decline of our country and its spirit that we champion a guy for being nice despite him being the exact opposite of what is needed in his role. Because the purpose of sport is to win. And winners win and losers lose. That's the brute truth which a nice boy like James Graham can't or won't tell you. As someone who follows England home and away, all I can say is I’m glad you spend your time posting on a theatre forum rather than about football. I suppose we shall have to agree to disagree! He has the backing of England’s travelling fans who actually spend money to follow the team, that’s the main thing. capybara, you are definitely entitled to your own opinions but under no circumstances your own facts. The facts are: 1) In 72 years of competing in finals of major International tournaments England have never beaten a major nation in a knock out match outside Wembley in either a World Cup or European Championships. Gareth Southgate has not improved on this. 2) Gareth Southgate's England beat Tunisa, Panama and Sweden en route to the World Cup Semi Finals in 2018 which is the easiest run by any side to reach that stage - according to FIFA rankings- in any Post War World Cup 3) Alf Ramsey's England side beat Argentina, Portugal and West Germany in 3 consecutive knock out matches in 1966 which is, according to rankings, the toughest run of consecutive wins in a major tournament by any England side in history. 4) Following England home and away is a hobby which does not automatically equate to football knowledge. Some opinions now: 1) England's performances against Croatia in 2018, Italy in 2021 and France 2022 are no better than their performances against Brazil in 1962, West Germany in 1970, West Germany in 1990, Germany in 1996, Argentina in 1998 or Portugal in 2004. They were not better than defeats earlier than the knock out rounds against West Germany in 1972 or Holland in 1988. The opinion that somehow Southgate's England are venturing into new territory with performances is, in my opinion, a myth created by a media desperate to create a legacy for him and lapped up by fans not old enough to have seen those matches I refer to or relatively new to football. I'm more than happy to discuss this 'offline' but must advise that I regularly write for a peer reviewed football history magazine and have an archive of over 5000 football matches on DVD. 2) Southgate has hugely benefited from the expansion of tournaments to include more weaker sides.Better England sides didn't qualify for the finals of the 1972 European Championships (We lost to a West German side in the 2 legged quarters who were World Cup semi finalists in 70, European Champions in 1972, World Champions in 1974 and European Runners Up in 1976), 1974 World Cup (due to only 1 team qualifying from the group- the greatest Polish side in history who finished 3rd in West Germany) and, finally, 1978 World Cup (We were in a group in which only 1 side qualified and that was Italy). Again I'm more than happy to take this offline for you to explain which of Southgate's wins were against sides better than those mentioned here.
|
|
|
Post by capybara on Jul 26, 2023 21:14:43 GMT
Ha. Football can be so tiresome and tedious to debate and I had hoped to avoid that on this forum.
My last response to this discussion will be that Croatia and Italy were markedly better than us at the time we played them. I did think that was also the case with France - up until we played them. We were better than them all over the pitch. Unfortunately the low scoring system in football does not always reward playing better.
We should have beaten France, we would have beaten Morocco and then god know’s what would have happened against Argentina. 2022 was the only genuine missed opportunity. We were lucky to get as far as we did in the previous two tournaments, in no small part due to the manager.
However, opinions are opinions and the only certain fact we can all agree on is that Gareth Southgate is statistically the second best England manager of all time, after Sir Alf Ramsey. If, like me, you grew up watching decades of dirge, you learn to appreciate the better times!
Over and out (and, despite our differences, I’m glad there are other passionate football fans on this message board!).
|
|
486 posts
|
Post by wiggymess on Jul 26, 2023 21:47:04 GMT
As someone who follows England home and away, all I can say is I’m glad you spend your time posting on a theatre forum rather than about football. I suppose we shall have to agree to disagree! He has the backing of England’s travelling fans who actually spend money to follow the team, that’s the main thing. capybara , you are definitely entitled to your own opinions but under no circumstances your own facts. The facts are: 1) In 72 years of competing in finals of major International tournaments England have never beaten a major nation in a knock out match outside Wembley in either a World Cup or European Championships. Gareth Southgate has not improved on this. 2) Gareth Southgate's England beat Tunisa, Panama and Sweden en route to the World Cup Semi Finals in 2018 which is the easiest run by any side to reach that stage - according to FIFA rankings- in any Post War World Cup 3) Alf Ramsey's England side beat Argentina, Portugal and West Germany in 3 consecutive knock out matches in 1966 which is, according to rankings, the toughest run of consecutive wins in a major tournament by any England side in history. 4) Following England home and away is a hobby which does not automatically equate to football knowledge. Some opinions now: 1) England's performances against Croatia in 2018, Italy in 2021 and France 2022 are no better than their performances against Brazil in 1962, West Germany in 1970, West Germany in 1990, Germany in 1996, Argentina in 1998 or Portugal in 2004. They were not better than defeats earlier than the knock out rounds against West Germany in 1972 or Holland in 1988. The opinion that somehow Southgate's England are venturing into new territory with performances is, in my opinion, a myth created by a media desperate to create a legacy for him and lapped up by fans not old enough to have seen those matches I refer to or relatively new to football. I'm more than happy to discuss this 'offline' but must advise that I regularly write for a peer reviewed football history magazine and have an archive of over 5000 football matches on DVD. 2) Southgate has hugely benefited from the expansion of tournaments to include more weaker sides.Better England sides didn't qualify for the finals of the 1972 European Championships (We lost to a West German side in the 2 legged quarters who were World Cup semi finalists in 70, European Champions in 1972, World Champions in 1974 and European Runners Up in 1976), 1974 World Cup (due to only 1 team qualifying from the group- the greatest Polish side in history who finished 3rd in West Germany) and, finally, 1978 World Cup (We were in a group in which only 1 side qualified and that was Italy). Again I'm more than happy to take this offline for you to explain which of Southgate's wins were against sides better than those mentioned here. Sometimes - and reading both this post and the one calling Southgate a "loser" are certainly two of those occasions - I'm genuinely jealous of people who have no interest in, or passion for, football. I'm certainly not surprised that someone who proudly proclaims their collection of 5000 football matches on DVD didn't enjoy the play. Point missed completely. I thought it was stunning personally.
|
|
|
Post by andbingowashisname on Jul 26, 2023 21:48:52 GMT
Ha. Football can be so tiresome and tedious to debate and I had hoped to avoid that on this forum. My last response to this discussion will be that Croatia and Italy were markedly better than us at the time we played them. I did think that was also the case with France - up until we played them. We were better than them all over the pitch. Unfortunately the low scoring system in football does not always reward playing better. We should have beaten France, we would have beaten Morocco and then god know’s what would have happened against Argentina. 2022 was the only genuine missed opportunity. We were lucky to get as far as we did in the previous two tournaments, in no small part due to the manager. However, opinions are opinions and the only certain fact we can all agree on is that Gareth Southgate is statistically the second best England manager of all time, after Sir Alf Ramsey. If, like me, you grew up watching decades of dirge, you learn to appreciate the better times! Over and out (and, despite our differences, I’m glad there are other passionate football fans on this message board!). I really enjoyed Dear England. And there is a great deal to admire about Gareth Southgate and his approach to being England manager, but his in-game decision-making against Croatia in 2018 and in the Euro 2020 Final against Italy showed that he was managing with the sort of fear that he was trying to get his players to abandon. In both those games England scored an early goal then dominated the first half, only to then be completely tentative in the second half. Southgate failed to make any tactical or personnel changes to address the changes his opposite number had made (Croatia changed their system, Italy making two subs 10 minutes into the second half) only to then concede an equaliser with around 25 minutes to play, and ultimately he ran out of ideas and belief. The final v Italy was especially galling as watching Southgate repeat the same reticence to make changes, culminating in those excruciating final 10 minutes of extra time in which he delayed and delayed getting Rashford and Sancho on, just made clear how indecisive he was. We were in with a great chance of winning both those games, and a bolder, more pro-active manager would have stood us in better stead. Hopefully if it happens again, and Southgate is still in the job, he’ll roll the dice rather than close his eyes and cross his fingers.
|
|
|
Post by observing on Jul 26, 2023 22:10:54 GMT
Ha. Football can be so tiresome and tedious to debate and I had hoped to avoid that on this forum. My last response to this discussion will be that Croatia and Italy were markedly better than us at the time we played them. I did think that was also the case with France - up until we played them. We were better than them all over the pitch. Unfortunately the low scoring system in football does not always reward playing better. We should have beaten France, we would have beaten Morocco and then god know’s what would have happened against Argentina. 2022 was the only genuine missed opportunity. We were lucky to get as far as we did in the previous two tournaments, in no small part due to the manager. However, opinions are opinions and the only certain fact we can all agree on is that Gareth Southgate is statistically the second best England manager of all time, after Sir Alf Ramsey. If, like me, you grew up watching decades of dirge, you learn to appreciate the better times! Over and out (and, despite our differences, I’m glad there are other passionate football fans on this message board!). Would love to discuss how we were lucky to progress so far in 2018 because of Gareth Southgate... We played Tunisa, Panama, Belgium (lost), Columbia (drew) and Sweden to reach the semi final. It was the easiest run of fixtures (Belguim was a dead rubbber) in English history at a major tournament including 2010. As for being better than France all over the pitch for most of the game I'm interested in your thoughts of the matches against Brazil in 1962, West Germany in 1970, Holland in 1988, West Germany in 1990, Germany 1996 and Argentina 1988 because, in my opinion, anyone who has seen those matches and has studied those eras will not consider the performance against France better than any and would laugh at the suggestion that it was an unparalleled performance. As for statistics, find me a single historian who doesn't believe that Bobby Robson's run to the semi finals in 1990 absolutely trumps Southgate's in 2018...
|
|
486 posts
|
Post by wiggymess on Jul 26, 2023 22:15:11 GMT
Ha. Football can be so tiresome and tedious to debate and I had hoped to avoid that on this forum. My last response to this discussion will be that Croatia and Italy were markedly better than us at the time we played them. I did think that was also the case with France - up until we played them. We were better than them all over the pitch. Unfortunately the low scoring system in football does not always reward playing better. We should have beaten France, we would have beaten Morocco and then god know’s what would have happened against Argentina. 2022 was the only genuine missed opportunity. We were lucky to get as far as we did in the previous two tournaments, in no small part due to the manager. However, opinions are opinions and the only certain fact we can all agree on is that Gareth Southgate is statistically the second best England manager of all time, after Sir Alf Ramsey. If, like me, you grew up watching decades of dirge, you learn to appreciate the better times! Over and out (and, despite our differences, I’m glad there are other passionate football fans on this message board!). Would love to discuss how we were lucky to progress so far in 2018 because of Gareth Southgate... We played Tunisa, Panama, Belgium (lost), Columbia (drew) and Sweden to reach the semi final. It was the easiest run of fixtures (Belguim was a dead rubbber) in English history at a major tournament including 2010. As for being better than France all over the pitch for most of the game I'm interested in your thoughts of the matches against Brazil in 1962, West Germany in 1970, Holland in 1988, West Germany in 1990, Germany 1996 and Argentina 1988 because, in my opinion, anyone who has seen those matches and has studied those eras will not consider the performance against France better than any and would laugh at the suggestion that it was an unparalleled performance. As for statistics, find me a single historian who doesn't believe that Bobby Robson's run to the semi finals in 1990 absolutely trumps Southgate's in 2018... We get it, you know a lot about football and watch a lot of games, give the guy a break man, good grief. It's a fictionalised account of the Southgate era that has a feelgood tone.
|
|
|
Post by observing on Jul 26, 2023 22:21:42 GMT
capybara , you are definitely entitled to your own opinions but under no circumstances your own facts. The facts are: 1) In 72 years of competing in finals of major International tournaments England have never beaten a major nation in a knock out match outside Wembley in either a World Cup or European Championships. Gareth Southgate has not improved on this. 2) Gareth Southgate's England beat Tunisa, Panama and Sweden en route to the World Cup Semi Finals in 2018 which is the easiest run by any side to reach that stage - according to FIFA rankings- in any Post War World Cup 3) Alf Ramsey's England side beat Argentina, Portugal and West Germany in 3 consecutive knock out matches in 1966 which is, according to rankings, the toughest run of consecutive wins in a major tournament by any England side in history. 4) Following England home and away is a hobby which does not automatically equate to football knowledge. Some opinions now: 1) England's performances against Croatia in 2018, Italy in 2021 and France 2022 are no better than their performances against Brazil in 1962, West Germany in 1970, West Germany in 1990, Germany in 1996, Argentina in 1998 or Portugal in 2004. They were not better than defeats earlier than the knock out rounds against West Germany in 1972 or Holland in 1988. The opinion that somehow Southgate's England are venturing into new territory with performances is, in my opinion, a myth created by a media desperate to create a legacy for him and lapped up by fans not old enough to have seen those matches I refer to or relatively new to football. I'm more than happy to discuss this 'offline' but must advise that I regularly write for a peer reviewed football history magazine and have an archive of over 5000 football matches on DVD. 2) Southgate has hugely benefited from the expansion of tournaments to include more weaker sides.Better England sides didn't qualify for the finals of the 1972 European Championships (We lost to a West German side in the 2 legged quarters who were World Cup semi finalists in 70, European Champions in 1972, World Champions in 1974 and European Runners Up in 1976), 1974 World Cup (due to only 1 team qualifying from the group- the greatest Polish side in history who finished 3rd in West Germany) and, finally, 1978 World Cup (We were in a group in which only 1 side qualified and that was Italy). Again I'm more than happy to take this offline for you to explain which of Southgate's wins were against sides better than those mentioned here. Sometimes - and reading both this post and the one calling Southgate a "loser" are certainly two of those occasions - I'm genuinely jealous of people who have no interest in, or passion for, football. I'm certainly not surprised that someone who proudly proclaims their collection of 5000 football matches on DVD didn't enjoy the play. Point missed completely. I thought it was stunning personally. I never made a comment on the play as I refuse to watch it. First Jamie Graham play I'll have missed but I have no interest in it or what he has to say about the England national team or its place in society.
|
|
486 posts
|
Post by wiggymess on Jul 26, 2023 22:29:06 GMT
Sometimes - and reading both this post and the one calling Southgate a "loser" are certainly two of those occasions - I'm genuinely jealous of people who have no interest in, or passion for, football. I'm certainly not surprised that someone who proudly proclaims their collection of 5000 football matches on DVD didn't enjoy the play. Point missed completely. I thought it was stunning personally. I never made a comment on the play as I refuse to watch it. First Jamie Graham play I'll have missed but I have no interest in it or what he has to say about the England national team or its place in society. Thought as much. Well then you're massively lost my friend.
|
|
|
Post by observing on Jul 26, 2023 22:48:35 GMT
I never made a comment on the play as I refuse to watch it. First Jamie Graham play I'll have missed but I have no interest in it or what he has to say about the England national team or its place in society. Thought as much. Well then you're massively lost my friend. I study the history of football- to the extent that I regularly have articles published in specialist magazines as I said - and I know the effect the gentrification of the sport by people like Graham has had on the traditional support. I can sleep having not seen one of my favourite playwrights plays far easier than I could fearing I have in some capacity supported what I, and many others, believe to be cultural genocide even if others believe that to be an extreme view.
|
|
2,530 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by n1david on Jul 26, 2023 22:52:59 GMT
Wow. Given the passion in this thread I'm quite glad I'm Scottish. I remember Ally's Tartan Army in 1978 but since then I don't believe that football has been integrated with national identity. (I guess there have been other issues)
As for the play, Southgate was the first England manager that made me feel that England had changed its attitude to the rest of the world. And I think the play reflected that, the loss of arrogance and entitlement and a sense that England had no divine right to win, but had to deserve it. Whether that affected their performance is another discussion.
PS "cultural genocide"? From someone who only joined the board tonight? OK, welcome and thank you for your contribution.
|
|
486 posts
|
Post by wiggymess on Jul 26, 2023 23:07:28 GMT
Thought as much. Well then you're massively lost my friend. I study the history of football- to the extent that I regularly have articles published in specialist magazines as I said - and I know the effect the gentrification of the sport by people like Graham has had on the traditional support. I can sleep having not seen one of my favourite playwrights plays far easier than I could fearing I have in some capacity supported what I, and many others, believe to be cultural genocide even if others believe that to be an extreme view. Ah the classic "I haven't actually seen it but it's an act of cultural genocide committed by "Jamie" Graham - my favourite playwright who is also responsible for the gentrification of the sport I'm an expert in" argument. That seems... solid...?
|
|
377 posts
|
Post by Nelly on Jul 26, 2023 23:17:49 GMT
I saw this tonight and thought I’d pop on here to give my thoughts. What I didn’t expect was to come on here and it resemble my Twitter feed (people mostly arguing about football)!
Anyway, I loved it. Such a great night out at the theatre and the portrayal of such familiar people to me, out of this world. They’d be stupid not to give this another run especially with the Euros next year.
So glad I caught this!
|
|
3,475 posts
|
Post by showgirl on Jul 27, 2023 3:37:23 GMT
And following n1david's comment, I'm glad I'm a fan of theatre, not football. I found yesterday's matinee riveting, very funny and at times quite suspenseful. Definitely destined to be one of the year's theatregoing highlights for me and again imo, possibly the best work James Graham has done yet.
|
|
|
Post by observing on Jul 27, 2023 7:01:37 GMT
Wow. Given the passion in this thread I'm quite glad I'm Scottish. I remember Ally's Tartan Army in 1978 but since then I don't believe that football has been integrated with national identity. (I guess there have been other issues) As for the play, Southgate was the first England manager that made me feel that England had changed its attitude to the rest of the world. And I think the play reflected that, the loss of arrogance and entitlement and a sense that England had no divine right to win, but had to deserve it. Whether that affected their performance is another discussion. PS "cultural genocide"? From someone who only joined the board tonight? OK, welcome and thank you for your contribution. Hi @n1david If its any help Scotland had every right to be optimistic in 1978. They were one if the better teams in Europe and the Argentine World Cup was a winter one due to being played in the Southern Hemisphere played on pitches with significant similarities to British. In fact, the most common predicted final was Argentina vs Scotland. England can appear arrogance to the population of Scotland but when you look at our record it is among the finest in Europe with few other nations reaching as many Qtrs, semis and finals as us. If your user name is still accurate and you haven't moved, you live on the doorstep of the most used example of working class cultural genocide in British football. Whereas the terraces at Highbury were full of working class fathers and sons from estates in Holloway, Camden, Archway and Islington the Emirates is full of middle class 'fans' who are, statistics have shown, are mostly what are called Johnny Come Latelys. After watching this play it seems you may have formed an opinion on the role football can have galvanising communities. May I suggest that you speak to traditional fans forced to watch their teams on pub screens rather than in stadiums because of gentrification and designed actions to price them out?
|
|
|
Post by observing on Jul 27, 2023 7:06:54 GMT
I study the history of football- to the extent that I regularly have articles published in specialist magazines as I said - and I know the effect the gentrification of the sport by people like Graham has had on the traditional support. I can sleep having not seen one of my favourite playwrights plays far easier than I could fearing I have in some capacity supported what I, and many others, believe to be cultural genocide even if others believe that to be an extreme view. Ah the classic "I haven't actually seen it but it's an act of cultural genocide committed by "Jamie" Graham - my favourite playwright who is also responsible for the gentrification of the sport I'm an expert in" argument. That seems... solid...? I didn't actually say Graham was personally responsible for the gentrification of football or the play is an act of cultural genocide only that I feared that I may be endorsing such acts if I attended so I haven't and won't which is my perogative.
|
|
18,813 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Jul 27, 2023 16:24:44 GMT
Posts from the last few hours have been removed. Firstly because we are way off topic, secondly because the thread had become incomprehensible. Sorry if your post has been caught in the cull.
Please could I ask that members use the quote feature judiciously. There is really no need to quote the previous post every time when the discussion is flowing in a continuous way. If you want to direct a comment at another member consider tagging instead of quoting, it’s usually not necessary to repeat everything they said. And if you can see that a previous post has messed up quotes PLEASE don’t quote it, because that results in post after post after post with the mess up repeated hence becoming impossible to follow.
Finally, this thread is to discuss the play. Not the state of English football generally. If you want to have that discussion please start a thread in General.
|
|
4,038 posts
|
Post by kathryn on Jul 27, 2023 22:04:36 GMT
As a non-football fan who has often been bemused by the expectations places on the England team (even *I* know that most star players in the top leagues are not English, and neither are most top managers - why on earth would anyone expect our National team to be the best in the world?!) I really enjoyed this play.
Was particularly impressed by how they developed the character of Harry Kane throughout the play, from what my football-loving friend assured me was a caricature to a fully-rounded person.
James Graham has never let me down. No matter whether I am interested in the topic of a play or not, he always makes it compelling.
|
|
1,265 posts
|
Post by mkb on Jul 29, 2023 11:35:00 GMT
I am pleased that some others have aired counter views, because Graham's narrative is a very one-sided interpretation of England's progress under Southgate, and one that doesn't stand up to much scrutiny.
But there's no doubting he has written a very entertaining piece of theatre. Despite squirming at a huge amount of ridiculous dialogue that is there solely an an explainer to the audience, there is a lot of humour and some poignancy and some stirring themes. The excitement of the penalty shoot-outs is a far cry from the nerve-jangling reality, but they give a reasonable flavour of what it's like to be there.
Like others, I found Act 2 somewhat languid and lacking focus. I rather suspect Graham has been wanting to write this play for some years but has not had the (successful) ending he needed. Using the women's success instead and trying to make a point about that simply left me confused as to what he was trying to say about the burden of expectation and the state of the nation.
My view is that Graham is wholly wrong to interpret the lack of riots after failure in Qatar as some sort of progress. What actually happened was that people didn't care about Qatar; they were not invested in it. It was a sham and immoral World Cup that should never have happened.
This play is far from a great one, but it is populist, crowd-pleasing, soap opera. With some brilliant performances and a set that wonderfully captures the previous Wembley Stadium in its opening scene, this is good fun.
Four stars.
Act 1: 19:34-20:51 Act 2: 21:13-22:30 (The National are persisting in claiming the running time is 2:50. It is not.)
|
|
|
Post by londonpostie on Jul 29, 2023 12:17:56 GMT
My view is that Graham is wholly wrong to interpret the lack of riots after failure in Qatar as some sort of progress. What actually happened was that people didn't care about Qatar; they were not invested in it. It was a sham and immoral World Cup that should never have happened.
I remember saying to a theatre friend who is also a councillor at Lambeth that the BLM parades/marches would fizzle out in 2 weeks time. They did.
Same with the idea of 'riots' after Qatar. Hugely unlikely to happen in downtown Brixton.
Reason? BLM street activity fizzled out the weekend the new Premier League football season started, it always was going to. Qatar took place in the middle of winter; very difficult to get alcohol-based unrest going in this climate outside the summer months.
If you have some grasp of the society (and how football sits in that society) these things are not difficult to understand. I can confirm Lambeth councillors are not among that group.
Graham is projecting his own agenda or hopes. There are plenty of reasons to be optimistic about England - which is what this play accesses (just), though the absence of alcohol-fuelled riots in winter isn't in the top 100.
|
|