Yes. 2 of the black players they had doing the penalty kicks were not even in the game. The manager wanted them to look like the heroes who won England the game. Some people think their only role was to do penalty kicks like that, and it's all they practiced and still fucked it up.
I just want to point out that the practice of introducing players late in the game specifically to take penalties is fairly common in soccer. That aspect of this situation isn't the smoking gun some of you seem to think it is.
I honestly don't know, but is it common [and even if it is, is it smart] to do this in such a big stakes game in the game winning situation? I legit don't know just trying to figure it out.
As someone who doesn't follow the sport, it does seem incredibly stupid to lose the big championship by putting less than your best in for what WILL decide the game. I could see in like earlier matches in a tourny or something it not being a big deal doing it but I dunno?
Don't get me wrong, there was undoubtedly a huge contingent of "journalists" and Marxists ready to push an England win as a triumph for diversity. I just don't believe that a manager would deliberately decrease the chances of winning for good boy points, even an insufferable wokester like Southgate.
I'd struggle to think of many managers that have done this in a final, especially so late. Normally, the penalty takers would be introduced with 5 or so minutes to go so they can at least get a few touches in. A couple of prominent examples in major tournaments is the Dutch manager subbing his goalkeeper for penalties and Italy bringing on a guy called Zaza, who took one of the worst penalties I've ever seen. It's not like there were lots of other players who were better suited to taking the penalties though. Maybe Sterling, who is also black, or Grealish.
Yes. 2 of the black players they had doing the penalty kicks were not even in the game. The manager wanted them to look like the heroes who won England the game. Some people think their only role was to do penalty kicks like that, and it's all they practiced and still fucked it up.
I just want to point out that the practice of introducing players late in the game specifically to take penalties is fairly common in soccer. That aspect of this situation isn't the smoking gun some of you seem to think it is.
I honestly don't know, but is it common [and even if it is, is it smart] to do this in such a big stakes game in the game winning situation? I legit don't know just trying to figure it out.
As someone who doesn't follow the sport, it does seem incredibly stupid to lose the big championship by putting less than your best in for what WILL decide the game. I could see in like earlier matches in a tourny or something it not being a big deal doing it but I dunno?
Don't get me wrong, there was undoubtedly a huge contingent of "journalists" and Marxists ready to push an England win as a triumph for diversity. I just don't believe that a manager would deliberately decrease the chances of winning for good boy points, even an insufferable wokester like Southgate.
I'd struggle to think of many managers that have done this in a final, especially so late. Normally, the penalty takers would be introduced with 5 or so minutes to go so they can at least get a few touches in. A couple of prominent examples in major tournaments is the Dutch manager subbing his goalkeeper for penalties and Italy bringing on a guy called Zaza, who took one of the worst penalties I've ever seen. It's not like there were lots of other players who were better suited to taking the penalties though. Maybe Sterling, who is also black, or Grealish.