A flag is a type of fabric used as a symbol for military or naval purposes, as well as for signaling, decoration, and propaganda.
Mark as a sign. Action. To sag, to flutter weakly, to become weakened.
Indeed. That pretty much sums it up. The current scandal involving the desecration of the English flag on a shirt and the lesbian conspiracy has caused quite a commotion (imagine having to explain all of this in great detail to someone from 1993) and is now entering its third day. Both dictionary definitions of the four-letter word at the heart of the issue seem to be accurate.
“With some foresight, the Football Association could have prevented the dissatisfaction regarding the modified George Cross on their expensive, low-quality replica shirt. They could have explained that this design element was inspired by the fact that England v Brazil was scheduled on Palm Sunday, a day when the cross is typically draped in purple. This would have made even the most fervent fabric enthusiasts feel outdone in terms of sanctity.”
Not that this would have helped anyone get any closer to the objective truth here. Which is that the flag (and this isn’t The Flag. It’s a flag, not a protected symbol. Nike’s decision to go with a purple, blue and pink version of the beloved cross may be pointless, gimmicky, and even quite cynical – nobody here does anything without focus-grouping every last chevron and flash: if the response really was unforeseen then the FA and Nike need to sack their entire marketing teams).
There are currently no regulations or guidelines prohibiting the disrespect of the flag, as it is not considered a sacred symbol. If England were to wear a huge version of this shirt while competing at sea, they could potentially be charged with violating the Merchant Shipping Act for displaying an incorrect flag. It is worth considering if Gareth Southgate has taken this into account, and if Ben White’s exclusion from the team is linked to possible maritime misconduct.
In other words, the lack of violation of laws or regulations in this situation is noteworthy in terms of culture, heritage, and beliefs. The ability to not care about trivial things like fabric colors, proper saluting, or enforced expressions of patriotism is a quintessentially British quality. Countless individuals have fought to protect this freedom. It is a valuable aspect worth preserving.
It should be noted that the flag has been continuously altered and reused over time. Did Geri Halliwell’s famous mini-dress hold no significance? The flag can now be found on the rear lights of the latest version of the Mini Cooper. Additionally, you can currently purchase a T-shirt with a graffiti-style version of the flag at a nearby Next store. The flag has become a symbol and a part of certain brands. Interestingly, it wasn’t traditionally associated with football and was only seen in the stands during Euro 96, and was even completely absent from the 1966 shirt. It mainly serves as a decorative element.
Display the image in full screen mode.
However, we find ourselves in the same situation, reliving the repetitive pattern of expressing anger towards English football (during the Southgate era). This brings up two common questions. Does any of this have significance? And is there a way to prevent it from happening?
The answer to the second of these questions is clearly no. Early on there was a small, tantalising chance that annoyance over the “playful” (this is also disingenuous) reworking of the George Cross might have passed off as just another routine expression of localised internet brain-rage.
Keir Starmer’s involvement in the debate may have hindered the possibility of a resolution, as his intentional and deceitful input played a role. There is a strong belief that Starmer’s concern for the matter is insincere. He made the strategic choice to call for the removal of the shirt, causing further dissatisfaction among the public, all for his own political gain. It is common for Labour to shift their focus during election years in order to appeal to voters, even if it means distancing themselves from their own party’s values. This is a perfect example of the state of UK party politics.
Starmer has been accompanied by the typical group of individuals who will benefit from perpetuating division. Nigel Farage has an opinion. Joey Barton is making statements in support of the great replacement theory, a concept often used for propaganda by the Nazi party. Rishi Sunak has also released a cautious statement of his own, reflecting the calculated image determined by his team of data analysts.
Ignore promotional newsletter.
after newsletter promotion
This will continue during the final two international friendly matches of the season, with the feeling that outside of international football, England is a peculiar, tiny, and disgruntled island, isolated at the pivot point between continents.
There are two important points to note about this situation. First, it may seem trivial to dismiss the anger people feel over a discoloured flag; however, this reaction only contributes to the problem. The FA’s statement on Friday afternoon in response to the public outcry also came across as disconnected and dismissive, as if they were caught off guard by the controversy and it was beneath their attention.
The outcome was not surprising. A large number of individuals have expressed their disapproval of the new shirt and are choosing to boycott Nike. Football has become a medium for amplifying and reflecting genuine emotions, such as dissatisfaction and anger. This sentiment is often associated with England’s football team, evoking a feeling of loss or deprivation.
It might appear that English people are the only ones who constantly discuss their emotions. Other countries do not have a popular play like “Dear Portugal” currently playing in Lisbon that tackles the challenges of being Portuguese in the era of Fernando Santos. However, the appearance of both Brazil (with talk of a coup, rioting, and national jersey being taken over) and Belgium (where farmers are currently spraying riot police with manure) at Wembley serves as a reminder that there is widespread discontent and disconnection in the world. Football serves as a gathering place for these feelings, and therefore has a duty to address them.
Ultimately, all of this is unlikely to contribute to the team’s success on the field. The excessive focus on Southgate’s political opinions, particularly regarding flags, is nonsensical. Southgate is a loyal supporter of the national sport, and embodies the values of a compassionate, accepting, and quintessentially English individual. It is still difficult to comprehend why there continues to be a constant barrage of negative chatter surrounding this team.
There are individuals in the public eye, impassioned factions of supporters, and those in the media with a platform who may wish for England and Southgate to fail. This could be due to strong beliefs and the desire to be proven right, as well as the potential difficulty of accepting success at this stage.
Clearly some part of this lies behind the more extreme and thunderous reactions to the flag shemozzle. For decades England teams struggled under the weight of underperformance. This version seems to have found a novel and highly distinctive method of increasing its chances of failure. Toxicity, distraction, outside pressure, it will all take a toll at some point.
-
Would you like to share your thoughts on the topics discussed in this article? If you would like to write a 300-word response and send it by email to be potentially published in our letters section, please click the provided link.
Source: theguardian.com
