England’s victory over Colombia in the World Cup has made many English people happy.
But not all English people.
Left-wing campaigner Kevin Maguire is clearly miffed, after a somewhat embarrassing misreading of the match which he seems to imagine England lost:
That sound is Germany laughing at English fans who laughed at Germany going out. They do have a word for schadenfreude #EngCol
— Kevin Maguire (@Kevin_Maguire) July 3, 2018
Talk Radio host Stig Abell’s liberal sensibilities were severely discombobulated by the fact that the English commentators were not rooting sufficiently for the diving, cheating, devious Colombians:
Colombia are a disgrace. But our players are moaning and diving too. The commentary is so biased as to be a nonsense. #ENGCOL
— Stig Abell (@StigAbell) July 3, 2018
And here’s some other random SJW Twitter person who was pissed off too – for the bizarre, but not untypically SJW reason that Colombia is committing human rights abuses for which England needs to be punished:
But maybe they are right to have their doubts about England’s “victory” last night. Maybe, as Julia Hartley-Brewer has suggested, it wasn’t a victory at all.
— Julia Hartley-Brewer (@JuliaHB1) July 4, 2018
I think she has a point, don’t you?
Most certainly it is the case that if we are to treat international football results in the same way that Theresa May’s administration has treated the EU referendum result, then here is what we can expect to happen next.
- Much chuntering on social media that 4-3 is too close a score to decide the match result. There needs to be a second England Colombia game, this time where the players are properly informed about what it actually means if one side scores more goals than the other, Twitter experts say.
- Pro-Colombian politicians declare in tones of sweet reasonableness that in the interests of unity it’s clearly very important to give the butthurt Colombian losers as much of a say in the final result as the winning England team. More say, actually, because they’re noisier and more aggrieved and have a greater claim to victim status.
- Massive media campaign – probably funded by George Soros – pouring scorn on every aspect of the original game: the refereeing; the line decisions; the biased camera angles which purported to show the Colombian players fouling the opposition and deliberately scuffing the turf in the penalty area before Kane’s penalty kick. It concludes that Colombia – with its longstanding reputation for transparency and moral rectitude, especially with regards to its heroic and selfless contribution to the international war on drugs – is far more deserving of victory than Britain, with its brutal record of colonialist tyranny and its institutionalised racism.
- Investigations by top Observer journalist Carole Cadwalladr reveal the SHOCK RUSSIAN CONNECTIONS of the World Cup contest. Not only was the match played at the Otkritie Arena in Moscow, which is in Russia, but also, Cadwalladr reveals on pages 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 9, 11 and 25, 26, 27 of the Guardian‘s sister paper, all the other matches are being staged in the SAME country, run by Vladimir Putin, who was singlehandedly responsible for brainwashing 17.4 million fools to vote for Brexit, and who was also behind the victory of sinister right-wing dictator Donald Trump. Cadwalladr’s scoop dominates the BBC’s news for several days. It is hailed by Nick Cohen as “worthy of a second Orwell Prize, at the very least.”
- The case for overturning the match result in favour of Colombian victory is pursued in the courts by top QC Jolyon Maugham. Funded by Gina Millar and that plumber bloke, Maugham compellingly argues that when the England players took their penalties against Colombia they had no idea what the consequences for getting the ball past the keeper and into the net would be. Had they been better informed, they would almost certainly have fluffed it, just like the losing, cheating, Colombian fails did.
- Prime Minister Theresa May, having carefully listened to the Colombian side of the argument, and having consulted her violently anti-English civil service experts for confirmation of her prejudice, decides that there was never any real appetite in England for an England “hard win” victory. In a new compromise deal, reached after some tough negotiations by her top civil service expert Ollie Robbins, May will declare what she calls a “soft win” victory. The “soft win” decisions are as follows: Colombia in fact won the match; they will automatically win all future matches against England; instead of actually playing those games, the England team will be required to line up in the middle of the pitch and by ritually fouled and buttkicked by the Colombians; Colombia will be paid a £40 million settlement to compensate it for any embarrassment caused by the previous, now rejected result.
This might sound like satire. Unfortunately, at least where Brexit is concerned, it’s perilously close to reality:
The May line is becoming clearer by the hour:
There is no majority in Parliament for no deal.
My deal is only one with a chance in Brussels.
If you reject it, Parliament will vote for EEA status, the EU will accept — and Brexit will be in indefinite limbo. https://t.co/pmufYtQLYd
— Andrew Neil (@afneil) July 4, 2018