And the winners of the World Cup of pettiness are ...the SNP’s MPs

Jonathan Brocklebank

WHAT valuable information the world’s biggest sporting tournament offers us about nations.

Moments after Japanese fans’ hearts were broken by a sensational injury time goal by Belgium this week, they were clearing up their litter in the stadium – as they always do.

Leaving things tidy is part of their culture. In the dressing room, the Japanese players whose 2-0 lead was overturned by three Belgian goals in 20 minutes put their disappointment aside and got on with the cleaning too. They left the place spotless. They also left a note in Russian to their hosts saying thank you. Polite people, the Japanese.

The Brazilians are higher maintenance. They demean their silky skills with the most cynical playacting – exemplified by writhing narcissist Neymar, whose talent for goalscoring renders less endearing traits irrelevant in the eyes of the nation that worships him.

I would rather they idolised a player who tried to score even more goals by spending less time on the deck clutching unharmed parts of his anatomy – but that is the way the Brazilians swing.

The Belgians – there are only 11.5million of them – ooze Western European confidence in the way their neighbours Germany used to. And the Swedes – of whom there are even fewer – are the soul of earnest Scandinavian endeavour. Either could become the smallest country since Uruguay in 1950 to win the thing. So, of course, could Uruguay.

The English are a footballing nation both inspired and haunted by their past, both over and under-confident and both apologetic and unrepentant about their 1966 fixation and the navel-gazing over their failure thus far to repeat the experience.

It is all quite charming, as is their talismanic captain and top goal scorer Harry Kane, straight from the pages of Roy of the Rovers, and their charismatic manager with his affecting back story. How wonderfully English that Gareth Southgate quietly brooded for 20 years on the penalty he missed in the Euro 96 championships before, as manager of his national side, equipping his players with the cojones to prevail at shoot-outs. I could not be happier for him.

Cheats

And how satisfying to see a team of brazen cheats lose. Before Tuesday, I could have told you little of Colombian culture and national character traits. Now I and everyone who watched that match know at least one thing about the country: their national team has players prepared to sabotage the penalty spot with the studs of their boots while the referee’s attention is distracted by team mates squealing it shouldn’t have been a penalty when it unquestionably should.

It is, of course, quite unfair to brand Colombia a nation of scoundrels just because some of its footballers certainly are. But it is entirely fair to point out that these players are ambassadors for their country on a world stage.

If the Japanese deservedly win international admiration for the impeccable conduct and sportsmanship of their players, it is hardly surprising that a team of Colombian shysters evoke negative thoughts in audiences about their country of origin. It would be reassuring to think honourable Colombians back home are appalled at the impression their national team has given the world.

Which brings us to another nation into which the World Cup is giving people a fascinating insight: Scotland.

On Tuesday night in the Commons, Scottish Nationalist MPs forced five spurious votes, all of which they lost, on public spending. But the purpose of the votes, it was soon apparent, was not to win them. It was to delay English MPs for as long as possible to stop them watching their national side’s biggest match in years.

It was, said Moray Conservative MP and senior football referee Douglas Ross, ‘pathetic theatrics’ which not only kept politicians away from the game, but Parliamentary staff as well.

Party colleague Sir Bernard Jenkin, meanwhile, asked if the SNP would be calling so many divisions if it were Scotland playing a key football match.

More on this dismal Nationalist strategy would no doubt have been said if it had not meant playing into their hands by taking up yet more time.

But let me try to put into words how I, as a Scot who has no problem with English MPs of any political persuasion enjoying their football, feel about it.

I feel appalled, embarrassed and ashamed. And, I suppose, I feel a measure of relief that, unlike the Colombians, our MPs’ deplorable mean-spiritedness was witnessed only by our neighbours in the Union and not by the entire planet.

Grievance

I feel that the point of the World Cup – besides finding out who is best at football – is to bring nations together through a shared love of a glorious sport which, when played well, thrills and engrosses even those who have no team in the competition. I feel the point of the SNP is to do the very opposite – to drive two nations apart through peevish bickering, grievance mongering and, daily, fraying English nerves.

These are not characteristics I wish to be associated with me or my country. It is, I hope you will agree, not a fair or accurate reflection of who we are or aspire to be at all. The problem is this increasingly odious Nationalist shower are our ambassadors and the impression they give sticks.

I am reluctant to express loathing for anyone in Scottish politics. But I do loathe the way the SNP’s Westminster team misrepresents its country and perpetuates the fiction that we and the English are irreconcilably at odds. We sorely need better players there.