Israel close to Euro 24 Qualification

[Winter]

Was going to make this a poll but thought it best just leave it as a post as its a sensitive issue.
Russia have been banned rightly so imo for their invasion of Ukraine.
Also Kenya and Zimbabwe earlier this year. Kenya’s sports ministry shut down the Football Kenya Federation after allegations that funds had been misused. Zimbabwe’s Football Association was suspended by government officials following allegations of fraud and sexual harassment of female referees , I don't know the latest news on the African nations situation. There must be a huge difference in the Spanish women's side harassment compared to Zimbabwe’s?
I doubt that in my gut, something tells me Zimbabwe and Spain will be/have been treated differently for similar offenses .

Anyway I noticed yesterday that Israel managed a 1-1 draw with group leaders Switzerland in Hungarys Pancho Arena , a small 2,500 seater stadium. A good result by all means for Israel, in this postponed fixture.
It keeps Israel in the mix with the top 3 still to meet again.
It's puts the state of play in that group as such;



With 2 games remaining which are
Matchday 9:
Switzerland v Kosovo
Israel v Romania.
Matchday 10:
Andorra v Israel
Romania v Switzerland
Kosovo v Belarus

Basically a draw for the Romanians v Israel will see Switzerland and Romania qualify . Then on the last matchday it would be a straight shoot out between Romania v Switzerland for group winners.
What's all this to do with anything?

Well it came to my mind , that Israel suffered quite possibly the most barbaric attack from Hamas and as we all know have since set about flattening Gaza, flouting the Geneva convention and committing genocide ( imo that is).

If Russia are banned for invading Ukraine, Kenya for misuse of funds , Zimbabwe for allegations of fraud and sexual harassment of women referees then should not Israel also be banned for their actions?
Granted its a tough question, but Israels reaction is way over the top ( to an outsider fed propaganda from both sides ) but how much blood is enough to satisfy Netanayu?
I'm of the impression on Netanayu that he's no different from Hamas, he has wanted this for years and now has his wish, flatten Gaza, again.

All of that aside my thoughts were/are should Israel or any other nation involved in war efforts be allowed to participate in such competitions?
I realise that sport in general is one of if not the best thing for taking people's minds off reality for an hour and a half and the benefits it brings so banning Israel at this time might seem harsh given they were attacked first ( in this instance).

However war is war regardless of how its dressed up " special operation " etc.
The thought occurred would it not be better if Israel, Palestine , Russia any nations involved by proxy all be banned ?
This is something I've wrestled with and still not come up with a definitive answer.
I remember how Argentina beating England at the world cup returned order from chaos and brought Argentinian people back together.

Sport is very powerful in this respect, but I'd rather see a world cup free of protests about Ukraine and Israel and anything else other than football whilst at the same time acknowledging there's no better medium or platform to use as the eyes of the world are watching.
We all know the geopolitical standpoints behind Russian exclusion, the west is on Ukraines side the west is on Israels side but is what Israel are continuing to do in Gaza any better or worse?

What think you noisers ?
Should Israel be allowed to continue under UEFA/FIFAs competitions or be banned like any other ?

 

[boab1916]

Was going to make this a poll but thought it best just leave it as a post as its a sensitive issue.
Russia have been banned rightly so imo for their invasion of Ukraine.
Also Kenya and Zimbabwe earlier this year. Kenya’s sports ministry shut down the Football Kenya Federation after allegations that funds had been misused. Zimbabwe’s Football Association was suspended by government officials following allegations of fraud and sexual harassment of female referees , I don't know the latest news on the African nations situation. There must be a huge difference in the Spanish women's side harassment compared to Zimbabwe’s?
I doubt that in my gut, something tells me Zimbabwe and Spain will be/have been treated differently for similar offenses .

Anyway I noticed yesterday that Israel managed a 1-1 draw with group leaders Switzerland in Hungarys Pancho Arena , a small 2,500 seater stadium. A good result by all means for Israel, in this postponed fixture.
It keeps Israel in the mix with the top 3 still to meet again.
It's puts the state of play in that group as such;

View attachment 24350

With 2 games remaining which are
Matchday 9:
Switzerland v Kosovo
Israel v Romania.
Matchday 10:
Andorra v Israel
Romania v Switzerland
Kosovo v Belarus

Basically a draw for the Romanians v Israel will see Switzerland and Romania qualify . Then on the last matchday it would be a straight shoot out between Romania v Switzerland for group winners.
What's all this to do with anything?

Well it came to my mind , that Israel suffered quite possibly the most barbaric attack from Hamas and as we all know have since set about flattening Gaza, flouting the Geneva convention and committing genocide ( imo that is).

If Russia are banned for invading Ukraine, Kenya for misuse of funds , Zimbabwe for allegations of fraud and sexual harassment of women referees then should not Israel also be banned for their actions?
Granted its a tough question, but Israels reaction is way over the top ( to an outsider fed propaganda from both sides ) but how much blood is enough to satisfy Netanayu?
I'm of the impression on Netanayu that he's no different from Hamas, he has wanted this for years and now has his wish, flatten Gaza, again.

All of that aside my thoughts were/are should Israel or any other nation involved in war efforts be allowed to participate in such competitions?
I realise that sport in general is one of if not the best thing for taking people's minds off reality for an hour and a half and the benefits it brings so banning Israel at this time might seem harsh given they were attacked first ( in this instance).

However war is war regardless of how its dressed up " special operation " etc.
The thought occurred would it not be better if Israel, Palestine , Russia any nations involved by proxy all be banned ?
This is something I've wrestled with and still not come up with a definitive answer.
I remember how Argentina beating England at the world cup returned order from chaos and brought Argentinian people back together.

Sport is very powerful in this respect, but I'd rather see a world cup free of protests about Ukraine and Israel and anything else other than football whilst at the same time acknowledging there's no better medium or platform to use as the eyes of the world are watching.
We all know the geopolitical standpoints behind Russian exclusion, the west is on Ukraines side the west is on Israels side but is what Israel are continuing to do in Gaza any better or worse?

What think you noisers ?
Should Israel be allowed to continue under UEFA/FIFAs competitions or be banned like any other ?

Would Isreal in a tournament pose a security threat to all other nations in the tournament? IMO fans and players could be potentially be at risk from terrorist attack at stadiums. Surely this would be on the agenda.

 

[Imatim]

There’s more chance of the Huns conceding a penalty than Israel being banned if they finish in the qualifying places…

 

[Brimcbhoy]

They shouldn't even be in it. They're not in Europe. Same with their clubs. That aside you can't ban one Country for an attack and not another, its gone way beyond self defence now.

 

[boab1916]

Recieves the ball, how about was he offside when the ball leaves the supplying players foot to the reciever.

"with the subsequent VAR review determining that the Celtic player had received the ball in an offside position."

Referee Operations Statement: Motherwell v Celtic

www.scottishfa.co.uk

 

[Brimcbhoy]

Recieves the ball, how about was he offside when the ball leaves the supplying players foot to the reciever.

"with the subsequent VAR review determining that the Celtic player had received the ball in an offside position."

Referee Operations Statement: Motherwell v Celtic

www.scottishfa.co.uk

Right thread boab?

Is that an admission VAR is not fit for purpose..


Referee Operations can confirm that during a VAR review at Motherwell v Celtic, the footage from the relevant 18-yard line camera did not capture an appropriate view of the incident.

While the broadcast footage was only able to show a wider camera angle for viewers, Hawk-Eye technology is designed to calibrate an accurate offside decision from either of the two 18-yard line camera positions, with the subsequent VAR review determining that the Celtic player had received the ball in an offside position.

We have provided feedback to the host broadcaster on the incident as part of our regular review of the system operation.

 

[Imatim]

Recieves the ball, how about was he offside when the ball leaves the supplying players foot to the reciever.

"with the subsequent VAR review determining that the Celtic player had received the ball in an offside position."

Referee Operations Statement: Motherwell v Celtic

www.scottishfa.co.uk

So there’s no physical (photographic) evidence of the Celtic player being offside, (or was there?) so the VAR officials decided they would make their decision based on a series of Hawkeye calibrations?

I suppose this is a common occurrence in world football. Anyone know anywhere else where this has happened? Surely not a world first?

In essence, as a precedent has now been made.

If no physical (photographic) evidence is produced, VAR officials can simply say they calculated that a player was/is in an offside position without producing any definitive evidence to support their decision? Is this correct?…

 

[Brimcbhoy]

So there’s no physical (photographic) evidence of the Celtic player being offside, (or was there?) so the VAR officials decided they would make their decision based on a series of Hawkeye calibrations?

I suppose this is a common occurrence in world football. Anyone know anywhere else where this has happened? Surely not a world first?

In essence, as a precedent has now been made.

If no physical (photographic) evidence is produced, VAR officials can simply say they calculated that a player was/is in an offside position without producing any definitive evidence to support their decision? Is this correct?…

Its not the first time, remember last year they decided we were off side from the wrong 18 yard line in the wrong half? Was it at Ross County?

 

[Imatim]

Its not the first time, remember last year they decided we were off side from the wrong 18 yard line in the wrong half? Was it at Ross County?

Accepting this type of determination by the SFA without any definitive validation, allows the MIB to make offside VAR decisions carte blanche, with no need for them to supply supporting evidence.

I’m shaking my head in disbelief…

 

[POD]

A cop out to aid the incompetent or cover for the biased.

 

[Brimcbhoy]

A cop out to aid the incompetent or  and cover for the biased.

Fixed that for you, your welcome,

 

[Winter]

Would Isreal in a tournament pose a security threat to all other nations in the tournament? IMO fans and players could be potentially be at risk from terrorist attack at stadiums. Surely this would be on the agenda.

Absolutely boab, The fact they played Switzerland in Hungarys Pancho Arena , a 2,500 capacity academy venue says to me its not safe to play Israel anywherevin the world, not even a neutral venue is safe so the attendance has to be manageable, hence the crowd size .
We all saw/read/heard about the two Swedish fans shot dead before the game in Brussels v Belgium, something I strongly believe had everything to do with June 28th of thus years public burning of the pages from the Quran in front of the Stockholm mosque.
Even at the best of times Israel rotates matches between 5 different stadiums and these last 3 games would've been guaranteed sell outs of 30,000 at least.
Club sides like Maccabi Haifa and Maccabi Tel Aviv have to play their European home games in Serbia.
No question it's not safe, who could sit still for 5 minutes if you knew your kid was at an Israel International match, regardless of where it was played?

 

[Winter]

Recieves the ball, how about was he offside when the ball leaves the supplying players foot to the reciever.

"with the subsequent VAR review determining that the Celtic player had received the ball in an offside position."

Referee Operations Statement: Motherwell v Celtic

www.scottishfa.co.uk

Aye, I should've put this in the clickbait and everything else under the sun thread

 

[Brimcbhoy]

Aye, I should've put this in the clickbait and everything else under the sun thread

I blame boab,

 

[Winter]

They shouldn't even be in it. They're not in Europe. Same with their clubs. That aside you can't ban one Country for an attack and not another, its gone way beyond self defence now.

It's well past self defence, this is making dresden , the blitz and pearl harbour look timid. Israel were accepted into UEFA after Arabic complaints on their taking part in Asian federation football, in short forced out.

Until the thought occurred to me , last week I'd tried to leave a comment on an article about the green brigade on the one football app which to paraphrase said " any countries involved in war, be it directly or indirectly by proxy should be banned from taking part, it cannot and should not ever be one rule for some another for others, id include the Ukraine, USA, UK, China etc , teams and any who profit from war" I was shocked to say the least to get an email from Onefootball saying my comment had been deemed as unacceptable and broke site regulations by mixing politics with football when theyd just printed an article on the GB for this same reason.

Here's an eye opener for you brim that I wasn't aware of until I started digging under the propaganda manure .
Well, it certainly was for me.

Why Does Israel's Football Team Play In Europe?

As Sepp Blatter tries to resolve Israel's status in FIFA, we look at the country's turbulent history in international football.

news.sky.com

 

[Winter]

Absolutely boab, The fact they played Switzerland in Hungarys Pancho Arena , a 2,500 capacity academy venue says to me its not safe to play Israel anywherevin the world, not even a neutral venue is safe so the attendance has to be manageable, hence the crowd size .
We all saw/read/heard about the two Swedish fans shot dead before the game in Brussels v Belgium, something I strongly believe had everything to do with June 28th of thus years public burning of the pages from the Quran in front of the Stockholm mosque.
Even at the best of times Israel rotates matches between 5 different stadiums and these last 3 games would've been guaranteed sell outs of 30,000 at least.
Club sides like Maccabi Haifa and Maccabi Tel Aviv have to play their European home games in Serbia.
No question it's not safe, who could sit still for 5 minutes if you knew your kid was at an Israel International match, regardless of where it was played?

As an edit to my reply boab I thought it just as important to include this.
Belarus are not allowed to play home matches in Belarus as they are supporters of the Russians and the majority of FIFA members, in the west or Europe are not .
Which is pathetic, they'd be better banning them ( unfairly I'd add) , it's OK to support Ukraine and I think its the first time in my life I can remember ever seeing requests of charitable donations from the public so that a foreign state can afford to buy more shells and ammo.

UEFA confirm Belarus national team have to play at NEUTRAL grounds

Belarus is only one of four nations that supports Moscow's actions of invading Ukraine, which has now entered its eighth day of fighting.

www.dailymail.co.uk

 

[Brimcbhoy]

It's well past self defence, this is making dresden , the blitz and pearl harbour look timid. Israel were accepted into UEFA after Arabic complaints on their taking part in Asian federation football, in short forced out.

Until the thought occurred to me , last week I'd tried to leave a comment on an article about the green brigade on the one football app which to paraphrase said " any countries involved in war, be it directly or indirectly by proxy should be banned from taking part, it cannot and should not ever be one rule for some another for others, id include the Ukraine, USA, UK, China etc , teams and any who profit from war" I was shocked to say the least to get an email from Onefootball saying my comment had been deemed as unacceptable and broke site regulations by mixing politics with football when theyd just printed an article on the GB for this same reason.

Here's an eye opener for you brim that I wasn't aware of until I started digging under the propaganda manure .
Well, it certainly was for me.

Why Does Israel's Football Team Play In Europe?

As Sepp Blatter tries to resolve Israel's status in FIFA, we look at the country's turbulent history in international football.

news.sky.com

Thanks for that W. They missed the bit about bribing Blatter though.

 

[TartanTim]

Note tae self, pack Palestine Flag along with Saltire for Euro 24

 

[Winter]

Thanks for that W. They missed the bit about bribing Blatter though.

Yes in this Sky article they don't mention it, nor infantinno and his bribes for Qatar hosting a world cup , his comments were like vomit in your mouth " Qatar is lgbtq+ friendly, we're all gay, I'm gay you're gay " so pathetic forgetting very few in the west get their news from controlled newspapers these days.
A little digging will show more than honestly I think I want to know, but blatter bribes are mentioned in other articles

"Four countries joined Russia in voting against the resolution – Belarus, Nicaragua, North Korea and Syria. Another 35 countries abstained from the vote, including China, India, Pakistan and South Africa. The rest did not vote.16 Feb 2023" - source Al Jazeera

This is where FIFA and thecwest cannot get everything their own way.
I knew South Africa in principle supported the Russians, they'd given a statement I remember at the UNGA stating how the west under the guise of NATO had reneged on the end of the cold War promises, stating "why should anyone trust NATO? An unelected co-army who bombed former Yugoslavia, and one of its OWN European capital city's Belgrade with illegal cluster bombs?" ( something I very well remember the bassas those wee floating parachuteced grenades, live on telly as people ran in panic not knowing which way to run as they're so indiscriminate and impossible to target specific locations, just any given area, like slow carpet bombing).
Being a European capital city means fk all to NATO.
South Africans view Something widely reported in the west ( not).

So what of the 39 countries who refused to vote, abstained, or supported the Russians? Are they also banned?
No of course not. The UNGA can put forward proposals/motions which are voted on but they have no legal standing or obligations it's just a show of the will of the community at large,

At the bottom of this article is a map of countries of whom in whichever way they chose refused to condemn Russia for its
" taking back of land which Russia/USSR had conceded in good faith in the Warsaw pact " - Al Jazeera

Where does your country stand on the Russia-Ukraine war?

Al Jazeera breaks down the political, military and economic positions of various countries around the world.

www.aljazeera.com