Sideways passing and fewer proper tackles: modern football is boring

Your piece on a football fan falling asleep indicates just how boring modern football has become (‘Loss of emotion and connection: Why have we felt detached from football?’, 2 April).

Last night I watched a replay of Newcastle vs Manchester United from the 1996-97 season. The match was competitive, played at a fast pace; the passing, mostly forward, was accurate and one or two touch; there were lots of passionate physical challenges and by today’s standards, the game would have ended five a side. All the players seemed to accept the challenges, though, with just a few grumbles.

The problem with football now is it’s boring. The modern mantra seems to be: why pass forward when you can pass back or sideways?

Michael Pate

Preston

If we want to be part of society (any society) we have a commitment to be responsible. That way you reap the benefits of being part of it. If Bill Halsey (Letters, 2 April) does not want to have the vaccine (as opposed to can’t have it safely), why should he have the right to visit the pub, a restaurant or any other institution that requires a vaccine to keep workers, visitors and others safe? Having the vaccine should be pre-requisite to having the right to do these things, not the other way around.

It is curious that Mr Halsey, as an intelligent person, has not researched and analysed the scientific research being carried out in the UK; if he did, he would conclude that not having the vaccine is a very poor decision on his part.

Anna Taylor

Sudbury-on-Thames

I respond to the letter from Bill Halsey who has refused Covid vaccination but believes that, in the event that passports are introduced, he is entitled to enjoy the same freedoms as those who have been innoculated.

I would ask if, refusing to take a test, I should be entitled to the same freedom to drive as those who have the driving licence passport to do so? If I did, the consequence may be the same. Others may die as a result. The unlicensed driver may kill others on the road and the unvaccinated Mr Halsey may infect and kill people he meets in the pub.

Alan Pack

Canterbury

I am totally against identity cards and other infringements of freedom. But I am amazed to find that (a first) I actually agree with the prime minister over these vaccine passports. And yes, they do discriminate against those selfish enough to refuse the jab.

At present, I am prevented from visiting my mother as there has been a Covid outbreak at her nursing home. Given that all the residents have been vaccinated and they are in lockdown, the finger of blame points at those carers who won’t have the jab. This illustrates how the human rights of some must be balanced against the human rights of others. The right to be daft does not trump my mother’s right to a family life. So, too, my right to go to a restaurant in the reasonable expectation that I won’t be exposed to a silly person with the virus.

Peter Kent

Crowle

As public health professionals and doctors, our role is to understand and address the “causes behind the causes” of health inequalities. Structural racism has long been recognised as a significant driver of these, so it is concerning that the Sewell report denies its existence. The report is based on flawed methodologies and contradicts decades of academic research, including the government’s own reviews; the authors omit “inconvenient” evidence from Sage regarding the importance of structural racism in Covid outcomes.

The report cites employment, income and geographical location as factors that explain racial disparities in Covid-related deaths, but ignores the fact that systemic racism underlies these differences. The data shows that once these socioeconomic factors are accounted for, Black men are still twice as likely to die from the virus than white men.

Read more:

Racism affects outcomes over the life course. Black babies in the UK have over twice the risk of being stillborn than a white baby and Black mothers have four times the risk of death in childbirth. At the end of life, Black Caribbean, Pakistani and Bangladeshi people live up to nine fewer years in full health compared to those of white backgrounds. Contrary to the report’s suggestions, such differences cannot be addressed through changing individual attitudes and behaviours alone.

We add our voices to experts in other fields in criticising this report and warning against its use to inform policy. Debating the existence of structural racism is a dangerous distraction. Since 2010, life expectancy has stalled, our society has become more unequal, and we spend more years living in poor health. Tackling the structural causes of this (including, but not limited to racism), must be a political priority.

Dr Chetna Sharma

Dr Emma Sherwood

Dr Gemma Slater

Dr Ahimza Thirunavukarasu

(On behalf of a group of 230 Public Health Specialty Registrars across England)

This morning I came across a tweet regarding a new bill proposed by the French senate. This bill, if passed, would ban everyone under the age of 18 from wearing religious symbols, including the hijab, in public.

Being an Ahmadi Muslim woman, I wish to address some misconceptions and make it crystal clear that my hijab does not in any way oppress me. However, if the French senate decides to pass this bill, unfortunately many Muslim women in France will be oppressed, as their freedom will be usurped.

One thing I have always been grateful for while living in the West is the fact that I have the freedom of religion. If I have the freedom of religion, surely, this includes the right to dress in a manner that I am comfortable in, which includes the Islamic veil? Those who think that the hijab is a form of oppression and compulsion should think again because the Qur’an clearly states: “There should be no compulsion in religion.” 

My hijab is not just a piece of cloth that I wear on my head. Rather, it’s a spiritual garment through which I find my honour. It does not in any way restrict me, nor does it manifest any political agenda. In fact, it represents a timeless modesty that does not conform to society.

For me, my hijab has always been a form of empowerment. It is while wearing the hijab that I was able to obtain a degree from the University of Roehampton and later gain employment. I may not look the same as everyone else due to the veil but that has never hindered my ability to integrate into this society.

The French government claims to be non-discriminatory and the champion of free speech yet this bill only threatens the values of freedom and impartiality. Those who believe that stigmatising the hijab will liberate Muslim women should take a moment to consult Muslim women rather than making decisions on their behalf.

Husna Butt

Hampshire

Julian Self (‘Face facts’, Letters, 2 April) draws attention to the tautological “face masks”. My pet peeves are “social distancing” (which is rather unsocial, unless it is intended to mean “for the social good”) and “self-isolation” for people effectively imprisoned in quarantine hotels. Isolation yes, but as on a cholera ward, and not by eremitic choice.

In both cases, the language has been perverted to try to establish a particular emotional reaction to an unpleasant reality. Orwell, eat your heart out.

Rachael Padman

Newmarket

I most certainly welcome the letter from Julian Self, pointing out how unnecessary it is to pair the word “face” with the word “mask”. 

Without doubt it is an excellent example of what is known as a pleonasm; and as anyone who makes their living by writing will tell you: must be avoided like an infestation of the plague.

Robert Boston

Kingshill