Xtratime Community banner

1 - 14 of 14 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,740 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
The Basque national soccer team will not play its friendly against Iran

Players and representatives of the Federation met yesterday afternoon in Durango to try to reach an agreement, but finally the Basque selection will not play its friendly match.
euskal selekzioa

Finally, the Iran and Basque selection will not play their friendly match. Players and representatives of the Basque Federation of Soccer met on Wednesday evening in Durango to try to come to an agreement after soccer players announced they would not play if the selection was not named Euskal Herria.

In the meeting, the soccer players proposed to play under the name of Euskal Selekzioa, but the Federation did not accept it since it understands that the official name is Euskadi Selekzioa.

The news has not become official until today when the Federation has confirmed the match suspension.
http://www.eitb.com/sports/news/detail/51924/

What's this for nonsense? Why can't we play as Euskal Herria, which is our name? Just like we over the past years?
 

·
Lehendakari
Joined
·
2,025 Posts
Shame, I had been looking forward to the game.

Seems very silly as well, to cancel the match just over what the team is called. And especially when the players had no objection to the name before.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,001 Posts
I was looking forward to this, I do not think Nekounom or Shojaei would have played though. We were supposed to play Catalonia too, but that got cancelled. I think we are playing Galicia instead.
 

·
Senior Poster of the year 2007
Joined
·
40,147 Posts
I don't understand shit, seriously. If someone can explain this to me... I mean, what's the difference between playing under the name of Euskadi and Euskal Herria? :confused:
 

·
In Exile
Joined
·
5,398 Posts
Is it a rhetoric question or you really don't know the difference between the two terms?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,740 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
As far as I know Euskal Herria stands for 'Basque Land' which are the seven provinces, while Euskadi only stand for the three; Bizkaia, Gipuzkoa and Araba.

Here an article I read, not that I agree which all is said over there, but still interesting. Also they say the same about the name:

Some argue that the name Euskadi refers only to the three Basque provinces in the Spanish autonomous region Pais Vasco (Basque Country) and not the neighbouring region of Navarre or the three French Basque regions, Lapurdi, Zuberoa and Behenafarroa which belong to the French department Pyrénées-Atlantiques. Therefore, they say, Selección de Euskal Herria is the correct name for the team, as it has players from all seven provinces – provinces which share a thousand years of linguistic and cultural heritage yet have never had a common political or administrative institution.
http://www.cafebabel.com/eng/article/27885/basque-iran-christmas-match-name-dispute.html

On another note, I'm almost sure Koeman knew this :).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
736 Posts
As far as I know Euskal Herria stands for 'Basque Land' which are the seven provinces, while Euskadi only stand for the three; Bizkaia, Gipuzkoa and Araba.
That is what makes sense for me too, but when I ask basques, they say there are no difference!
They should know...
 

·
Senior Poster of the year 2007
Joined
·
40,147 Posts
Is it a rhetoric question or you really don't know the difference between the two terms?

For me, Euskadi also refers to the 7 Basque provinces, as far as I know. Euskadi comes from Euzkadi, which is the name given by the founder of the PNV-EAJ to the 7 provinces. Sabino Arana used the term Euzkadi to give a name to the country, while Euskal Herria refers to the "land of the Euskera" (the language of the Basques and even the culture of the Basques), although I know that, lately, they also use it as equivalent of Euskadi, as "the land of the Basques" or something like this.

But I seriously think that it's a stupidity to think that Euskadi doesn't refer to the 7 provinces they claim. IMO, the players look as total ignorants.

Besides, didn't Arana prefer Euskadi instead of Euskal Herria because the "carlistas" (a kind of "españolistas") used this other term? This is mad. I seriously think it's a joke. Even the Spanish ultra-right accepts the term "Euskal Herria" over the name of "Euskadi", because the Spanish nationalists see it as more correct!!! Add the fact that the regime of Franco didn't allow to talk about Euskadi, while they accepted the name Euskal Herria!! After all it was the term used by the carlistas, friends of Franco.

Well, it's the players' choice, even if it seems they don't know shit, which is not new among the profession anyway. Don't worry, they still can read books to finish with their problem.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,740 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
Doesn't anyone living in Basque Country know the background-information you posted? This makes the decision of the players look extra weird...

Also, what does the average fan of the Basque national team think about it, how is the general opinion in Basque Country about it?

And on another hand, it's still confirmed the match definitely won't take place? That would be too bad... :thmbdown:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,740 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
Just was a bit confused about it, so a summary, wikipedia says this, which is right --> 'The team was named Euskadiko Selekzioa until 2007, when changed its name to Euskal Herriko Selekzioa.'.
We played as Euskadi since 1915 (is this right?), but in 2007 before the game versus Catalunya the name was changed to Euskal Herria. I guess the Basque FA accepted it. Now the players still want to play as Euskal Herria but the Basque FA doesn't accept it, and no match will take place.

So, my questions are;
1. Why did the players want a name change in 2007?
2. Why did the FA it accept back then, but doesn't accept it now?

Are there political reasons? Other reasons?

Perhaps it sounds weird, but for me it's not clear at all...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
998 Posts
I think it is confirmed, read about it on several different websites (found it on Iran Daily website as well)

don't really get what's all this about either, especially considering the information Koeman4 posted...been really looking forward to the match!
 

·
Senior Poster of the year 2007
Joined
·
40,147 Posts
Sad day. I'd like to know Iribar's opinion about it, but, honestly, I don't understand why playing under the name of Euskadi is such a crime. Is that enough reason to suspend a game? I think that some people went so extremist in their thoughts that even the name of Euskadi is something "ugly" now. The only reason that I can think about is that Euskadi is a name already accepted by everyone, independently of their political tendencies, while Euskal Herria is nowadays a name more related with the nationalist ideals, even if historically there is not a reason for it. But even if that's the reason, why do people want to put part of the Basque society out of this?

It's stupid, IMO, to say that Euskadi only refers to the 3 provinces. At the end, it seems that only minoritary groups inside the Basque nationalism, represented by EA and the old Batasuna defend this. Man, not even PNV-EAJ is behind this! Basically, the players suspended the game against the thoughts of the big majority of Euskadi, represented by PNV-EAJ and PSE. If that's the way to go, using the via of division, then things can only get worse in the fight to get a national team. IMO, if you want to reach this goal, everyone should try to get support from everywhere and it's a big mistake to look for formulas that only create division in the Basque society.

Personally, I'd try to look for formulas that would make ALL the Basque society to go in one direction. Today, they found a way to divide, not only the Basque society, but also the Basque nationalism.

I've always thought that the Basques should be free to make their choice about the future, but I truly despise those who just want to divide and break. It's a huge mistake to divide people between good and bad Basques. I adore this place and, as I said once, I have good friends in Hernani, near Donosti. Nationalists, but not radicals that hate others just for thinking different. And, even if we may disagree with each other about some ideas, we agree that Euskadi only has a future in the common aspects. Nationalists and non-nationalists, left and right,... it's time to look for things in common, it's time to walk in the same direction, looking for agreements, which should force people to renounce to part of their own ideas. All the ideas are valid and respectable, people should try to understand, to use empathy. Just for a change!

In this sense, I'd like to see PNV-EAJ and PSE looking for solutions for Euskadi, to finish with the violence, to look for solutions for the future of the Basques. If these 2 parties represent the big majority of the Basque society, the moderate ideas of both nationalists and non-nationalists, left and right, they should be the ones to lead the change.

I don't like to see those who try to divide, because I do really believe that the extremism of the Spanish right of Partido Popular and the people of Batasuna (or however they call themselves) just feed each other and it seems to me that they can only get votes from the tension and hatred.

For me, it seems that the players (all of them? Curious to me in this society) prefered the way of division. Good for them. People didn't have their game, they didn't achieve anything for the good of Euskadi and the NT and they just gave an image of division among the Basques. Beautiful, what a pathetic show.

And I'm sorry if I offend someone, since it's not my intention. I love Euskadi and its people, but these stupidities are beyond me and make me feel sad and pessimistic.

The question is: who won today? IMO, the reply is clear, those who want your NT to disappear and those who want to divide socity between the goods and the bads. IMO, it's a very sad day for Euskadi.
 

·
In Exile
Joined
·
5,398 Posts
But there is a distinction between Euskadi in Euskal Herria, even though I'm not an authority on euskara.

Arana invented the word Euskadi, and both terms Euskadi and Euskal Herria were meant to be synonymous, and they were at the beginning. Arana invented many neologisms, mostly to replace the Spanish/Latin borrowings, but the problems with Arana was that he was not a linguist and many of his new words (neologisms) were the result of misinterpretation and false knowledge of Basque language etymology, word formation and morphology. Euskadi is such an example, he postulated suffix -adi (Euskadi = Eusk+adi) as meaning "land, place", but this turned out as bogus, there was never such a suffix with such meaning in euskera. Anyway, most of his language inventions became obsolete. The traditional and existing name for Basque land was Euskal Herria, it's maybe unclear why he wanted to replace it with his neologism, but maybe he thought it as a calque from French/Spanish, were the country is named with similar syntagm Pais Vasco/Pays Basque (Herria- Pais, Euskal - Vasco). Btw, Euskal should be at least etymological better translated as vascohablante, then just vasco.

Anyway both terms coexisted, where Euskadi was probably more popular among nationalist/patriotic circles. When later on Basques gained autonomy in Spain, their region was officialy named Euskadi, and comprises 3 provinces. At that point synonymous terms got differentiated again, Euskadi being mostly percieved as a name of a political entity = autonomous region of 3 provinces, while traditional name Euskal Herria gaining a wider sense, comprising all 7 provinces (Euskadi + Navarra + 3 provinces in France).

That's how I see it, from purely linguistic view.
 

·
Senior Poster of the year 2007
Joined
·
40,147 Posts
But there is a distinction between Euskadi in Euskal Herria, even though I'm not an authority on euskara.

Arana invented the word Euskadi, and both terms Euskadi and Euskal Herria were meant to be synonymous, and they were at the beginning. Arana invented many neologisms, mostly to replace the Spanish/Latin borrowings, but the problems with Arana was that he was not a linguist and many of his new words (neologisms) were the result of misinterpretation and false knowledge of Basque language etymology, word formation and morphology. Euskadi is such an example, he postulated suffix -adi (Euskadi = Eusk+adi) as meaning "land, place", but this turned out as bogus, there was never such a suffix with such meaning in euskera. Anyway, most of his language inventions became obsolete. The traditional and existing name for Basque land was Euskal Herria, it's maybe unclear why he wanted to replace it with his neologism, but maybe he thought it as a calque from French/Spanish, were the country is named with similar syntagm Pais Vasco/Pays Basque (Herria- Pais, Euskal - Vasco). Btw, Euskal should be at least etymological better translated as vascohablante, then just vasco.

Anyway both terms coexisted, where Euskadi was probably more popular among nationalist/patriotic circles. When later on Basques gained autonomy in Spain, their region was officialy named Euskadi, and comprises 3 provinces. At that point synonymous terms got differentiated again, Euskadi being mostly percieved as a name of a political entity = autonomous region of 3 provinces, while traditional name Euskal Herria gaining a wider sense, comprising all 7 provinces (Euskadi + Navarra + 3 provinces in France).

That's how I see it, from purely linguistic view.
It's their choice. I take it to the Catalan aspect and I'd think it's silly to suspend a game because we play under the name of Catalunya instead of Països Catalans. I'd feel ridiculous and I'd think that the players are stupid.

But, as I said, it's their thing. The question is: what did they gain with all this mess? I just see division, even among people who aren't suspicious of being anti-Basque.
 
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
Top