That's pretty much it. Absolutely nothing wrong with supporting a team from somewhere else, but it is a different thing altogether. Until that cup game I considered myself as much a Liverpool as Blackburn fan, maybe more, but my dad took me to Blackburn all the time etc. When I got to the game something changed, like "who are all these arrogant bastards walking round my club like they own the place". Ping, Blackburn fan for life. I could have stayed supporting Liverpool, it's only an hour away after all. I could have chosen Man United they're close too and I've had seen a lot more trophies. In fact I have to drive past those every week to get to Blackburn now I've moved away. But none of those represent me or where I'm from, so there's nowhere near the passion I'd feel for them, and to me that'd be pointless. Anyway, I think people would be surprised at their thinking if their big club ever came to their town to play. I was. People often criticise this sort of thing as mindless tribalism, but I was a kid and none of that mattered, I just had pride in my town and club, simple as that.
Very interesting point. I really don't want the Arsenal to play in New York. I'm deeply and vehemently opposed to Game 39, even if that would mean an easier trip to see my beloved Gunners.
Pray it never happens. For me, "the mighty reds" turned into "those red bastards." Nah, not that bad, I still like them to do well, but not at our expense. Although they turn into those red bastards on matchday, but just twice a year. Luckily Blackburn grew into a decent club, it was a bit of a pain being inexorably tied to a crap one.
Well, quite a bit different for me in that I've supported the Arsenal longer than MLS has been around, so I could never ever cheer against them. I suppose if the Cosmos never went away I never would have developed such a passion for the Gunners. My first trip to Highbury there was no team back home in NY. If the Arsenal ever came here to play the Red Bulls...(don't like thinking this!)...I suppose I would hope for a draw, but it would feel very very weird.
Well if you want to talk word choice, two that don't go together are "Bolton" and "massiv [sic]"." Mediocre would be more a propos. My love for the Arsenal disproves your notion that foreign supporters are fickle lovers of player or manager. I know loads who think likewise. I do think, though, that xenophobia is just a symptom of solipsism.
Guys guys guys, forgive DoctorK before you flame him - our only access to any kind of English slang here is via Ali G or perhaps drum and bass records, and I don't think DoctorK is a fan of either. Give him a pass on this one.
Hey, what do I know? I'm just an ignorant American. Up the Arse! https://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showpost.php?p=14230091&postcount=4
Hmmmmmm.......? Stoke City will receive a minimum payment of around £35m for this seasons participation in the EPL, even if they lose EVERY game both home and away. That is a staggering amount of money, quite frankly. Now........ That money is generated by foreign interest in the EPL, and the majority of that interest is focused on the top 4. Although it would skew the balance irretrievably in their favour, the top 4 could reasonably demand a bigger share of the money that comes in and rationally argue that it comes in solely because of foreign interest in them. So while you rightly argue that the top 4 make more than the rest, their presence and participation in the EPL actually makes every club a minimum of £35m from TV rights. Then they get additional payments for live televised games, prize money depending on how hight they finish and increased sponsorship from their sponsoirs because they are in there. Let's not portray the EPL as a league of paupers with a handful of meanies at the top. Was this aimed at me, by the way?
damn. i'll need to take a refresher course before i respond to that in any detail. but regardless of what that post says (everything seems a bit out of context, so far down the road), i don't think my premise was to imply that foreign capital's primary fault lies in the alienation of small clubs from access to vertical mobility within england's league structure so much as its alienation of small clubs from their traditional support base ... namely, its established fans - the bitching of one being the genisis of this thread. i doubt it. i suppose it does kind of looks that way, but i really can't see myself having said that to you based on anything that i know of you. did you have more information on yourself and who you support on your profile back then? again, i'd have to look alot deeper into this thread than i'm inclined in order to know exactly where i was coming from; but (also again) i doubt it.
as a supporter of one of the "sky four" i think your missing a point. yes Stoke city can lose every game and come away with 35 million. but as a supporters of an average team do we now accept we will never be able to compete for honours and be satisfied with paying £45 to watch a game, or £700 for a season ticket just to see our teams make up the numbers in a mini league of four. the money from tv and foriegn investment has not been evenly distributed, rightly or wrongly is not the issue, and eventually supporters of normal teams will have enough of paying out for mid table mediocrity and our once great league where all teams stood a chance ( all be it a lesser chance but still a chance) will be dull and even more boring. apart of course to supporters of the big four.
Well said Im a Liverpool supporter and the big 4 make enough money from Merchandise, sponsorship, vast number of foreign fans, The TV money should be distributed evenly. But part of the problem is stoke and the other smaller clubs, all it needs is for the chairman of the other 16 clubs to have a secret meeting. Imho the champions should get a 10 million Winners Bonus, everyone else gets the same, those who finish 2nd -4th get championsleague money as a bonus.
I don't get how it's ever been all that different. The top flight was more competitive, sure, but look at first division winners from 1970 to the founding of the Prem: Liverpool x11 Everton x3 Arsenal x3 Leeds x3 (if you count '69) Derby x2 Villa Forest Wow, look at that competition. Everyone had a chance at winning the title!
What is the relevance of this? You may aswell go back to the 1920's when Bolton were one of the best teams. Or when Darwen and Blackburn Olympic were competing for FA Cups.
because the point is as football goes on it gets less intresting for the rest of us. four clubs (with the odd club getting rich quick like man city) qualify for the champions league every year and they will get even further ahead of the pack because of financial gain, so what's the future for the supporters of lesser teams? if you go back to Bolton's glory days in those ten years 18 clubs finished in the top four. in the last ten years of the 1st div(81-91) 15 clubs finished in the top four. and in the last ten years(99-08) of the premiership 7 teams did the same. the point is unless money is shared out amongst all 92 clubs English football will belong to the supporters of the top four watching all over the world and those of us that actually go through the turnstiles will have to doph our caps when the big four come to town and watch meaningless games when they don't.
A lot of people who consume today's Premier League are only interested in the big 4 because that is all that's been sold to them since their interest started. They're perfectly happy to see them in the blockbuster games against each other and for the rest of it to watch the smaller clubs be fed to the lions, it fits with their perception of what's right and how it is. It might have only been how it is for a short time but that's what they know. So that's the product that the Premier League will continue to support, the one that's worked so far. Whether the actual fans like it is not really their concern, and I include a lot of fans of the big 4 in that, who also find it a bit boring and predictable. But it pays for them to have some very good players to watch and I can't blame them for not wanting to change it. Unfortumately our turnstile money is not what lines the the League's pockets for the most part. Whether the league will remain competetive and interesting and eventually begin to fail is yet to be seen. I personally think sense will be restored sooner or later because absolutely everything works in cycles. Fans are starting to turn away from the game as it's no longer what they grew up with and love, and players don't like to play in front of half empty stadiums. I might love football and have a season ticket but for the first time since it started I don't have Sky sports this seaon, and I don't miss it. We're hardly on anymore and I'm not interested in watching the Sky 4, not because I'm sulking, they're just not my team. MotD, I watch sometimes but hardly ever. Yesterday was a big game for us, a big relegation battle and with some history behind the fixture but you know that it will get a mention at the end of the programme and nothing more. I don't not watch it because I'm feeling sorry for myself, just because it's not relevant to me. That's something that my none match going friends find very bizarre, but a fair few of the fans I know who go to the game have also binned Sky's package for the same reason, it's no longer relevant to them. Anyway, aren't you grateful that four times a year you're given the opportunity to watch good football. I mean on those occasions it's the visitors who you are paying to watch isn't it