Probably a can of worms, but thought this article was worth reprinting here nonetheless....
Written by Gimme5, Thursday, 18th December 2008
Lfc Online
Back in the 70's and 80's football managers were appointed and left to do their job without outside influence.
They had scouts who looked out for potential new signings and if they reported back about a player the manager decided whether or not to try to sign him. The manager was given free reign to choose a team and tactics that he thought would be the most successful. The supporter's role was to turn up every Saturday, cheer on the eleven players the manager had picked and hope for victory.
The 90's changed a lot. The introduction of Sky TV and the money it offered to big, successful clubs, meant there was a demand for 'sexy football' to entice television viewers to buy satellite dishes and subscribe to premium sports channels. Each season more and more games were televised live, spawning a glut of pundits, usually recruited from the pool of former players who weren't good enough to go into management. These pundits were employed to dissect the events on the field, criticise team selections and tactics and speculate about behind the scenes issues.
As we welcomed in the new millenium we saw the rise of the internet which empowered each and every one of us to have our own little soapbox in our own corner of cyberspace. Suddenly we were all pundits. Experience of team tactics and the abilities of foreign footballers playing in far off leagues gleaned from football management games allowed somebody who previously had know knowledge of the game to appear an expert. Football fan websites sprang up all over the net, each with their own forum allowing visitors to have their say. The anonymity offered by this public fora meant that an adolescent child could pretend to be a wise man of the world and a wise man of the world could resort to acting like an adolescent child, and both did on an all too regular basis.
Blogs were also launched, allowing anyone who is able to fill in a basic online form the ability to rant about anything they liked, and have control over the responses received. The web began to embrace the new freedom of speech and the term 'citizen journalism' was born. Social media webites sprang up allowing likeminded individuals to group together and it wasn't long before everyone realised that these networks could be used to launch campaigns, from bringing back the Wispa bar, to forcing the BBXC to sack misbehaving DJs. Television companies took this one step further, introducing talent shows which gave viewers the impression that they could influence the outcome when in reality the judges still had overall control.
So how have these developments affected football? A quick look at the fan forum of any team that has just lost a game or, in Liverpool's case, failed to win comfortably, and you will see the results. A mass of screaming knee jerk reactions from people who quite possibly care more about their credibility in the school playground the following day than the fortunes of their club over the course of the season. There are fans who can see the bigger picture, realise that their team can't win by four goals each and every game and that players are only human and can have off days, but forum software doesn't take into account the value and quality of contributions, just the number of posts and threads made. Ten loud-mouthed children who have only followed a match by logging in at the final whistle to check the result are able to flood the forum with negativity, while a fan who actually watched the game is still stuck in traffic on the way home.
There are plenty of supporters who see the positives in a game, even when it hasn't gone to plan, and hope we can improve on the negatives. Unfortunately, for every one of these there are a dozen soothsayers who only ever appear after a defeat and blindly predict gloom and doom with an 'I told you' attitude. The only method of dealing with these people is to ignore them. They thrive on acceptance by their peers and refuse to allow difference of opinion. By ignoring them you aren't contributing to their moment in the spotlight. This won't make them go away, they will be back the next time we lose or the next time one of the disliked players misses a shot, but it doesn't give them the attention they seek.
The worrying aspect of this whole mob rule culture is that it has now spread to Anfield. For the first time in many years, and loudly than I've ever heard it, I hear the boos of fans around all four sides of the ground when the team has underperformed. The Liverpool Way is more than just a fanzine. It is a behaviour and attitude developed over time, not just by the team on the field but also the crowd in the stands. We sing 'You'll Never Walk Alone' (including the final chorus) before every game, we applaud the opposition keeper when he's taking his place at the Kop end goal and, most important of all, we don't boo our own. While most of the matchgoing fans have failed to adhere to the first two for some time now, its the rise of the third which is of most concern.
Let fans of other clubs verbally abuse their own and throw their season tickets onto the pitch, and feel free to mock them for doing so. But never boo your own. Let the manager criticise them for their poor performance in the privacy of the dressing room and moan about them as much as you like in the pub after the game, but never boo your own. Liverpool fans have been respected around the world for their support of the team for decades. Let's not lose that for the sake of a few dropped points and missed shots.
Written by Gimme5, Thursday, 18th December 2008
Lfc Online
Back in the 70's and 80's football managers were appointed and left to do their job without outside influence.
They had scouts who looked out for potential new signings and if they reported back about a player the manager decided whether or not to try to sign him. The manager was given free reign to choose a team and tactics that he thought would be the most successful. The supporter's role was to turn up every Saturday, cheer on the eleven players the manager had picked and hope for victory.
The 90's changed a lot. The introduction of Sky TV and the money it offered to big, successful clubs, meant there was a demand for 'sexy football' to entice television viewers to buy satellite dishes and subscribe to premium sports channels. Each season more and more games were televised live, spawning a glut of pundits, usually recruited from the pool of former players who weren't good enough to go into management. These pundits were employed to dissect the events on the field, criticise team selections and tactics and speculate about behind the scenes issues.
As we welcomed in the new millenium we saw the rise of the internet which empowered each and every one of us to have our own little soapbox in our own corner of cyberspace. Suddenly we were all pundits. Experience of team tactics and the abilities of foreign footballers playing in far off leagues gleaned from football management games allowed somebody who previously had know knowledge of the game to appear an expert. Football fan websites sprang up all over the net, each with their own forum allowing visitors to have their say. The anonymity offered by this public fora meant that an adolescent child could pretend to be a wise man of the world and a wise man of the world could resort to acting like an adolescent child, and both did on an all too regular basis.
Blogs were also launched, allowing anyone who is able to fill in a basic online form the ability to rant about anything they liked, and have control over the responses received. The web began to embrace the new freedom of speech and the term 'citizen journalism' was born. Social media webites sprang up allowing likeminded individuals to group together and it wasn't long before everyone realised that these networks could be used to launch campaigns, from bringing back the Wispa bar, to forcing the BBXC to sack misbehaving DJs. Television companies took this one step further, introducing talent shows which gave viewers the impression that they could influence the outcome when in reality the judges still had overall control.
So how have these developments affected football? A quick look at the fan forum of any team that has just lost a game or, in Liverpool's case, failed to win comfortably, and you will see the results. A mass of screaming knee jerk reactions from people who quite possibly care more about their credibility in the school playground the following day than the fortunes of their club over the course of the season. There are fans who can see the bigger picture, realise that their team can't win by four goals each and every game and that players are only human and can have off days, but forum software doesn't take into account the value and quality of contributions, just the number of posts and threads made. Ten loud-mouthed children who have only followed a match by logging in at the final whistle to check the result are able to flood the forum with negativity, while a fan who actually watched the game is still stuck in traffic on the way home.
There are plenty of supporters who see the positives in a game, even when it hasn't gone to plan, and hope we can improve on the negatives. Unfortunately, for every one of these there are a dozen soothsayers who only ever appear after a defeat and blindly predict gloom and doom with an 'I told you' attitude. The only method of dealing with these people is to ignore them. They thrive on acceptance by their peers and refuse to allow difference of opinion. By ignoring them you aren't contributing to their moment in the spotlight. This won't make them go away, they will be back the next time we lose or the next time one of the disliked players misses a shot, but it doesn't give them the attention they seek.
The worrying aspect of this whole mob rule culture is that it has now spread to Anfield. For the first time in many years, and loudly than I've ever heard it, I hear the boos of fans around all four sides of the ground when the team has underperformed. The Liverpool Way is more than just a fanzine. It is a behaviour and attitude developed over time, not just by the team on the field but also the crowd in the stands. We sing 'You'll Never Walk Alone' (including the final chorus) before every game, we applaud the opposition keeper when he's taking his place at the Kop end goal and, most important of all, we don't boo our own. While most of the matchgoing fans have failed to adhere to the first two for some time now, its the rise of the third which is of most concern.
Let fans of other clubs verbally abuse their own and throw their season tickets onto the pitch, and feel free to mock them for doing so. But never boo your own. Let the manager criticise them for their poor performance in the privacy of the dressing room and moan about them as much as you like in the pub after the game, but never boo your own. Liverpool fans have been respected around the world for their support of the team for decades. Let's not lose that for the sake of a few dropped points and missed shots.
Comment