Cricket-Match-Special ... A forum for discussion

Something which has been mulling over in my head for a while which I thought I would put out there to see if anyone agrees with me.

The accusation is often levelled at fans of big teams that they're one of the things mentioned in the title of the thread, especially if they were unlucky enough to have been born more recently than the last time the team they support was particularly bad. Mostly the accusation is that people should "support their local club" or the like. This might well have been a tenement which held true up to the mid-1990s, but I'm not sure it really holds water anymore.

Let me explain why I'm thinking this. In this multi-media, 24/7 football on TV world is it any wonder people support the clubs they hear mentioned a lot on the TV? Since the dawn of the Premier League era the top teams who are ever-present are undoubtedly some of the most famous sporting brands on the planet, and yes there can be no doubt some people support them for the reflected glory supporting a club which wins things brings. However, one thing this attitude does not breed is loyalty. Which is why the Manchester City rise is an interesting development, as, personally, an awful lot of Manchester City fans seem to be slowly emerging from the woodwork. Where were these people 15 years ago when they were in the 3rd Division I wonder? Well in at least three of the people I know who now profess to be City fans, supporting Liverpool actually.

With the smaller world we now undoubtedly live in (after all, I can now follow a cricket match in Australia as it happens on several different media types while conversing with people in India and South Africa about it) is the concept of "the local team" still a particularly valid one? Of course many people will still support the local club (especially if the local club is reasonably big), but where does this influence end. Should someone in Havant be supporting Havant & Waterlooville or could they legitimately claim to be a Portsmouth fan? And do you have to get a tape measure out in London to ensure you support the correct local club?

Cards on the table, I am a Manchester United fan living in Sussex. I support Manchester United because they were the team my mother (the sports fan in the family) supports (she grew up in the wake of the Munich air crash and as was rather swept along on the emotion of that), and so (like many others throughout history) I support the same team as my parent(s). The abuse I have received for this has been at times almost biblical from fans of other teams. It's made me wonder why, and the only reason I can conclude is that, on a subconscious level, they feel the need to get one over on the fans who end up supporting a team which is more successful than theirs. They might not win trophies, they might not play in a particularly high quality league, they might be an absolutely terrible team, but none of this matters because they think of themselves as somehow "purer" than the others. It's your badge to wear, while other fans are celebrating winning something or beating them, their success means less than your lack of it because they're all lesser fans than yourself.

There's a good reason why I feel this is the case. Let me put it this way. If someone lives and has always lived in Exeter, but they support York City, are they a "glory hunter"? If someone lives in London and, despite having no connection to Spain, supports Rayo Valladolid, are they? It's funny how the accusation only ever seems to be levelled at people who support successful teams (and I limit this not just to United but also to Chelsea, Liverpool, Arsenal, Tottenham or any of the other teams which are Premier League regulars).

I believe, though, for the reasons mentioned above that the key to being what many of these people refer to as a "true fan" is not how near the ground is to where you live / were born but the club to which you feel the most loyalty. I'm proud of being a Manchester United fan for many reasons which do not cover winning things. I'm continuing the family line. They were the first team I ever watched play live. That they win things is merely a (very pleasant) sideshow.

Which brings me back to the Manchester City reference earlier. The ex-Liverpool fans who now proclaim themselves as City fans are the real "plastics" in this, in my opinion. So seeing people like me who have only ever supported the one team being put in this category can be quite galling.

Anyway, that's my point for debate, it'll be interesting to hear what any of you have to think about it (and with a long old gap with not much beyond the play-offs and Champions League final for a month or so God we need something to talk about).

Interesting thoughts, yorker, and one that also tends to reflect on the global nature of the Premiership now....

The Premiership is a world-wide phenomenon. A few years ago, I went to SE Asia and I was surprised to see how seriously Prem football is taken there. The back page article on one of Malaysia's leading newspapers was about Arsene Wenger's buying plans for Arsenal, and one of their leading ads on telly was about a Chelsea fan buying tickets and accommodation to watch his team play in the Prem. Now, how does that fan support a 'local' team? Is that Malaysian fan a 'glory hunter'? When I moved on to Indonesia, I was wearing a Man Utd shirt, and the waiter in the hotel was ribbing me about how 'his' team, Real Madrid, were going to lure Cristiano Ronaldo away from Old Trafford, a claim I scoffed. Well, we all know who won that argument....But is that waiter right to call Read Madrid 'his' team? He lives in Jakarta, not Madrid....

I became a United fan in the days when Liverpool were dominating the then English First Division. IN the early 1980s, a United side comprising Jesper Olson, Mark Hughes and Norman Whiteside toured the Caribbean, and came to Kingston, where they beat the Jamaican national side 3-2. I was in the National Stadium for that match, and I was so taken in my United's exciting play that I became a United fan.

If I was to support my local side, I would've been a fan of Real Mona. Now, google that, and you will see how pathetic my football life would've been!

I've since discovered, when I came back to England, and when I did my family research, that my English side of the family has a history of supporting Arsenal. Given that my children currently support Arsenal, having gone to school in North London, I guess that's my family history re-asserting itself! I guess I'm the abherration....

I grew up with the only local league side being Oxford United and given that they were pretty awful in the late 70's, most of my mates supported Liverpool, Arsenal and West Ham (weird). I don't see anything wrong with that, if they keep supporting them through thick and thin.

Like you say, swapping teams because of success is real glory hunting.


Nice article, btw!

mikesiva wrote:Interesting thoughts, yorker, and one that also tends to reflect on the global nature of the Premiership now....

The Premiership is a world-wide phenomenon. A few years ago, I went to SE Asia and I was surprised to see how seriously Prem football is taken there. The back page article on one of Malaysia's leading newspapers was about Arsene Wenger's buying plans for Arsenal, and one of their leading ads on telly was about a Chelsea fan buying tickets and accommodation to watch his team play in the Prem. Now, how does that fan support a 'local' team? Is that Malaysian fan a 'glory hunter'? When I moved on to Indonesia, I was wearing a Man Utd shirt, and the waiter in the hotel was ribbing me about how 'his' team, Real Madrid, were going to lure Cristiano Ronaldo away from Old Trafford, a claim I scoffed. Well, we all know who won that argument....But is that waiter right to call Read Madrid 'his' team? He lives in Jakarta, not Madrid....

Nearly all football followers in Malaysia and SE Asia support Man United or Liverpool. A possible reason could be because every United match is shown live on TV and i suppose it helps that teams like United, Arsenal, Chelsea and Liverpool tour the country every few years. Also, the standard of football in countries like Malaysia is poor and it's not worth supporting a team that play poor quality football, have no good players and no one else is interested in them. When they finally see some good footballers play on TV, i would think it's quite easy to start gaining an interest in them and i suppose that's how they become fans. However, in Malaysia, the national team has many fans despite no real progress being made so i'm not too sure why they support the big teams like United over the local teams. Some/most of them are probably glory hunting but the good thing is that they stay loyal. If a fan chooses a team and then sticks with them for their whole life then i don't have a problem with that.

My opinion is not footie related, but I felt I can contribute my 2 cents here...

I support the Mumbai Indians in IPL, although my hometown is Pune. Reason? Sachin Tendulkar. So maybe some far away fans support a particular club because they like particular players in a side?

Cant really call me a "Plastic fan" now... Mumbai has not won the IPL even once...

i support west ham, there is no way im a glory hunter!

Dilbert wrote:My opinion is not footie related, but I felt I can contribute my 2 cents here...

I support the Mumbai Indians in IPL, although my hometown is Pune. Reason? Sachin Tendulkar. So maybe some far away fans support a particular club because they like particular players in a side?

Cant really call me a "Plastic fan" now... Mumbai has not won the IPL even once...

You've made one very important point there Dilbert old chap. Reasons for supporting teams come in all different packages.
I too support teams with certain players in them and it goes far beyond soccer. Which brings me to another point that there are so many sports now that we can view on the TV and live which leaves us having to juggle our time between stations.
It's like friends, you have to eliminate the bad ones, the ones that are just hanging on for the quality ones. Especially as you get older you become more selective. Sounds harsh but we all will eventually do it, same goes for sport.

The die hard fan will always remain, but you can bet your house on it that most season ticket holders to the NBA, EPL, AFL, etc probably only follow that sport or maybe one or two other sports. They go to the matches week in and week out and will support their team no matter like a religion.

Personally I would hate to be that fan and I have only ever known one other person in my life whom went to footy matches in the 70's and he grew out of it, if you catch my drift.

I would say that football is different then, for some people. I come from Chi originally and I support Pompey my local team, even though they are in Hampshire, but I could never support Hampshire at cricket.

Surely no cricket fan would support a county, other than that of his birth and upbringing.

I think this discussion about plastic fans and glory hunters is made redundant by the present make-up of the teams themselves. For example, how many players in the two Manchester teams actually come from Manchester? Danny Welbeck is from Moss Side, and Scholes is from Salford, but anyone else? Arsenal may have a lot of French players, but at least Walcott is English. Yesterday, Fulham fielded a side without a single English player in it, new Villa manager Paul Lambert is bringing in Dutch players, and new Swansea manager Michael Laudrup is bringing in Spanish players.

So, if the players no longer represent the community they claim to, then why should the supporters?

mikesiva wrote:I think this discussion about plastic fans and glory hunters is made redundant by the present make-up of the teams themselves. For example, how many players in the two Manchester teams actually come from Manchester? Danny Welbeck is from Moss Side, and Scholes is from Salford, but anyone else? Arsenal may have a lot of French players, but at least Walcott is English. Yesterday, Fulham fielded a side without a single English player in it, new Villa manager Paul Lambert is bringing in Dutch players, and new Swansea manager Michael Laudrup is bringing in Spanish players.

So, if the players no longer represent the community they claim to, then why should the supporters?

I am affiliated to four different countries through family and other reasons not to mention having gone to nearly 30 schools growing up so for me it's not an issue.I have no choice but to support whom ever for all sorts of various reasons and not because I'm from there. I'm really from no where in fact, and am a bit of a mungral in that sense.

I tend to support fighters more than anything, and teams with that spirit that says never say die. That's why I'm a huge fan of Nadal, United, and similar teams. Yes I support the New York Yankees, but have done so since 1976 when I watched Reggie Jackson go ballistic. from memory I started being a true supporter of United when Beckham started playing for them and I have supported Collingwood since 1982. Why I don't know.

yorker_129-7 wrote:Something which has been mulling over in my head for a while which I thought I would put out there to see if anyone agrees with me.

The accusation is often levelled at fans of big teams that they're one of the things mentioned in the title of the thread, especially if they were unlucky enough to have been born more recently than the last time the team they support was particularly bad. Mostly the accusation is that people should "support their local club" or the like. This might well have been a tenement which held true up to the mid-1990s, but I'm not sure it really holds water anymore.

Let me explain why I'm thinking this. In this multi-media, 24/7 football on TV world is it any wonder people support the clubs they hear mentioned a lot on the TV? Since the dawn of the Premier League era the top teams who are ever-present are undoubtedly some of the most famous sporting brands on the planet, and yes there can be no doubt some people support them for the reflected glory supporting a club which wins things brings. However, one thing this attitude does not breed is loyalty. Which is why the Manchester City rise is an interesting development, as, personally, an awful lot of Manchester City fans seem to be slowly emerging from the woodwork. Where were these people 15 years ago when they were in the 3rd Division I wonder? Well in at least three of the people I know who now profess to be City fans, supporting Liverpool actually.

With the smaller world we now undoubtedly live in (after all, I can now follow a cricket match in Australia as it happens on several different media types while conversing with people in India and South Africa about it) is the concept of "the local team" still a particularly valid one? Of course many people will still support the local club (especially if the local club is reasonably big), but where does this influence end. Should someone in Havant be supporting Havant & Waterlooville or could they legitimately claim to be a Portsmouth fan? And do you have to get a tape measure out in London to ensure you support the correct local club?

Cards on the table, I am a Manchester United fan living in Sussex. I support Manchester United because they were the team my mother (the sports fan in the family) supports (she grew up in the wake of the Munich air crash and as was rather swept along on the emotion of that), and so (like many others throughout history) I support the same team as my parent(s). The abuse I have received for this has been at times almost biblical from fans of other teams. It's made me wonder why, and the only reason I can conclude is that, on a subconscious level, they feel the need to get one over on the fans who end up supporting a team which is more successful than theirs. They might not win trophies, they might not play in a particularly high quality league, they might be an absolutely terrible team, but none of this matters because they think of themselves as somehow "purer" than the others. It's your badge to wear, while other fans are celebrating winning something or beating them, their success means less than your lack of it because they're all lesser fans than yourself.

There's a good reason why I feel this is the case. Let me put it this way. If someone lives and has always lived in Exeter, but they support York City, are they a "glory hunter"? If someone lives in London and, despite having no connection to Spain, supports Rayo Valladolid, are they? It's funny how the accusation only ever seems to be levelled at people who support successful teams (and I limit this not just to United but also to Chelsea, Liverpool, Arsenal, Tottenham or any of the other teams which are Premier League regulars).

I believe, though, for the reasons mentioned above that the key to being what many of these people refer to as a "true fan" is not how near the ground is to where you live / were born but the club to which you feel the most loyalty. I'm proud of being a Manchester United fan for many reasons which do not cover winning things. I'm continuing the family line. They were the first team I ever watched play live. That they win things is merely a (very pleasant) sideshow.

Which brings me back to the Manchester City reference earlier. The ex-Liverpool fans who now proclaim themselves as City fans are the real "plastics" in this, in my opinion. So seeing people like me who have only ever supported the one team being put in this category can be quite galling.

Anyway, that's my point for debate, it'll be interesting to hear what any of you have to think about it (and with a long old gap with not much beyond the play-offs and Champions League final for a month or so God we need something to talk about).

Interesting topic there Yorker

I suppose anyone who hails from Havant can legitimately claim to support Portsmouth FC as non league football is culturally different to that of League Football, maybe those from Havant do attend the odd H&W game a year.

If someone living in Exeter supports York City, chances are that someone has roots in York and still make the pilgrimage to Bootham Crescent or nearby away games. Believe it or not there are folk who live in the South who support Northern football teams. Went to Watford to follow Bradford City in the FA Cup this, a good percentage of Bradford support were Londoners and had the accent.

Distance isn't really an object about supporting a football team. It's making the effort to travel to a game, partaking in the social aspect with fellow fans and lending your support to a team who are there alongside, sharing and exchanging various emotions before, during and after the game.

Dilbert wrote:My opinion is not footie related, but I felt I can contribute my 2 cents here...

I support the Mumbai Indians in IPL, although my hometown is Pune. Reason? Sachin Tendulkar. So maybe some far away fans support a particular club because they like particular players in a side?

Cant really call me a "Plastic fan" now... Mumbai has not won the IPL even once...

I started supporting Barcelona because of Patrick Kluivert did not even know they were one of the better clubs in Spain. Loved him at Ajax and followed him to Barca. Liked Arsenal because some of their players came over and really enjoyed thier passing game. Now I love Arsenal.

Some folks would just rather a particular team win because of their dislike for another. The physical education coach at my school supports all who play against Barca because he doesnt like them and I feel the same way when Real Madrid is playing in the UCL.

My allegiance to a football team is different from how I feel about my two favourite sports...cricket and athletics. I support the West Indies cricketers, Caribbean athletes in the sprints, and British athletes in the other events. I don't feel any pain when Man Utd lose, but I do feel pain when the Windies, Veronica Campbell-Brown and Phillips Idowu are beaten.

And in the past year, I have questioned my support for Man Utd, especially since I did my research and found out that my family traditionally supported Arsenal. My wife and kids support Arsenal, and I don't feel any ties to Man Utd in particular, so it would be very easy, I suppose, for me to switch my support to another football team.

But I would never change my support in the field of cricket and athletics....

Switching allegience from one team to another = treason, in my book. When you've shed tears for a team, that's it. It's like a marriage without divorce. A team will break your heart on many occasions, but you stick with them, through thick and thin. Turn coats, or fair weather supporters are not fair dinkum. It doesn't happen in the AFL, because it's considered un-Australian.

I'm afraid I have to agree there. Support whatever club you most want to, but once you've made your bed you have to lie in it.

The way to think about is this. If you have a doubt and wonder whether you should support a different club, think about how you would feel if the "new" club were to thrash the "old" club 5-0 at the home of the old club. If the feeling is anything other than sheer, unmitigated delight then you have your answer.