Football 16-17

[TheGayTent]

10 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

while i don't disagree that disposable income is in the mix, i'd say it's about more than just that with that age-group - it's as much about where they might spend the disposable income they have as it might be a lack of disposable income.

That's the age group that most "going out" options are targeted towards, and a wild night with your mates is likely to have greater attractions than footie which is (compared to other options) less about the socialising and more about the watching.

For that age group in today's world, I reckon footie is always going to come out as second to most folk against the other options, particularly when the ability to follow at match as it happens or to watch it (or highlights) afterwards is so easy now.

Agree to an extent, but think you're downplaying the social aspect of it. For many, the social aspect is the only thing that keeps them going.

That's being lost because kids these days don't get the social thing to start with to subsequently miss. 

Like most things there's many reasons. There's not just a lack of groups of young adults compared to years gone by. The demographics within football grounds up and down the country has changed drastically in the last 20 years. 

[mjsell]

40 minutes ago, TheGayTent said:

The missing generation for me are the 17-30 age range. Too old to qualify for kids prices, too young and not mature enough career wise to have the disposable income needed to afford adult prices. 

You used to get groups of older teenagers/early 20 something's going together to games. That's what I don't see much of anymore. 

 

21 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

while i don't disagree that disposable income is in the mix, i'd say it's about more than just that with that age-group - it's as much about where they might spend the disposable income they have as it might be a lack of disposable income.

That's the age group that most "going out" options are targeted towards, and a wild night with your mates is likely to have greater attractions than footie which is (compared to other options) less about the socialising and more about the watching.

For that age group in today's world, I reckon footie is always going to come out as second to most folk against the other options, particularly when the ability to follow at match as it happens or to watch it (or highlights) afterwards is so easy now.

I fit into that age bracket, and from personal experience (again have to take into consideration I support the most expensive club in the country) would pretty much agree with those sentiments.

I cannot justify spending 40/50 quid every week. So have to settle for going on a less regular basis - a good mate shares two season tickets between him and his parents, so offers me a seat when they aren't free (probably works out to be once every 6 weeks or so) .

What with a desire to keep attending music and various other events with mates, as well as girlfriend expenses (unable to drive atm so cost of train fares are eating into my spending) going to the football is not top of my list in priorities. And your point about the social side of things TGT is fairly accurate too - mainly because not many of my Arsenal supporting mates can afford to go either, so when I do attend, theres generally only 3 or 4 of us around to meet up in a pub beforehand/after. 

Edited November 29, 2016 by mjsell

[big__phil]

33 minutes ago, TheGayTent said:

Interesting as that's not my experience at all over the last decade. I think there's a lot of clubs that do offer decent kids prices and I've seen youngsters all over the country. Pretty confident that the numbers of kids at games now is much much higher than it was in the 80s for example.

The missing generation for me are the 17-30 age range. Too old to qualify for kids prices, too young and not mature enough career wise to have the disposable income needed to afford adult prices. 

You used to get groups of older teenagers/early 20 something's going together to games. That's what I don't see much of anymore. 

Yeah I think I'd agree with this, although I'd be interested to hear from people who grew up next to lower league clubs. Going to watch The Prem is a very expensive hobby these days, whereas I can watch Gloucester City for £12.

The reason I don't watch Gloucester more is usually because, like eFests says, I'd rather go to a gig/weekend away/other social event somewhere. That being said, if I did have a group of mates who went often I'd probably make more of an effort.

[eFestivals]

13 minutes ago, TheGayTent said:

Agree to an extent, but think you're downplaying the social aspect of it. For many, the social aspect is the only thing that keeps them going.

That's being lost because kids these days don't get the social thing to start with to subsequently miss. 

Like most things there's many reasons. There's not just a lack of groups of young adults compared to years gone by. The demographics within football grounds up and down the country has changed drastically in the last 20 years. 

I get exactly what you mean, but I was meaning the social aspect for a group of mates who don't currently go, rather than those who already do.

There's a bunch of mates, where some or all might half-fancy the footie - but compared to other things they might do together with their limited spending money, the footie doesn't rank particularly highly for being 'social' (in the way that an afternoon in the pub might do, as a fairly extreme example).

In today's world, I don't think footie is ever going to be particularly attractive to enticing new people from that age group into coming, because it's always going to be at the expense of doing something else, and the greater social aspects (to their minds, at least) of other things are going to see those other things beat footie for the thing to do.

(they'll always be exceptions, of course)

[TheGayTent]

24 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

I get exactly what you mean, but I was meaning the social aspect for a group of mates who don't currently go, rather than those who already do.

There's a bunch of mates, where some or all might half-fancy the footie - but compared to other things they might do together with their limited spending money, the footie doesn't rank particularly highly for being 'social' (in the way that an afternoon in the pub might do, as a fairly extreme example).

In today's world, I don't think footie is ever going to be particularly attractive to enticing new people from that age group into coming, because it's always going to be at the expense of doing something else, and the greater social aspects (to their minds, at least) of other things are going to see those other things beat footie for the thing to do.

(they'll always be exceptions, of course)

Largely talking around the same point I think?

For many people football did and still does revolve around beers before, during, and after a game. 

In years gone by, people who weren't perhaps taken as a child by family members, were enticed by friends to come along - by the whole pre match pub beers/football/post match pub beers - social aspect of going to a game. As well as the enjoyment of football and the sense of identity many get out of it. 

Now instead of pub/football/pub, it's more like pub/pub/pub. Why? 

I do think the price of football has had a big effect. Looking at this:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2027320/Football-matchday-ticket-prices-soar-1-000-2-decades.html

It suggests you could see Man Utd in 1989 for £3.50. In 1989 price of a pint was? According to this:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/7937042/Beer-prices-to-surge.html

£1.08. So going to the game cost just over 3 pints of beer. 

Nowadays the cheapest ticket at Man Utd and the price of a pint is? I don't know, perhaps one of our resident Man Utd supporters can tell us, but I'd bet my mortgage on you not being able to get a bog standard premier league game ticket at Old Trafford for 3 times the price of a pint....

[zahidf]

Halfway down the page, my letter about afc wimbledon's season

http://www.football365.com/news/mails-im-a-man-united-fan-and-im-not-worried

[mjsell]

52 minutes ago, TheGayTent said:

Now instead of pub/football/pub, it's more like pub/pub/pub. Why? 

I do think the price of football has had a big effect. Looking at this:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2027320/Football-matchday-ticket-prices-soar-1-000-2-decades.html

It suggests you could see Man Utd in 1989 for £3.50. In 1989 price of a pint was? According to this:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/7937042/Beer-prices-to-surge.html

£1.08. So going to the game cost just over 3 pints of beer. 

Nowadays the cheapest ticket at Man Utd and the price of a pint is? I don't know, perhaps one of our resident Man Utd supporters can tell us, but I'd bet my mortgage on you not being able to get a bog standard premier league game ticket at Old Trafford for 3 times the price of a pint....

I genuinely think this is a great way of looking at it.

Do we think that there will eventually be a cliff edge for football in England where it's popularity suddenly dives or is this a product that will only continue to increase in price and keep enough of a fan base to make that viable?

 

[big__phil]

1 hour ago, mjsell said:

I genuinely think this is a great way of looking at it.

Do we think that there will eventually be a cliff edge for football in England where it's popularity suddenly dives or is this a product that will only continue to increase in price and keep enough of a fan base to make that viable?

 

Nope, not in the Premier League anyway. Match day incomes are tiny compared to TV deals, sponsorship etc. I think the (big) Premier League clubs would be more worried if there were empty seats visible on TV, as it makes their 'brand' seem weaker.

Largely speaking though, most of the big clubs can treat their fans in whatever way they want, because there will always be another punter who will take their seat. You only have to look at the amount of 'football tourists' these days (of which I have to include myself), with many locals starting to be priced out.

[eFestivals]

10 minutes ago, big__phil said:

the amount of 'football tourists' these days

Hmmmm. 

There's a book I read well over a decade ago now, which said (via research that had been done) back then that the churn rate in football sometime before the book was published - so more likely to be 90s than 2000's - was hugely high. It was something like 50% of fans at any match will no longer be attending football 2 years later.

 

[pink_triangle]

I once hoped that fans who couldn't afford the inflated premiership fees would filter down to the lower leagues.

Unfortunately (I write this having paid £18 to sit in a freezing cold Lincoln ground) the lower league clubs survive on loyal  fans overpaying for the football, something a neutral probably won't do. The trouble is a team like wrexham or Lincoln could half ticket prices, but it wouldn't double attendances.

[zahidf]

 

[eFestivals]

Watched the game last night. Ronaldo Viera?

Talk about collecting players names. He also has a brother called Romario (unless the commentators were taking the piss?).

And talking of name, I just read elsewhere about a club called the tory dildos. I wonder who that is?
(it might not be new but it's the first time I've seen that, and it made me laugh)

 

[LJS]

Hey #comfortablynumb, I see the spiders are visiting the honest men in the next round of the Scottish Cup. Thinking I'll make a wee trip doon the watter. Maybe catch you for a pre-match beer?

[zahidf]

 

[The Nal]

7 minutes ago, zahidf said:

 

"I don't use PR people to run my social account..... but I do when I fuck up".

[eFestivals]

30 minutes ago, zahidf said:

 

What Bristow said was wrong, and it's fair to take a shot at him for it.

But quite why he should be vilified by you for being big enough to say he did wrong, I'm not sure.

Care to tell me?

 

[zahidf]

54 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

What Bristow said was wrong, and it's fair to take a shot at him for it.

But quite why he should be vilified by you for being big enough to say he did wrong, I'm not sure.

Care to tell me?

 

Im not sure how tweeting “Dart players tough guys footballers wimps," and “U got to sought him out when u get older or don’t look in the mirror glad I am a dart player proper men.” is supposed to encourage more abuse victims to come forward. So i dont really buy his explanation or apology as 100% sincere

[eFestivals]

25 minutes ago, zahidf said:

Im not sure how tweeting “Dart players tough guys footballers wimps," and “U got to sought him out when u get older or don’t look in the mirror glad I am a dart player proper men.” is supposed to encourage more abuse victims to come forward. So i dont really buy his explanation or apology as 100% sincere

the guys clearly a moron, and he's trying to defend himself being a moron while owning up to being that moron. If people like you won't accept people like him owning up to being a moron, guess what they'll be doing instead?

it's not like you're perfect with the things you've chosen to spread to the world, but Bristow is a better man than you because he's at least prepared to also say to the world he was wrong. 

[big__phil]

43 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

the guys clearly a moron, and he's trying to defend himself being a moron while owning up to being that moron. If people like you won't accept people like him owning up to being a moron, guess what they'll be doing instead?

it's not like you're perfect with the things you've chosen to spread to the world, but Bristow is a better man than you because he's at least prepared to also say to the world he was wrong. 

...getting a bit personal there eFests.

Anyway, back to the football. Did L'pool deserve to win last night? I didn't see it.

Sounds like Southgate is going to get the nod today. Thank god the FA spent all that money on a 'panel' to come to that decision.

[eFestivals]

1 minute ago, big__phil said:

...getting a bit personal there eFests.

If someone says something on twitter it's the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, and it's to be spread far and wide only for the purposes of whipping up hate, and where contrition counts for nothing at all because damnation is forever. Hate is all there is.

I'd much rather not have to get personal towards him about this, but for all the while he's making it his mission (as he is currently) I'm going to be calling it out for what it is. 

 

7 minutes ago, big__phil said:

Anyway, back to the football. Did L'pool deserve to win last night? I didn't see it.

They did, tho they were far from stunning, and Leeds were well organised when sitting back and dangerous on the break. I'd like to see Gary Monk do well, and from what I saw last night I reckon he might take Leeds places (if the moron owner stops sacking people on a whim).

The crowd seemed to get a bit nervy that Liverpool couldn't score - they didn't shoot much either - tho the players didn't appear to panic and just kept at it which was good attitude. It was mostly a 'b' team too, with only three (I think) normal starters, and some very decent looking kids on display.

[big__phil]

9 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

They did, tho they were far from stunning, and Leeds were well organised when sitting back and dangerous on the break. I'd like to see Gary Monk do well, and from what I saw last night I reckon he might take Leeds places (if the moron owner stops sacking people on a whim).

The crowd seemed to get a bit nervy that Liverpool couldn't score - they didn't shoot much either - tho the players didn't appear to panic and just kept at it which was good attitude. It was mostly a 'b' team too, with only three (I think) normal starters, and some very decent looking kids on display.

Your comments may or may not be true, but let's keep this thread to football shall we?

Agree with you about Monk - he really came across as a broken man by the end of his Swansea run, which is a real shame considering how much he gave that club. Hopefully dropping down a league should help him get back on track. (Although as you say, he'll probably get sacked for wearing the wrong colour shoes or something.)

Arsenal v S'ton tonight. I don't mind really mind how we do (obviously want us to win but it's hardly top priority), just looking forward to some of the kids/fringe players getting a run out. Hopefully Lucas is fit enough to play and he gets the nod up front. I hear Southampton are going to be resting a few as well, so god knows how good a game it'll actually be.

Utd v W'Ham is the one of the box though. @TheGayTent - is Oxford going to play, or will he not rest players for this one?

Edited November 30, 2016 by big__phil

[TheGayTent]

Thought Liverpool just about deserved it by the end, but for 70 mins Leeds held their own and were probably unfortunate not to take the lead. Certainly Mignolet was the busier keeper. 

1-0 or 2-1 would have been a fairer reflection of the game. 

[zahidf]

On the game, also good that a youngster scored the second in his home debut. Always good to see!

On the other stuff, he acted like a moron and his PR/Manager has drafted a pretty non apology/apology because he got sacked by sky sports over it. 

 

On the other hand, there is little else to say about it now, as he wont apologise further, so that is that!

Also, i think calling sexual abuse victims is much worse than anything ive posted.

There is a pretty good owen jones article about it

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/29/eric-bristow-twitter-toxic-attitudes-stop-abuse-victims

 

And a terrible one from the spectator which basically says victims should stop whinging and get on with it! He seems to have missed the fact that speaking out about it is bringing more stories out in the open.

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/11/defence-eric-bristow/

[TheGayTent]

3 minutes ago, big__phil said:

Utd v W'Ham is the one of the box though. @TheGayTent - is Oxford going to play, or will he not rest players for this one?

I would be very shocked if Oxford plays. Bench at best. Can't see that changes until (if) he signs a new contract. 

We'll pick as strong a side as injuries and 3 games in a week allows. 

I have my thermal underwear ready. 

[big__phil]

2 minutes ago, TheGayTent said:

I would be very shocked if Oxford plays. Bench at best. Can't see that changes until (if) he signs a new contract. 

We'll pick as strong a side as injuries and 3 games in a week allows. 

I have my thermal underwear ready. 

In that case you've probably got a really good chance, with Utd sure to rest a few.

Where is it, your place?