Booing is and always will be tin-pot

[nutty nigel 7,509]

Who knows why the people booed. Maybe there was a whole range of reasons/targets. But ultimately the players were on the pitch where the boos were directed so would surely assume it was them?

These are the players we need to keep us in this league. The transfer window is shut and the money spent. For me booing these players is probably not the most supportive thing we could do.

But each to their own.

 

[BigGrantsTash 70]

So is continually getting relegated after just one season tbf.

[shefcanary 2,385]

And there we have it.  Even Farke says the fans that booed on Saturday had every reason to boo!  He even said he was "booing inside".  Right you guys who call it tinpot how do you reconcile that?

[Badger 2,405]

4 minutes ago, shefcanary said:

And there we have it.  Even Farke says the fans that booed on Saturday had every reason to boo!  He even said he was "booing inside".  Right you guys who call it tinpot how do you reconcile that?

1. It doesn't help 

2. It isn't supportive (unless you are Monty and King Canary who have a concept of "supportive booing.")

3. It damages confidence

4. It was accompanied by threatening behaviour by some of the protagonists

[nutty nigel 7,509]

7 minutes ago, shefcanary said:

And there we have it.  Even Farke says the fans that booed on Saturday had every reason to boo!  He even said he was "booing inside".  Right you guys who call it tinpot how do you reconcile that?

I reckon those who booed agree with Farke.

I reckon those who stifled their boos agree with Farke.

I reckon those who clapped have some explaining to do.

Which are you?

[shefcanary 2,385]

1 minute ago, nutty nigel said:

I reckon those who booed agree with Farke.

I reckon those who stifled their boos agree with Farke.

I reckon those who clapped have some explaining to do.

Which are you?

I've not asked for Farke's head, just asked for something to change and quick. The people that booed have done so and clearly made it known that from that part of the fanbase any more inept defensive displays against teams we need to be beating will not be tolerated or swept under the carpet.  500 out of 27K indeed. 

And how many were in the stadium at that point (less than 13,000 i'd warrant), that also speaks volumes - is that tinpot too? I mean there is always a chance in injury time in any match to snatch a goal (it only takes a second quoth Clough) so those who stayed were more of a supporter than the early leavers?

Football, its all about opinions and how you express them, n'est-ce pas?

[nutty nigel 7,509]

2 minutes ago, shefcanary said:

I've not asked for Farke's head, just asked for something to change and quick. The people that booed have done so and clearly made it known that from that part of the fanbase any more inept defensive displays against teams we need to be beating will not be tolerated or swept under the carpet.  500 out of 27K indeed. 

And how many were in the stadium at that point (less than 13,000 i'd warrant), that also speaks volumes - is that tinpot too? I mean there is always a chance in injury time in any match to snatch a goal (it only takes a second quoth Clough) so those who stayed were more of a supporter than the early leavers?

Football, its all about opinions and how you express them, n'est-ce pas?

How is that a reply to my post. Did you quote me by accident?

[shefcanary 2,385]

8 minutes ago, nutty nigel said:

How is that a reply to my post. Did you quote me by accident?

You're right, think i rushed things on the phone, just a general comment. 

It's confusion all round.  It's what happens when the cracks appear.  

[nutty nigel 7,509]

1 minute ago, shefcanary said:

You're right, think i rushed things on the phone, just a general comment. 

It's confusion all round.  It's what happens when the cracks appear.  

Ain't that the truth 👍

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

Fact is, those who booed were at the game and probably go to every game so they are no better or worse than anyone else.

Maybe the expectations are too high or level of disappointment is even higher.

[Badger 2,405]

23 minutes ago, shefcanary said:

clearly made it known that from that part of the fanbase that any more inept defensive displays against teams we need to be beating will not be tolerated

I hope the matter doesn't arise, but if you won't tolerate it, what will you do? You have already booed and tried to undermine the player's confidence - as a warning.

What will you do next as proof that it won't be tolerated - what actions do you have in mind? Or is it just hot air?

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

Must admit the worst I ever did was shout out to Nigel Worthington "its not bleddy working Nigel" after watching us get hammered at Plymouth Argyle in 2006.

[nutty nigel 7,509]

4 minutes ago, keelansgrandad said:

Must admit the worst I ever did was shout out to Nigel Worthington "its not bleddy working Nigel" after watching us get hammered at Plymouth Argyle in 2006.

I was at Plymouth in 2006. A few weeks earlier I was at Torquay. Two long pokes that's for sure. Used to meet City fans who you didn't see at other away games. Maybe I met you POPs.

Do you remember the big old boy with the Plymouth fans near by? One of the funniest exchanges of banter I've witnessed🙃

 

[Badger 2,405]

5 minutes ago, nutty nigel said:

A few weeks earlier I was at Torquay.

Was it on a bank holiday weekend? I think I tried to go to this game. I left early and like a fool decided to go North round the M25; got fed up with perpetual queues, so double foolishly decided to take the M4. I got held up again in Bristol before eventually deciding that I wasn't going to make it even for the second half, so turned around and went home. I couldn't even get a commentary.

[Monty13 2,229]

9 hours ago, Badger said:

 

You’ve got yourself so tangled in knots I don’t know where to start.

Is usually customary to debate what people say not what you said they did.

I never said Saturdays booing was well thought out constructive criticism.

I never said that being critical of the BK8 deal and booing Saturday was the same, I was using it as an example of how Supporters can be critical and still be Supporters, despite your declaration they can’t.

I never said those booing wanted the management gone, only they were well within their rights to let them know how they feel.

I also never said the booing was supportive, I said under your rather bizarre self interpretation of what a supporter is allowed to do letting the management team know they are unhappy can be viewed as allowable.

Let me just remind you the only thing I took umbrage with was your declaration that it is fact those that boo are not supporters.

And finally no I would not boo people taking the knee and my opinion on that is my own, you were welcome to ask rather than make a baseless assumption about me that I find incredibly offensive. You know nothing about me.

In a few comments however I’ve learnt you are a thoroughly detestable person who will go one hell of a mile to not admit to being wrong about something. Mistake I won’t waste any more time on.

[nutty nigel 7,509]

1 hour ago, Badger said:

Was it on a bank holiday weekend? I think I tried to go to this game. I left early and like a fool decided to go North round the M25; got fed up with perpetual queues, so double foolishly decided to take the M4. I got held up again in Bristol before eventually deciding that I wasn't going to make it even for the second half, so turned around and went home. I couldn't even get a commentary.

The one I went to was a Tuesday evening cup game.

In 2009 I did Yeovil and Exeter within days of each other. Exeter may well have been bank holiday weekend👍

[TIL 1010 4,722]

2 hours ago, Badger said:

1. It doesn't help 

2. It isn't supportive (unless you are Monty and King Canary who have a concept of "supportive booing.")

3. It damages confidence

4. It was accompanied by threatening behaviour by some of the protagonists

Threatening behaviour by some of the protagonists needs explaining Badger.

[horsefly 4,287]

2 hours ago, Badger said:

1. It doesn't help 

2. It isn't supportive (unless you are Monty and King Canary who have a concept of "supportive booing.")

3. It damages confidence

4. It was accompanied by threatening behaviour by some of the protagonists

Spot on Badger! I'm sure there wasn't a single City fan that wasn't disappointed by the result. How, and if at all, one vents that disappointment is really what is at question. If the players had downed tools and not put in a genuine effort then I could understand fans wanting to boo, however, that clearly wasn't what happened. Farke's very considered response was typical of his intelligent and constructive management of a rather toxic situation. Of course fans have a right to boo if they so wish, it's just that it is hard to see how that is supposed to encourage the players to perform better. Is a young player likely to perform better if he thinks the fans are fully behind him, or is he likely to be more prone to error in fear that 26,000 fans are waiting to rip him to shreds at the first sign of a mistake? This is a very new and young team, and it surely isn't too much to ask that the fans support them constructively while it is evident that they are putting in the effort to improve their performance.

[Badger 2,405]

11 minutes ago, TIL 1010 said:

Threatening behaviour by some of the protagonists needs explaining Badger.

In the Snakepit there were several episodes of people taking offence and being challenged in response, fingers pointed, being held back by friends etc as he made to come as he left the terraces.

A group of people who clapped some of the players in response to one person boing very loudly were rounded on aggressively and told that they were "effing morons for clapping that." One bloke near the front got very upset at something that was said to him and kept shouting that "there are children here" or "you've got your child with you." 

Aggressive and threatening but I think as far as I could see that nothing physical actually happened. I'm sure that you will have seen the type of thing before. I think that at least one got reported to a steward, not by me, so whether anything will happen I don't know.

[lake district canary 4,531]

48 minutes ago, Badger said:

In the Snakepit there were several episodes of people taking offence and being challenged in response, fingers pointed, being held back by friends etc as he made to come as he left the terraces.

A group of people who clapped some of the players in response to one person boing very loudly were rounded on aggressively and told that they were "effing morons for clapping that." One bloke near the front got very upset at something that was said to him and kept shouting that "there are children here" or "you've got your child with you." 

Aggressive and threatening but I think as far as I could see that nothing physical actually happened. I'm sure that you will have seen the type of thing before. I think that at least one got reported to a steward, not by me, so whether anything will happen I don't know.

Too much anger and frustration is not a good thing and for some people the football is an outlet for their emotions - highs and lows - and anger and frustration happen in football as a matter of course, as well as great joy when things are going well - but if people are getting angry to the point of getting aggressive with others, that is not good and is totally unecessary

Edited September 20, 2021 by lake district canary

[Badger 2,405]

53 minutes ago, Monty13 said:

🤦‍♂️Is usually customary to debate what people say not what you said they did.

1. I never said Saturdays booing was well thought out constructive criticism.

So you didn't say the following?

20 hours ago, Monty13 said:

People booing yesterday obviously think doing so sends a message that they hope sees improvement,

You said that it was thought out (think) and "a message" that they hope sees improvement. Well, I'm sorry it was not as considered as you seem to think!

2. I never said those booing wanted the management gone, only they were well within their rights to let them know how they feel.

So what did you mean by this, then

21 hours ago, Monty13 said:

People booed Hughton and in my opinion they were right to, whether it’s right now to boo the current management setup is entirely subjective.

21 hours ago, Monty13 said:

My assumption was the boos were directed at the manager and Webber/board

3.  I also never said the booing was supportive,

So you didn't say this either that the "people booing yesterday" "were being supportive from their viewpoint."

21 hours ago, Monty13 said:

People booing yesterday obviously think doing so sends a message that they hope sees improvement, therefore your definition of supportive from their viewpoint.

4.  Let me just remind you the only thing I took umbrage with was your declaration that it is fact those that boo are not supporters.

It is simply a statement of fact. Supporters support, they don't undermine. It is a simple question of language no matter how tortuously you try to redefine the meaning.

Farke says that you are within your rights to boo, and of course you are but he also said that it was unhelpul and suggested that it damaged confidence. So, please explain how this fits into your definition of supportive?

5. And finally no I would not boo people taking the knee and my opinion on that is my own, you were welcome to ask rather than make a baseless assumption about me that I find incredibly offensive. You know nothing about me.

It is not a baseless assumption, those that booed loudest during the taking of the knee were also prominent booers later. If you didn't, I am happy to apologise.

6.  In a few comments however I’ve learnt you are a thoroughly detestable person who will go one hell of a mile to not admit to being wrong about something. Mistake I won’t waste any more time on.

I'm worse than a thoroughly detestable person, my wife and I and a section of us who clapped at the end are "effing morons" apparently, according to one of the booers who objected to our actions.

I think that it is pretty clear from the evidence provided above that it is you who is unable to admit to error, especially as I have already modified my position within the thread.

You didn't for example say this either,

On 19/09/2021 at 19:02, Monty13 said:

In my opinion that criticism should wait until after the whistle has gone and the team is no longer playing, which people did. Your opinion obviously differs, but it’s just an opinion.

 

On 19/09/2021 at 17:47, Monty13 said:

One boo, especially after the whistle is blown, doesn’t suddenly strip you of being one

Either you weren't at the game or you are trying to dissemble again - anybody there will have heard boos before this, especially when the substitutions were made.

I don't expect that you will reply because your false indignation has been called out and you denials shown to be misleading. I really don't understand why people won't own their words or acknowledge error, especially when it is in a written format and the truth traced down. 

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

3 hours ago, nutty nigel said:

I was at Plymouth in 2006. A few weeks earlier I was at Torquay. Two long pokes that's for sure. Used to meet City fans who you didn't see at other away games. Maybe I met you POPs.

Do you remember the big old boy with the Plymouth fans near by? One of the funniest exchanges of banter I've witnessed🙃

 

Yes, you had a good old round trip Double N. I was at the Torquay game as well. If you were in their bar before the game, I must have met you. And that was a midweek game. Whatever time did you get home?

I don't remember the big old boy incident. Was it inside or outside the ground?

We used to drink in the Britannia at Argyle and many of the City lads were there. Some used to meet at the Walkabout in the centre of the city.

[Monty13 2,229]

2 hours ago, Monty13 said:

🤦‍♂️Is usually customary to debate what people say not what you said they did.

1. I never said Saturdays booing was well thought out constructive criticism.

So you didn't say the following?

21 hours ago, Monty13 said:

People booing yesterday obviously think doing so sends a message that they hope sees improvement,

You said that it was thought out (think) and "a message" that they hope sees improvement. Well, I'm sorry it was not as considered as you seem to think!

No I said they "think". Think is a word with multifaceted meanings depending on context. In this context I was using the definition of think " to have a particular opinion, belief, or idea about someone or something." There is no implicit meaning to the word think that it implies "well thought out" like you have said. Once again I never said it was well thought out constructive criticism.

2 hours ago, Monty13 said:

2. I never said those booing wanted the management gone, only they were well within their rights to let them know how they feel.

So what did you mean by this, then

21 hours ago, Monty13 said:

People booed Hughton and in my opinion they were right to, whether it’s right now to boo the current management setup is entirely subjective.

21 hours ago, Monty13 said:

My assumption was the boos were directed at the manager and Webber/board

I meant exactly what I said. Booing the result and therefore the management of the team/club is not necessarily a call for someones removal, its a call for action. I don't think for a second everyone who booed wants Farke gone and I don't see any evidence of that unless you can provide it.

3.  I also never said the booing was supportive,

So you didn't say this either that the "people booing yesterday" "were being supportive from their viewpoint."

21 hours ago, Monty13 said:

People booing yesterday obviously think doing so sends a message that they hope sees improvement, therefore your definition of supportive from their viewpoint.

Again you've quoted me and I meant exactly what I said. You've cut what I said to the points you want and either not read or ignored the part in the middle. The booing itself is not supportive. The message they are unhappy and want change can be viewed as being supportive by the way that you have outlined how a supporter can be critical, just as being vocally critical of the club about the BK8 deal wasn't a supportive action in itself but it lead to a positive change (in yours, and as it happens mine as well, opinion).

4.  Let me just remind you the only thing I took umbrage with was your declaration that it is fact those that boo are not supporters.

It is simply a statement of fact. Supporters support, they don't undermine. It is a simple question of language no matter how tortuously you try to redefine the meaning.

Farke says that you are within your rights to boo, and of course you are but he also said that it was unhelpul and suggested that it damaged confidence. So, please explain how this fits into your definition of supportive?

You are back to a semantic argument of what it means to be a football supporter. You are declaring that the word supporter means X therefore a football supporter must support at all times or they are not a supporter, even though you've then contradicted yourself by saying you can be critical at times when you deem that it is necessary. That's therefore subjective. There is also nothing in the definition of the word supporter that implies it is universal, free of any feedback or unconditional anyway.

5. And finally no I would not boo people taking the knee and my opinion on that is my own, you were welcome to ask rather than make a baseless assumption about me that I find incredibly offensive. You know nothing about me.

It is not a baseless assumption, those that booed loudest during the taking of the knee were also prominent booers later. If you didn't, I am happy to apologise.

And when did I offer support to those that booed the loudest or that booed any other action? All I said was one boo at the final whistle does not strip you of being a supporter whether you like it or not. Your attack was baseless and uncalled for.

6.  In a few comments however I’ve learnt you are a thoroughly detestable person who will go one hell of a mile to not admit to being wrong about something. Mistake I won’t waste any more time on.

I'm worse than a thoroughly detestable person, my wife and I and a section of us who clapped at the end are "effing morons" apparently, according to one of the booers who objected to our actions.

Well that individual is a moron, not sure what that's got to do with me or anything I have said. It sounds like just as you view those booing are running on a massive amount of emotion, you are too, which to be fair is understandable if that happened to you. But i didn't say that and neither did everyone else who booed.

I think that it is pretty clear from the evidence provided above that it is you who is unable to admit to error, especially as I have already modified my position within the thread.

You didn't for example say this either,

On 19/09/2021 at 19:02, Monty13 said:

In my opinion that criticism should wait until after the whistle has gone and the team is no longer playing, which people did. Your opinion obviously differs, but it’s just an opinion.

 

On 19/09/2021 at 17:47, Monty13 said:

One boo, especially after the whistle is blown, doesn’t suddenly strip you of being one

Either you weren't at the game or you are trying to dissemble again - anybody there will have heard boos before this, especially when the substitutions were made.

The booing at the final whistle was much louder than any during the substitutions. Ergo many more people booed one than the other. I never offered any support of booing the substitutions, in fact I clearly stated my position and you've quoted it. I have at no point put forward a universal approval of booing, quite the opposite in fact.

I don't expect that you will reply because your false indignation has been called out and you denials shown to be misleading.

I personally don't think its false indignation when someone basically baselessly calls you a racist thug out of nowhere for daring to have a different opinion. You say you've modified your opinion, good I suppose, but you've not acknowledged that to me before an kept quoting me and taking digs at a position I've not put forward. A lot of people just insulted you, I took the time to actually debate with you.

I really don't understand why people won't own their words or acknowledge error, especially when it is in a written format and the truth traced down.

I'm quite happy to own my words, can you stop twisting them to suit your view of what I'm saying?

[Jimmy Raggatip 59]

I've often thought that booing is strange

 

do you boo stuff in daily life?

Mrs comes home "the cars failed its MOT" and you're stood there BOOOOOOOO with two thumbs down

[Badger 2,405]

13 hours ago, nutty nigel said:

The one I went to was a Tuesday evening cup game.

In 2009 I did Yeovil and Exeter within days of each other. Exeter may well have been bank holiday weekend

Thanks, it certainly wasn't a midweek game that I went to, so perhaps it was Exeter then? I don't suppose I'll ever now🥴

[Jim Smith 2,314]

Ever since ive been going fans have booed at the final whistle when we’ve lost. Sometimes it used to happen at half time. 
 

nobody is booing individual players. Farke may well think it’s not helpful but tough sh*t frankly. We all know the club (although not normally him) are incredibly precious and can’t take any kind of criticism, aided by the almost cult like faction of our following who think any kind of questioning or criticism of what anyone at the club is doing is akin to blasphemy. thankfully that element seems to be diminishing a bit of late. 

[Badger 2,405]

13 hours ago, Monty13 said:

Is usually customary to debate what people say not what you said they did.

The trouble is Monty, you deny you said something and when I prove that you did, you respond with further invention.

You said fans only booed at the end, when I pointed out that they booed earlier (the substitutions for example) you said that they booed louder at the end, as if that means the same as only booing at the end. You say I misquoted you but I didn't - there are numerous other examples, which I have given above.

Secondly, you say you want to debate "what people say" and then go on to say that I called you "a racist thug!" Where - this is pure invention?

 

11 hours ago, Monty13 said:

basically baselessly calls you a racist thug

To be honest, you have contradicted what you have said so many times I don't know what your point is and whether you disagree with me at all?

In the spirit of debating "what people say," I will summarize again my views and you tell me if you disagree. I think that my views have been consistent although I did give ground to one point where I could see the justification in very limited circumstances (and certainly not those that applied to most people on Saturday).

[Midlands Yellow 3,934]

15 hours ago, Badger said:

Was it on a bank holiday weekend? I think I tried to go to this game. I left early and like a fool decided to go North round the M25; got fed up with perpetual queues, so double foolishly decided to take the M4. I got held up again in Bristol before eventually deciding that I wasn't going to make it even for the second half, so turned around and went home. I couldn't even get a commentary

Torquay United v Norwich City, 23 August 2006

Score	2-0 to Norwich City
Referee	Steve Tanner
Competition	League Cup 1st round
Venue	Plainmoor, Torquay
Attendance	3,100

Plymouth Argyle v Norwich City, 23 September 2006

 

 

Score	3-1 to Plymouth Argyle
Referee	Jarnail Singh
Competition	League Championship
Venue	Home Park
Attendance	11,813

[Badger 2,405]

14 hours ago, Monty13 said:

Is usually customary to debate what people say not what you said they did.

As promised a summary:

1. People who boo are not being "supportive;" they are not "supporting" and not behaving like "supporters." I can't help what the word means - supporters support: it is not an opinion, it is fact.

2. Ricardo cited an extreme example which I accepted as an exception in very limited circumstances, aware as I stated at the time that others would falsely use this as justification.

3. Booing does not have a higher moral purpose: it is not helpful, it is damaging. Posters have suggested that it will get the players or manager to "buck up their ideas" - I think this is nonsense. I don't think Farke or the players think, "I'd better try next time, or I might get booed" - I think the argument is silly.

4. On the contrary, I think booing is damaging: it damages player confidence, particularly worrying for a team like us that has so many young players. I can recall even Steven Gerrard saying it affected Liverpool players when Roy Hodgson was being booed by Liverpool customers.

5. The booing on Saturday was at times aggressive and intimidating: not by all, but by enough to make it unpleasant. There were several heated arguments, people having to be "held back" and what looked like threatening behaviour - I'm sure you know the sort of male rutting stuff. As my wife said "Why do men behave like that?" (Particularly in relation to a man who got a mouthful for reminding someone that there were children there.) I don't think that this is acceptable but have been accused of "pearl clutching" for this because football is emotional and that perhaps I would be better off at the theatre. Is that what we want football to become (again)?

6. In conclusion, I can't think of a single good thing that came out of Saturday's booing and can think of several bad things. I do not think the people who booed were anymore more disappointed than those who didn't, they just responded in a way that I think is damaging rather than helpful.

I sorry if this offends anybody, but I can't for the life of me, see what's objectionable about it.

[Badger 2,405]

14 minutes ago, Midlands Yellow said:

 

Thanks MY. I think I got muddled - I definitely wouldn't have been able to make that sort of journey for a midweek game (unless I stayed in the area overnight, which I didn't).

Edited September 21, 2021 by Badger