Booing is and always will be tin-pot

[Badger 2,405]

11 minutes ago, Son Ova Gunn said:

Maybe ask Alex Ferguson, he seemed to have made a career out of shouting at players

Oh really?

Alex Ferguson said:

"Players who go on the football field and hear their own fans booing their own players is not the kind of encouragement they should be given. The new players who have come to the club, Park Ji-Sung and everyone, have said the same - 'I didn't expect this'.

"Manchester United as a club need to be united."

https://www.skysports.com/football/news/2342649/fergie-blasts-boo-boys

Edited September 21, 2021 by Badger
Removed excess spacing

[Mello Yello 2,289]

Maybe the players, staff etc should all stand in the centre circle at full-time and boo the remaining disgruntled support....Y'know, give as good as you get......

[hogesar 9,657]

19 minutes ago, Badger said:

Are you sure about this?

Steven Gerrard,

"“It was uncomfortable playing in the atmosphere under Roy. It felt tense and you could feel the players going into a shell. “You know yourself when you’re playing and the crowd are tense, getting on the players’ and team’s back, you don’t try something or you play it safe.

“That’s me talking as an experienced player and captain, so it probably had a bigger effect on other players."

 So it effects Steven Gerrard, an experienced international and many would say "a great," but you don't think it affects our young and inexperienced team!

The interview was before Gerrard became a manager.

Now that you know it negatively affects performance are you going to stop it or carry on anyway?

https://www.thisisanfield.com/2018/03/steven-gerrard-discusses-uncomfortable-period-liverpool-roy-hodgson/

For me Badger, the boo-ing at the end of the game, whilst not ideal and I didn't personally (or think it warranted it in all honesty) probably doesn't in itself have a negative effect on performance because the game has already gone. 

I did and still do take issue with the booing of substitutions which was the clearest example of brain-dead behaviour of the day (besides perhaps our defensive play at times!).

[BigFish 1,986]

2 hours ago, hogesar said:

I don't personally think, particularly in modern day social-media times, that the 'board' need to hear fans 'booing' to realise a performance was no good.

I certainly don't think Webber would have sat their after a 3-1 loss to Watford and thought "Oh, there wasn't loads of booing. We must have played really well!".

Equally, had our board acted in the way you'd like them to, we'd have sacked Farke after his first season, employed Rowett and probably be enjoying League One football.

Had we not done that, we'd have sacked Farke when we got relegated, or a few games into the Championship season, and possibly not have enjoyed a records point total and title last season.

Yep, pretty much this

[Jim Smith 2,317]

50 minutes ago, Badger said:

Do you really believe that he is not "have(ing) a good, hard look at what is going wrong?"

Do you honestly not think that he wants us to win just much as the fans do? Apart from anything else, it is his career. I'm sure he'd get a job if we sacked him, but equally I'm also sure that he would get a better one if he establishes us as a solid mid-table team.

I'm sorry Jim, but I don't see how it is possible to buy into the idea that he only wants to find a winning combination because a few fans boo at the end!

Course it won’t be the only reason but he is under some pressure now. He was able to lose 10 consecutive games last time without any real pressure because there were no fans in the ground. Farke is stubborn and doesn’t like to move away from his principles. I think he needs to here and if a bit of stick from the fans hastens action then I don’t see it as a bad thing. He has a blind spot when it comes to defending but hopefully now he can’t ignore it. 

[Monty13 2,231]

4 hours ago, Badger said:

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

But you didn’t prove, I pointed out in detail how you were twisting what I said. If you’re interested in actual honest debate and not “winning” you wouldn’t do that.

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.

Please show me where I have said fans only booed at the end? Because I’ve never thought this so I’m not sure where you’re belief in this is coming from.

I also didn’t say the same the same people  booed louder, I said more people booed at the end. I divided the line between those I don’t have time for (booing during the game) and those I have some (booing after the result).

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?

“No doubt you also see the booing of taking the knee (and then laughing about it) as a principled stand against Marxism rather than racism, despite the number of times it has been explained by football in general that it is not a political gesture. Regretfully, when opinions are formed without reason, no amount of reasoning will change your mind.”

Please explain to me how I’m meant to interpret this any other way? You clearly stated that I support racism, despite no justification or reason for bringing this up.

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?

I disagree with the point you made and I originally commented on  “we have established the those that boo are not supporters just customers”  all other points of discussion were simply in support of my position on that. 

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).

I will read and reply, but my views are consistent and purely boil down to supporting what I said - it is not a fact that one boo stops you being a Supporter of the club, it is an opinion, and mine differs.

 

[Monty13 2,231]

4 hours ago, Badger said:

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.

Ok so to focus and repeat my own point in response.

If you were someone that chose to boo the result Saturday, it is not fact that this strips you of being a Supporter of the club and just make you a customer. That is my position.

Reading your points above the only relevant argument against my position I can see is points 1+2.

You are correct many of the rest of your points I agree with to at least a general degree.

As you admit points 1+2 contradict each other as you have said there are exceptional circumstances where 2 applies. But that makes one subjective and not fact.

Using a semantic argument about the definition of the word supporter is not the invincible point you are making out. Whilst this is a definition of supporter as I’ve previously pointed out:

1. There is nothing in the definition of this word that says that support from a supporter must be universal.

2. Taking a title (in this case football supporter) and saying that title only applies to the individual if they strictly adhere to the definition of the words within the title at all times is not how language works. 

This then just brings me back to my one and only point, you are stating your opinion as fact. Everything else I said was to point that out.

Those supporters who choose to boo the result on Saturday were within their rights to as Supporters, that’s my opinion. If you disagree that’s fine, that’s your opinion and it’s opinion I respect even if I disagree, but it’s not an established fact as you said.

[shaunieboy77 73]

Are there limits on how much we should celebrate and enjoy a win?

[robert choice 24]

3 hours ago, lake district canary said:

So booing is mindless. Thanks for confirming this.

Booing is spontaneous and just part of watching live football.

 

Booing while watching the telly or listening to the radio is indeed mindless.

[lake district canary 4,531]

Booing is not spontaneous. If you didn't want to boo you don't have to. It's called self control! 

In other words you might feel like booing, but it is perfectly possible to not do it because you recognise it might be better not to. It's the same with any situation where you think twice before doing something. A bit of self-control is good for the character. 

[BigFish 1,986]

1 hour ago, shaunieboy77 said:

Are there limits on how much we should celebrate and enjoy a win?

Can't remember

[Badger 2,405]

2 hours ago, Mello Yello said:

Maybe the players, staff etc should all stand in the centre circle at full-time and boo the remaining disgruntled support....Y'know, give as good as you get......

Funnily enough the new York Mets have done something quite similar: they gave the fans the thumbs down, after they had ended a losing streak. A player (Baez) explained:

“When we don’t get success, we’re going to get booed,” Báez added. “So [the fans] are going to get booed when we get success.”

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2021/aug/29/new-york-mets-thumbs-down-fans-nationals-baseball-javier-baez-franisco-lindor

 

 

 

[Badger 2,405]

I have already done this but...

1 hour ago, Monty13 said:

Please show me where I have said fans only booed at the end? Because I’ve never thought this so I’m not sure where you’re belief in this is coming from.

You said it at 19:02 on 19th September

 

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.

You clearly state that people waited until after the whistle had gone "which people did." No they didn't!

Will you acknowledge it now?

[Ken Hairy 3,769]

Just finished work ready for tonight, been a few of us practicing for later..... BOOOOOOOOOOOO..... We're all in good voice you'll be pleased to hear 👍

[robert choice 24]

1 hour ago, lake district canary said:

Booing is not spontaneous. If you didn't want to boo you don't have to. It's called self control! 

In other words you might feel like booing, but it is perfectly possible to not do it because you recognise it might be better not to. It's the same with any situation where you think twice before doing something. A bit of self-control is good for the character. 

I'll boo if I want to if it's all the same to you.

 

 

[Monty13 2,231]

40 minutes ago, Badger said:

I have already done this but...

You said it at 19:02 on 19th September

 

You clearly state that people waited until after the whistle had gone "which people did." No they didn't!

Will you acknowledge it now?

Ah ok, I see the disconnect now and yes I admit what is written is ambiguous and I understand why it would be interpreted as you did.

I meant what I said, that people waited till the final whistle to boo. I didn’t mean they all did. However I can see how you interpreted that way as it was poorly worded, I should have said most people.

[wcorkcanary 4,334]

2 minutes ago, robert choice said:

I'll boo if I want to if it's all the same to you.

 

 

Wanting to  Boo kind of affects the spontaneity,  if you get my drift. ...which i doubt somehow. 😕

[ricardo 7,381]

30 minutes ago, Ken Hairy said:

Just finished work ready for tonight, been a few of us practicing for later..... BOOOOOOOOOOOO..... We're all in good voice you'll be pleased to hear 👍

I boo'd Mrs R when I didn't  get a biscuit with my cup of tea.

Still didn't  get a biscuit.😉

[lake district canary 4,531]

19 minutes ago, robert choice said:

2 hours ago, lake district canary said:

Booing is not spontaneous. If you didn't want to boo you don't have to. It's called self control! 

In other words you might feel like booing, but it is perfectly possible to not do it because you recognise it might be better not to. It's the same with any situation where you think twice before doing something. A bit of self-control is good for the character. 

I'll boo if I want to if it's all the same to you.

Even though it might be better not to? 

[Kenny Foggo 1,116]

If only people got as worked up by appalling defending as they did with a little booing...

[Badger 2,405]

17 minutes ago, Monty13 said:

Ah ok, I see the disconnect now and yes I admit what is written is ambiguous and I understand why it would be interpreted as you did.

I meant what I said, that people waited till the final whistle to boo. I didn’t mean they all did. However I can see how you interpreted that way as it was poorly worded, I should have said most people.

Glad that we have that misconnect sorted. I will attempt the "racist thug" point shortly, but would like to say before hand that I didn't describe anyone as a "racist thug."

I do think that most people who boo taking the knee are racists + I think that some people were threatening and on the edge of violence on Saturday (so "thuggish"). My wife says he saw a fight start (pushing and grappling) but I didn't - I only saw people being pulled away.

[sgncfc 1,227]

31 minutes ago, robert choice said:

I'll boo if I want to if it's all the same to you.

 

 

You can do what you like, but the point of the thread is that doesn't make you a "supporter" does it? You might still be a "fan" (albeit a disappointed one), but by definition, not a "supporter". I think we all go through times when it's hard to support - mine was during the Hughton reign when I was so bored I couldn't even pluck up the enthusiasm to boo. I just wanted him gone because he was so negative. Now, I'd employ him as our defensive coach!

Personally, I think the booing on Saturday was just disappointment at the performance and the situation we now find ourselves in rather than any "sack the manager" or "you're not fit to wear the shirt" opinions. 

[Badger 2,405]

3 hours ago, Monty13 said:

“No doubt you also see the booing of taking the knee (and then laughing about it) as a principled stand against Marxism rather than racism, despite the number of times it has been explained by football in general that it is not a political gesture. Regretfully, when opinions are formed without reason, no amount of reasoning will change your mind.”

This is the phrase that you used to suggest I called you a racist thug.

I think that in most cases people who boo taking the knee are racist. Most (all?), however, deny this on the grounds that "BLM is a Marxist movement and they are standing up against the hard left." It has been explained repeatedly by the authorities/ footballers etc that it is not a political statement, but an act of unity against racism. However, they use this feeble reasoning to justify their booing of taking the knee.

Likewise, I find the attempt to justify statements that one can do things that are clearly not signs of support and moreover actually undermining and damaging yet still argue that you are being supportive is equally feeble. The evidence that it is damaging to player morale and confidence is widespread so to argue that that you are being supportive does not even approach flimsy: it is weaker than that. You must know that it is damaging* yet you still argue that it is supportive. The modus operandi is exactly the same: use a feeble argument to try justify the and provide cover for something that you have done/ want to do.

I'm sorry Monty, but I don't buy Jim's argument that because fans booed, Farke will try harder to win is any more convincing than the racist justification of booing the knee: both rely on feeble reasoning and simply act as a cover for something that people want to do.

[Badger 2,405]

For those that think that booing helps players, here's another quotation from Gareth Bale, to go alongside the Steven Gerrard and Alex Ferguson points earlier.

If it affects them, what impact do you think our young Greek attacker (19 years old) 2000+ miles from home making his premier league debut when he steps on the pitch to a hale of boos? 

Gareth Bale

"I just don't get it. Because if you're not having a good time on the pitch, you would expect your fans to get behind you and try and make you do better because that will make them happy. But it seems to be they do the opposite.

"They just whistle you, which makes you feel worse, so you lose your confidence. They you play worse, which is going to make them even more upset...And the next time a chance comes the goal seems tiny. It's like a putt. The goal just gets smaller."

https://www.sportbible.com/football/news-gareth-bale-opens-up-about-being-booed-by-80000-real-madrid-fans-20200803

[Naturalcynic 629]

Our little furry friend really does like the sound of his own virtual voice rather too much.  Not content with arguing until the cows come home that supporters must be 100% supportive at all times and that any differing views are wrong, he’s now trying to move the subject on to BLM/taking a knee which, given previous threads on the subject, is something he can proselytise on incessantly and will no doubt assert that anyone who doesn’t agree with him must be racist.

[Monty13 2,231]

11 minutes ago, Badger said:

This is the phrase that you used to suggest I called you a racist thug.

I think that in most cases people who boo taking the knee are racist. Most (all?), however, deny this on the grounds that "BLM is a Marxist movement and they are standing up against the hard left." It has been explained repeatedly by the authorities/ footballers etc that it is not a political statement, but an act of unity against racism. However, they use this feeble reasoning to justify their booing of taking the knee.

Likewise, I find the attempt to justify statements that one can do things that are clearly not signs of support and moreover actually undermining and damaging yet still argue that you are being supportive is equally feeble. The evidence that it is damaging to player morale and confidence is widespread so to argue that that you are being supportive does not even approach flimsy: it is weaker than that. You must know that it is damaging* yet you still argue that it is supportive. The modus operandi is exactly the same: use a feeble argument to try justify the and provide cover for something that you have done/ want to do.

I'm sorry Monty, but I don't buy Jim's argument that because fans booed, Farke will try harder to win is any more convincing than the racist justification of booing the knee: both rely on feeble reasoning and simply act as a cover for something that people want to do.

No it was this:

“No doubt you also see the booing of taking the knee (and then laughing about it) as a principled stand against Marxism rather than racism, despite the number of times it has been explained by football in general that it is not a political gesture. Regretfully, when opinions are formed without reason, no amount of reasoning will change your mind.”

You didn’t hide your opinion of such people racist thugs unless I’m misunderstanding, and you lumped me in with them without any justification. There was “no doubt” to you I was such a person, that’s what got me so angry.

I think we are at completely crossed loggerheads. My only position is that it’s not a fact that every Supporter who chose to boo at the final whistle is somehow stripped of their right to be called a Supporter of the club.

Theres a lot of what you are saying about booing and behaviour displayed around it I’m broadly in agreement, if not fully on some specific points, but that doesn’t change my position on the above.

[FenwayFrank 2,458]

1 hour ago, robert choice said:

I'll boo if I want to if it's all the same to you.

 

 

Even after you beat Lincoln 1-0 ? 

[lake district canary 4,531]

7 minutes ago, Naturalcynic said:

Our little furry friend really does like the sound of his own virtual voice rather too much.  Not content with arguing until the cows come home that supporters must be 100% supportive at all times and that any differing views are wrong, he’s now trying to move the subject on to BLM/taking a knee which, given previous threads on the subject, is something he can proselytise on incessantly and will no doubt assert that anyone who doesn’t agree with him must be racist.

Supporters support 100% of the time.  It's not rocket science.  Fans who boo can try and justify it as much as they like, but they will be seen by the majority as just noisy ingrates and a threat to the well being of the club.

Take a game we are losing and people start booing as with the substitutions on Saturday - is that really helpful?  Does that inspire the players?  Does it get them going? No, of course not - all it does is make them feel they are fighting their own crowd as well as the opposition players - it makes their jobs harder.  "No, no", the booers cry, "it will make them realise we aren't happy and will make them buck up their ideas"........

Ba!!s it will. 

[Monty13 2,231]

50 minutes ago, sgncfc said:

You can do what you like, but the point of the thread is that doesn't make you a "supporter" does it? You might still be a "fan" (albeit a disappointed one), but by definition, not a "supporter". I think we all go through times when it's hard to support - mine was during the Hughton reign when I was so bored I couldn't even pluck up the enthusiasm to boo. I just wanted him gone because he was so negative. Now, I'd employ him as our defensive coach!

Personally, I think the booing on Saturday was just disappointment at the performance and the situation we now find ourselves in rather than any "sack the manager" or "you're not fit to wear the shirt" opinions. 

At the risk of starting a new argument can I just pickup on this point SG.

If you are so dejected you stop doing any active supporting, or you walk out for instance.

Isn’t the difference between someone who does that and someone who stays to the end to boo a bit semantic?

I totally understand why people don’t like booing, but people show dissatisfaction in different ways.

Its not like the players and staff didn’t notice the lack of support or the swiftly growing number of empty seats after their third. The added time announcement was greeted with virtual silence not a roar.

 

[nutty nigel 7,527]