Sports Card Blogs

Man Utd fans should be humble; Liverpool are so far ahead

Anything to add for the afternoon Mailbox? [email protected]

It’s only a matter of time before Liverpool end their trophy drought
I didn’t watch Monday Night Football but, having read through the quotes on here, Gary Neville has absolutely hit the nail on the head: “Jurgen Klopp has corrected their errors and brought order to the team…” and you can see it paying dividends. Based on TransferMarkt’s records, Klopp has brought in 14 players at Liverpool, only 4 of whom haven’t really paid off (Grujic, Karius, Matip, and Klavan). The jury is still out on Fabinho and Oxlade-Chamberlain because neither have really been able to play as much as you would have expected for one reason and another. While his other 8 have all a) made various levels of positive contribution to the team and b) addresses notable weaknesses in their squad.

I’m not interested in the money side of things – good players usually cost good money, and if they perform as desired then it’s worth it in the end – and in any case, Liverpool have only spent more than they recouped once under Klopp, so it’s not as if it’s an unsustainable model. But because Klopp has a clear plan, both in terms of the current personnel and the future development of the team, you can quite clearly see that it’s all starting to come together. They may (hopefully!) end the season potless again, but no one in their right mind would suggest that this isn’t a brilliant incarnation of the team, and if they stick with Klopp then it’s only a matter of time before they do end their trophy drought.

Compare that to United and the story makes for painful reading. Of the 11 players we’ve signed, Matic, Pogba, and Lukaku are the closest things we have to a guaranteed starter, but even the latter two’s places are now in question. Dalot was signed as a player for the future so he still has time on his side, while Fred is a recent signing who may still play a part in the second half of the season. But of the rest, they are either backup (Grant), no longer with the club (Zlatan, Mkhitaryan), have been ostracised at least once in their time at United (Bailly, Lindelof), or failed to find anything like good form (Sanchez). Where Klopp has brought order, Mourinho has brought utter chaos and uncertainty. Where Liverpool have identified and seemingly rectified issues, United have either ignored, created, or exacerbated them.

It’s hard to see where this is going to change for United, unless something else happens to kick start it. Whether it be a change in the recruitment structure, a change in manager, and change in players, or just dumb luck, it seems pretty clear that our current position in the table is a fairly generous reflection of where we are as a club. We have resources that could make King Solomon blush but the club as a whole has absolutely no idea what it’s doing. Give the funds and resources at our disposal to any of the teams around us and I am damn sure that they would make a better fist of things than we are doing right now. As one of the commenters said, now is the time for United fans to be humble; Liverpool are so far ahead of United right now – not just in league points and places – that they’re barely even visible on the horizon. Fair play.
Ted, Manchester

Winning ugly
Quick response to Sam(inho) on winning ugly. It is certainly a skill, and one that Liverpool have this year. Raheem Sterling certainly helped City to a few wins last season that were heading towards draws, so if you are going to win the title, you need to catch some breaks along the way.

The issue with leaving it close against inferior opposition is that you leave yourself open a poor refereeing decision, or a deflected shot, or even a scruffy set piece goal. Eventually, you are going to get caught out by some bad luck, no matter how mentally strong your team is. Having elite players like Salah, Van Dyke, or Allison will help you steal points, just De Gea, or Kane, or Sterling, or Hazard, but you can’t rely on that forever.
Ryan, MCFC (and don’t forget, we still get KDB back.)

Where is the line drawn?
P Didi raises an interesting point about where the line is to be drawn with what should and shouldn’t be acceptable in the stands. At first I thought it was simple, even stupid, question to ask, something that would be easily answered with: If it can be treated as being hate speech or properly discriminatory to a persecuted minority then there’s no place for it. Race, religion sexual orientation etc are off limits.  I’m sure most will also agree that slagging Troy Deeney and Frank Lampard for being “fat bast**ds” is somewhat fair game in the context of a football match (However, I will judge you for call someone like Lampard ‘fat’, but that’s another story). Just like you can slag Sterling for not being able to satisfy his misses and legitimately have it chalked it down as ‘banter’, but you can’t slag him for being black in the name of banter. Everyone beyond the moronic bigots can (hopefully) agree with that being pretty black and white, so to speak.

But like P Didi asks, where is the line? The above examples are two ends of a spectrum. If you mocked Jack Colback for being a “ginger pr**k”  it’s not too far off “fat bast**d”, but if you slagged Sterling for a “fuzzy haired pr**k” then what? Shades of grey as appear. There would be arguments that you are just slagging the players’ hair in both cases, but a lot of level-headed people would understand the context and file it under the same category as skin colour, and therefore falls into the racism bucket. So far, the line relatively clear.

If you were to go to the Emirates on Jan 3rd and heard someone call Jordan Henderson a “stupid bast**d”, you’d be forgiven for thinking there’s no major harm in that. If you heard Sterling being called the same, you’d probably think it no different.

But here’s where the the different shades of grey comes in. If I were to say “My two queer neighbours tied the knot and I’m delighted for them” I might be scorned for using the word ‘queer’. However if I said “the homosexual couple next door tied the knot and it’s sick, they should be locked up.” then I’m using acceptable words to say something much more vile. Banning words and phrases isn’t going to stop racial abuse in the stand. The words will just change. The use of “Dogwhistle” phrases is becoming more and more common place. Suddenly the same bigots will be calling all black players lazy and stupid. Words often used against them when wide-spread racism was the norm. But hey, if they called Mesut Ozil lazy and David Luiz stupid once, then it can’t be racist, can it? The answer is yes. Yes it can. Therefore should we ban slagging players on the pitch? On this one I’ll gladly side with the PFMs and say no. It’s a road that can never truly be policed and one that will create a crap, sterile environment making the game infinitely less enjoyable for everyone.

So where is the line? Well, there isn’t one. There can’t be one. There are words you can put on paper that are clearly racist and words that are clearly not, but there are so much more that could be either depending on context, tone, etc. There’s no answer because it’s the wrong question. We shouldn’t be asking what can and can’t be said, we should be asking how do you create an atmosphere that still has that bit of an edge to it that we all love, but isn’t an environment that produces a situation where grown men are racially abusing a 21 year old. How do we as the football going community ensure that bigots are 100% unwelcome, even if they support the same team as you? It’s a simple question but it’ll have a big answer. I just hope that someone far more intelligent than an office drone in Luxembourg pretending to do overtime while emailing F365 can come up with one.
Big D, Luxembourg

P Didi asks an astonishing question – how do we retain the atmosphere in football grounds whilst removing the vitriol.

It really amazes me that a grown adult has to even ask this. The clue is even in the words we use. P Didi presumably ‘supports’ a team. He is a ‘fan’.

So, support YOUR team; write articles, do a podcast, in the stadium wave a flag, a scarf, sing for 90 minutes, chant, jump up and down going mental and scream until you’re hoarse when you score, applaud your team when they win, support them when they don’t, arrange awesome murals like continental teams (love Dortmund). Anything, do any of it, use your imagination. Run wild.

You are not, however, a ‘denigrator’. You do not exist to spit vile and abuse at the opposition. A bit of fun singing ‘you’re not very good’ or waving at opposition fans as they leave the stadium early is always amusing but 90 minutes at a football game should not be anyone’s release valve for their constipated bile duct that they’ve flooded to overflowing point during their working week.

If you treat supporting your team as a method for purging your life frustrations by actually being a ‘denigrator’ of someone else you really don’t need a football team. You need a therapist and some better life choices.

You’re welcome.
Josh, AFC, Dubai

Indecision on Sterling
I read your site everyday as an Irish Liverpool fan (let’s get that out of the way) – I would be one of the people who would often-times be classified as the “PC gone mad brigade”. Having said that, I feel perplexed about the current situation with Raheem Sterling being linked to wider societal issues.

Firstly, I think there is an undercurrent of racism to the treatment of Sterling. All footballers we know of fall under the spotlight but he, Mario Ballotelli (don’t remember the same shitstorm there) and several other players have come in for horrendous abuse. This brings me to my main point.

Racism is inexcusable but so are chants about wishing your wife to have cancer and a prominent person cheating with your wife (you can get the references). There is too much abuse and hatred at matches full stop. We all know of the ultras in Italy, Russia etc – why is this a football thing? We went to a Chelsea v Leeds match on a school tour in 2000 and it was unusual to us to see police on horses separating fighting fans.

I recently went to a Leinster v Munster rugby match and clever old me booked my wife and I tickets among the Munster supporters (we live in Leinster, Munster are biggest domestic rivals). We chatted with fans next to us, cheered our team and commiserated with fans beside us… For GAA it is normal to host a family member before a big match even if they are from a different county (team).

To get to the point, some of this hatred is racially based. Some of it is tribalism (eg. Players leaving old club for new with more money). However, there is a rush to conflate this hatred with larger societal issues and assume a moral high ground. I would personally be anti-brexit as it would negatively affect me but I respect democracy – don’t label all “leavers” as racist/xenophobic and start linking every injustice to those folk might be a start. Do not label Trump as some usher of racism/sexism/xenophobia in the USA – he won the vote because he resonated with the mass on issues that affected them.

There is a deeper underlying issue in football that has nothing to do with left/right politics and pervades all clubs – you should not need safety measures between fans. They should be there to watch the match.
Stephen (first time and last time mailing given abuse I expect)

My take on the Sterling issue
Firstly, want to express my deep sense of disgust and displeasure at the alleged racist abuse that Sterling received at Stamford Bridge in the Man City game.  Regardless of whether it was my club supporter or any other supporter for that matter, usage of racial language is just unacceptable.  In fact, I am against usage of obscene language (and foul-mouthed ranting also) for that matter.  Banter and trying to get in an opponent’s head is ok, but the usage of bad language and personalized abuse is just not ok.

I also want to bring to the notice of the mailbox that there are wider issues in football (and life).  I want to take the example of when John Terry (my then club captain) had an issue with (a) Wayne Bridge and (b) Anton Ferdinand.  I am going to bite here, JT was never the greatest personalities I looked up to off-field (it was Frank Lampard who I admired more, and maybe Zola).  While I loved JT the player, was never a fan of JT the individual.  I recall when the Bridge episode first played out, many of my friends here in India (we were in our early 20s then) would just abuse Bridge and his then ex-girlfriend like crazy.  In fact, I hate it when people used the C word to abuse men (as though calling a man a c*** is derogatory, implying gender-specific abuse).  My friends, Chelsea fans would abuse Bridge as a C (calling his ex a whore).  While Racism is a big issue, deep down, this also needs to change.  I was and still am uncomfortable when people use such abuse at players (and people).  When the Ferdinand issue came, it was even worse.  He was no more a mere C to my friends, but a black C.  As though the derogatory of two big irrational biases (racist and sexist) was meant to portray JT as a great individual.

I have always asked some questions to my friends, fans all around and especially those who go to games.  We watch the sport for the sake of fun at the bottom.  While we subjectively may choose what is fun for us (entertaining football, pragmatic football etc.), there is no subjectivity when it comes to abusing players/fellow fans/other people – it is just unacceptable.  I ask a question – are we all deep down so frustrated with life that all that anger comes out in places like these? Is football an outlet for people to show the ugly side of themselves?  We are all sold so many narratives when we are children, we read and come across narratives when we grow up.  Whatever our worldview becomes, is a flux of such narratives.  Ideally, I’d like to think education and civilized society means we learn to question many narratives, in the process becoming better versions of ourselves.  But now, I seriously wonder whether any such thing is even true.  The chap who abused Sterling is 60.  Just think about that for a moment.  A 60 year old white man showing all his frustrations by abusing an opponent player racially.  Even racial abuse aside, some of the chaps near him were using the C word of abuse.  And none of them were young (I’m in my early 30s now btw).  The scene is no different in India (or around the world).  Are these middle-aged men setting the right value systems for the next generation?  What happens when a kid sees his father throw vile abuse at a team he hates whenever there’s a game? To the kid, abusing racially/sexist is normal!  I can understand if a 16-year-old teen does it.  What does it say when it is a 60-year-old man?

I originally wanted to write about how good tactically Chelsea were, but I just couldn’t help myself but rant.  Oh and btw, goto social media of football writing accounts (personal/professional).  Some of the racists are even verified accounts (including my club supporters).
Aravind, a sad Chelsea fan.

As a United fan I would just like to add my support to Raheem Sterling a wonderful young player who’s only crime (in tabloid terms) is being born with different coloured skin. His immense courage in the face of blind hatred from Neanderthal fans and media alike needs applauding. I think someone yesterday alluded to Brexit and the rise of intolerance and I’m in total agreement with that sentiment, Brexit and people like Tommy (I’m not a racist) Robinson, Donald Trump and Nigel Farage have given the far right leaning bigots a voice and a voice they now think they can shout with impunity as these high level media savvy Saville Row Nazis have made racism the norm.
Well enough is enough and people need to stand up to these ugly excuses for humanity, you may play for City and you may have played for Liverpool but I’m with you all the way Raheem as every right thinking football fan across the Country is too regardless of who they support.
Paul Murphy, Manchester