Football Media Discussion 2

[Paul01]

12 minutes ago, FCB said:

Lowy/Gallop out. They have no respect for the competition. Give football back to football people.

 

Get rid of the puppet master Gallop and football can get out of the media pleasers.

[StringerBellend]

Something this morning summed up Footballs position in the Australian media. ABC news breakfast mention the 0-0 draw of ccm, show two seconds of footage then they say well at least it wasn’t a 5 day draw like the test match but there is big bash on tonight and then proceed to bang on about a 6 week hit and giggle.

And this is the abc who don’t have a massive financial commitment to the other sports 

aus media ranges from complete disinterest to outright hostility we are always going to struggle for “mainstream” while that is the case

I don’t even think we should bother trying, they can keep their food container headwear and urinating on furniture 

Edited January 1, 2018 by StringerBellend

[luisenrique]

Was at a pub in Narooma yesterday and the secco saw my Wanderers hoodie and immediately brought out the classic 'where are your flares lol?'

...which shows that it doesn't actually matter whether we've had any flares recently, if anything has happened in the crowd recently, because those with that stereotype of us will always stick to it, even if we cure cancer in the active section. So trying to appease non football fans by sanitising the match day experience is a pipe dream anyway. 

It's good to see the journos now saying what we've been saying for years, but I won't be holding my breath for the FFA to admit their mistakes and start the process of bringing active support back to what it used to be. 

[Unlimited]

I like this section:

"

The move over the past few years to sanitise the match-day experience has not worked. 

The push to make grounds into giant adult day-care centres, with restrictions everywhere on what banners (if any) fans can bring, rules preventing them playing instruments or just behaving in a lively manner, has been counter-productive.

The game's rulers have been spooked too much by tabloid newspaper headlines and fears of what might occur rather than what has occurred.

How much better would the whole match-day experience be if clubs worked to fully harness the power of their most passionate fan base rather than see them as the enemy within.

The FFA has bent over backwards in the past decade to appeal to "newbies", AFL fans, NRL supporters and those who never cared about soccer.

It was worth a try, but it's not going to deliver the long-term growth that they hoped for.

"

[Paul01]

6 minutes ago, Unlimited said:

I like this section:

"

The move over the past few years to sanitise the match-day experience has not worked. 

The push to make grounds into giant adult day-care centres, with restrictions everywhere on what banners (if any) fans can bring, rules preventing them playing instruments or just behaving in a lively manner, has been counter-productive.

The game's rulers have been spooked too much by tabloid newspaper headlines and fears of what might occur rather than what has occurred.

How much better would the whole match-day experience be if clubs worked to fully harness the power of their most passionate fan base rather than see them as the enemy within.

The FFA has bent over backwards in the past decade to appeal to "newbies", AFL fans, NRL supporters and those who never cared about soccer.

It was worth a try, but it's not going to deliver the long-term growth that they hoped for.

"

Check out David Squires cartoons in the Guardian today as well

[sonar]

35 minutes ago, Paul01 said:

Check out David Squires cartoons in the Guardian today as well

Thanks for the heads up...posted a link in the D S thread.

[HillsPanther]

The problem is that the FFA & A-League are a bunch of hypocrites. One minute they are promoting the football experience and then the next they are trying to stamp it out.

[beatsurrender]

3 hours ago, HillsPanther said:

The problem is that the FFA & A-League are a bunch of hypocrites. One minute they are promoting the football experience and then the next they are trying to stamp it out.

True.  They pay lip service to it. For some reason they are like a little kid seeking approval from their parents,  in this analogy,  the parents being free to air media.  They need to stop trying to appeal to 'everyone ' and concentrate on the thousands who already love our game. We'll never be as big as AFL or cricket in Oz but let's win over the football fans already out there. 

[Johnno]

in trying to cater for newbies, they've lost the fans who were already building the game. trouble is, the newbies were never interested.

[HillsPanther]

A major problem is that the majority of the public are too easily influenced by the media. If it is in the media, it must be true. Of course the media will never let the facts get in the way of a good story.

[Paul01]

Sam Kerr made the Ten News playing a game with a few kids. 

[tardotz]

😮😮😮 Gee never thought I would say this but this must be the first time I agree with Slater.

He had a passionate rant about the FFA (Just for kicks) and he completely correct.

[GunnerWanderer]

Yeah that was quality rant 

[Davo]

 

[beatsurrender]

A Bossi positive WSW article 

https://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/sport/soccer/home-is-where-the-heart-is-for-western-sydney-wanderers-20180112-h0hh6p.html

[Paul01]

44 minutes ago, beatsurrender said:

A Bossi positive WSW article 

https://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/sport/soccer/home-is-where-the-heart-is-for-western-sydney-wanderers-20180112-h0hh6p.html

We should all go out and buy a lottery ticket!

[btron3000]

On 11/01/2018 at 7:52 PM, tardotz said:

😮😮😮 Gee never thought I would say this but this must be the first time I agree with Slater.

He had a passionate rant about the FFA (Just for kicks) and he completely correct.

That rant would suggest either Arnie hasn't got the job or Arnie is still in the mix and is getting impatient. 

[mack]

8 hours ago, Paul01 said:

We should all go out and buy a lottery ticket!

Was there anything that said "paid promotion" on the article?

[Davo]

He works for Fairfax so I think it’s implied.

[Paul01]

If you can, download the Fox Football Podcast. On it there is a discussion on active support well worth listening to. Kosmina calls the security at football games anti-football.

[Hughesy]

4 hours ago, Paul01 said:

If you can, download the Fox Football Podcast. On it there is a discussion on active support well worth listening to. Kosmina calls the security at football games anti-football.

I just listened to that and was about to come and post about it. For the grumpy old pain in the ass that Kossie can be, an issue like this is when you want him being that grumpy old bastard cause he calls it as it is and will make noise. Peacock is also good cause he will call it as he sees it. Garbie is trying too hard to be everyone's friend and gave a pretty weak response regarding the FFA's role in it I thought.

[Legionista]

They didn’t say it when it mattered. 

They were all aboard the outrage train.

[wendybr]

I don't remember any one being outraged by active support at all.

I do remember people (including Fox Sports commentators)  being angry about flares.

Is active support only about flares?

[mack]

Fox Sports are a mediocre supporter of active support at best. Individually they might occasional speak in defence but ultimately the organisation as a whole are just part of the same Murdoch stable of pro-authoritarian nanny state outrage factories that are some of the most vocal attackers of both football as a sport, and active supporters.

[wendybr]

12 minutes ago, mack said:

Fox Sports are a mediocre supporter of active support at best. Individually they might occasional speak in defence but ultimately the organisation as a whole are just part of the same Murdoch stable of pro-authoritarian nanny state outrage factories that are some of the most vocal attackers of both football as a sport, and active supporters.

I NEVER remember them attacking active supporters - just speaking out against flares.

I've heard them sing the praises of the RBB, and of WSW supporters in general - often, in those early years.

I've read/heard Simon Hill and Bozza speak passionately about active support.

I HAVE heard them condemning flares eg Bozza (although usually, the cameras didn't focus on flares if they could be avoided during a broadcast, and zero was spoken by the commentators about them during games as i recall)

So I ask again - flares and active support are one and the same? And the only thing that defines active support is the use of flares??

Otherwise, I don't understand how you can say that the Fox guys are "mediocre supporters of active support".

[Legionista]

It’s as if you were never present in the hundreds of discussions that were had on this issue wendy.

[mack]

Because they haven't taken any steps to actually support fans. If they ever cared about fans in general they'd never push for 7pm Sunday timeslots.

[wendybr]

21 minutes ago, Legionista said:

It’s as if you were never present in the hundreds of discussions that were had on this issue wendy.

Hahaha!

Oh... you know I was present, my friend. 

But it was never a debate about active support per se.

Those arguments were furious debates about flares, and flares alone.

Over and over people sang the praises of the RBB, but spoke out again flares.

You know this.

I do understand how integral a part of active culture you see flares as being.

But I think it's misrepresenting those debates to see them as condemnations of active support as a whole from most people - although some might have gone all the way down that path.

[wendybr]

2 minutes ago, wendybr said:

Oh... you know I was present, my friend. 

But it was never a debate about active support per se.

I'll leave it at that post above...except to say, I have rarely participated in disagreements as passionate and intense as those were...well except for some of our politics debates . 

You probably felt the same way.

I struggled to understand the passion on your side, and you saw the stance from people like me as being anti-active support as a whole (which is absolutely not how I felt) rather then just anti - flares.

I think this is one of those issues we'll have to agree to disagree about.

But I'll give you this.....I'd be prepared to have flares back, I think, rather than the diminished and fragmented from of active support that's been left behind.

There I said it. 

[btron3000]

Wendy, you asked me a while back about why flares and active support had to be intertwined (something like that).  I can't answer for Legia or those closer to the people who actually rip (or ripped) flares (to remind you, I stand in RBB but don't know the main players), but I can answer your question with another question.  Think about the people that you have sat near in the stands. Ask yourself whether they will get up and encourage a whole area of people around them to sing and chant and jump when the team is down 0-3 in the rain at home?

The simplest reasons for why the two are related are:

a) it's part of football culture

b) you cannot expect to have thousands of people who want to jump and sing and go crazy and not expect some to "take it too far" (inverted commas here because I don't think it is too far of course!). The types of people creating "active support" are more likely to be the type who either rip flares or encourage and support their ripping. I, of course, am the latter - my days of getting arrested are over (I hope!).

The comments about the outrage are correct, primarily because the football media didn't start being outraged until the mainstream media did, and the mainstream media used flares as the very visual representation of their outrage (which was more protecting their own sports than actually hating on flares, as we have seen when flares turn up at their sports).

When we beat Uruguay in 05, there were a couple of flares when Bresc scored the goal in the home leg that took the tie to 1-1. All Simon Hill says in commentary is "there's a real buzz aroud the stadium" or something like that. As soon as it became an issue with mainstream media, the football commentators - who, let's remember, get paid to sit in comfy seats to watch the game, unlike the huddled masses on the terraces - jumped on the bandwagon, in most cases only because they thought it would be better for the sport's image to not have flares, and the ridiculous hooligan comparisons that come with them, showing up in the media .

What they clearly couldn't see - and what football supporters all over Australia tried to tell everyone - was that by using complete heavy-handedness to remove the "rogue element", they were going to ruin the atmosphere and thus take away the advantage that football has over other sports. Even looking at it from a business perspective, which clearly the FFA tries to do (not very well), in a league where the best players are all on the other side of the planet, the atmosphere was the A-league's biggest competitive advantage. We could have had proper football culture AND a business advantage.

Now they've gone and killed it and everyone would rather have it back. But how can they allow it now the horse has bolted and every media person will be on to it. And, more importantly, are those in positions of power willing to say what you just did? Are they willing to accept a few problems with authorities so that the league can get its atmosphere back? I doubt it.

Right from the start they should have done what the AFL do when they have crowd issues - publicly condemn it, say they're going to weed out the troublemakers causing issues for their sport (instead of basically admitting the sport has a problem), go on the attack by showing that violence at a-league is below other sports, and then do nothing to the flare-rippers. Maybe find and ban the odd one here and there just to look like they are doing something. NOT send in undercover security and ban people for ridiculous nothings.