Calis Beach and Fethiye Turkey Discussion Forum

General Topics => Football => Topic started by: Ian on March 28, 2014, 08:09:33 AM

Title: Is "survival football" attractive?
Post by: Ian on March 28, 2014, 08:09:33 AM
Following on from what looks like the beginning of the end for Big Sam it is worth asking the question - would you prefer to struggle in the the Premiership or win more in the Championship?

I watched Oldham Athletic for 10 years and the first 5 were all about progress and winning many many more games than we lost. Great fun - attractive football etc. Then 3 seasons in the first tier which were a real struggle and we usually got a battering every week. I went to almost every game and the disappointment driving back from Highbury and the like on a wet Tuesday evening after defending for 90% of the game but still losing by one goal was awful and repeated week after week!

I know a young man who is a Burnley fan and he told me 6 months ago - we will come up and I am now telling him you will come straight back down again! His response is yeah but we have no expectations of staying up!

So do Sunderland, Hull, Palace, West Brom, Norwich, Cardiff, Stoke, West Ham supporters enjoy being in the Prem???
Title: Re: Is "survival football" attractive?
Post by: steve marshall on March 28, 2014, 10:57:11 AM
as a CITY HULL fan, here are my views about being in the prem..( for what they are worth ;-)
positive points
being able to attract better players to the club
watching your team play against the best players / teams in the country
visiting the finest stadiums in the country
raising the city of hull profile worldwide
the general feel good factor
seeing more city hull shirts / colours around the city..( instead of the 4 big clubs )
being yorkshires number 1 ;-)

negative points
the season ticket prices / matchday ticket prices
difficulty in obtaining tickets for the "big games" home and away !
the bias towards the bigger clubs from tv / sky / referees / f.a ..etc
missing the yorkshire derby games ( hehehe )

my only wish now is a cup final ( hopefully beating the blades in the semi )...THEN A EUROPEAN ADVENTURE !!!  :-)

overall...enjoying the adventure,,not really bothered what division we are in.....SILVERWARE,WE DONT CARE,,WILL FOLLOW HULL CITY EVERYWHERE......;-)


Title: Re: Is "survival football" attractive?
Post by: SteveJ on March 28, 2014, 11:06:58 AM
Why are you including Stoke in that list? The last time I looked they had just beaten Aston Villa away and were in the top half of the table - hardly relegation fodder?
Title: Re: Is "survival football" attractive?
Post by: Ian on March 28, 2014, 11:18:02 AM
Because for most the 5 years they have been in the a premiership they have played football that most people wouldn't want to watch week in week out - effective but very unattractive.
Title: Re: Is "survival football" attractive?
Post by: SteveJ on March 28, 2014, 18:16:20 PM
You've changed your goalposts - pun intended.

Your original question was "would you prefer to struggle in the the Premiership or win more in the Championship? but now you've changed it to "Do you prefer to watch attractive football or not?" Make your mind up and then maybe we can give you our opinions on the subject of your choice.
Title: Re: Is "survival football" attractive?
Post by: Ian on March 28, 2014, 19:10:21 PM
Yes but they are a conundrum because they still play survival football probably because the last 4 seasons they finished 11th - 13th - 14th - 13th which in my book means they have consistently strived to survive :-)
Title: Re: Is "survival football" attractive?
Post by: Scunner on March 28, 2014, 19:32:32 PM
Ask all the Man U fans for an answer to your question :D
Title: Re: Is "survival football" attractive?
Post by: Ian on March 28, 2014, 19:47:55 PM
If they were in the bottom 6 - I would seriously see them going down !

Apparently tomorrow some supporters have paid for a plane to fly over the ground BEFORE the game with a banner saying "The Wrong One" as opposed to "The Chosen One" which I think is a bit unfair
Title: Re: Is "survival football" attractive?
Post by: FrankStanley on March 28, 2014, 23:35:43 PM
Used to struggle most seasons at Sunderland, but we keep fighting! Been to Wembley this season and quarter finals of FA Cup, better than other teams. If we are relegated, then we will fight again, till then there is always hope.  (Howay the lads)
Title: Re: Is "survival football" attractive?
Post by: usedbustickets on March 29, 2014, 06:42:31 AM
Ask the real yoyo club Palace fans - who in recent years went through two relegation battles from the Championship, receivership and change of ownership - who play Chelski today is it attractive and indeed worth it.  I think the answer would be a big yes, even with the downs, there's the ups, all the passions of football, not just the sensation of consistently winning, or even the performances that are bad but fought with a passion, and usually by a parade of different players who feed through to the bigger clubs or are sold on because of cash restraints.  I know cos I live with one, the Present Mrs Tickets.  Former Palace Dolly Girl, Season Ticket Holder and member of an extended family of Palace supporters who go to all the home games and some to the away games too.  As Andy Gray would say take a boo son, take a boo!!  ;)  ;)
Title: Re: Is "survival football" attractive?
Post by: Ian on March 29, 2014, 07:08:30 AM
I remember going to watch Bolton v Fulham for 2 consecutive seasons because a friend had corporate at Bolton. It was so bad that I had my excuse ready for the third invite. Now I was probably guilty of remembering the days of Bolton with John McGinlay and Owen Coyle upfront when I accepted - beating Arsenal et al if I remember correctly but believe me this was awful football.
Title: Re: Is "survival football" attractive?
Post by: keng38 on March 29, 2014, 07:40:13 AM
As a Burnley fan, tipped for relegation at the start of this season, smallest squad size, sold our best asset to QPR just before our first game, no money.
We have it all to lose with 8 games left and 10 points clear of third place.
We aspire to become part of the elite, like we did a few years ago.
The buzz around the area stayed long after we dropped back down, and the town itself did benefit too.
The club had no intention of trying to stay up and took the money and ran.
This time may be different if we go up.
Bloody good effort and worthy of sporting achievement of the year award!
Title: Re: Is "survival football" attractive?
Post by: Ian on March 29, 2014, 07:55:46 AM
Totally agree - manager of the season already - (followed by Keith Hill at Rochdale) - will be glued to the radio at 12.15pm - hoping they win (3-0 would put them top but 1-0 will do)

But it was my future son-in-law who is a big Burnley fan who made me think to write this post as he was the one who said "if we go up it will be a bit of fun and we might stay up but if we come down again - hey ho - off we go - to try and go up again"

I was quite surprised to say the least that his expectations were realistic - not something you see very often! But you can't ignore the fact that he has been a happy chappy virtually every week this season (only 3 losses - best record in the 4 divisions there) but that euphoria will likely be replaced by a siege mentality next year with only a few wins and more importantly a different style (after the first few games) to stay up.

I do remember Blackpool sticking to their principals and they must have had some fun but few do.

Title: Re: Is "survival football" attractive?
Post by: Scunner on March 29, 2014, 09:41:23 AM
The tragedy of all this is the fact that the manager who narrowly missed out on promotion and stays in the Championship for 2 seasons has a good chance of keeping his job. The manager who excels and gains promotion one season, only to fall straight out next, will probably pay with his job.
Title: Re: Is "survival football" attractive?
Post by: Andrew H on March 29, 2014, 10:18:17 AM
As a palace season ticket holder for more than 30 years do I prefer struggling in premiership? Too right I do Chelsea today is so much better than the prospect of Yeovil  away next year.  look out for us on "Survival Sunday "  in May We will survive [just!]
Title: Re: Is "survival football" attractive?
Post by: Ian on March 29, 2014, 11:04:48 AM
As a palace season ticket holder for more than 30 years do I prefer struggling in premiership? Too right I do Chelsea today is so much better than the prospect of Yeovil  away next year.  look out for us on "Survival Sunday "  in May We will survive [just!]

Lol - I think you might just survive because you have a manager who knows how to do it and I hope he has learned that you need to play better football - if the manager wants to keep his job.

West Brom / Swansea / Norwich have all played some decent football at times so I hope they all stay up :-)
Title: Re: Is "survival football" attractive?
Post by: SteveJ on March 29, 2014, 11:10:24 AM
would that be the ex-manager of "stuggling" Stoke City by any chance?    ;)
Title: Re: Is "survival football" attractive?
Post by: Ian on March 29, 2014, 12:10:32 PM
Yes - he knows how to survive but would you pay to watch it week in - week out?

I would not pay for a season ticket at a team managed by Mark Hughes / Big Sam or Tony Pullis - but all three will likely keep you up - that is the point.

There is a case for it in your first season or two (West Ham must be in the Premiership to go to their new stadium so it is a calculated risk) but eventually you want to watch your team play football.

Southampton are one place above Stoke - now if you asked any football neutral where would you like to spend your season - watching Southampton or watching Stoke - say no more............  :'(
Title: Re: Is "survival football" attractive?
Post by: SteveJ on March 29, 2014, 18:23:21 PM
Ian - to be honest I'm not sure what your point is any longer. You started this thread by asking us if "survival football" was attractive, and your last post intimates that that the higher up the table the more 'attractive' the style of play must be.

So, let me see if I've got this right?  - Stoke (and therefore all the teams below them)  play "unattractive survival football" and Southhampton (and therefore all the teams above them) do not. Well, if nothing else, we've discovered where the cut off point is.

I know you said "say no more" but given an unobligated chance to watch Southampton or Stoke every week I'd say that I'd be more entertained at Stoke. I would go further and suggest that given a free choice most PL players would prefer to play away at Southampton than away at Stoke.   

I'm a ManU fan and I'd rather see them win 1-0 by scoring in the 90th minute of an dour battle than see them lose 6-5 in an end to end thriller. No-one give a sh*t if their team won the title by grinding out a load of 1-0 wins, they just celebrate that they won the title. As we say up t'North "ut victor spolia"   ;)

Title: Re: Is "survival football" attractive?
Post by: Ian on March 29, 2014, 18:47:26 PM
Southampton or Stoke today - let me think about that?

Oh and the question was:

So do Sunderland, Hull, Palace, West Brom, Norwich, Cardiff, Stoke, West Ham supporters enjoy being in the Prem???

And I suspect Andrew H does today :-)
Title: Re: Is "survival football" attractive?
Post by: SteveJ on March 29, 2014, 19:50:06 PM
and the answer is "Yes of course they do", otherwise what's the point of being a football fan?
Title: Re: Is "survival football" attractive?
Post by: tiggsy on March 29, 2014, 20:01:05 PM
I want to see my team play the best, and hopefully win. This is the same for any football fan, if its Manchester United, Chelsea or Accrington Stanley, it matters not. Good luck to any team fighting promotion or relegation, your fans deserve the best you can give them, not second best. If you achieve it, great, enjoy the ride. I know I am. Oh and good luck Burnley my favourite second club.
Title: Re: Is "survival football" attractive?
Post by: Ian on March 29, 2014, 20:13:07 PM
I want to see my team play the best, and hopefully win. This is the same for any football fan

I am not sure about everyone SteveJ would settle for playing awful and scraping a 1-0 - which is where we clearly differ.

Although you need to have been down at the bottom to know the feeling - as I said earlier about my time with Oldham:

"Then 3 seasons in the first tier which were a real struggle and we usually got a battering every week. I went to almost every game and the disappointment driving back from Highbury and the like on a wet Tuesday evening after defending for 90% of the game but still losing by one goal was awful and repeated week after week!"

Like so many others we struggled after the Premiership and will likely never recover but maybe this is just a personal view with the benefit of hindsight.

Title: Re: Is "survival football" attractive?
Post by: keng38 on March 29, 2014, 20:30:22 PM
Last time Burnley played in the Premiership it was a party atmosphere every week.
Even after going 6-0 down to Man City.
Title: Re: Is "survival football" attractive?
Post by: Ian on March 29, 2014, 20:38:13 PM
I think some teams (and Burnley and Blackpool are in that list) don't have expectations and enjoy a season or two - but some fans really suffer.

I was at The Etihad to see City put 7 past Norwich this season and although they were singing at 3-0 and 4-0 they looked really peed off at 5,6 & 7 - as you would - and you had to feel for them - a long trip back from almost every ground and lots of those away days with no wins.

I know I am being unrealistic as everyone strives to get promoted but it is a bit sad masochistic for some fans :-)

PS apart from Robbie Blake goal moments :-)