The Chelsea question - football ‘expert’ Dr. Rogan Taylor enters the debate…
I’ve always been in awe of people who dedicate their lives to study and academia; nuclear fission, the reproductive system of the European earthworm or whatever. It must be quite an achievement to be the leading expert in the field on that particular subject. It brings to mind watching the news and seeing little men in half-moon spectacles with an uncontrollable greying mop of hair in well-worn corduroy jackets, spouting passionately about their particular area of knowledge.
So what has this got to do with Chelsea, I hear you say? Read on. Browsing through the papers is always a hazard, given that at any moment you could find a few hundred words having a dig at Chelsea – Abramovich’s money, our perceived arrogance – you know the drill. But on occasion, you can find some fair comment on the subject. In this morning’s Guardian, an intriguing article caught my eye. “Is Chelsea’s era of domination good for the Premiership” shouted the headline. On further examination, both ‘Yes’ and ‘No’ camps were represented which made a pleasant change.
So if I suggested to you that former Gooner legend Kenny Sansom was on one side of the fence and Dr. Rogan Taylor, academic and director of the Football Industry Group at Liverpool University and a writer / broadcaster for various media outlets, as well as a serial committee member and lecturer on all aspects of the beautiful game was on the other, who do you think would be fighting which corner?
A mixture of experience and no small degree of cynicism made me think that the man with nigh on 400 appearances for Arsenal, numerous caps for England now frequently appearing on Sky as a pundit would have chipped in with the usual anti-Chelsea tirade, tinged with bitterness at a very mediocre season for his former team during a crucial period in their history. Dr. Taylor’s argument, I assumed, would be balanced and borne out of years of studying the subject, watching trends and patterns in the game, talking to those at every level from bootroom to boardroom, terrace to executive box.
It just goes to show how wrong you can be. To my surprise, Sansom fell into the ‘Yes’ camp. The former Arsenal man made some sensible, balanced comments which generally covered the simple facts about the Blues (and the competition) in the Abramovich era that we all know but many seem to ignore. Lots of money yes, but an excellent side that has been simply head and shoulders above the competition which has been largely down to Mourinho and the commitment of the players, amongst other things. His suggestion that the rest of the Premiership need to work harder and smarter also rang true. The concluding point spoke volumes about the issue in the most basic of terms, summing it up perfectly – “Sure, the money has got a lot to do with them doing well but they are not the first side to have a bit of money. I think everyone’s going on about it without looking at what Chelsea have achieved – and obviously I’m saying that as an Arsenal fan.”
Dr. Taylor’s argument, however, despite being borne out of years of study on the subject of football, was so astonishing in its blinkered lack of coherence and selective memory of the game it made me wonder whether the cynical “Well they give out doctorates with Cornflakes packets these days, don’t they” Littlejohn style rant actually carries a degree of truth. It was simply a more eloquently constructed version of the tabloid driven “Chelsea and their money blah blah blah” nonsense that people gorge themselves on and repeat ad nauseum under the guise of having some knowledge of the game. A closer look at Dr. Taylor’s criticisms of Chelsea show a series of bigger holes than those to be found in the Arsenal back four this season.
“I don’t really think of Chelsea being in the same competition anymore…” Really? So which Chelsea is that sitting twelve points clear at the top of the Premier League? Must be another one. Not the one beaten by strugglers Middlesbrough at the weekend? He then pulls out one of the standard anti-Chelsea trump cards at a surprisingly early stage – “This is different from the recent domination by Arsenal and Manchester United – or Liverpool before them – because their success was more about astuteness, youth investment and coaching skills than money.”
This of course plunges a knife into the heart of the average Chelsea fan. He’s right – it’s never been about money before. Thierry Henry, Patrick Vieria, Sol Campbell, Dennis Bergkamp, Robert Pires, Freddie Ljungberg for Arsenal and Rio Ferdinand, Jaap Stam, Ruud van Nistelrooy, Andy Cole and Dwight Yorke for United (to name just a few). All youth products to a man, born within spitting distance of Highbury and Old Trafford respectively, dreaming of playing for the clubs they supported as kids and would probably do it for next to nothing if you asked them nicely. And obviously the likes of Graeme Souness, Kenny Dalglish, Kevin Keegan, Ian St. John, Terry McDermott, Alan Hansen, Mark Lawrenson and many others all grew up a Grobbelar punt from Anfield too. But of course the coaching skills can never be overlooked – Ferguson and Wenger toiled and grafted over their title winning teams, sweating blood over formations and tactics whereas Mourinho arrived in English football, threw a few expensive names onto a team sheet every week and won the Premiership, smashing numerous records on the way, with a very large stroke of luck and no effort, skill or dedication at all.
Then we move on to the “Chelsea can afford to leave a €40m player like Shaun Wright-Phillips on the bench… they can take off €50m worth of strikers and replace them with €60m worth… it’s ridiculous” tirade.
Of course it is, O learned Doctor of football. Aside of the inaccuracy of your valuations of our frontmen, we bought Wright-Phillips to do just that with him and obviously to annoy people like you. Six months into his Chelsea career having taken a big step up, he is competing with the likes of Joe Cole (the Joe Cole who was ‘finished’ at Chelsea prior to the transfer window of January 2005 and set for a cut-price move away), Damien Duff and Arjen Robben. Possibly a little early to suggest a career as a permanent bench warmer? Maybe his development would have been better served at Arsenal, playing every week in one of their weakest sides in recent memory? And as for the strikers – disgraceful! When I think of poor Manchester United, struggling to make ends meet, substituting the €28m Ruud van Nistelrooy for the €18m Louis Saha it saddens me to my very core. Dr. Taylor later suggests that football was becoming more sensible before Roman arrived, only to send everything barmy again. Presumably Rio Ferdinand’s new mega-deal with United wouldn’t have happened without the presence of the Russian? Oh, of course, it was all Chelsea’s fault because Peter Kenyon was once seen in the same restaurant as the United stopper. Please – get real.
But apparently it isn’t just about the quantum of the money, it is the origin that grates. “And you can’t get away from the source of the money. A significant chunk of the wealth of a whole – now largely poverty-stricken – nation has been sunk into a foreign football team and that sticks in the throat.” I’m truly amazed by the number of people who have suddenly taken an interest in the plight of the Russian people since Abramovich turned up at Stamford Bridge. There seem to be literally thousands who felt so strongly that membership of Amnesty International must have rocketed amongst football fans, armies of them willing to march across the Urals to rip back Russia’s natural resources from the hands of the oligarchs and return them to state ownership.
Without wishing to over simplify matters there are people in poverty all over the world, many of whom are in a far worse situation than the average Russian citizen. Their plight is often caused by governments that you voted for, organisations that you work for and companies on whose products and services you spend money on a daily basis. It would be interesting to ask this new socially aware breed of football fan whether he would be happy to pay a premium for domestically produced fuel for his house or car, or to obtain it from Russia at a far cheaper price.
But if we’re on rich sugar-daddies, let us remember that Roman is hardly the first. Take a look at Samuel Hill-Wood – forefather of Arsenal director Peter Hill-Wood – and his family history in the north of England. Samuel Hill-Wood owned various cotton mills, generally acknowledged not to be the most worker friendly of environments, at the turn of the century. In short, he invested his money in Glossop North End’s football team, flung plenty of it at them until they reached the giddy heights of second place in the league behind Manchester City. When the cotton industry declined, he remained true to his roots – no, sorry – he sold up, went to London and invested in property and ultimately Arsenal. Glossop North End could currently exist for about a decade on a week of Thierry Henry’s wages. Most of the money in football has never been particularly ‘ethical’ – whining about it now is shutting the gate after the horse has bolted to say the very least. Was Berlusconi’s cash that catapulted AC Milan back into the big time earned solely from football? I think not; there are plenty of other examples if you dig deep enough. Ours is under constant scrutiny; others are buried in the depths of history – something football fans only feel comfortable referring to when it relates to the number of trophies that their team has won.
Dr. Taylor’s ranting and raving reaches a crescendo on a subject which seems to be closer to his heart than most – fanbase, and a comparison between ours and that of the club we all know and love – Liverpool. Maybe now we get to the crux of his dislike for all things Blue.
It seems that Liverpool sold over half a million copies of their end of season DVD last year, which, even ‘allowing for the Istanbul effect’, puts the 22,000 copies of the title-winning season DVD Dr. Taylor “heard that Chelsea had sold” into the shade (no sources to back this up, of course). So Liverpool are Robbie Williams style mega-unit shifters and we’re not? I’m heartbroken. But he continues – we have a small ‘core’ support and we’re posing as a big club, and apparently “In passion or dedication, they don’t even approach the numbers of United or City fans, Newcastle, Liverpool or Everton for that matter.”
It is certainly true that Chelsea’s support slumped between the late 1970’s and the early 1990’s for a number of reasons. More difficult to argue with is the fact that Chelsea’s all-time average attendance figures are actually greater than those of Newcastle, Everton and Manchester City. The somewhat inaccurate comparison is made with cities like Manchester, Liverpool and Newcastle where one or two huge clubs dominate the football landscape with a few lower league stragglers picking up the scraps in terms of available support. Chelsea, for a team posing as a ‘big club’ in a city that houses Arsenal, Spurs, West Ham, Fulham, Charlton, Millwall, QPR and Crystal Palace to name just a few, with numerous clubs in the satellite towns that surround the capital, aren’t doing too badly by my reckoning.
For all Dr. Taylor’s accumulated knowledge, his arguments sadly add up to the same thing – the real ‘big’ clubs are long established and we simply have no business crashing their little exclusive party. The rest of us should know our place, doff our caps politely like subservient also-rans and be happy with the occasional lucky victory over football’s squeaky-clean old guard without daring to disrupt their ritual sharing out of silverware that has gone on for years on end. Dr. Taylor finishes his tirade with the pointed suggestion (borrowed from elsewhere, I might add) that the three hardest words to say in the English language are “Come on Chelsea”. Is this really the best argument one of football’s top academic minds can come up with? Rogan, I’ve no alternative but to finish with another three words that I find trip effortlessly off my tongue, as they do every time these weak, tiresome, biased and baseless arguments are leveled at Chelsea:
You’re talking shit.
- Posted at 12:45 PM · Permalink · Print · 5918 views · Last indexed by Google on the 9th May 2008
- Tags: History, Jonathan Dyer, Miscellaneous, Roman Abramovich
Excellent reply………. should be sent to The Guardian and see whether they have the balls to print it!
Great pay off Jonny!
Taylor’s a bitter Scouser who, seeing Arsenal and Man Utd in decline knows that, if it wasn’t for us, Liverpool would be cleaning up for the next five years. He’s also something of a fraud: basically got himself a reputation as a football expert about 20 years ago when nobody else was interested and held on for dear life ever since. Just another hack, in other words.
Rogan Tosh!
Yet another rant dressed up as meaningful comment. Apart from anything else his cringeworthy defeatism is staggering. Now confronted with the same title winning chances the rest of us faced every season (for decades) he advocates giving up. Little short of backbone are we Rogan?
Most of football was sick to the back teeth of watching the same clubs win everything each season. Of course if Chelsea win everything that will be no better, that’s obvious. But so far we have won one, minor, domestic cup and one league title. It’s hardly a crushing blow to a generation of fans.
Many factors have adversely affected football, all seater stadia (and which club is that down to?); too much exposure on TV, gross lack of competition (you knew in advance which clubs would win everything), players paid obscene wages, ticket prices far too high.
Oddly enough all these things were eating away at football well before Roman arrived in SW6. You’d expect an academic whose field is the social impact of football to know that.
Well written Jonathan. Being a fully fledged Guardian reader I was spitting at this article from this alleged academic. Pleasantly surprised by Kenny Sansom though.
I believe I have Rogan Taylor’s email address and seriously think you should send this retort to him for furthert comment.
I too, had three words in mind for Rogan Taylor
“You’re a c**t”
What sort of twat is called ‘Rogan’ anyway?
I saw this posted on another website but they’d cut out the bit about where the “Football Industry Group” were based. I could hear a high pitched whining as i read the article and thought there must be a scouser nearby, the above article explains it. Rogan Taylors (sorry, “Dr” Rogan Taylor) e-mail address is easily obtained via Google, though I personally wouldn’t lower myself to e-mailing someone that i hold in such low regard. Perhaps if enough people did he’d have to change his e-mail address and Liverpool could have a minutes silence for it before their next home game. You know they want too.
Top reply to the self imposed football expert - commonly known as TWAT!
I could hardly believe what I was rading this morning. This article should definitely be sent to the sad scouser, and to the Gaurdian, to see if they have the bottle to print it.
I’ve also just read an article stating that the scouse ‘keeper - his name is insignificant - who was sent off at the Bridge last week, hopes Barca beat us by 4 goals in each leg because of his ‘unjust’ sending off. Well that just summs up the sad scousers. What he fails to recognise is that if he had kept his hands by his side, he wouldn’t hasve been sent off. Muppet.
It’s about time that the football world forgot about Chelsea ruining football, and comments like ‘they have no history’. Instead step back and look at Liverpool’s history, and I’m not talking trophies here either. Heysel and Hillsborough - which other club can boast such devastation and death in their history?
Answer me that one Rogan Josh!!
i can’t even believe you lots read the Guardian, what a terrible waste of paper. And i’m a student!
What chance have we got trying to defend ourselves against increasingly irrational rival fans if so-called academics spout the same anti-Chelsea crap so beloved by our media!
Take a look at the Football Industry Group’s Liverpool Uni website - there’s a photo of the esteemed ‘Dr.’ Rogan Taylor standing next to the equally annoying Phil Thompson: not wanting to stereotype, but the Dr. does have the look of a short-arse, high-pitched, moustachioed, annoying Red Scouser. ;-) “Calm down, calm down…”
Great stuff as usual, Jonathan.
la guardia,
Which English newspaper would you recommend?
If you require a daily newspaper that encourages you to think for yourself I would recommend the times or independent (compact editions, of course). These newspapers sufficiently; critique socially accepted constructions of our society, seldom add ’spin’ or obvious preference to any belief, and encourage the double-loop method of thinking (relating everything back to core beliefs and being able to add new notions to it), as opposed than the Guardian attempt to single-mindedly critique everything, regardless of hypocracy or the need to actually encourage free thought. I also feel the guardian has a rather dim view of life - promoting pessimism, and it appears to print anything that will seem opposed to other papers, (this makes it a different read, but it ‘tries’ too hard to be different - all too similar to those goth kids you see- wanting to be different from the rest, but not actually realising that they arent portraying what they truly feel). This is on the same tangent as the reply johnathan has written- the guardian article author knows what he writes is not truth, simply wants to make an obvious statement to attract people who feel this is the alternative and unbiased view. In truth it is neither, simply a poor attempt to rouse the chelsea haters and put forward a view that will give guardian readers something to parrot in the pub when they want to argue with a mate’s common view.
any guardian fanboys or other paper afficionados please make your polite beliefs known
to avoid the moderator closing these comments I should relate this to chelsea -
as we all now know; if you are a chelsea supporter, don’t bother with the guardian
Wrong Goth, wrong. I read the Guardian for the exact reason that it is more impartial than all of the others with the possible exception of The Indie. The Times is just The Sun for those that can read! And this mornings article quoted the pro-Chelsea as well as the anti-Chelsea so they can’t be accused of not being balanced in this case. I have rarely found them anything other than objective about most football teams. yes The Grauniad has some anti-Chelsea column writers, but so do all the papers, its what they’re paid to do. I’d love to have a job that involved me writing about football, and do you think I could keep my anit-Liverpool/Arsenal/Manure views inside. Fat chance. Nice retort though.
BTW on FM2006 I just played Barcelona at home and won 1-0 form a Frank L penalty. I’d settle for that!
I always thought the Guardian to be a decent newspaper. I even bought a copy today ! How strange that they should allow their pages to be taken up by this type of tabloid pap. If they’re going to have a go, let it at least be an intelligent argument. The fact is that the money brought in to the game by Chelsea has been a shot in the arm for English football, saving numerous clubs from going bust e.g Leeds (Bates millions), West Ham (Cole and Johnson) and Manchester City (SWP) to name just three. And the defeat at Boro was proof that Chelsea are not the all powerful leviathan that the media likes to think they are. They can be beaten (so long as it isn’t very often!).
Can’t believe you’re bothered about this kind of tosh from the Guardian, like anyway vaguely interested in sport even reads the Guardian.
Was reading a great article with Arrigo Sacchi last night and the way he talked about the great AC Milan side of the early 90s made me think of our current situation. On the bench every week was one of Van Basten, Rijkaard, Gullit, Savicevic, Desailly, Boban, due to the three foreigners rule.
But that didn’t stop Milan going out and buying the best players - usually after they’d destroyed Milan in European competition (Weah particularly springs to mind). That was becasue, in Sacchi’s words, Milan wanted to dominate domestically ie. they bought all the best players just so their rivals couldn’t. Exactly what Chelsea get accused of now.
Poor old SWP….I guess the answer is step up to the plate, just like those great players did.
btw, if it wasn’t for RA’s money West Ham would now be in adminstration or better, playing in the Southern Counties League as AFC Bethnal Green.
I’m not a chelsea fan but but its unfair for so much hardwork of arsenal and man utd in the past being overthrowned by just chelsea in a year
whther you like or not, united arsenal and liverpool are still better and will still conquer
It is encouraging that the guardian at least published both sides of the story. I would like to think the editorial staff cried with laughter at the anti-side and published it to expose the nonsense.
Interesting that, unlike Kenny declaring his bias, the good doctor chose not to. So much for disclosure.
havinalaff in auckland
P.S. Some of us who are interested in the number of angels who can dance naked on a pin head feel balance is a desirable attribute.
I “heard” that if they want to be taken seriously, people with research doctorates provide sources for their wild claims.
Otherwise they run the risk of looking like cocks.
Steve from Perth Australia/Chelsea WA Supporters club
I replied the same day to the Gaurdian, about the absolute garbage written by Rogan (whoever) I still can’t beleive that to have history you must have won something more than a few times. It’s an insult to all the other football teams Professional or part time that exist throughout the world. In fact all that you mentioned has been spelt out to them. Lets see if we get a response from them.
shamnex is a funny man, im loving his delusion.
“The Times is just The Sun for those that can read!”
grocer jack - this is the first time I have disagreed with you…
although I like your result in Fm 2006…
much love
Is it Chelsea’s fault Arsenal have lost 9 games this season? Is it Chelsea’s fault half of ManU’s signings over the last 3 years failed? Is it Chelsea’s fault not 1 of Liverpool’s strikers have scored a goal in 2006?
How can Chelsea be responsible for what really are the failings of the ‘great teams’ to excel. Do you hear Wigan complaining? Do you hear West Ham complaining? Honestly stop whinging and whining and throwing mud and just try to play better football. Score some goals win some points buy some decent players (there are more out there than just the ones we want to buy) and for gawd’s sake shut up. I thought football was a man’s game but all we hear are cry babies.
I saw the article at GU yesterday, and thought that Dr. Rogan Taylor must be a hardcore scouser. He whinges like one, in any case.
Cheers for adding the link to the picture of the in-no-way stereotypical Dr. Taylor, Blogmaster. Not only is he a buffoon, but it appears that he allows Stevie Wonder to choose his ties for him.
If it’s any help Jonathan i emailed Taylor yesterday with a short note regretting his absolute lack of scholarship and his splenetic attitude. Shame really because he has often been a sane voice aout football - but the he is a liverpool fan and we just beat them again haven’t we?
Have to note that Kenny Sansom’s piece hd all the ingredients that Taylor’s didn’t - rational argument clear thought and good criticism.
Rogan Taylor’s email address is rogan@liv.ac.uk
I’m a Liverpool fan who just got this link from a civilised Chelsea fan who quite rightly has been giving the article by Taylor an absolute caining. The man’s an embarassment to the team I support and the place of my birth.
But what I can’t understand is how this then prompted the following comment from Blue_Tone…..
“It’s about time that the football world forgot about Chelsea ruining football, and comments like ‘they have no history’. Instead step back and look at Liverpool’s history, and I’m not talking trophies here either. Heysel and Hillsborough - which other club can boast such devastation and death in their history?”
Please, I implore you, keep your poisonous opinions to yourself. Your comments go beyond football and good taste. I was unfortunate enough to be in the Leppings Lane end on that horrible day. I watched people die at a football match. No-one at LFC BOASTS about either of these tragic events you idiot. So instead of using your single brain cell to offend people on matters you nothing about, concentrate on enjoying the success that your club is currently enjoying.
One title and we’ve got an era of domination? That’s the biggest thing that bothers me. Where’s the traditional English apathy? Stiff upper lip? C’mon.
No one ever talks about how Abramovich reinvigorated the transfer market. Look at the teams that have happily taken the Russians money and not complained a bit about it. So why do they complain when Chelsea win?
And why has UEFA suddenly taken such a huge interest in the big money clubs that are ruining football? Had they never heard of Real Madrid? AC Milan? Inter? Barca?
For those who don’t like their Russians getting rich off of oil, congratulations, Abramovich no longer owns an oil company. He got paid pennies on the dollar for his Sibneft holdings. But thanks to the fact that his name appeared nonstop in the tabloids in 2003, he isn’t sitting in jail with his old partner M. Khodokorovsky.
Speaking of which, where was the moral outrage when Sibneft’s multi-million Pound sponsorship of CSKA Moscow was promptly cancelled without warning when Abramovich sold out to the state? Why doesn’t UEFA care about the illegal breach of contract that has thrown their Cup holders into a state of economic chaos?
Let’s face it: it’s easier to kick a rags to riches Russian peasant (Abramovich was an orphan who started in business selling dolls) than to kick the Russian Bear that raised him.
Typical Grauniad, dressing up their bile as some sort of high brow academic opinion. What a load of bollocks.
Kenny Samson has been round the block a few times and he knows London football. I will stick with him rather then the bitter Scouser.
Where is the connection between “hungry russians” and the question “Whether Chelsea good for PL, or not?” I have not found one.
Where is the connection between Chelsea being ” the small club” and the same question? Could not find one as well.
Dr. Taylor just spitting his guts in anger instead of making argumented dispute. It is F for this paper “doctor”.
Hey those of you that read The Sun, there was an interesting article from Pele-Remember him watching us with Chalton at the Bridge?. I thought it a bit of time before somebody shared my views. I thought this applies not only to Cole but could easily be 10 Chelsea players. We really need to ’stop the flicks and tricks’ if we are to be a great side, especially before matches are wrapped up. Hands up on that one? It leaves me wishing we could go back in time and watch the likes of Di Matteo, Petrescu, Sinclair, Wise, Poyet-it was all about ‘romantic football’.
Way off topic though!
Guardian is classically an Arsenal paper, seeing as many of its readers are leftish north london types (eg Melvyn Bragg, a gooner). But its football coverage has improved alot recently and it has some pretty decent (and balanced) writers. The trouble with any pro-and anti-case is that they always present a singular view so are probably worth ignoring - pretty low form of journalism. Most people can see more than one side of a debate (which is true of Sansom’s piece). Though this Rogan fellow does seem particularly irksome and is asking for a (verbal) slap.
If anyone interested the Telegraph always been much more Chelsea favoured, which makes sense given they both have similar constituencies (ie west london people with a bit of cash). Sadly, Telegraph footy coverage, which used to be the best by a mile, is now mainly rubbish like the rest of the paper, with exception of Henry Winter. The Times, which is a comic generally, does have a couple of decent football writers but just seems a shame to buy a paper that is part of an overall dumbing down of considered British journalism.
As one of 18,000 core Chelsea supporters ( I sure there are more but who am I to argue), I was not too pissed when we lost to Middlesborough as I thought it would give us (even) more focus, and further give the rest of the PL a boost and the incentive to provide a more interesting competition.
However, since reading Mr Taylors peice in the Guardain I now hope that Chelsea buy every good player (especially targets of the teams with a Glorious Past) and win the PL and FA Cup for the next 20 years non stop - leaving the League Cup as the only real competition, for the “Big teams” with “Real history” and “home grown talent” (Arsenal???) , to compete for- even if it is just to piss that half wit “academic” off even more - which would be nice!
In future, instead of us all wasting our time reading nonsense such as this can every post, article, comment etc on any CFC related website that has been submitted by a supporter of Liverpool F.C. simply be pre-fixed with the warning - Bitter, Whining LFC alert - a bit like the warning on a fag packet.
Liverpool did very nicley out of their own financially dominant position as have Arsenal ann Man. United. When all is said and done, despite our relative lack of trophies and 20 years fighting to ensure the club survived we are still 5th on the all time attendance lists. That is a FACT, as opposed to opinion, and speaks volumes in regards to the size and potential of CFC. Goodbye Mr. Taylor - another lazy, self-pitying, whining, bitter LFC supporter (Note not Scouser - LFC supporter)
Core support of 18,000? What might Liverpools core support be? Even their own fans moan about the lack of locals at Anfield and the huge amount of Out of Towners (as they call them). Liverpool, despite their success = small time.
Good to see the reaction that this has provoked - the general feeling, as always, seems to be that we don’t get a fair deal from the media. I was pretty surprised at the Guardian for printing something so poor - you expect it from the tabloids and even when the broadsheets are critical there is usually some substance behind it. I doubt that the childish comment about the 70’s team spending half time under hairdryers would have even made one of the redtops though.
The accusation that we’re whining about it is pretty shallow. We’ve never really been that well liked - a couple of decades of Batesy winding up virtually every hack in the country saw to that - but I suspect that most of us really don’t give a flying f**k whether we’re loved or hated. The one thing we do hope is that when people are critical that they at least try and be balanced about it.
It’s always interesting to hear what oppo fans feel about the coverage they get. With teams like Arsenal and Liverpool, who we think are media darlings, you often find that their fans believe the same - that the media are biased against them.
There is no doubt that football fans are fairly bad for paranoia when it comes to what is written and said about their team, but it doesn’t alter the fact that in general the standard of football reporting in this country is laughably poor. The general reaction in Europe to the Sven / Sheikh NOTW sting was one of utter disbelief - one of the best managers England have had in recent years and the nation’s media are doing their utmost to hound him out with less than 6 months to go before the World Cup. They simply didn’t understand it.
In an ideal world, people would stop buying rags like the Sun and not listen to the constant stream of aural diarrhoea that is TalkSport. Then again, if everything written about us was fair and balanced, what would I have to bitch about on here?!
Nice comments Jonathan……….The extent to wich they hate us should be used as a motivation so we win day in day out…………..and I think the Special One is just conveying the same message to the team.
we should reply the world with every win that we are the best team in the world……its upto them whether they like us or not but we are gonna win everything……..week after week……day after day……and game after game………
GO CHELSEA GO…….
Jonny, I think we can safely say we’re getting a harder time from the press than any dominant club has before.
I’ve lost count of the amount of times I’ve read hacks saying they hope we lose to Barcelona to teach us a lesson - did you ever read anything like that when Man U, Liverpool or Arsenal were playing?
Oh aye, no question. Everyone feels that the media is biased against their team but it seems the nation and his wife is willing Barcelona to stuff us rotten next week.
But first, the slightly less glamourous task of sending Colchester back to, well, Colchester which is theoretically an easier task (showing my nasty Chelsea arrogant streak there…)
Well done! A superb rebuttal to an absurd attack.
some other points:
Sir Herbert Chapman’s famed Arsenal sides of the 30’s were bought and paid for,
plain and simply.
Throughout the Manchester United dynasty years of the 90’s, they were the most expensive
assemblage of football talent on the planet.
Before Bill Shankly brought success to Liverpool, they also had a scant history and fan base. They were clearly the second most popular and successful club in the city.
Perhaps if clubs other than Manchester United, Liverpool and Arsenal were able, or permitted, to build a winning tradition, increased fan bases would follow. Let us not be naive: this takes money. A lot of it.
Privilege and power do not invite others to partake of their bounty. Their high fortresses aren’t breached or even approached by the timid or impecunious.
Why is necessary or in any way “good for football” that the multi-national, mondo-corporate mega-giant Manchester United win yet another Premiership title?
If money is such a threat to the sport and fairness is truly desired, why not put-up-or-shut-up and have a strict salary cap and revenue sharing?
Taylor and other critics of his ilk are being disingenuous when they endlessly cite pound amounts. The reality is that Chelsea are forced to overpay for players.
Any club *not* Man. Utd., Liverpool or Arsenal are already starting with two strikes against them
(to use a baseball term). Here’s why: these clubs are privileged and spoiled. By virtue of their name-recognition, they have a much easier time attracting young talent as well as veteran stars.
They pick the players they want, and everyone else fights for the leftovers. If by chance they
somehow overlook a highly-desirable young player, they just go and buy him (e.g. Wayne Rooney, et al.)