|
As Max Boyce would have said........
|
26-10-2018, 17:15
Makes you want to cry, doesn`t it.
That was a long time ago, Dancing, Mind you he`s still around, as Dev says. He`s 90 apparently. 
Chesterfield / Mansfield, Blunts / Wols, Pompey / Southampton, Spurs /Arsenal, Republican / Democrat - these rivalries and hatreds are learned behaviours. They just aren't genetic. They aren't hard-wired. Prejudice is learned and stupid misbehaviour - the word says it all. Pre = before: Judice = judgement. It's environmental ADHD of the mental processes. (The potential for aggression, both in defence and attack IS however hard-wired both in chimps and man.)
It is such hard work to form a football club that disillusionment with Chesterfield alone won't be enough to sustain a new team as I've said. Unless the people concerned also genuinely wanted to run a team and give that project their heart and soul it would never get off the ground. And the effort involved would inevitably change them too. They'd no longer have time to be full of disillusionment and hatred. You have to take into account a new club would be enormously lucky to have reached the level of Staveley MW Reserves after a couple of seasons ....... It would be ages before the National League hoved into view. It just wouldn't attract enough of a crowd to be a serious rival OR to be viewed in the local psyche as the equivalent of a Stag. Children wouldn't be finding out early in their school days that it was their duty to hate it in the same way they're coached to hate Mansfield. You simply can't compare ancient rivalries with something new and fresh and different. But I'll say again a club founded solely out of HATE would be very fortunate ever to even reach the field. Its a commitment to the future and the game itself. (And you clearly don't know much about internal mechanics of academia or the sheer bitterness of the organisational politics it generates. I could also relate the opposite experience of working at a college, taken over by a larger college, which swore its determination to maintain the courses and ethos of its mergee. It was cannibalism, it simply swallowed down its prey and shat out all the pieces it found indigestible. But that doesn't have to happen either.) I don't know what would happen if a new club formed. All I'm saying is that it doesn't have to become an illustration of bitterness and division. There has to be the possibility of something good and better emerging, because its sheer existence alone would create so many potential futures ........ and we have no idea what Chesterfield itself will look like ten years down the line - anything from a sought-after housing development to the little club that gatecrashed the Premier League.
No ........ What I say usually goes. Straight down the pan that is!
All I'm saying is Dave Allen is well into his seventies. If someone set up a new club even with the eventual aim of destroying the current Chesterfield ........ the new club and Chesterfield could well be totally different creatures before they began occupying anything like the same space. I think any new club is good ........ and even TheMaclad's plastic clubs do have the potential to become the real thing eventually (which doesn't mean I don't share his feelings about Mr Tamplin, a name which does sound rather like a sexual offence. (I'd be amazed if many of Chesterfield's currently vocal "supporters" were prepared to put in the time and effort necessary for such a project.) |
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
