21-09-2016, 19:41
My typing finger has just come out of physio and has been declared fit to take on the keyboard once more, so here goes.
Once again, Matt, thanks very much for that. Interesting stuff. None of the results really surprise me, apart perhaps from the 60/40 split on FA Cup replays. I really thought the gap would have been wider. Perhaps it`s just sentimental old farts like me that would like that particular competition to be preserved in aspic as far as possible.
I`m sorry if you thought I was `belittling` your argument over travelling costs, Dev. I didn`t intend to offend you in any way at all. It`s just that in the course of this thread you`ve made one or two very subjective statements that I really don`t follow and - this, after all, being a fans` forum and therefore a discussion group - I feel I have the right to question. ( I could also make the observation that your comment of 'Love you all dearly. Above all you have the right to be wrong.' is ever so slightly condescending and patronising. It suggests that anyone who holds a different opinion to you is clearly a penny short of a shilling. I may indeed be a penny short of a shilling - that opinion has indeed been voiced more than once - but I don`t enjoy having it pointed out. I also have - and always have had - a knee-jerk adverse reaction to being patronised. Several of my ex-bosses will testify to that). If I`m over-reacting, I apologise unreservedly
As I think I said earlier, Dev, I fully accept your point as regards travelling costs for clubs on the geographical extremities. That`s pretty much why the likes of Barrow and Workington dropped out of the league some years ago. As you said yourself, however, Torquay is where it is. It`s where it always has been; in fact it`s where it was when Torquay United joined the Football League in 1927. Why is it suddenly the insurmountable problem that is wasn`t 90-odd years ago when travelling was a lot more difficult and expensive (relatively) than it is now? I also made the point that, under your suggested format, the reduced travelling costs would be more than offset by the loss of revenue as a result of the reduced fixture list; 15 home games, compared to 23 at the moment. That`s a reduction of about 35%, by my reckoning. Any thoughts on that?
When it comes to `belittling`, I think you did a fairly efficient job on Matt`s comment about not fixing what ain`t broke. Can I put forward a few facts that actually tend to support his view?
This completely malfunctional and decrepit league system that we are apparently so keen to trash supports - and has done for many years - 92 fully professional football clubs. That is way, way more than anywhere else. In fact, I think I`m right in saying that it is more than double that of any other country in the world; even Brazil. (If anyone know otherwise, I`d be happy to be proved wrong). What is more, no clubs have gone bust / gone into administration for a few years now, whereas in other parts of the footballing world that is almost an everyday occurrence. What is so seriously broke about that? More on that subject in a minute.
The 'mismanagement of the 60s' that you refer to - again, another subjective statement that I think you need to justify - resulted in what I reckon to be the most successful period that club football in this country has ever enjoyed; the years from 1970 until 1985, when we were kicked out of Europe after Heysel. I haven`t looked up the exact stats, but an English club certainly won the European Cup 5 years running in the late 70s, not to mention several other years also. They also regularly brought home the Cupwinners Cup and the UEFA Cup to boot. If that`s the result of 'mismanagement', then let`s have more of it! (To my mind, the real mismanagement of our football started in 1992 when the Premier League was spawned; but you already know my thoughts on that subject.) That`s the legacy that Bob Lord and Bert Millichip left behind - and I don`t think it`s one they should be totally ashamed of.
You suggest that television wouldn`t be interested in our football if we didn`t have photogenic rent-a-quote managers like Mourinho, Conte, Wenger et al. Sorry, but I disagree. As it happens, I spent most of 1970 as a student in Spain - in Salamanca, to be precise. Like most 20-year old students - or perhaps it was just me - I spent a lot of time in bars. Every Saturday afternoon I could guarantee that a First Division (as it was then) match would be shown live on their TV and I distinctly remember watching both matches of the 1970 Cup Final - that was the year Chelsea beat Leeds after a replay - in a packed bar with a fantastic atmosphere. The locals were as into it as I was and I know for a fact that that interest is still there. What is more, Scandinavian countries have always had colossal interest in our football. We simply don`t need a mass influx of overseas players and 'glamorous' managers to generate world-wide interest and therefore tv income in and from our football; it`s always been there and it`s still there. If it`s so 'broke', why is that?
That`s enough for now. However, as some of you may have noticed this is a topic that seriously rattles my cage. That being so, there may be another diatribe later.
Once again, Matt, thanks very much for that. Interesting stuff. None of the results really surprise me, apart perhaps from the 60/40 split on FA Cup replays. I really thought the gap would have been wider. Perhaps it`s just sentimental old farts like me that would like that particular competition to be preserved in aspic as far as possible.
I`m sorry if you thought I was `belittling` your argument over travelling costs, Dev. I didn`t intend to offend you in any way at all. It`s just that in the course of this thread you`ve made one or two very subjective statements that I really don`t follow and - this, after all, being a fans` forum and therefore a discussion group - I feel I have the right to question. ( I could also make the observation that your comment of 'Love you all dearly. Above all you have the right to be wrong.' is ever so slightly condescending and patronising. It suggests that anyone who holds a different opinion to you is clearly a penny short of a shilling. I may indeed be a penny short of a shilling - that opinion has indeed been voiced more than once - but I don`t enjoy having it pointed out. I also have - and always have had - a knee-jerk adverse reaction to being patronised. Several of my ex-bosses will testify to that). If I`m over-reacting, I apologise unreservedly
As I think I said earlier, Dev, I fully accept your point as regards travelling costs for clubs on the geographical extremities. That`s pretty much why the likes of Barrow and Workington dropped out of the league some years ago. As you said yourself, however, Torquay is where it is. It`s where it always has been; in fact it`s where it was when Torquay United joined the Football League in 1927. Why is it suddenly the insurmountable problem that is wasn`t 90-odd years ago when travelling was a lot more difficult and expensive (relatively) than it is now? I also made the point that, under your suggested format, the reduced travelling costs would be more than offset by the loss of revenue as a result of the reduced fixture list; 15 home games, compared to 23 at the moment. That`s a reduction of about 35%, by my reckoning. Any thoughts on that?
When it comes to `belittling`, I think you did a fairly efficient job on Matt`s comment about not fixing what ain`t broke. Can I put forward a few facts that actually tend to support his view?
This completely malfunctional and decrepit league system that we are apparently so keen to trash supports - and has done for many years - 92 fully professional football clubs. That is way, way more than anywhere else. In fact, I think I`m right in saying that it is more than double that of any other country in the world; even Brazil. (If anyone know otherwise, I`d be happy to be proved wrong). What is more, no clubs have gone bust / gone into administration for a few years now, whereas in other parts of the footballing world that is almost an everyday occurrence. What is so seriously broke about that? More on that subject in a minute.
The 'mismanagement of the 60s' that you refer to - again, another subjective statement that I think you need to justify - resulted in what I reckon to be the most successful period that club football in this country has ever enjoyed; the years from 1970 until 1985, when we were kicked out of Europe after Heysel. I haven`t looked up the exact stats, but an English club certainly won the European Cup 5 years running in the late 70s, not to mention several other years also. They also regularly brought home the Cupwinners Cup and the UEFA Cup to boot. If that`s the result of 'mismanagement', then let`s have more of it! (To my mind, the real mismanagement of our football started in 1992 when the Premier League was spawned; but you already know my thoughts on that subject.) That`s the legacy that Bob Lord and Bert Millichip left behind - and I don`t think it`s one they should be totally ashamed of.
You suggest that television wouldn`t be interested in our football if we didn`t have photogenic rent-a-quote managers like Mourinho, Conte, Wenger et al. Sorry, but I disagree. As it happens, I spent most of 1970 as a student in Spain - in Salamanca, to be precise. Like most 20-year old students - or perhaps it was just me - I spent a lot of time in bars. Every Saturday afternoon I could guarantee that a First Division (as it was then) match would be shown live on their TV and I distinctly remember watching both matches of the 1970 Cup Final - that was the year Chelsea beat Leeds after a replay - in a packed bar with a fantastic atmosphere. The locals were as into it as I was and I know for a fact that that interest is still there. What is more, Scandinavian countries have always had colossal interest in our football. We simply don`t need a mass influx of overseas players and 'glamorous' managers to generate world-wide interest and therefore tv income in and from our football; it`s always been there and it`s still there. If it`s so 'broke', why is that?
That`s enough for now. However, as some of you may have noticed this is a topic that seriously rattles my cage. That being so, there may be another diatribe later.