Moaning, Critical Fulham Fans

I go back to the early 60's as a supporter who used to live in London and go to all the home games. Whilst we are obviously in deep sh*t, I'm amazed at the nasty negativity of many fans, especially on the offal. I don't remember it being quite like that in the past - there were always moaners of course.

I was interested to read Reg Matthewsons memories of the same period, on the offal. Reg was a solid, dependable defender (could do with him now). This is what he says:

"What really stood out for me at Fulham were the supporters. At Sheffield the fans were very critical and their mood could change very quickly, but they were first class at Fulham. They never seemed to lose heart, and never turned on players. Even when we were relegated they never stopped supporting the team.”

Hmm. Oh for that support now.

Full article is at:

http://www.fulhamfc.com/Club/News/NewsA ... ewson.aspx

 

Yes. The reference to Reg getting "30 Quid" in his pay packet was a reminder of their much lower status in those days.

I've often wondered where the money went in those days. They used to regularly get 23,000 when they were in the 1st Div (now EPL). If the players were getting 50 quid a week each, who was getting all the rest. A quick calculation says they might take about 15k on the gate, pay the first team about 1,500 max (Haynes was on 100 / week), giving a weekly nett of over 13.5k. Lot of money in those days. It certainly didn't go into ground maintenance - it was standing on 3 sides, and uncovered on 2.

Perhaps Tommy Trinder snaffled it all.

 

Yes indeed. For me as a junior, it was two bob - (translation, two shillings) and sixpence for a programme. But big crowds, low salary bill, low maintenance expenditure - where did it all go.

 

perhaps to the owners? i dont know if the same was the case in england, but i know that in sports like baseball the owners were loaded (and still are).

 

To be honest, I'm not *tremendously* bothered by this. Professional sports must have started because some guys decided they could turn a profit by selling tickets to a bunch of people who would watch other people who were really good play sports. While the business concerns and individuals that owned teams "back in the day" certainly had money, I have to guess it was George Steinbrenner in the 1970s who started the paradigm shift where you had to have LOADS of money and be willing to spend it in order to be a good owner.

Or I may just be talking out my ass here.

 

Internet boards generally attract the most negative among us(they're certainly the loudest and most repetitive!!). I know the offal is not an accurate sample of Fulham supporters.

But I'm biased, I tend to be of the "the only good thing about the good old days is that there gone" point of view.

 

Doesnt it also have to do with the fact that players dont stay with a team as long as they use to. As sports have become an ever larger business, players are always moving around. To the fans this appears to be a lack of loyalty. Just as they start to like a player, he leaves.

 

Curt Flood help start free agency in MLB and it's been getting tougher and tougher to follow teams ever since. You've got to have a program to learn all the new names and faces. I'm loyal to a fault, but it is frustrating. It relates to most sports. The smaller teams can't hang on to the quality players and the fans get tired of replacing the stars and struggling year after year.

 

The majority of the Fulham fans at the offal are horrible. There is nothing special about them. They don't even really support the team. One woman referred to Dempsey as a "numpty" after his performance against Newcastle. They're simply no different than any other English football team's fans... which is kind of sad, because Fulham fans really can't afford to be like everybody else.

For Fulham to have any kind of hope of staying up in the Prem the fans are going to have to forget about playing football in Europe and concentrate on supporting Fulham staying up year after year. Fulham simply isn't going to be a good Premier League team ever when at least 10 or 11 of the teams will always be bigger and better supported clubs.

 

Depends what you mean by a "good Premier League team". If we play quality football, (which earlier this season we did at least occasionally), and win more than we lose, then in my book that's "good". The trouble in recent matches is that we seem to have lost belief in our ability to play well, and end up hoofing and hoping. I'd regard us as good if we are entertaining, honest and around mid-table.

 

By "good" I mean UEFA quality or thereabouts.

The problem is you can't play "quality" football and get results against better teams, and results are all that matter. So more often than not Fulham will have to resort to a Bolton style of play just to survive when things aren't going so well.

 

BTW, I don't even know what a "numpty" is, and I was brought up in London! Perhaps its a compliment.

 

It is more or less synomous with stupid.

Not all the fans are horrible of course. White Witch is a great example of a noble Fulham fan.

 

I found a definition in the Urban Dictionary. Scottish derivation which would explain my ignorance of it:

Scottish usage:
a) Someone who (sometimes unwittingly) by speech or action demonstrates a lack of knowledge or misconception of a particular subject or situation to the amusement of others.

b) A good humoured admonition, a term of endearment

c) A reckless, absent minded or unwise person

a) "No. That wisnae wit she meant, ya big numpty!"

b) i.e. "Silly billy", "You big dafty"

c) "That numpty's driving with no lights on!"