West Ham Fan's letter to the board.

[Simster]

YES!!!

I WANT a toaster that does this! Im annoyed we havent got one

Does the toaster stop working when you get relegated? Mind you, most toasters barely last a f***ing year anyhow.

 

[1959]

I don't 100% disagree with you, but I think you're only highlighting the negatives. Before the Premiership and before Sky football was played in slum stadiums in front of crowds that were almost 100% white and almost 100% male. They were also prone to violence and football grounds could be scary places. I say 'crowds', but this was in the era when the big clubs routinely got attendances of less than 20,000 and England internationals were often played in front of a few die-hards rattling around the old rotting Wembley. Football was dying on its arse in the 1980s and was becoming increasingly marginalised. The Sky money changed all that and allowed it to become, well, 'modern'. The downside is, as you say, the arrival of a new breed of fan (often female) who wouldn't have been seen dead in a football ground in the 70s and 80s, and more crucially is happy to pay £50 to sit in a seat and then pay a further £5 for a matchday magazine, which is nothing more than a glossy brochure advertising her club's financial services.

And I don't like it. I miss the days of terraces and tear-ups (ooh, I like that as a title. Maybe I could sell it it to Danny Dyer), and I certainly miss the era of cheap tickets, but football had to change. It's a pity we can't / couldn't follow the German model but there you go. People have always hated money coming into football: professionalism, the abolition of the minimum wage, the abolition of 'Retain and Transfer', the introduction of Freedom of Contract, the arrival of subscription TV, all were opposed as 'the end of football as we know it'.

And as I said earlier, despite being counted as a Sky Sports subscriber I don't watch Premiership football. As far as premium packages go I'm actually a Sky Movies subscriber and for a few extra quid a month (MUCH less than the price of a single Albion ticket) they let me have the sports as well. If you like films you could use that as justification. Much cheaper than renting DVDs!

You're right, I was only highlighting the negatives.....I didn't want to ramble on for hours and send you to sleep.

You are right about the white male thing, although I'm not sure we have Sky to thank for that situation having changed. I feel it was going that way anyway. It has changed now but into something which is also not ideal. There are a few women and ethnic minorities and, thankfully, there is no racism/sexism apparent. But, if you look at a picture of the average Prem crowd, the vast majority are still white males but the difference is that they are nearly all one age grouping; middle-aged white men. It used to be that a kid could decide to spend his or her pocket money going to the game, because that's what it cost. Nowadays, kids only go to the game if their dad buys them a ticket and if he doesn't, they don't go and never get that habit, never feel quite the same involvement and affinity. This, I feel, has serious implications for the future of the game and could end up with the game dying on its arse for entirely different reasons from those you have mentioned.

I remember the violence well. I hated it and everyone who got involved. I stopped going to football for years because of it. I despise those books written by former terrace thugs. They make me puke with their appalling self-justification and skewed morals (yes, I've read bits and pieces).

I remember when Chelsea would get average crowds of 8000. Glasgow Rangers was the same before David Murray took over. Someone I know used to take deckchairs onto the terraces at Ibrox for him and his mates. And I remember when it was possible to go to Wembley and pay on the gate to watch England in a half-empty stadium.

Yes, it could be argued that football was dying on its arse and, for those who remember, Mrs Thatcher tried her best to kill it off altogether, it was so openly loathed by her core support.

There was a programme on a few weeks ago that argued that the resurgence of football was intimately connected to Paul Gascoigne's tears in that match against Germany, so I'm not entirely convinced that without Sky it would never have happened. Football was changing anyway. They just jumped on the bandwagon and got rich on the back of it.

But, you know, it's just an opinion. I appreciate you taking the time to read and respond so thoughtfully.

 

[janee]

Before Sky came on the scene, going to football cost about the same as going to the cinema, as it still does throughout pretty much the rest of the world. Nowadays it can cost perhaps ten times as much, and more. Roughly the same as going to the Royal Opera House. I don't see this as a coincidence.

The result is players who do not care about their club, their manager or their fans. But they do care about their Rolex, their Bentley, their gated mansion and their trophy women.

We are left with the situation where Mr Capello is paid 6m p.a. while the second-highest paid manager at the World Cup was on £500,000 (according to The Times).

It has turned out exactly as was predicted by many, many people in the early 90's who warned against Sky......they warned of overpaid underachievers playing in front of ripped-off mugs who have suddenly discovered a passion for football that was previously hidden. They warned of spiralling, prohibitive ticket prices that would result in a short-term boom followed by a whole lost generation of fans. This would all result in a dreadful, underperforming national team and a league dominated by just two or three clubs packed with foreigners. It will be just like Scotland if we're not careful, they said.

Many people at the time scoffed and mocked these prophecies of doom and gloom, arguing precisely the opposite....that Sky's money would result in cheaper tickets, better players motivated by vast salaries and an invincible national team of superstars. Guess which newspaper group followed that line?

That's why I would argue that if a person subscribes to Sky TV, they are part of the problem. I mean no individual / personal offense by that. It's the way I saw it in 1992 and the reason I would never have Sky Sports in the house, something that has made me fairly unpopular with the kids, but there you go. It's just an opinion, that's all.[/QUOTE]

This

 

[Brovion]

....
But, you know, it's just an opinion. I appreciate you taking the time to read and respond so thoughtfully.

It's a perfectly valid opinion and likewise I appreciate you taking the time to reply to me. And there is a lot of truth in what you say. Germany manages to have a competitive national league (and a competitive national side) without feeling the need to rob the fans blind. The Sky 'problem' if you like is just symptomatic of the English clubs' greed. Even before the advent of the Prem the big clubs passed a rule that for league games the home club kept all the gate receipts (they used to be shared) This obviously favoured the big clubs over the small ones - and they've kept taking more and more money ever since.

 

[The Spanish]

the obsession with money can be understood a little bit referring to the above posts, when football was f***ed and it wouldnt be overly dramatic to say could have stopped completely in England at a couple of points in the eighties. you dont have to have a long memory to remember people who are now well ensconsed in the premier league being stony broke. the money now may be killing the soul of the game but i do see how spending money like drunken sailors is a natural response to the dark days only a few short years ago.

 

[Steve Foster]

You can get tickets for the ROH for £10 - I wish I could buy Albion tickets at that price






That statistic about the Arsenal game is a bit misleading. It may not have sold out but we got over 30,000 at a time when football crowds were much lower. And don't forget that it was in the summer holidays when lots of people are away (it's also wedding season, one of my Albion-going mates got married that day and a lot of his friends went to the ceremony instead of the game). And don't forget that we may not have sold out Arsenal but we did sell out for Tottenham barely a year before.

Since those days, the population of Brighton has increased and football attendances have risen, both of which should make it easier to sell out Falmer.

And why should a large student population not come to games? When I was a student, I went to watch my local team as do thousands of other students. They may not be lifelong supporters but I'm sure we'll get plenty coming along.

We never actually got a 30,000 crowd at the Goldstone in all of the 4 seasons that we were in the top flight. The biggest gate was 29,682 against Liverpool in 1979.
Whilst the population of Brighton has increased, unfortunately seaside towns/cities have a greater fair feckle number of supporters. Many people retire to the coast & have allegiances elsewhere. Yes I know Blackpool have risen to the Premiership, but even their most ardent supporter will know that it will be only for a short period. Some cities that are not seaside resorts seem to perform & have larger crowds, however, in a diversified city like Brighton there are far more attractions for people to part with their cash.

 

[clapham_gull]

We never actually got a 30,000 crowd at the Goldstone in all of the 4 seasons that we were in the top flight. The biggest gate was 29,682 against Liverpool in 1979.

Sure we got a bigger crowd in the FA Cup against Norwich in 83.

 

[Simster]

Sure we got a bigger crowd in the FA Cup against Norwich in 83.

28,800

 

[Gwylan]

We never actually got a 30,000 crowd at the Goldstone in all of the 4 seasons that we were in the top flight. The biggest gate was 29,682 against Liverpool in 1979.
Whilst the population of Brighton has increased, unfortunately seaside towns/cities have a greater fair feckle number of supporters. Many people retire to the coast & have allegiances elsewhere. Yes I know Blackpool have risen to the Premiership, but even their most ardent supporter will know that it will be only for a short period. Some cities that are not seaside resorts seem to perform & have larger crowds, however, in a diversified city like Brighton there are far more attractions for people to part with their cash.

That's nit-picking in the extreme - 29,000 is scarcely miles away from 30,000. Remember, we only need to get 22,500 to sell out Falmer.

I really don't understand the point you make about having allegiances elsewhere. Yes, they may support other teams but if you're a football fan from, say Mansfield or Northampton, living in Woodingdean, I reckon you'd be more likely to be a regular at Falmer than trekking a couple of hundred miles up north. I spent 20 years living in London and while I came back to the Goldstone regularly, I also went to matches at Highbury, WH Lane, Selhurst Park and Craven Cottage quite regularly (not to mention rugby matches). I'm sure we're not going to attract 50,000 or 60,000 supporters to Albion matches but I think just over 20,000 is not going to be too hard (provided we don't fall down the league that is).