[Albion] Where is Moises going? (Chelsea - 14/08/2023)

[Tyrone Biggums]

If you are referring to that guy in Australia called Miz then yes you are right in that he is the biggest bellend the Chelsea chavs have online. Lives in his flat on the other side of the world, probably couldn't even find London on a map, and spouts constant drivel as if he's a 16 year old child. This is a grown man for F's sake. I've never seen a more needy 'me me me' so called fan on line anywhere, and that even includes Arsenal's tools!

I've never heard of him. I'll go give it to him in Australian words.

 

[Sid and the Sharknados]

It's an upper class English word. The Americans don't, and shouldn't be expected to, have a full understanding of the infinitely complex English relationship with social class and how it is interwoven with sport (and every other aspect of life).

For any Americans reading, it's perfectly straightforward. - Association Football was codified and spread by Victorian public school boys (that's our public schools, not your public schools. Ours are called public but are not publicly funded. We call those state schools. These are the fee paying ones that you call 'private'. We call some of them 'private' too, but the older, more elite (more expensive) ones that the upper claases dominate: Eton, Harrow, Winchester, Rugby etc. are generally called 'public schools'.)

The public schools encouraged football and other sport (please don't add an 's' - it's considered plural without the need) as a means of controlling/tiring out the boys (or perhaps to prepare them for the violence of the imperial war battlefields). Every school had its own rules, generally defined by the space in which the games took place. Some happened in quads rather than on pitches. There were efforts to codify to enable interschool competition and this split proponents into those who supported the kicking game and those who favoured the handling game. - One became Association Football and the other Rugby Football, named after the public school (but the William Webb Ellis story is a myth).

Upon leaving school and taking their places as factory owners, vicars, teachers etc. the former public schoolboys encouraged the formation of Association Football teams in working class communities. These proved popular and, following the 1850 amendment to the Factory Act that granted workers Saturday afternoons off to pursue leisure activities, became useful in keeping the blokes out of the pub for a couple of hours. The working classes loved the game and adopted it as their own. It became virtually a religion in working class industrial communities. (Less so in more rural places like Sussex as farmworkers didn't see the benefit of the factory act and had to work on Saturdays.)

The association of the game with the working classes eventually made it 'Non U' (Check out Nancy Mitford) with the upper and middle classes (that's our middle classes, not the working classes that you call the middle class). They prefered to play rugby (Union that is - Rugby league comes later and is another story of code splits and upper class denegration of professionalism. See also 'gentlemen & players' in cricket).

The slang terms 'rugger' and 'soccer' from the abbreviation of the longer names of the two codes has become associated with the upper and middle classes. The working classes don't use the terms very much for fear of association with the upper classes. A bit of reverse snobbery is inherent in the game's culture. Even though many modern fans are not actually working class themselves, they still like to think of football as 'the people's game' (which internationally, it certainly is) and will avoid any references that may have upper class connotations.

The word 'soccer' is one such term. When English football fans hear the word they are not hearing a long used and pefectly sensible abbreviation of 'Association Football', they are hearing (old Rugbeian) Rupert Brooke's "Stands the clock at ten to three? And is there honey still for tea?" rather than (apprentice boy) William Blake's "Was Jerusalem builded here, Among those dark satanic mills?". They prefer the latter.

We all feel these class distinctions very deeply, but won't explain them and, if pressed, will deny that they have much impact, as we don't like to be seen to be making a fuss over nothing (even though we're very keen on making a fuss over nothing). Americans using the term, allows Englishmen of all classes to raise above our class prejudices and join together in taking a supercillious attitude to anyone who wasn't lucky enough to have been born English and "Won first prize in the lottery of life". (Cecil Rhodes - NO! FOR THE LOVE OF GOD - DON'T GOOGLE HIM!!!!)

In short:

Sorry, it's not you, it's us. Glad you left?

Back to Moises...

On the other hand I remember it being in notably more common use even as recently as my childhood in the 90s, and always find it weird when people get het up about it.

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

It's an upper class English word. The Americans don't, and shouldn't be expected to, have a full understanding of the infinitely complex English relationship with social class and how it is interwoven with sport (and every other aspect of life).

For any Americans reading, it's perfectly straightforward. - Association Football was codified and spread by Victorian public school boys (that's our public schools, not your public schools. Ours are called public but are not publicly funded. We call those state schools. These are the fee paying ones that you call 'private'. We call some of them 'private' too, but the older, more elite (more expensive) ones that the upper claases dominate: Eton, Harrow, Winchester, Rugby etc. are generally called 'public schools'.)

The public schools encouraged football and other sport (please don't add an 's' - it's considered plural without the need) as a means of controlling/tiring out the boys (or perhaps to prepare them for the violence of the imperial war battlefields). Every school had its own rules, generally defined by the space in which the games took place. Some happened in quads rather than on pitches. There were efforts to codify to enable interschool competition and this split proponents into those who supported the kicking game and those who favoured the handling game. - One became Association Football and the other Rugby Football, named after the public school (but the William Webb Ellis story is a myth).

Upon leaving school and taking their places as factory owners, vicars, teachers etc. the former public schoolboys encouraged the formation of Association Football teams in working class communities. These proved popular and, following the 1850 amendment to the Factory Act that granted workers Saturday afternoons off to pursue leisure activities, became useful in keeping the blokes out of the pub for a couple of hours. The working classes loved the game and adopted it as their own. It became virtually a religion in working class industrial communities. (Less so in more rural places like Sussex as farmworkers didn't see the benefit of the factory act and had to work on Saturdays.)

The association of the game with the working classes eventually made it 'Non U' (Check out Nancy Mitford) with the upper and middle classes (that's our middle classes, not the working classes that you call the middle class). They prefered to play rugby (Union that is - Rugby league comes later and is another story of code splits and upper class denegration of professionalism. See also 'gentlemen & players' in cricket).

The slang terms 'rugger' and 'soccer' from the abbreviation of the longer names of the two codes has become associated with the upper and middle classes. The working classes don't use the terms very much for fear of association with the upper classes. A bit of reverse snobbery is inherent in the game's culture. Even though many modern fans are not actually working class themselves, they still like to think of football as 'the people's game' (which internationally, it certainly is) and will avoid any references that may have upper class connotations.

The word 'soccer' is one such term. When English football fans hear the word they are not hearing a long used and pefectly sensible abbreviation of 'Association Football', they are hearing (old Rugbeian) Rupert Brooke's "Stands the clock at ten to three? And is there honey still for tea?" rather than (apprentice boy) William Blake's "Was Jerusalem builded here, Among those dark satanic mills?". They prefer the latter.

We all feel these class distinctions very deeply, but won't explain them and, if pressed, will deny that they have much impact, as we don't like to be seen to be making a fuss over nothing (even though we're very keen on making a fuss over nothing). Americans using the term, allows Englishmen of all classes to raise above our class prejudices and join together in taking a supercillious attitude to anyone who wasn't lucky enough to have been born English and "Won first prize in the lottery of life". (Cecil Rhodes - NO! FOR THE LOVE OF GOD - DON'T GOOGLE HIM!!!!)

In short:

Sorry, it's not you, it's us. Glad you left?

Back to Moises...

You have confirmed the American prejudice that Brits are obsessed with class . Or at least some are.

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

On the other hand I remember it being in notably more common use even as recently as my childhood in the 90s, and always find it weird when people get het up about it.

Indeed. When I was growing up (70s) it was widely used, especially by people who liked other sports like rugby. I didn’t know any posh people so nothing to do with class. Aussies I know all also call it soccer because they have their own football. There’s no such thing as a posh Aussie.

 

[Stato]

Oi! this thread is about Moises! NSC is not about derailing threads to talk about something entirely unconnected. That would just give opportunity for old bores to post overlong wordy BS that nobody should have to endure.

 

[Sid and the Sharknados]

Oi! this thread is about Moises! NSC is not about derailing threads to talk about something entirely unconnected. That would just give opportunity for old bores to post overlong wordy BS that nobody should have to endure.

The moment anything interesting, accurate or definitive happens re. Caicedo we'll be right back on topic.

This may take some time.

 

[Sid and the Sharknados]

Indeed. When I was growing up (70s) it was widely used, especially by people who liked other sports like rugby. I didn’t know any posh people so nothing to do with class. Aussies I know all also call it soccer because they have their own football. There’s no such thing as a posh Aussie.

Pretty sure a decent chunk of the Aussie cricket team are counter examples to that idea.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

It's an upper class English word. The Americans don't, and shouldn't be expected to, have a full understanding of the infinitely complex English relationship with social class and how it is interwoven with sport (and every other aspect of life).

For any Americans reading, it's perfectly straightforward. - Association Football was codified and spread by Victorian public school boys (that's our public schools, not your public schools. Ours are called public but are not publicly funded. We call those state schools. These are the fee paying ones that you call 'private'. We call some of them 'private' too, but the older, more elite (more expensive) ones that the upper claases dominate: Eton, Harrow, Winchester, Rugby etc. are generally called 'public schools'.)

The public schools encouraged football and other sport (please don't add an 's' - it's considered plural without the need) as a means of controlling/tiring out the boys (or perhaps to prepare them for the violence of the imperial war battlefields). Every school had its own rules, generally defined by the space in which the games took place. Some happened in quads rather than on pitches. There were efforts to codify to enable interschool competition and this split proponents into those who supported the kicking game and those who favoured the handling game. - One became Association Football and the other Rugby Football, named after the public school (but the William Webb Ellis story is a myth).

Upon leaving school and taking their places as factory owners, vicars, teachers etc. the former public schoolboys encouraged the formation of Association Football teams in working class communities. These proved popular and, following the 1850 amendment to the Factory Act that granted workers Saturday afternoons off to pursue leisure activities, became useful in keeping the blokes out of the pub for a couple of hours. The working classes loved the game and adopted it as their own. It became virtually a religion in working class industrial communities. (Less so in more rural places like Sussex as farmworkers didn't see the benefit of the factory act and had to work on Saturdays.)

The association of the game with the working classes eventually made it 'Non U' (Check out Nancy Mitford) with the upper and middle classes (that's our middle classes, not the working classes that you call the middle class). They prefered to play rugby (Union that is - Rugby league comes later and is another story of code splits and upper class denegration of professionalism. See also 'gentlemen & players' in cricket).

The slang terms 'rugger' and 'soccer' from the abbreviation of the longer names of the two codes has become associated with the upper and middle classes. The working classes don't use the terms very much for fear of association with the upper classes. A bit of reverse snobbery is inherent in the game's culture. Even though many modern fans are not actually working class themselves, they still like to think of football as 'the people's game' (which internationally, it certainly is) and will avoid any references that may have upper class connotations.

The word 'soccer' is one such term. When English football fans hear the word they are not hearing a long used and pefectly sensible abbreviation of 'Association Football', they are hearing (old Rugbeian) Rupert Brooke's "Stands the clock at ten to three? And is there honey still for tea?" rather than (apprentice boy) William Blake's "Was Jerusalem builded here, Among those dark satanic mills?". They prefer the latter.

We all feel these class distinctions very deeply, but won't explain them and, if pressed, will deny that they have much impact, as we don't like to be seen to be making a fuss over nothing (even though we're very keen on making a fuss over nothing). Americans using the term, allows Englishmen of all classes to raise above our class prejudices and join together in taking a supercillious attitude to anyone who wasn't lucky enough to have been born English and "Won first prize in the lottery of life". (Cecil Rhodes - NO! FOR THE LOVE OF GOD - DON'T GOOGLE HIM!!!!)

In short:

Sorry, it's not you, it's us. Glad you left?

Back to Moises...

Brilliant and amusing post.

I pity the TLR contingent sometimes.

Oh, and I have the 'American' poster to who you are presumably replying on ignore. Fancy that!

 

[Greg Bobkin]

Oi! this thread is about Moises! NSC is not about derailing threads to talk about something entirely unconnected. That would just give opportunity for old bores to post overlong wordy BS that nobody should have to endure.

And fish puns.

 

[Brovion]

The moment anything interesting, accurate or definitive happens re. Caicedo we'll be right back on topic.

This may take some time.

Yeah, this is like people chattering in the stalls at the theatre waiting for the next act to start. Think I might have time to nip out for a wee ...

 

[The Pilsbury Echo]

And fish puns.

And Chav Bellends

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

Pretty sure a decent chunk of the Aussie cricket team are counter examples to that idea.

That bit was slightly tongue in cheek

 

[Stato]

And fish puns.

This is not the plaice.

 

[Guinness Boy]

It's an upper class English word. The Americans don't, and shouldn't be expected to, have a full understanding of the infinitely complex English relationship with social class and how it is interwoven with sport (and every other aspect of life).

For any Americans reading, it's perfectly straightforward. - Association Football was codified and spread by Victorian public school boys (that's our public schools, not your public schools. Ours are called public but are not publicly funded. We call those state schools. These are the fee paying ones that you call 'private'. We call some of them 'private' too, but the older, more elite (more expensive) ones that the upper claases dominate: Eton, Harrow, Winchester, Rugby etc. are generally called 'public schools'.)

For any Americans reading it's perfectly straightforward. STOP calling a game 'football' when 99% of the on field touches are with the hand or arm and many of the players don't touch the ball at all. Then you can use 'football' for the correct sport and rebrand the NFL to something more appropriate. Fat blokes fighting league* or something.





*writes a disgruntled and dispirited Chicago Bears fan who is once again weighing up the value of Gamepass just to see us lose every game in the 4th Quarter and watch adverts for Popeyes and shit beer.

 

[The Rivet]

PIZI from Talk Chelsea site:

'The only upside of negotiating with Brighton so often is that at least we’re building a report with their owner/negotiating team. We’ll know how they operate and how to approach them. Whether it’s Boehly or Egbhali, having that relationship could give us a leg up on any future players we may be interested in.

If we’re able to smooth things out and get Caicedo it wouldn’t shock me at all if we use this business relationship to go in for Mitoma within the next year or two.'

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm

 

[Paulie Gualtieri]

But that’s football. Always has been. By that definition we will be destabilised again and we will destabilise others. If people decide to leave and their contracts allow them to do so then they will leave. All that matters is what’s next. I was disappointed for about 5 minutes that Potter etc left but then immediately intrigued by the new manager and the team he was bringing in. If it didn’t work out then that’s football as well. It has worked out. I guess we just see things differently but I think there are no guarantees in life and certainly none in football. My indifference towards Potter and the rest couldn’t be greater because they are no longer Brighton. Therefore I also couldn’t give a damn about their subsequent employers.

I don’t have an issue with Potter and co, it was clear why they went and beyond the pantomime I would show him any malice face to face.

I do take issue with that fat oaf **** who now runs Chelsea, who simply could leave us along in 3 separate raids (Our POTS, potter and team and thirdly Winstanley)

Chelsea have never had a likeable or relatable fan base and it would seem their ownership isn’t exactly bucking that trend either.

Yet despite all of this history, here they are again.

 

[Joey Jo Jo Jr. Shabadoo]

PIZI from Talk Chelsea site:

'The only upside of negotiating with Brighton so often is that at least we’re building a report with their owner/negotiating team. We’ll know how they operate and how to approach them. Whether it’s Boehly or Egbhali, having that relationship could give us a leg up on any future players we may be interested in.

If we’re able to smooth things out and get Caicedo it wouldn’t shock me at all if we use this business relationship to go in for Mitoma within the next year or two.'

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm

They shouldn't need to build a rapport with us, their (co) head of recruitment worked for us for years so should know how we work, there is no need for this getting a feel for each other bullshit or building some sort of relationship.

It certainly won't give them a leg up on any future player deals. They either bid what we think any player is worth or they'll be told no. It's really that simple.

 

[Green Cross Code Man]

at least we’re building a report

 

[Stato]

PIZI from Talk Chelsea site:

'The only upside of negotiating with Brighton so often is that at least we’re building a report with their owner/negotiating team. We’ll know how they operate and how to approach them. Whether it’s Boehly or Egbhali, having that relationship could give us a leg up on any future players we may be interested in.

If we’re able to smooth things out and get Caicedo it wouldn’t shock me at all if we use this business relationship to go in for Mitoma within the next year or two.'

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm

Secret footage of Chelsea developing a rapport with our negotiating team:

 

[Weststander]

Secret footage of Chelsea developing a rapport with our negotiating team:

From 1:30