[Football] Football is better without fans - discuss

[Stato]

I certainly like a by-product of the current fan-less period: each game being played at different times, with no overlap at all.

As much as I'm a Saturday-3pm traditionalist, it's great having the games spread out across the whole weekend, and Monday evening as we currently have.

This has been a boon during time when we've had our options of things to do and places to go restricted. It also made me realise over the weekend that all the fuss about Soccer Saturday ditching Thompson, Le Tissier & Nicholas suggested that the motivation was to bring in more diversity, but probably missed the prime motivator. With only one Premier League game to watch on a Saturday at three o'clock, and a subsequent likely reduction in audiences, why would they continue to employ expensive old boys with little knowledge of anything below the top half of the Premier League instead of pundits who know a little bit about the leagues they'll be watching and who are presumably on far smaller wages.

 

[Frankie]

The only thing Football would be better without is VAR , I actually prefer watching the EFL now .

 

[Napper]

I'm less interested in any games that dont involve us. Interested int he scores etc but sitting down to watch the games not involving us is hard to get into.

Guess at the moment we dont know who the relegation rivals etc are so its hard to watch as a neutral personally.

 

[Beanstalk]

I think the idea that a home crowd improves their teams performance is overrated.
However I would argue that certain away players can be got at and put off their game.
Equally some players will feed off of it and get better when they are getting abuse.

So crowds can have an effect on individual performances IMO.

The stats would disagree with you - I think it is understandable to feel that we can have an effect on the pitch and we like to think that when a ground is "rocking" it can have a real effect, but the reality is there was no change in home advantage in the Premier League before and after lockdown (45% home wins, 31% away). This implies that fans have no effect on results at all. Whilst I agree that once in a blue moon a crowd can get under a player's skin, an individual does not make a team. Stats show that we don't affect the on field game.

My point was more that it is a lesser product. Football in this country is really fun because of passionate crowds filled with people's emotional connections to their clubs. I spent some time in New Zealand last year and the Kiwis who watched the PL all said that they'd love to go to any game in England regardless of the level. It was all about the crowds and the experience, not the undoubted quality on the pitch.

 

[zefarelly]

I play football every Sunday and we don't have any fans.

Which begs the question why is not having fans at bigger games such a big deal . . . . . it also highlight how massively overblown a bunch of over paid prima Donnas kicking a ball round a park is.

unless its the 92nd minute against Manure and Solly winding up to blaze one over the bar when you're 2-1 down against MAnure . . . then you NEED to be there.

 

[Hamilton]

But that's not what your opening post was talking about

I was merely replying to your observation that football without fans is nothing. Surely football without players is nothing. That's just keepy-uppy.

Is Solly a better player for not having the Albion faithful - me included - screaming at him to do something different?

Just asking.

 

[Hamilton]

I'm less interested in any games that dont involve us. Interested int he scores etc but sitting down to watch the games not involving us is hard to get into.

Guess at the moment we dont know who the relegation rivals etc are so its hard to watch as a neutral personally.

That's interesting. So your knowledge and awareness that there is a crowd at the game affects your enjoyment of the game. The quality of the football being played can be a little poorer but it is made up for you by the fans in attendance.

Still begs the question, dispassionately, is the football quality better without us there, or not?

Agree that the pressure is off at the moment until relegation prospects are known.

 

[ringmerseagulltoo]

Not a direct answer to the question posed but I do think the football on the pitch is different. I have no statistics to support the view, but it seems to me that there is far less conflict, either between players or with the referee. Without the crowd pressure, this may be a good time to try and adopt the Rugby ethic. Forlorn hope I realise.

Personally, I intensely dislike the fake crowd noise, hearing the actual interchanges is far more entertaining.

On the Rugby theme, I wish football would adopt the end of match philosophy that the final whistle is blown when there is a stoppage in play. That allows any attacking move to be concluded and relieves the ref of the need to make a final whistle decision during a phase of play that may end in a goal. Sorry, just realised that is nothing to do with the original post.

 

[Simster]

The only thing Football would be better without is VAR , I actually prefer watching the EFL now .

I'd rather they got rid of the current crap interpretation of the handball rule than VAR. That is what is putting me off. At least with VAR, they are slowly beginning to use it properly, but the handball law is absurd.

The ball flicks Maupay's hand - penalty
Forward heads a ball powerfully onto the Palace defender's arm 3 feet away - penalty
Forward heads a ball onto a Spurs defender's hand from 18 inches away - penalty.

All three were correctly given after VAR (which is a good thing) but simply show the handball rule is absolute shite (which is obviously VERY bad).

Then only time I think VAR proved to be crap was was when our ref overturned the Connolly pen. There was no "clear and obvious" mistake, thus the original decision should have stood.

 

[Pavilionaire]

For me, whether football is better or not with fans is of secondary importance.

I am questioning whether I want to give up a significant amount of time and money to continue attending live football where I am unable to celebrate a goal in the moment and where VAR can wreak havoc and f*ck up my day with impunity. If I decide to give up my season ticket I may well bin off the football altogether.

What is the point of watching a match as a neutral knowing the outcome is determined by a nerd in a booth and not by the action on the pitch? After the Man Utd debacle I binned off watching Palace - Everton and Spurs - Newcastle and I'm glad I did because that was 4 hours of progress in my garden rather than 4 hours of wasted time watching VAR-decided matches.

VAR is killing football.

 

[Poojah]

For me, whether football is better or not with fans is of secondary importance.

I am questioning whether I want to give up a significant amount of time and money to continue attending live football where I am unable to celebrate a goal in the moment and where VAR can wreak havoc and f*ck up my day with impunity. If I decide to give up my season ticket I may well bin off the football altogether.

What is the point of watching a match as a neutral knowing the outcome is determined by a nerd in a booth and not by the action on the pitch? After the Man Utd debacle I binned off watching Palace - Everton and Spurs - Newcastle and I'm glad I did because that was 4 hours of progress in my garden rather than 4 hours of wasted time watching VAR-decided matches.

VAR is killing football.

If VAR had stuck to its original mantra of correcting 'clear and obvious errors' there would be no problem with it. Every now and then, there are refereeing mistakes which are absolute travesties and deserve to be corrected, off the top of my head things like:

• Ben Thatcher failing to be sent off for committing GBH on Pedro Mendes
• Reading's ghost goal at Watford
• Frank Lampard's non-goal against Germany at the 2010 World Cup
• The hand of God
• Graham Poll awarding three red cards to Croatia's Josip Simunic at the 2006 World Cup

These examples have two things in common. First of all, they're memorable because they're freak incidents and therefore incredibly rare - retrospectively correcting them wouldn't have an adverse effect on the general experience of your average stadium-going fan. They were also all 'clear and obvious' - a correct decision could have been reached within seconds using no more than a standard, slow motion replay (and probably not even that).

No one cares whether someone's armpit is half a centimetre offside. The trouble is, it's difficult to justify the cost of the VAR infrastructure to only use it so sparingly, and I think therein lies the rub.

I have no doubt though, it would be absolutely the right way to approach it. Witnessing a VAR event as a fan in a stadium (well, y'know what I mean) should be a memorable and intriguing experience because you would know something quite unusual or unique had occurred whether you saw it yourself or not - being exposed to it several times during a single game (or even after one has ended) is just killing the best spectator sport in the world at its highest levels.

 

[zefarelly]

It is killing it . . . . another step towards an Amrican football style thing, a 10 hour marathon of utter shyte.

 

[Deleted member 2719]

[MENTION=34942]Dr. No[/MENTION] Would you say football is better without fans?

[MENTION=34942]Dr. No[/MENTION] is a proven liar.

Ask him if he is real Dr?

 

[RossyG]

[MENTION=34942]Dr. No[/MENTION] is a proven liar.

Ask him if he is real Dr?

Ok, I will.

[MENTION=34942]Dr. No[/MENTION] is Mouldy Boots right about your lack of qualifications?

 

[drew]

For me, whether football is better or not with fans is of secondary importance.

I am questioning whether I want to give up a significant amount of time and money to continue attending live football where I am unable to celebrate a goal in the moment and where VAR can wreak havoc and f*ck up my day with impunity. If I decide to give up my season ticket I may well bin off the football altogether.

What is the point of watching a match as a neutral knowing the outcome is determined by a nerd in a booth and not by the action on the pitch? After the Man Utd debacle I binned off watching Palace - Everton and Spurs - Newcastle and I'm glad I did because that was 4 hours of progress in my garden rather than 4 hours of wasted time watching VAR-decided matches.

VAR is killing football.

Disagree, what's killing the game are the inadequate referees in this country. Change how they arrive at offsides so it is seen with the naked eye rather than a line across the screen. That will eliminate that problem. Get rid of idiot refs like Moss (he ruled against Palace's goal at Villa last season when ball was clearly off the shoulder). I would also remove the reference to the 'clear and obvious' as it is to contentious. If a decision is wrong then it's wrong. I'm not advocating every decision is looked at but red cards, goals and offsides are fine. I would also expect them to make reference to things like Sheffield's non goal last season (Villa again) when clearly the technology failed.

As for celebrating a goal, I still do. If it get's ruled out so be it, I'll just celebrate the next one.

 

[Weststander]

I certainly like a by-product of the current fan-less period: each game being played at different times, with no overlap at all.

As much as I'm a Saturday-3pm traditionalist, it's great having the games spread out across the whole weekend, and Monday evening as we currently have.

I love that too, spoiled since Restart. Sadly, I’ve watched an awful lot of football.

Away teams have thrived without the aggression of home fans, refs have had no home fans screaming and whining to influence decisions e.g. knee jerk red cards after a cheat parachute rolls.

It’s not been all bad by any means, imho.

 

[PeterOut]

Maybe it's just me, but one of the few things I like more in these strange fan-less times seems to be the reduction in ridiculous reactions when a player is tackled.

With us in the stadium, it seemd obligatory to roll at least 3 rimes, scream to the heavens and then just lay there like a dead swan.

Not saying it has disappeared, but it does seem much reduced.

Maybe the snipers in the stands can't use the crowd for cover anymore, so fewer players get shot - or at least you would think some of them had been, from their reaction to a 'firm challenge'.

 

[Pint of Ale and a Burger]

Football needs fans and fans need football.

 

[Weststander]

Maybe it's just me, but one of the few things I like more in these strange fan-less times seems to be the reduction in ridiculous reactions when a player is tackled.

With us in the stadium, it seemd obligatory to roll at least 3 rimes, scream to the heavens and then just lay there like a dead swan.

Not saying it has disappeared, but it does seem much reduced.

Maybe the snipers in the stands can't use the crowd for cover anymore, so fewer players get shot - or at least you would think some of them had been, from their reaction to a 'firm challenge'.

Except for Leeds’s Klich at Bramall Lane on Sunday. The ultimate in cheating, followed by an attempt on goal.

 

[Motogull]

I do like your angle on this, and it is worth considering.

I am happy to come and watch you, so at least you have one fan.

I'll go too. And boo him.