Want to start writing regularly about West Ham?

I can understand where your coming from and in something like this I don’t think there is a right or wrong point of view, I guess football just means different things to different people. I personally think that there should be a concentration of talent at the top to allow the most beautiful football to be showcased to the world. I dont think it should necessarily be the same four teams every season at all, but it should always be the most talented teams that are at the top. Although I value excitement in a football match as highly as anything, seeing a scrappy and lucky technically poor team doing well feels a little bit like seeing a dumb person getting promoted to me.

I get pleasure from seeing the best in the world doing things that most people couldn’t even dream of aswell as all the drama and passion. Maybe for you footballs something you want to relate to more directly and appreciate the aspects of winning and losing and seeing people give it their all more?
Thats fair enough, although if you ask someone from any other country what theyd rather watch out of the chamions League and the Coca-Cola championship I think youd be in for a big surprise.

Is it just me or is your site dominated by the thinking that there is no-one in the country who supports a team outside the Top 4? It’s not about the specific order of the top 4, it’s the fact that the top 4 are always the same.

The vast majority of football fans in this country would welcome a change in the top 4. Even if you support a team outside the Premiership there is more interest in that happening. As someone else stated in an article on this site, other sports e.g. NFL have methods of ensuring more equitable distribution of resources leading to more exciting competitions. The current hegemony of Clubs in England and elsewhere in Europe will, eventually, lead to less interest and therefore lower TV revenue. This will be no bad thing.

Personally I take no interest in the Chumps League places or Chumps League itself cos West Ham have never looked like getting there. The Championship is a lot more interesting as there is more competition and you don’t know what is going to happen.

For me personally the whole appeal of the showcase competitions is to see the most talented footballers in the world facing off against each other and playing the best football. Seeing South Korea, PSV Eindhoven and Greece progress at the expense of better teams didn’t leave me feeling happy at all, it left me feeling empty, frustrated and robbed. Robbed of the privelige of seeing the most talented and entertaining teams looking horns, of being able to see which of the players who have been hyped for years can truly deliver and which are just over-rated. People have questions going into tournaments which remain unanswered when luck prevails.

Aside from the entertainment factor, one of the great things about football is the parity that exists, the fact that unlike real life, circumstances,luck and external factors tend not to have any control over what happens, its almost purely down to talent, hard work and endeavour. Its great that a players or teams success and accolades are based on these and tend to be deserved. Seeing less talented teams win throws this into doubt. It almost invalidates all of this which is in no way a good thing.

I think that the whole love the underdog thing doesn’t is pretty much a myth. Favouritism towards an underdog is usually based on occasions when it directly benefits someones own team (eg a Man U or Chelsea fan seeing
Barca get knocked out the champions league, or Liverpool get knocked out of the FA cup by Crystal Palace) or sometimes when their is affinity based on a team playing good football or having a romantic story behind them (West Ham, Newcastle, Reading, African Teams in the World Cup). Aside from that Im sure theres no real natural tendency to favour the weaker teams.

Im not trying to belittle teams who have done well unexpectedly. When a team has good players and wins and emerges through playing good football such as Porto in 2004 (who had some great players and a brilliant manager), Sevilla and Stutgart thats fair enough. Its just not good when teams who are less able play the percentages game and grind their way to success. It taints the game if it goes too far, football needs a heirarchy, at least to an extent..

Point #1

When you talk about ‘teams who no one thought would win’ aren’t you just buying into the hype & media build up around such matches? I’ve watched quite a few football documentaries & i’ve realised one thing that no matter how big the team or how much money they’ve got behind them, every match is just down to 22 men on the pitch competing against each other. The hype & money only JUSTIFIES the team & managerial talent of a club rather than making a match win a foregone conclusion.

CL final 2005 – i would have LOVED to have known what went on in both those dressing rooms that resulted in Liverpool fighting back like they did & AC Milan (reknowned for their defensive capabilities) screwing it up so badly. Was it the fans who cheered them on? I doubt that Milan’s fans were any less enthusiastic or vocal in their support for their team. Was it the pep talk that the managers or respective influential members of the team gave to each other? More possible seeing Gerrard’s famous on pitch antics. In the end none of the hype or media publicity mattered on that pitch, nor the fact that AC Milan had some of the biggest stars of European football in their team (Crespo, Seedorf, Shevchenko etc). What mattered was how they played that day & Liverpool delivered magnificently.

Now fast forward to CL final 2007. Nobody can deny that Liverpool were the more aggressive of the 2 teams. They suffered for lack of a decent striker but they kept pushing & poking at the Milan defence. Conversely Milan had learned their lessons & were patiently waiting for the crucial few opportunities that came their way & did not waste time in sealing the match win. Shouldn’t they be applauded for what they did? Sure the match might have been boring to some but Rafa ‘Tactician Extraordinaire’ Benitez was outdone by Ancelloti. Before the match i remember thinking that the game would be pretty evened up now that Inzaghi was playing instead of Gilardino & that told me that AC were serious about taking home the trophy rather than worry about what style of football they played. Personally i don’t care about styles of football too much. I do have my own favourite teams but I respect the result at the end of the day because i always think the teams deserve whatever they got from the match (unless there was some crucial refereeing that went wrong).

Point # 2

I totally agree with ‘rivalries & new winners sell papers’. Who doesn’t get bored with the same old winners all the time unless its your own team? But in terms of money coming in that generally goes only to the teams with more long-term success & a solid development program that makes them come back year after year to seriously challenge the competition. That’s the kind of thing that ‘one-hit wonders’ like Greece need. Their surprise win in 2004 on Portugese home soil was a massive accomplishment. Who doesn’t like seeing the underdog beat a good team on their own turf? Its inspirational to say the least & the stuff of legends. But they didn’t capitalise on the win afterwards with more national team development which only makes it seem that they didn’t deserve it.

I say bring on more surprises. Unpredictability is what makes this game great to watch!