Barstool facepalm

[sullanefc]

J. H. Christ. Reading some of the analysis here on the slagging of "barstoolers" by LOI fans is waaay too deep.

For as long as I can remember, football fans have been insulting other football fans on who they support.

1. Man City fans at the moment will get slagged as being former Blackburn fans back in the day and for being glory hunters.

2. Man Utd fans will be slagged for being not from Manchester.

3. Liverpool fans will be slagged for being constantly deluded about their teams chances of winning the league.

4. Celtic/Derry fans will get slagged for being Brits and not Irish.

5. Clubs from outside Dublin will be called culchies and teams from Dublin will be called heroin addicted, thieving scumbags.

Slagging/insulting is part of football. So if a "barstooler" gets insulted by a LOI fan for following a foreign team and not an Irish team, and he takes this to heart, then maybe he should stop following football. If it's his reason for not going to matches, then he needs to develop a thicker skin as a football fan. ( I'd assume it was just an excuse if someone told me they didn't go to LOI because of their perception of LOI fans having superiority complexes).

Similarly LOI fans get insulted when told that the standard is crap.

Some people who take this issue way too seriously need to learn to ignore the insults if they can't take it and lighten up a bit IMO.

[DannyInvincible]

J. H. Christ. Reading some of the analysis here on the slagging of "barstoolers" by LOI fans is waaay too deep.

...

Some people who take this issue way too seriously need to learn to ignore the insults if they can't take it and lighten up a bit IMO.

The insults don't apply to me, so it's not as if I'm posting from the "thin-skinned" perspective of being provoked or offended. We're discussing what might be conducive to ensuring more of the Irish football-following public can or will relate to the League of Ireland. I think it's an important matter that merits deep analysis. I'm not saying I have all the answers - osarusan has all of those, I believe - but it can't be a bad thing to have at least a discussion about it. Inter-club rivalry operates via a different dynamic altogether. For example, Manchester City fans slagging United fans for not being from Manchester is an intentional means of winding the United faithful up; it's a way for City fans to reassure themselves they're "more authentic" than their "glory-hunting" out-of-city counterparts. As far as I know, City fans generally have no interest in trying to convince such United supporters that City is actually the club for them. They want nothing to do with them. They just use them as ego boosters. On the other hand, most LOI fans would love to see the general Irish public get behind the league. Throwing insults and polarising potential partners would thus be counter-productive, surely?

Slagging/insulting is part of football. So if a "barstooler" gets insulted by a LOI fan for following a foreign team and not an Irish team, and he takes this to heart, then maybe he should stop following football. If it's his reason for not going to matches, then he needs to develop a thicker skin as a football fan. ( I'd assume it was just an excuse if someone told me they didn't go to LOI because of their perception of LOI fans having superiority complexes).

Similarly LOI fans get insulted when told that the standard is crap.

So are you saying that maintaining the present degree of polarised entrenchment is the way it always should be just because that's the way it is? And it's all their fault anyway for being thin-skinned? They should just take it on the chin, start being thick-skinned and take an interest in the League of Ireland for a change?...

[sullanefc]

To be honest, I don't think there is anything we can "say" that will convince our "barstooling counterparts" to come to matches IMO. If they don't get the buzz of live football regardless of meagre facilities (for the most part) watching lower quality football (compared to epl) then they are unlikely to become regulars despite anything we say IMO.

What may bring them might be prem league standard stadia, with bigger crowds and a higher standard of football, maybe. And even then, maybe a lot of them would still prefer to watch it in front of a TV as it is less hassle. Can't see any of that happening soon though.

For now though, slagging them makes ourselves feel "more authentic" and them as being "glory hunters" like your city-united example above. This is just football supporter one upmanship IMO.

[DannyInvincible]

I don't doubt that it might feel like banging ones head against a brick wall, but it's in response to pessimistic fatalism like that that I say something extra is required, be it imagination or whatever. "Imagination" is a cover-all term for what evidently hasn't been thought of or tried yet. That's not me trivialising the seriousness and difficulty of the task, nor is it me telling responsible parties how they should be invest their time and money, but it surely can't be the case that there's simply nothing to be done. I'm talking a long-term plan; not just some magical soundbite that'll be sure to win over even the most hardcore anti-LOIer in seconds.

[ger121]

Reading this thread the last few days is really giving me a headache. Maybe take it to the PM lads

[DannyInvincible]

Reading this thread the last few days is really giving me a headache. Maybe take it to the PM lads

I don't think what I'm saying is all that novel or revelatory, to be honest. It's pretty much stating what has obviously been the case for years - it's been well discussed on here - but, for some reason, someone took issue with a comment I'd made about imagination being evidently lacking - the FAI have led the way on that sorry front - and then misrepresented me. Is it broadly denied that more could be done to promote the league, by the FAI especially? Of course they could do more. LOI supporters have been saying that for years.

[ger121]

I don't think what I'm saying is all that novel or revelatory, to be honest. It's pretty much stating what has obviously been the case for years - it's been well discussed on here - but, for some reason, someone took issue with a comment I'd made about imagination being evidently lacking - the FAI have led the way on that sorry front - and then misrepresented me. Is it broadly denied that more could be done to promote the league, by the FAI especially? Of course they could do more. LOI supporters have been saying that for years.

Danny, I don't really have issue with what you're saying but it's the length of the replies, they're like mini novels! I'm not aiming this just at you but at a few posters on here. I think once you get into a heated debate that needs several long responses, I think it's time to go to the PM option and not clutter up threads.

[BonnieShels]

I don't think what I'm saying is all that novel or revelatory, to be honest.

Novella maybe...

[EAFC_rdfl]

Danny, I don't really have issue with what you're saying but it's the length of the replies, they're like mini novels! I'm not aiming this just at you but at a few posters on here. I think once you get into a heated debate that needs several long responses, I think it's time to go to the PM option and not clutter up threads.

Couldn't agree more - I haven't read any of the long winded comments on the last few pages here.

[DannyInvincible]

Danny, I don't really have issue with what you're saying but it's the length of the replies, they're like mini novels! I'm not aiming this just at you but at a few posters on here. I think once you get into a heated debate that needs several long responses, I think it's time to go to the PM option and not clutter up threads.

Alright, alright. Back on topic; will this keep you happy?



I'd imagine even the most ardent Irish Manchester United fan might find the evidently-extreme hypnotising influence of such commodity fetishism scary!

[osarusan]

but, for some reason, someone took issue with a comment I'd made about imagination being evidently lacking - the FAI have led the way on that sorry front - and then misrepresented me.

Ok, I'm back from my holidays, so let's start with this.

On the issue of the prevalence of the mindset you ascribe to some LOI fans, you in post 857 you paraphrased some opinions and said that 'they're all unhelpful attitudes.' You also said you were 'speaking generally' when you said these fans should stop assuming non-LOI fans were 'imbecilic ignoramuses.' You say you don't think it's a majority of fans at all, fair enough, although it is clearly more than just a response to MarinoBohs, as you later suggested. Can you tell me how prevalent you think it is?

On the issue of your comment about advertising just needing a bit of imagination, if that was directed at the FAI only, then fair enough, but it was phrased 'rather casually' indeed (and you continued to argue that even if you'd meant it in the way I interpreted it, it wouldn't have been wrong).

On the issue of your analogy about archaeology, you created this analogy after reading Nesta99 talk about the use of the word 'excuse'. You assumed that he had been asking people to justify their non-attendance, but it turns out that he hadn't. (He clarified in post 887 that there was no interrogation, but you still told him he was missing the point). So your analogy has fans of a particular activity badgering others who have no interest in that activity as to why they don't participate in that activity. You may not have explicitly accused Nesta99 of badgering people, but it is clear from your post that you imply there are some LOI fans out there badgering people over their non-attendance. Why make it part of the analogy regarding an 'unhelpful attitude' otherwise? You assumed all this from the word 'excuse', and even when the context was made clear to you, you still insist the analogy is valid. But it isn't.

So, in post 922, you are still going on about 'the present degree of polarised entrenchment'. Could you let me know what that degree is. Just how prevalent are these fans with the mindset of assuming non-LOI fans are imbeciles, are deluded (I saw no delusion in MarinoBohs post - could you point it out please), and badger non-LOI fans?

You ask me if these attitudes do not exist, and are not harmful. In my opinion, these attitudes exist in such tiny numbers as to have no harmful effects. Again, the people being insulted, in the vast majority of cases, are those who have dismissed the league without rational reason. They are not 'potential partners'. And, to use an argument you're familiar with, anybody who would be insulted by these comments would have to be very precious indeed.

[bennocelt]

Ok, I'm back from my holidays, so let's start with this.

Ah jeez Osarusan just when we had it nipped in the bud.........

[DannyInvincible]

Ok, I'm back from my holidays, so let's start with this.

Ho hum... I'd really have rathered this not be dragged out - I'm not sure why you're so determined to do so - as it seems to be grating others who'd prefer we made private our exchanges, but, as you persist with misrepresenting me, you're kind of compelling me to publicly defend myself yet again. You're looking for something that simply isn't there. To be very clear, I'm a supporter/defender of the league; not a detractor.

On the issue of the prevalence of the mindset you ascribe to some LOI fans, you in post 857 you paraphrased some opinions and said that 'they're all unhelpful attitudes.'

And they are, aren't they? marinobohs expressed angry supremacist sentiment (that being indicative of a superiority complex; not superiority in a racial sense), which I paraphrased, and Bonnie appeared to suggest its wider prevalence with a collective "we". Now, I don't want to get Bonnie into trouble with you too as he's a civil and thoughtful poster with a sense of anger that is borne out of much consideration and deep frustration, but why are you singling me out here as if I've made some revelatory claim about negative or vindictive attitudes harboured by some LOI fans? What I've said has been pretty conservative by this board's standards. Even Dodge, who you know knows his stuff, condemned the "whiny" attitude. He expressed much the same sentiment as I did in stating: "Fans of LOI clubs constantly moaning about being ignored/dismissed does no good. Whining rarely makes people think something is fun." He seems to think of it as potentially harmful too, so why the particular gripe and double standard when I happen to offer the same opinion based on shared or similar observations?

You also said you were 'speaking generally' when you said these fans should stop assuming non-LOI fans were 'imbecilic ignoramuses.' You say you don't think it's a majority of fans at all, fair enough, although it is clearly more than just a response to MarinoBohs, as you later suggested. Can you tell me how prevalent you think it is?

You're tying two paragraphs-apart lines together there to give a completely false impression of what I've said. You've completely misinterpreted my having spoken "rather generally for a moment" on the issue of taking responsibility. When I said I was speaking generally there, I was talking of the psychology of humanity or society as a whole; as in, explaining the important psychological distinctions for humans collectively between assuming responsibility and shirking responsibility, and the respective repercussions of those two options. I wasn't even speaking specifically of football supporters, never mind supporters of the LOI, in illustrating the broader, or general, nature of psychologically accepting or denying responsibility.

When I later reassured Jofspring that I was "speaking generally", it was no more than an innocent or neutral expression to make a direct distinction from speaking personally so he'd know I wasn't referring to him specifically, despite the fact I was responding to his quoted comment. Perhaps "speaking non-personally" would have been a better way to phrase it, but once again, I wasn't trying to tarnish LOI fans generally as I wasn't referring to LOI fans en masse. It was just an expression and applied to whomever it generally concerned; not necessarily all, or a majority of, LOI fans. And I thought I'd been nitpicking...

I couldn't tell you exactly how prevalent it is, but it is real (as evidenced on this very thread), and, crucially, oft-tolerated. It does seem to creep up now and again. The prevalence of serious loathing and animus is in the minority - most LOI fans are good-natured about it if they do rib their bar-stooling counterparts - but why sweep the former under the carpet by shifting the focus onto what I've said, as if my opinion is actually the problem? Why not have spent your energy pulling up those guilty of malice instead of cherry-picking comments I've made and regurgitating them in decontextualised fashion in order to divert attention away from the real issue? Not that I want to turn this into a witch-hunt - I'm not out to get anyone - but I'm just pointing out the utter absurdity of your over-reaction.

I challenged marinobohs and then others got embroiled in the conversation so I ended up explaining what I felt were the potentially-damaging repercussions of such a mindset (to the aspirations for widespread national support that most LOI supporters share) without any indication as to how widespread I thought the mindset was. The discussion might have since snowballed if it has become "more than just a response" to marinobohs, but I haven't been on some moral crusade to whip LOI fans generally into line.

On the issue of your comment about advertising just needing a bit of imagination, if that was directed at the FAI only, then fair enough, but it was phrased 'rather casually' indeed (and you continued to argue that even if you'd meant it in the way I interpreted it, it wouldn't have been wrong).

On clubs, I have great respect for those putting in the time/finance and struggling along, or just about surviving. If those running clubs have taken the wrong path or gone off the rails at times down through the years, at least their hearts were in the right place in spite of some reckless risk-taking. The only reason I say imagination might be evidently lacking here is because I do think something can be done to win people over. I never used the word "advertising" - you did - so it isn't correct to portray it as if I've suggested better advertising is the solitary solution to the exclusion of all other possible ideas. Nevertheless, human history shows you can convince mass swathes of people of the merits of virtually anything, even if otherwise seemingly abhorrent or harmful. Not that the LOI is seemingly abhorrent and harmful - before you nitpick again - but you get my drift; people can be won over to an idea. Evidently, whatever that elusive thing is that can win the Irish public over to the LOI has not been thought of or tried yet, for if it were, there would be broad interest amongst the Irish public. It sounds almost tautological, but that's all I mean by claims of imagination being lacking. That funds are tight for clubs only makes things more difficult; it makes promotional investment very tough and long-term planning practically impossible. Clubs are compelled by circumstance to exist in the immediate short term.

As for the mismanaging and historically-amateurish FAI, the great protectors of our game, I think they've neglected the league and have their priorities confused. You'd like to think talent and wealth would flow upwards through a recognisable pyramid rather than trickle downwards, but Ireland doesn't even have such an infrastructure of layered and connected support to bolster the game from grassroots to league to international level. With a bit of initiative and foresight, the FAI might realise that a stronger league that does more than struggle to just about sustain itself would be broadly advantageous; being ultimately lucrative and profitable in the long run. Well, I'm sure they do realise this already but maintaining the status quo can be very cosy. The FAI cannot sustain themselves through disproportionate reliance and focus on the finite cash cow that is the the men's senior international team. If greater attention was devoted elsewhere, they might see us producing full squads domestically rather than having to piggyback off British academies' lucky Irish and those eligible for us through the "granny rule". The FAI can't keep relying on the UK to produce our international players if they want us to keep qualifying for major finals and want to keep the punters happy (and spending). England and Scotland can only just about produce challenging sides for themselves. Whilst clubs are cash-strapped, the FAI have the capability to promote and invest, yet are utterly blighted by short-termism and evasion of responsibility.

[DannyInvincible]

On the issue of your analogy about archaeology, you created this analogy after reading Nesta99 talk about the use of the word 'excuse'. You assumed that he had been asking people to justify their non-attendance, but it turns out that he hadn't. (He clarified in post 887 that there was no interrogation, but you still told him he was missing the point). So your analogy has fans of a particular activity badgering others who have no interest in that activity as to why they don't participate in that activity. You may not have explicitly accused Nesta99 of badgering people, but it is clear from your post that you imply there are some LOI fans out there badgering people over their non-attendance. Why make it part of the analogy regarding an 'unhelpful attitude' otherwise? You assumed all this from the word 'excuse', and even when the context was made clear to you, you still insist the analogy is valid. But it isn't.

I hadn't necessarily assumed that he'd been asking or badgering people to justify their non-attendance. I didn't accuse anyone of badgering anyone. I simply (mis)perceived his use of the word "excuse" to imply that he had an expectation upon others and that if they were ever explaining their non-attendance, he saw them as excusing themselves from what he, perhaps inadvertently, viewed as an obligation. Both myself and Nesta since came to an accord; I had misunderstood his use of the word "excuse". It was actually the case that non-attenders were volunteering reasons unprompted, as if offering excuses tinged by their own non-imposed feelings of guilt. He did not expect them to be excusing themselves from some obligation he imposed upon them.

I used the word "badgering" in order to demonstrate how odd and inappropriate it would be to have an archaeology digger expect someone with no interest in archaeology whatsoever to have to excuse themselves from attending a dig to which they'd never committed themselves in the first place. I was trying to draw a comparison with another mindset or dynamic of expectation. I mentioned "badgering" to illuminate and maybe even with a sense of hyperbole in order to drive home the oddity or inappropriate nature of such expectation, but it was not to level a strict accusation at Nesta. The analogy was valid within that context, but as I said, Nesta re-clarified for me and I eventually understood, so the analogy obviously doesn't apply to him any longer; I've not insisted it still applies to him. Well, it never actually did, but as I've acknowledged, I'd initially misinterpreted his use of the word. If you'd like me to acknowledge that the vast majority of LOI fans do not go around badgering non-supporters, I'm happy to do so. Nevertheless, I have seen the word "excuse" used before with the connotation with which I'd mistakenly taken issue.

So, in post 922, you are still going on about 'the present degree of polarised entrenchment'. Could you let me know what that degree is. Just how prevalent are these fans with the mindset of assuming non-LOI fans are imbeciles, are deluded (I saw no delusion in MarinoBohs post - could you point it out please), and badger non-LOI fans?

Are you actually denying that there's a severe polarisation between LOI supporter and barstooler in Ireland? The degree of mutual contempt or disdain is significant. That is to say the feelings are not unilateral. You can't seriously play that down? Isn't that the big issue?

Repressed anger and hatred applied more to marinobohs' post, but there can also be delusion in feelings of anger being directed towards others for what they happen to take an interest in, simply because it's not in line with what the angry party is interested in. It is to selfishly or expectantly assume, or at least imply, on the part of the angry party, that the others somehow owe the angry party something or that they exist to serve the angry party's interests to some degree. It's a delusion as to one's right or entitlement.

You ask me if these attitudes do not exist, and are not harmful. In my opinion, these attitudes exist in such tiny numbers as to have no harmful effects. Again, the people being insulted, in the vast majority of cases, are those who have dismissed the league without rational reason. They are not 'potential partners'. And, to use an argument you're familiar with, anybody who would be insulted by these comments would have to be very precious indeed.

Well, well, well... Someone who might feel a bit intimidated by an expressed intent to "bludgeon them to death with the nearest TV" would have to be "very precious indeed"? Really?! I guess they're lucky he who wants to bludgeon them to death can "resist the urge to kill"... Sure, marinobohs was most likely posturing (with the aid of some hyperbole), but don't try and compare the nature of this argument to the one we had about Paddy Barnes' harmless incident on the podium. Barnes is a good boxer and he knows who he is, but he has never expressed such vitriol as an intent to murder someone over the team with whom they affiliate. He didn't even set out to insult, or, at least, you, despite your suspicions, couldn't say with any certainty that he did. Anyhow, whether or not non-interested parties are being "very precious indeed" in relation to the matter at hand, the LOI has a serious national image problem. Such attitudes and their tolerance (or is it defending them in which you're now engaging?) doesn't help with that, yet most LOI fans would simultaneously claim they want to see more people flock to the league. Why can't these people who are being insulted be potential partners? Would you rather shun them?

[osarusan]

Anyhow, whether or not non-interested parties are being "very precious indeed" in relation to the matter at hand, the LOI has a serious national image problem. Such attitudes and their tolerance (or is it defending them in which you're now engaging?) doesn't help with that...

It has a national popularity problem, certainly. Where we disagree is how much of this problem is caused by the image that non-fans have of the unhelpful attitudes and behaviour of LOI fans. I think it's negligible, and its impact on the popularity of the league is virtually nil. I think you exaggerate the extent and impact of the polarisation and disdain, and I don't think it's a 'big issue' at all. You think otherwise. Again, all I can say is that this hasn't been my experience in any way.

It's probably best to leave it there.

[DannyInvincible]

OK, I wouldn't be able for another round!

I hope I wasn't too ratty; I was frustrated by what I perceived to be repeated misrepresentation, but we've both said our bits and we shall leave it at that.

[Charlie Darwin]

Anybody watching the (repeat) Match of the Day 50 years show? Could have sworn the Newcastle fan just now (who sounds like he has a Merseyside accent) was wearing a Dundalk scarf. I don't have rewind on my TV so I can't check.

[ArdeeBhoy]

But then maybe a failure to accept an outside perspective is part of their problem...

[Duffman]

geordie.jpg

Anybody watching the (repeat) Match of the Day 50 years show? Could have sworn the Newcastle fan just now (who sounds like he has a Merseyside accent) was wearing a Dundalk scarf. I don't have rewind on my TV so I can't check.

That looks very like a St Georges cross to me!

[Charlie Darwin]

geordie.jpg

That looks very like a St Georges cross to me!

So it is a Dundalk scarf?