Points vs Technical Merit

In an interview with Matt Hughes in Wednesday's Times, Cesc Fabregas commented on the difference in styles between English and Spanish club football and the cultural differences between fans in both countries in accepting style and results.

"In Spain we believe in one style of football. The way we play is most important. It is not just about winning, it's about how you do it. If you lose, you go again. You will never play the ball long or do things you are not used to. We want to win by playing football. No Spanish teams would play like Bolton. Here in England it is all about passion - the fans love it when there are hard tackles and you play long balls and counter attack. But if you do that in Spain they will boo you even if you win."

Na na, we make more passes than you...

Now people will point to Spain and say, World and European champions and suggest that maybe Fabregas has a point. But Spain are blessed with technically excellent players and their big two clubs are blessed with significant transfer funds, therefore winning with style tends to come easier for them than other teams and, last time I noticed, points and trophies are awarded for winning matches. It's not 3 points for a win and 5.9 for technical merit.

Firstly, I find it really disappointing that he chooses Bolton as his example of ugly football. They still seem to be tarred with the long ball brush, usually by lazy media pundits who fail to see the changes made to the way they play, particularly under Owen Coyle. Yet even in the Allardyce days they played with noted footballers in a team containing Okocha, Djorkaeff and Campo amongst others. The goals they scored were often spectacular as much as direct and I don't think any of the three players mentioned ever complained that the tactics and style inhibited their performances or enjoyment of the game. 

Ask any Bolton fans, would they have preferred to see a few more passes in the build up to their goals when they finished 6th in 2005 and qualified for the UEFA Cup? I doubt it. Maybe they would have preferred their team to play differently when drawing away with Bayern Munich, when they became the first British team to win at Red Star Belgrade and when they knocked out Atletico Madrid? Clubs like Bolton, live within their means and play within their means, I see little wrong with that. It is noticable that the other English clubs (outside of the usual suspects) to achieve greater UEFA Cup success since Bolton reached the last 16 (Middlesboro and Fulham) have multi-millionaire's backers who have invested significant sums to achieve similar success.

Success is what drives a majority of fans in this country and it's what drives clubs. Never mind trophies, £800k prize money per place in the Premier League means the extra point gained, sat playing deep at the Emirates and hitting on the counter, can lead to a significant windfall. The reward structure is the direct cause of teams setting out to frustrate when visiting the Big 4.

Now I don't see a huge amount of the Spanish football live on Sky, so I cannot comment on the style of football played by Deportivo De La Coruna. However, I struggle to believe that fans of a club who played Champions League football 5 years ago, would not mind a bit of direct football if it brings the goals and victories that would lift them from the foot of La Liga. Would new boys Hercules not sacrifice style, if it elongated their Primera Liga tenure? 

I asked freelance Spanish football writer Mike Holden about how fans react to performances in Spain. He told me "They don't like losing, but they just stop going if their team keeps losing. Spanish fans are passionate but many can take or leave the match experience. To English fans, matchday is their life."

Therefore if  Cesc's claim is right, the Spanish support will boo their team when winning ugly and just stop going altogether when they are losing. Maybe Fabregas is basing his comments on his beloved Barcelona, but that is hardly indicative of Spanish football as a whole. 

Maybe I am a footballing neanderthal, but we have to accept that every team has it's limits. As much as we would love to see our teams play the beautiful way, there is not the talent to achieve it and the structure of the game means tipi-tapi with little end product costs points and costs money. By all means continue playing your way Cesc, but maybe you and your teammates might have to compromise your footballing principles to get the results that will bring Arsenal a first trophy in five years. I am guessing that the Arsenal fans might like one?   

How to gain friends and influence people?

In the past, the fans had a voice, in the literal sense, and the way to effect change was to use it. Cries of "Sack the board", "[Insert name of failing manager] out!" would echo from the terrace and often that would be enough to make the boardroom quake and eventually give way to the wishes of the faithful. But the times are a changing, the nature of football club ownership is changing and society is changing, both in terms of behaviour and culture.

At my club, the death knell for any manager used to be when the fans took to the South Stand car park. Chanting for change right underneath the directors' suite. But this is less effective than it once was.   

It was enough to lead to the departure of Adrian Heath, but not even the waving of shoes, "Shoes off if you want Robson out", led to the immediate departure of Bryan Robson and, despite periodic demands for the head of Kevin Blackwell, the timing of his departure was surprising to the majority.

South Stand protest Copyright:The Sun 

Across the city, Owls fans protested in a traditional manner, outside the ground, following last week's home defeat to Southampton. It got a reaction, with chairman (and former player & manager) Howard Wilkinson coming out to make his points and state the reasons why the board would not be going anywhere. But the behaviour of some of the supporters, some of the questions they asked, the points they made and the manner in which they made them  were embarrassing. Mobile phones and the Internet now mean actions like this have a wider audience. Is witnessing this going to attract the potential investment that Wednesday need?

What is more noticeable is the vitriolic outpourings within these demonstrations. Fuelled by alcohol and changes in what the public consider acceptable behaviour, some of the vicious personal abuse, targeted at Robson in particular, did not sit comfortably with a majority of Blades fans.  With Internet forums and social networking sites giving free reign to fans wanting to proffer their opinions on players, management, club staff, fellow fans and the tea lady, the boundaries are further extended and this permeates the outside world. The Internet also gives fans the opportunity to mobilise themselves in a much more organised way and this is not limited to just physical mobilisation.

When dealing with the new breed of football club owner, not used to English football culture, the traditional methods of protest appear to be no longer effective. With Manchester United and Liverpool fans unhappy with the way their clubs are being run, marches and protests have been arranged. These gain publicity and media coverage for the cause, but seemingly had little impact on those that they were targeting.

Some may suggest that the protests might be more effective if the fans march went away from the ground to another location, leaving empty seats in the ground. The recent example from Germany, where Borussia Dortmund fans boycotted their game at Schalke in protest at hikes taking the cheapest ticket prices above 20 Euros, was effective, but only because it was against their rival club and not against their own. It would be difficult to make it work over here, particularly when so many fans have season tickets and the club has the money banked already. All they would lose out on is the discretionary spend at the match and the fans would miss out on a match they have paid at least £30 to attend.

The exception might be cup games, which already suffer from lower attendances anyway, and the Liverpool crowd of 25,000 against Steaua in the Europa League could be seen as a combination of supporter apathy with both the club's owners and competition. I have to say though, the idea of a "supporter" voluntarily choosing not to watch their team, doesn't sit easily with me.

Now things are moving on and more innovative fan mobilisation has come to the fore. This includes an email bombardment of Deutsche Bank and JP Morgan, from Liverpool fans who perceived them to be a potential source of financing for Messrs Gillet and Hicks. On the Kop Faithful website there is a standard email to send to Stephen Hester (Group Chief Executive of RBS) along with many others who might be able to call off any potential re-financing of the Americans' RBS loans. In summary, it suggests the sender will seek a parliamentary or public enquiry if RBS fail to seize the assets (Liverpool FC) and force a sale at a market price. Extreme threats.

Whilst their upset is understandable and their determination and organisation is to be applauded, their actions have to be perceived as risky.  In not just targeting the owners and the directors, but involving financiers and other professionals who may well end up working for/influencing new owners down the line, are they not having a potentially negative impact on any sale and on the club's working relationships with these entities afterwards?  

Might these protests and organised disruption to business cause potential owners to walk away? Do these wealthy investors look at what the fans are doing and question whether they should put themselves in that situation, potentially becoming the recipients of such actions when things turn sour at some future date? Many of these investors come from deeply religious countries/states with moral codes of conduct, the negative attention and bad publicity may well scare them off. Would you want to buy a club that has clearly inherent problems with its fan base? A fan base that is well organised and reacts so aggressively to a lack of success. Could you honestly believe that you will be given the, probably quite lengthy, time needed to effect change in those circumstances?

Fans need to have a voice, they are the major stakeholder in a football club, but what they say and do with it is important. The fans are revolting, but they need to be careful. What they don't need, is for those who might save them to view them as revolting in an entirely different way.