Football has become boring

[Lawrie’s Left Peg]

6 hours ago, Maddogbob said:

Becoming less and less interested in the professional game, much rather watch and be involved in grassroots. Way more fun. 

 

Seems to be more about how much and how much your aloud to spend, rather than building a team. 

 

 

it’s the business that has infected the game which is the real problem. 
 

Watching grassroots is a much more real experience. Less than a tenner to get in. You can choose to sit or stand. You can have a beer next to the pitch. There are no stone island toting chavs or ultras.  
There is significantly less diving, cheating, feigning injury and significantly more respect for officials. There is no VAR or trial by TV replay and nobody cares nor is the experience any worse for its absence. 
The chairman, sponsors, management and players from both teams mingle with the fans before and after the game and are happy to discuss the club. They aren’t media trained or sanitised to blab out the same old cliches.
There are no processes, projects, identities or groups. Just teams and matches. 
Games kick off at 3 on Saturday and 7:45 midweek. No one has to play a match 200 miles away with a 5:15 kick-off Sunday so the product suits the Chinese market. The referee doesn’t have to wait for Hangkok tyres to give the ok before he can blow the whistle for kick-off

 

[gurujuan]

Not sure I find it boring, it’s more technical, yes, but that can also be absorbing Certainly don’t hanker after the kick and rush of the previous eras 

[Lawrie’s Left Peg]

5 hours ago, sherlyegg said:

I rarely watch mod, england matches are more often than not a bore fest. Hate the diving fake injury / cheating tw@ts.

Beats me why football is in such a healthy state financially.

If it weren't for Wednesday I would have turned to cricket / dancing / chess yonks ago

The Premier League will tell whoever will listen that the product is the best it’s ever been using only one measure of success. Revenue

 

The costs are out of control. Nett spend is higher than nett income so the game is technically bankrupt. Arguably the world’s largest club Man Utd is financed wholly by debt So far from being in a healthy financial state the business of football is unsustainable in the long term.  

[Lawrie’s Left Peg]

4 hours ago, Worksop Wednesday said:

 

poo refs or has someone at Sky or EFL or whatever  had a word with Refs association or whatever about how romantic it would be to see 'ol' North End in Prem

 

Tell me its not bent 

 

im gonna see what odds they are for a pen in next match !

It’s not bent. Presumably you also think Neil  Armstrong never left Cape Kennedy and that Hitler, Elvis and Shergar share a flat down 

Ecclesall Road

[torryowl]

24 minutes ago, gurujuan said:

Not sure I find it boring, it’s more technical, yes, but that can also be absorbing Certainly don’t hanker after the kick and rush of the previous eras 

i think football was a lot better 30 - 40-50 years ago …….wilko's promotion winning side was a joy to watch as was atkinsons 7 years later .you really  think that watching players like banno curran  waddle nilsson shez craig  mccalliog hirst  etc etc was less entertaining than what we have now . 

[gurujuan]

1 minute ago, torryowl said:

i think football was a lot better 30 - 40-50 years ago …….wilko's promotion winning side was a joy to watch as was atkinsons 7 years later .you really  think that watching players like banno curran  waddle nilsson shez craig  mccalliog hirst  etc etc was less entertaining than what we have now . 

Less entertaining than what WE have now, no  However football is much better now, and played on better pitches. For so long, we, as in Britain, was taking the game backwards Football in Britain has improved enormously, in my opinion

[scram]

6 minutes ago, torryowl said:

i think football was a lot better 30 - 40-50 years ago …….wilko's promotion winning side was a joy to watch as was atkinsons 7 years later .you really  think that watching players like banno curran  waddle nilsson shez craig  mccalliog hirst  etc etc was less entertaining than what we have now . 

 

I agree

 

it was also a much better experience as a fan

 

Corporate football PLC may be ok for the younger fan but for older traditionalists like me it's pretty much anathema to everything that drew me to the game

[Worksop Wednesday]

24 minutes ago, Lawrie’s Left Peg said:

It’s not bent. Presumably you also think Neil  Armstrong never left Cape Kennedy and that Hitler, Elvis and Shergar share a flat down 

Ecclesall Road

 

No mate, Neil Armstrong, Hitler, Elvis and Shergar never crossed my mind. 

 

Why would they and why would you assume I might think that just because refs me wee wee me off ?

 

Fact is there are examples of c orruption in many sports.

 

Stop trying to be a c lever ironic edit x

[torryowl]

4 minutes ago, gurujuan said:

Less entertaining than what WE have now, no  However football is much better now, and played on better pitches. For so long, we, as in Britain, was taking the game backwards Football in Britain has improved enormously, in my opinion

how is it better if its less entertaining?...…..its different i'll grant you but better I don't think so . 

[gurujuan]

12 minutes ago, torryowl said:

how is it better if its less entertaining?...…..its different i'll grant you but better I don't think so . 

No, what I meant, it’s probably less entertaining watching Wednesday now, than it was when some of those were playing Would I rather watch a latter day, Manchester City, Liverpool, or even Leicester, than the Leeds and Arsenal of old, you bet

[Guest LondonOwl313]

30 minutes ago, gurujuan said:

No, what I meant, it’s probably less entertaining watching Wednesday now, than it was when some of those were playing Would I rather watch a latter day, Manchester City, Liverpool, or even Leicester, than the Leeds and Arsenal of old, you bet

It’s better in the sense that the quality of play is higher now than it was back in the pre or early Premier League days. For example, we’re a mid table second tier team yet a number of our current squad are better than what we had between 1996-2000 in the top flight. Fletcher > Booth, Bannan > Barry Horne/Scott Oakes.

 

But where it’s not better at all is the financial aspect. Used to be more affordable to go vs now. And inequality within the game is massive now. It’s the same 6 clubs at the top every year, may be different this season as Man Utd and Tottenham are in decline, but looking at the tables from the 80s and 90s there were loads of teams capable of a top 4 finish. Us, Leeds, Forest, Villa, Newcastle etc all had spells where we were in contention to challenge for stuff. That doesn’t happen now which is sad as it takes something away from most fans 

 

I guess Leicester are the benchmark for everyone outside the top 6 but what they’ve achieved is remarkable and probably a one off. Got lucky to win the league because there was a full season where it was wide open as none of the big 6 turned up, had a year in the champions league, so got the windfall financially and continued to build a team then appointed a top manager. Could see them breaking into the big 6 going forward. But it doesn’t look like that’s something most clubs can aspire to. Like what are the odds of going from mid table second tier to European football.. its much harder now than it was 25-30 years ago. I know Wolves last year and Pigs this year, but let’s see where they finish first

[MAL]

1 hour ago, torryowl said:

i think football was a lot better 30 - 40-50 years ago …….wilko's promotion winning side was a joy to watch as was atkinsons 7 years later .you really  think that watching players like banno curran  waddle nilsson shez craig  mccalliog hirst  etc etc was less entertaining than what we have now . 

 

Jeez

 

Nearly got a negging.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Specsavers calling.

 

Good job i read it again, i missed the part in bold the first time 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest ka58]

1 hour ago, gurujuan said:

No, what I meant, it’s probably less entertaining watching Wednesday now, than it was when some of those were playing Would I rather watch a latter day, Manchester City, Liverpool, or even Leicester, than the Leeds and Arsenal of old, you bet

god - I wouldn’t.

[gurujuan]

6 minutes ago, ka58 said:

god - I wouldn’t.

Fair enough, different strokes for different folks

[gurujuan]

36 minutes ago, LondonOwl313 said:

It’s better in the sense that the quality of play is higher now than it was back in the pre or early Premier League days. For example, we’re a mid table second tier team yet a number of our current squad are better than what we had between 1996-2000 in the top flight. Fletcher > Booth, Bannan > Barry Horne/Scott Oakes.

 

But where it’s not better at all is the financial aspect. Used to be more affordable to go vs now. And inequality within the game is massive now. It’s the same 6 clubs at the top every year, may be different this season as Man Utd and Tottenham are in decline, but looking at the tables from the 80s and 90s there were loads of teams capable of a top 4 finish. Us, Leeds, Forest, Villa, Newcastle etc all had spells where we were in contention to challenge for stuff. That doesn’t happen now which is sad as it takes something away from most fans 

 

I guess Leicester are the benchmark for everyone outside the top 6 but what they’ve achieved is remarkable and probably a one off. Got lucky to win the league because there was a full season where it was wide open as none of the big 6 turned up, had a year in the champions league, so got the windfall financially and continued to build a team then appointed a top manager. Could see them breaking into the big 6 going forward. But it doesn’t look like that’s something most clubs can aspire to. Like what are the odds of going from mid table second tier to European football.. its much harder now than it was 25-30 years ago. I know Wolves last year and Pigs this year, but let’s see where they finish first

Yes, I would agree re the money side of the game, it’s obscene, and there are other issues as well, but the product on the pitch is of a far higher standard Going to games back then, yes that was more of a crack, but the actual football was pretty basic

[Rogers]

5-5 Liverpool vs Arsenal in the League Cup last week; it’s not all boring defensive rubbish. 

 

Theere has been some cracking games in recent years, especially in the champions league. 
 

Wednesday being boring is nothing new. We’ve had the odd match, but we’ve been generally dross for years. 

[Lawrie’s Left Peg]

8 hours ago, Worksop Wednesday said:

 

No mate, Neil Armstrong, Hitler, Elvis and Shergar never crossed my mind. 

 

Why would they and why would you assume I might think that just because refs me wee wee me off ?

 

Fact is there are examples of c orruption in many sports.

 

Stop trying to be a c lever ironic edit x

Not trying to be clever mate. 
Your post indicated that you believe there is some kind of conspiracy. I merely referenced other equally plausible conspiracy theories that you might logically also consider to be real

 

i personally don’t believe that the governing bodies and / or referees have the time or inclination to sit down and decide to award certain teams penalties or victimise others.
 

Do you really believe refereeing in this country is corrupt Or are you letting your passion for Wednesday cloud your judgement?

[SwellOwl]

It is amazing what a defeat does to fans.

 

Lose to Blackburn and we are now questioning football as a sport!

 

If we lose Saturday, might be calls to take Owlstalk down!

[Lawrie’s Left Peg]

6 hours ago, gurujuan said:

Yes, I would agree re the money side of the game, it’s obscene, and there are other issues as well, but the product on the pitch is of a far higher standard Going to games back then, yes that was more of a crack, but the actual football was pretty basic

Bit too general for me Guru. There have always been innovative and sophisticated thinkers in football. 
 

For example five strikers (the 2-3-5) was the first real tactical innovation introduced as far back as the 1880s. By moving a striker further back to direct play, it heralded the transformation of football from a dribbling game to a predominantly passing-based game.  Guardiola revived it with Bayern Munich.

 

When the offside rule had its first overhaul, encouraging teams to play an extra defender, Arsenal manager Herbert Chapman devised  the “W-M” moving the inside forwards further back, allowing his teams to dominate midfield

 

It would be unfair to label Shankly’s pass and move, Clough’s beautiful game or Fergie’s treble winning side as basic

 

Where I do agree with you 100% is the lost years of the disciples of Charles Hughes’ “Winning Formula” concluding most goals were scored from three passes or fewer, therefore get the ball  forward as soon as possible. These tactics were explicitly basic and taught at all levels of the English game. Leaving us in the wilderness for years.  

[torryowl]

8 hours ago, gurujuan said:

No, what I meant, it’s probably less entertaining watching Wednesday now, than it was when some of those were playing Would I rather watch a latter day, Manchester City, Liverpool, or even Leicester, than the Leeds and Arsenal of old, you bet

I would rather watch the spurs double side ,the man utd of law best and Charlton the liverpool team of shanks and paisley ,cloughs derby and forest teams ,steins Celtic  ....