Local rags are dying on their backside. The strategy has changed completely in the last few years and is almost completely web focused. Why ? Fill the site with as much content as possible as cheap as possible and try and drive hits to generate ad income.
Which is why you get them trumpeting blogs from non-journalists with shock factor comments, that lead to the pieces getting linked elsewhere, which may lead to weirdos leaving comments. Those comments then drive further traffic, which is why forums attached to articles in local press are so badly moderated. And the above article is a perfect example of how that pans out.
News Shopper is certainly guilty of this over the last few years, but they are by no means alone.
Sounds like one of the the "play the hard man geezer when at 'Wall with the lads loving the aggro before reverting back to being the middle class "modern man" running round after the missus and begging for the remote control so he can catch a glimpse of Top Gear between cooking her tea and hoovering round her feet" element they attract from the leafy suburbs. Ergo I follow Millwall therefore I'm a bit tasty (even though I went to a soft grammar school and work in accounts).
Hilarious and probably not far off the truth. Most of them are about as working class as the Queen of England's t..t's.
Oh and before anyone on here who knows me pulls me up....I am probably whats considered middle class and work for an accountants but I dont stand there cutting vegetables on a Sunday (the maid does that). ;-)
Dear me...doesn't take much to wind this board up into a moral rage.
Bit of an odd comment about the coaches, I read it the same as others but took it with a pinch of salt rather than seeing red & firing off letters to the Newsshopper calling for it to be withdrawn.
As for why people choose to go to Millwall if they have no family ties or links to the area, you'd have to ask all of them to form a proper opinion rather than a sweeping generalisation that they all come to fight & to think they're hard. There are some, more often than not from deeper into Kent, that are like that. There are others, & you can like it or lump it, that go to Millwall because there is a reputation for it being a good, passionate support and having a good laugh down there, which makes it more exciting and interesting than going to Gillingham or Charlton.
There are a few on here who seem to pop along to Millwall a few times, perhaps they can give an honest view on whether there is more passion displayed & banter etc than at other grounds they've been to.
Some of the other stuff Matt Little comments on, like the aggression in the stands towards away fans & players, the appealing for throw ins & corners, the leaping out of your chair & shouting when your player is fouled....what's wrong with that? It's helped us in games more than hindered us, as Huddersfield fans in the play-off game will agree with.
Its depends on whether you interpret "follow" literally meaning following the fans of 45 years ago, not the football club now, or you read it as I did and saw "follow" meaning "follow in the footsteps of", in other words emulating them.
You also have to read this in the context of the article as a whole which seems to me to be call to re-kindle the passion of yesteryear which we all know related to violence off and on the pitch. The mention of Muscat, I am sure, makes most Charlton fans shake with fury.
In the end though, poorly written/edited though it is, it kind of echoes my thoughts about Millwall which I set out in an earlier thread.
It is club which feels to me to be in decline, having largely lost its fearsome reputation of old yet is struggling to find a new resonance in the modern era
I say that with no malice and personally when I was in my formative years of the 60's and 70's, I admired the passion of Millwall fans set against the lukewarm apathy than pervaded the Valley terraces most of the time.
Don't know why the quote button has disappeared, but enjoyed Rodney's description of that type of Millwall supporter. A classic example would be that world class knob, Rod Liddle.
I agree that the word 'followed' was not a good choice of words and it certainly doesn't automatically imply what News Shopper has stated above that they 'belonged' to the Millwall of 45 years ago. I read it the other way as well. Either some bad editorial editing or some back tracking going on I feel.
Read the posts before reading the article and whatever way you cut it up it's a spectacularly poor use of the English language if it isn't supposed to mean rather than throw bottles on the pitch I wish we had attacked the team bus.
Opinions are fine, I have no problem with people here criticising Matt's blog and I'm sure he wouldn't either. And no the article will not be getting pulled.
Why would anyone want it to be withdrawn from the site ?
Theres nothing wrong with what he's written for it to be taken off etc. He might not be but to me he comes across as a bit of a ####, The kind who bore everyone in boozers up Bexleyheath talking about the time one of his bottles reached the pitch from the East Upper. It's all about opiions.
"what the bottles raining down on the pitch did capture was the raw emotion and aggression being reawakened among the home support" This one line sums them up perfectly !
Me, I prefer the raw emotion and aggression on show after JJ put one in the top corner of Weaver's net on Saturday, but then again I prefer winning football matches than trying and failing miserably at intimidating the opposition. The article suggests that the Millwall faithful prefer bottle throwing to winning football matches, so maybe it would only be of interest if the writer told us something new ?
SLL of course it's a generalisation it's a football message board! ;-) Same as your lot and every set of fans genearlise about anoraks, nigels and vermin etc.
Dont get me wrong I have an admiration for certain aspects of millwall's support and despise the oft happy- clappy foam hand waving "banter" that gets forced down our throats of how football supporters should be... but I empahsise certain aspects. The 12th man thing for instance when the whole crowd on each side of the ground is making a collective noise intimidating the oppo but then its the other stuff that goes along with it. Have said in the past got absolutely no problem with 2 sets of like minded mobs getting together for a bit of pavement dancing if its well away from those who dont wanna be involved and every club has an element of that and if thats what theyre into there fair enough.
There's passion down at The Valley too and if youd been in the Covered End during the 4-4 you'd of seen it and although collectively we might not vocally get behind the team as much as other clubs there's still the same level of raw passion there. Your last paragraph for instance all occur at Charlton and at most clubs that havent completely sold their souls.
But what i cant get my nut round is the stuff like chucking seats and bottles in the much sanitised environments of 2011/12 football. I hate the way the game has gone so sterile, corporately cosy and almost soulless but at the same time that's the way it is and no amount of lobbing stuff in grounds smashing up coaches etc is gonna bring the purity of going to football back.
It doesnt make those who chuck bottles at the tossers running the line or the overpaid primadonas rolling about on the pitch any more "old school" or passionate it just puts them in the same bracket for me as the inadequate wrong uns that were smashing up shop windows in Croydon in August. In the same way they werent the Brixton riots the stuff like bottle throwing in 2011/2012 just comes across as a bit sad, petty and about as genuine as Westlife.
If a bunch of like minded blokes want to beat ten shades out of each other and only each other (ie not smashing things up) entirely away from anyone else in the middle of field or deserted alley for instance why on earth would i be bothered SHG?
I honestly dont mate. Personally find it all pretty sad and if I wanted a row id get into a boxing ring but if that's what people want to do with themselves then I dont see the drama. Its when its played out in public, uses police/ hospital time or impacts on non-willing people or their property that i of course share your obvious disdain.
i dont understand this ---it says Millwall---its about about Millwall-----so why would you want to read about a bunch of no good pikey tossers from Bermondsey ?
If he meant it as newshopper suggests he should add to his blog. Something like " anyone who throws bottles and coins on the pitch is scum and just like Millwall supporters of x years old who tried to smah up a caoch". Will he? Ha, I doubt it as he sounds he approves of scum
SHG - I'd be alot more worried about the scum that go round robbing people or the paedos etc who havn't been caught by the police yet rather than 30 people having an off out of the way.
Could guarantee you aswell, Over years all over the country there has been times where if it wasn't for 'lads' putting themselves on the line there would be plenty more ocassions like up at Sheffield the other day.
I can understand what he says about missing the likes of Harry Boy, Big Kitch and Hurlock when you're up against it, at least they've got Thierry "mad dog" Racon waiting in the wings...
Comments
Local rags are dying on their backside. The strategy has changed completely in the last few years and is almost completely web focused. Why ? Fill the site with as much content as possible as cheap as possible and try and drive hits to generate ad income.
Which is why you get them trumpeting blogs from non-journalists with shock factor comments, that lead to the pieces getting linked elsewhere, which may lead to weirdos leaving comments. Those comments then drive further traffic, which is why forums attached to articles in local press are so badly moderated. And the above article is a perfect example of how that pans out.
News Shopper is certainly guilty of this over the last few years, but they are by no means alone.
I'm pleased to hear it Mrs Whitehouse.
Bit of an odd comment about the coaches, I read it the same as others but took it with a pinch of salt rather than seeing red & firing off letters to the Newsshopper calling for it to be withdrawn.
As for why people choose to go to Millwall if they have no family ties or links to the area, you'd have to ask all of them to form a proper opinion rather than a sweeping generalisation that they all come to fight & to think they're hard. There are some, more often than not from deeper into Kent, that are like that. There are others, & you can like it or lump it, that go to Millwall because there is a reputation for it being a good, passionate support and having a good laugh down there, which makes it more exciting and interesting than going to Gillingham or Charlton.
There are a few on here who seem to pop along to Millwall a few times, perhaps they can give an honest view on whether there is more passion displayed & banter etc than at other grounds they've been to.
Some of the other stuff Matt Little comments on, like the aggression in the stands towards away fans & players, the appealing for throw ins & corners, the leaping out of your chair & shouting when your player is fouled....what's wrong with that? It's helped us in games more than hindered us, as Huddersfield fans in the play-off game will agree with.
You also have to read this in the context of the article as a whole which seems to me to be call to re-kindle the passion of yesteryear which we all know related to violence off and on the pitch. The mention of Muscat, I am sure, makes most Charlton fans shake with fury.
In the end though, poorly written/edited though it is, it kind of echoes my thoughts about Millwall which I set out in an earlier thread.
It is club which feels to me to be in decline, having largely lost its fearsome reputation of old yet is struggling to find a new resonance in the modern era
I say that with no malice and personally when I was in my formative years of the 60's and 70's, I admired the passion of Millwall fans set against the lukewarm apathy than pervaded the Valley terraces most of the time.
There were certainly over 16,000 intimidating empty blue seats on Tuesday night.
Passionate my arse.
Theres nothing wrong with what he's written for it to be taken off etc. He might not be but to me he comes across as a bit of a ####, The kind who bore everyone in boozers up Bexleyheath talking about the time one of his bottles reached the pitch from the East Upper. It's all about opiions.
So leave it on, He's only showing himself up!
This one line sums them up perfectly !
Me, I prefer the raw emotion and aggression on show after JJ put one in the top corner of Weaver's net on Saturday, but then again I prefer winning football matches than trying and failing miserably at intimidating the opposition.
The article suggests that the Millwall faithful prefer bottle throwing to winning football matches, so maybe it would only be of interest if the writer told us something new ?
Dont get me wrong I have an admiration for certain aspects of millwall's support and despise the oft happy- clappy foam hand waving "banter" that gets forced down our throats of how football supporters should be... but I empahsise certain aspects. The 12th man thing for instance when the whole crowd on each side of the ground is making a collective noise intimidating the oppo but then its the other stuff that goes along with it. Have said in the past got absolutely no problem with 2 sets of like minded mobs getting together for a bit of pavement dancing if its well away from those who dont wanna be involved and every club has an element of that and if thats what theyre into there fair enough.
There's passion down at The Valley too and if youd been in the Covered End during the 4-4 you'd of seen it and although collectively we might not vocally get behind the team as much as other clubs there's still the same level of raw passion there. Your last paragraph for instance all occur at Charlton and at most clubs that havent completely sold their souls.
But what i cant get my nut round is the stuff like chucking seats and bottles in the much sanitised environments of 2011/12 football. I hate the way the game has gone so sterile, corporately cosy and almost soulless but at the same time that's the way it is and no amount of lobbing stuff in grounds smashing up coaches etc is gonna bring the purity of going to football back.
It doesnt make those who chuck bottles at the tossers running the line or the overpaid primadonas rolling about on the pitch any more "old school" or passionate it just puts them in the same bracket for me as the inadequate wrong uns that were smashing up shop windows in Croydon in August. In the same way they werent the Brixton riots the stuff like bottle throwing in 2011/2012 just comes across as a bit sad, petty and about as genuine as Westlife.
Something like " anyone who throws bottles and coins on the pitch is scum and just like Millwall supporters of x years old who tried to smah up a caoch".
Will he? Ha, I doubt it as he sounds he approves of scum
Could guarantee you aswell, Over years all over the country there has been times where if it wasn't for 'lads' putting themselves on the line there would be plenty more ocassions like up at Sheffield the other day.
gypsy blood !