|
DoctaFun posted:Great info guys, keep it coming. It wasn't the only one. I can also name Heysel and Luzhniki disasters just off the top of my head
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 17:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 13:01 |
|
|
DoctaFun posted:Great info guys, keep it coming. In the 70's there was a massive massive problem with fan violence, they would fight in the terrafces outside and such then we saw the emergence of the professional hooligans like your millwall's and your leeds, the heysal disaster is probably the most notable event coming from hooliganism which got english teams banned for a number of years. Eventually football fans got their own laws along with terrorists (the only two specific groups that have laws for them in the UK). Nowadays you usually just hear about a few skirmishes outside the ground somewhere or some fat guy punching another fat guy in the ground. On the Hillsborough disaster it was absolutely shocking the more details came out about it, even more so when you look at the sun's coverage of it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 17:35
|
|
|
UnlimitedSpessmans posted:Nowadays you usually just hear about a few skirmishes outside the ground somewhere or some fat guy punching another fat guy in the ground. Also sometimes a horse
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 17:41
|
|
|
DoctaFun posted:Great info guys, keep it coming. England used to have a very serious problem with hooliganism. Most teams had "firms" (if you've seen Green Street this is a (highly fictualised) version of this). It kind of started in the 60s, rose through the 70s and reached its peak in the 80s. Fights were a regular occurrence and games would regularly be marred by violence in the stands. Unfortunately, this culture led to a number of disasters in stadiums, notably Heysel and Hillsborough. The former was caused by hooligans, almost exclusively Liverpool fans, fighting European fans (this was a thing in the 80s, UK firms would try to go abroad and stamp their authority on the international scene), the latter a direct police and media attitude towards football fans in general. Fortunately that has diminished dramatically. Since the 90s banning orders have basically cut off the head of firms. They can't go to games and watch their team (after all, most firms are diehard supporters first) if they want to also have a scrap. There are still some surviving, but they tend to organise fights with each other away from the stadium to try and circumvent this. Occasionally you do get some fights breaking out in stadiums, but this is rare and usually confined to derbies (and Millwall. gently caress Millwall). Eastern Europe and South America is an entirely different kettle of fish though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 17:43
|
|
|
EvilHawk posted:Eastern Europe and South America is an entirely different kettle of fish though. If you want to get a better idea of this, go watch Foreign Fields (part of a BBC documentary series) on Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N2RHsxRcBsE While Lazio are the worst offender by far in Serie A (and probably Italy, by default), this is the kind of thing you see all over the eastern side of the continent, and South America. In fact, most of the ultras you'll see in Soviet countries are there specifically to fight, and couldn't give less of a poo poo about the match's outcome. Greece and Turkey are a bit of a blend of that and going batshit over all of the sports encompassed by whatever club they follow, which is where you get hilarious moments like flares getting tossed and fans brawling at a women's volleyball match.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 20:14
|
|
|
Wow, I'm going to have to sit down at home and watch that. I had no idea there was basically organized gangs(for lack of better word) who just beat up on each other. It looks like on the Italian side it might be rooted in more than just club allegiance, but it's fascinating nonetheless.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 22:53
|
|
|
Italian ultras are as political as they are club loyalists. Lazio has calmed down a lot over the years compared to what they used to do. The real bad poo poo is in the lower leagues. Compared to when ultras were trying to kill police officers (and vice versa) things have improved anyway.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 23:46
|
|
|
DoctaFun posted:Wow, I'm going to have to sit down at home and watch that. I had no idea there was basically organized gangs(for lack of better word) who just beat up on each other. It looks like on the Italian side it might be rooted in more than just club allegiance, but it's fascinating nonetheless. https://twitter.com/wscsm1/status/835193291662581760
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 00:05
|
|
|
Italian ultras did this, never forget: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_Nu6HKVSmk
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 00:12
|
|
|
lol, not as insane as that clip, but Vice did a documentary about the Belgrade derby https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tskXWfy6eK0
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 00:17
|
|
|
Eau de MacGowan posted:Italian ultras did this, never forget: This was insanely good.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 03:00
|
|
|
DoctaFun posted:Wow, I'm going to have to sit down at home and watch that. I had no idea there was basically organized gangs(for lack of better word) who just beat up on each other. It looks like on the Italian side it might be rooted in more than just club allegiance, but it's fascinating nonetheless. One thing I think it's hard for Americans to grasp is how incredibly tribal club football is. Most football clubs in England are over a hundred years old. We're talking four or five generations who have grown up supporting the same team. You then have the historical context of it. Liverpool and Manchester have been rivals (as cities) since the industrial revolution. Southampton and Portsmouth have been at odds for as long as the Royal and Merchant Navies have existed. Intercity rivalries are drawn along social, political, and religious grounds. Most of the "organised gangs" came out of these associations. You'd have people three or four generations into supporting their team, from their city, in the same social class, supporting the same religion etc. etc. then taking on their closest rival. It's changed a bit in recent years where rivalries have sprung up out of purely footballing sources (e.g. Liverpool v Chelsea, United v Arsenal) but there's still an element of the above involved. Because America in general and American sports in particular are relatively new and almost entirely artificial (due to the franchise system) you just don't get the same level of deep rooted hatred.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 13:28
|
|
|
DoctaFun posted:Is Zlatan the coolest player in the world? If you like dank memes and hilarious twitter accounts clearly run by sponsor PR people & trollfootballz, sure. Woodenlung fucked around with this message at 15:03 on Feb 25, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 15:00
|
|
|
Woodenlung posted:If you like dank memes and hilarious twitter accounts clearly run by sponsor PR people & trollfootballz, sure. I don't really follow any of that stuff, he just seems like a cool dude. I also heard he told PSG that he'd stay in Paris if they took down the Eiffel Tower and put a statue of him in it's place(or something to that effect), which is pretty hilarious. EvilHawk posted:One thing I think it's hard for Americans to grasp is how incredibly tribal club football is. Most football clubs in England are over a hundred years old. We're talking four or five generations who have grown up supporting the same team. You then have the historical context of it. Liverpool and Manchester have been rivals (as cities) since the industrial revolution. Southampton and Portsmouth have been at odds for as long as the Royal and Merchant Navies have existed. Intercity rivalries are drawn along social, political, and religious grounds. Most of the "organised gangs" came out of these associations. You'd have people three or four generations into supporting their team, from their city, in the same social class, supporting the same religion etc. etc. then taking on their closest rival. That makes a lot of sense, are there any interesting characteristics of fanbases? ie: 'team x' fans are all blue collar workers with drinking problems and 'team y' fans are all rich and spoiled? How does Harry Kane score so many goals? I've watched him play many times and he seems to always score but doesn't appear to be especially fast or skilled on the ball. He just looks like he shoots the ball every single time he gets it. Just gets into good positions and has great finishing skills?
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2017 18:14
|
|
|
DoctaFun posted:I don't really follow any of that stuff, he just seems like a cool dude. I also heard he told PSG that he'd stay in Paris if they took down the Eiffel Tower and put a statue of him in it's place(or something to that effect), which is pretty hilarious. he's got really good movement and finishing yes.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2017 18:59
|
|
|
DoctaFun posted:
In very broad strokes: Anyone down south (basically Southampton and Bournemouth) are posh as gently caress The Liverpool/Manchester teams are scallies who'll nick your tires when you're at the game then charge you for the privilege of watching your car The Northern teams are all fat men who take their shirt off when it's -10c and punch horses It's the London lot that are usually the worst. Lots of teams that have built up around strongly working class areas that have had to fight (both literally and figuratively) against their neighbours for money/resources/respect. So West Ham, Chelsea, Millwall (in particular) have/had some of the biggest "firms". Nowadays Chelsea is attracting new richer fans, hence all the stuff about them having "plastic" fans, and their reputation has suffered. Also: it's England, everyone has a drinking problem. The only difference is what you drink.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2017 19:19
|
|
|
EvilHawk posted:Because America in general and American sports in particular are relatively new and almost entirely artificial (due to the franchise system) you just don't get the same level of deep rooted hatred. Also because of geography (there are only like four metropolitan areas — NYC, Chicago, LA and the SF Bay Area — that have more than one pro team in the same sport). There's a bit more of it in college football and basketball, albeit nothing close to Europe.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2017 19:36
|
|
|
Real Name Grover posted:Also because of geography (there are only like four metropolitan areas — NYC, Chicago, LA and the SF Bay Area — that have more than one pro team in the same sport). College football definitely has some similarities, but because of the nature of colleges (i.e. you don't necessarily go to the college your parents did, players don't stick around etc.) it will never quite match up.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2017 19:54
|
|
|
That too. Though there was that period of time where certain schools wouldn't play Notre Dame because they were Catholic
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2017 19:59
|
|
|
That actually raises another good point. In college football teams can choose who they schedule (there's been talk about not scheduling teams like Baylor or Penn State for example). You don't have that choice in club football. You can be scheduled against your fiercest rival as many as 8 times a season (not counting the Charity Shield). That breeds those deep, heated rivalries.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2017 20:04
|
|
|
blue footed boobie posted:Also a large portion of the population (read: black people) aren't exposed to the game at a young age. Blacks are 12% of the population And OP if you're American just call it soccer not football.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 01:34
|
|
|
DoctaFun posted:Hello there, have you been looking for the opportunity to educate someone on the mysteries of world football? Well here's your chance! no bitch (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 03:08
|
|
|
African AIDS cum posted:Blacks are 12% of the population 12% is a large portion and also they are athletically superior to the other races and have bigger dicks (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 03:29
|
|
|
You wanted to know about the way youth football works, this is an article that goes into some of it http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-sh/longform_manchester_cold_war
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2017 22:59
|
|
|
A nice hooligan rivalry is the one between Ajax and Feyenoord in Holland. In 1997 the two firms met in a field near Beverwijk, and tried to kill eachother. Only one Ajax dude was killed though, by a claw hammer to the head. Then the police came. Read all about it in the Battle of Beverwijk Wikipedia article! https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Beverwijk (to this day, Ajax supporters are not allowed to visit feyenoord matches because of the risks involved, and vice versa. So, the matches are played without an away section)
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2017 23:52
|
|
|
Tsaedje posted:You wanted to know about the way youth football works, this is an article that goes into some of it This is a good article, thanks. Stuff like this is remarkable to me: quote:“My son was five at the time, playing quite well,” says one father, who spoke to BBC Sport on condition of anonymity. The amount of pressure some of these kids have to deal with at such a young age is amazing and something I never could have done.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2017 17:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 13:01 |
|
|
GOOD TIMES ON METH posted:The amount of pressure some of these kids have to deal with at such a young age is amazing and something I never could have done.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2017 22:12
|
|