Is it ok to boo your own team?

[Ikki]

I didn't mean they booed in the stadium, I am talking about the negative reaction in the aftermath. It was just so expected which is why it was so important for England to have won that match. They'd have bought themselves some leeway. But as soon as something goes wrong...wham, the fans are on their case again. It took an age to get people on board - after they practically dominated their qualifying group - and, again, it falls to ****s. The players know all this too well and you can see them stressed out on the pitch.

IMO, if you're a real fan you support till the end. Their reactions aren't gonna help the team any. Support them, let them concentrate with what is going on on the pitch. When it's done, then go lambast the **** out of them. But during/inbetween important games? There is no justification IMHO.

[BoyBrumby]

Originally Posted by Uppercut

It's blatantly obvious to anyone watching England at the moment that they're having confidence issues, so I don't think the "good footballers can handle it" theory is holding up.

A surfeit of it: see my sig.

[GIMH]

Originally Posted by Uppercut

It's blatantly obvious to anyone watching England at the moment that they're having confidence issues, so I don't think the "good footballers can handle it" theory is holding up.

I didn't think confidence was an issue against USA and last night it seemed that the confidence went during the game rather than not being there at the start.

Aside from that anyhow, it doesn't really counter what I said. Being able to handle pressure and the **** flying from whichever side of the crowd is a part of being a good footballer, it's true at any level but more so as you go higher up.

Wayne Rooney is reviled in his hometown and thrives on it. Obviously that is different from being booed by your own fans but it still shows you how you can be affected.

Or take David Beckham. He was booed playing for England in the wake of France 98. This spurred him on to such an extent that he became the darling of the terraces by the time the next WC rolled around.

I'm not saying that some of the players won't be completely deflated by the booing but I'm saying that you can't assume that it will make all of them play worse. I'm also saying that they should have experience of similar and worse previously and that if they can't handle it then no, they don't have any business playing for England in a World Cup.

[Uppercut]

It depends what you mean by "handle". They're still going to do their job, but with a less-than-optimal mentality, and that decreases their chance of success. No one can say for certain what the overall effect will be- no one can say for certain what the overall effect of anything will be- but being booed by your own fans in the middle of a major tournament isn't considered likely to improve the quality of a team's football by very many people.

[Marcuss]

Booing does have merits. Has turned Eboue from a twisted joke into a cult hero of Arsenal fans. WAG.

But yeah, it's ok to boo so long as there is something to warrant booing. As has been mentioned before, lack of effort or manager sackings being two of the most common.

[sledger]

I find the suggestion that booing should be discouraged because it might upset the poor terribly fragile players somewhat facile tbh. Better wrap them up in cotton wool, and if the performance has been totally substandard, then never mind, better luck next time hey chaps, and if you're still feeling sad when you get back to your mansion, have a cry into that big pile of money of yours.

[Uppercut]

Oh ****, I forgot that when they were offered a job that paid well they forfeited their ability to be people, therefore enabling them to not care when 30,000 of their own fans (whose country they represent entirely for non-monetary reasons) boo them off the park.

[sledger]

I'm planning on turning up for work tomorrow and just sitting around and doing a **** job of it all day. If my boss says this isn't up to standard, I'll throw a fit.

[Uppercut]

That's pretty mean of him, especially considering you don't get paid for anything you're doing because you've all decided to donate all the fees to charity and work on a voluntary basis.

[sledger]

Is exactly why I'm performing like crap itbt.

[Uppercut]

Haha you can't turn an analogy literal when I've won the argument within the analogy! That's cheating .

[sledger]

Haha, tbf I'm being overly cynical (probably). However, my point stands. If you take a job which you know full well will place you under a lot of pressure and will have you performing under the public eye you have to expect to come in for this sort of criticism if you aren't living up to your billing, and you can't throw your toys out of the pram when you've made a hash of something and you've been called for it. Politicians are exactly the same, you don't hear anyone saying "better not moan about David Blunkett's failings, he might cock up even worse next time". Slightly different case, obviously. But the principle remains the same, these are people who are happy to bask in the praise of the public when they've done something right, so them getting their backs up when they're receiving the opposite in light of a woeful shortcoming in terms of performance does not sit right with me. You can't have your cake and eat it etc.. etc... I appreciate that footballers are people too, but you know what the job is when you take it on. If you don't like it, then harden up or get out, imho.

[Uppercut]

The thing is, I completely agree. I don't think the players have any right to complain about the crowd booing them after a bad performance. They knew it would happen when they decided to go to the World Cup, and if they didn't then they should have.

I'm not discussing the actions of the players though, this thread is about the actions of the fans. The players, being people, will undoubtedly be affected by 30,000 of their own fans booing them. You can say they should "harden up" or "deal", and to some extent I agree, but leaving judgment of the players to one side for a brief moment, is it appropriate for fans to boo them, given that it's likely to make the side play worse? They can if they want, of course, but I don't think they can call themselves "supporters" if they do. Which is ironic, because they're generally the same fans who tear into the average non-obsessed football fan for not being a "real" supporter.

[Burgey]

Originally Posted by BoyBrumby

Two problems with that: firstly I don't think an expectation that England would beat a demonstrably inferior side like Algeria is ridiculous pressure & secondly it wasn't at the drop of a hat. It was at the arse end of the game when the players had shown neither the ability nor much of an inclination to score.

I wonder though, if the thought that England has some divine right to proclaim teams like Algeria as demosntrably inferiror is no small part of the problem.

Gerard expressed a similar view when he came off, his mindset basically just assuming the notion of Algeria being competitive is anathema.

Think that attitude from a pro is crap frankly. If that's the way they think then no wonder they played so listlessly, without any passion.

Seemed they were just waiting for someone else to make it fall into place.

[Uppercut]

I don't think it's reasonable for English supporters to expect to beat Algeria 10 times out of 10, because football doesn't work like that. But it was the performance rather than the result which ground so many English gears, and I think that's fair.

Fair point on Gerrard's attitude though. Algeria haven't got the respect they deserve in the aftermath of the match.