The Future Fan

[h69]

Interesting article and how football will only become less like a sport and more like a soap opera.

https://www.theguardian.com/football/20 ... -listening

[eskimo joe]

A bit scarey really, I mean there are some supporters that can't attend matches and have to rely on t.v or streams. I myself would opt the real environment had I the choice.

It's the ones that couldn't careless about the buzz you get actually being there that most of the tech is aimed at.

Yes, the internet, social media has it's upside, that being you can voice your opinions to many and can interact with others you probably wouldn't know from Adam. But it has its downside also, as we have seen.

It is a possibility that football as we know it will be a business watched at home, the atmosphere that the players thrive or suffer from gone. It might take a few generations, but it will start with this current one, slowly the armchair is becoming a more convenient place to view. That will be passed down until one day the players will be playing in an empty stadium. We have had trial runs already...Nice?! I think not.

Some how the breaks need to be put on the money chasers and let sense prevail.

[Whiskyman]

Interesting article and how football will only become less like a sport and more like a soap opera.

https://www.theguardian.com/football/20 ... -listening

It is an interesting article but doesn’t it simply highlight the impact social media and technological advances generally are affecting us all. And of course how businesses will gather information about us to target us with “relevant” advertising.

[h69]

Interesting article and how football will only become less like a sport and more like a soap opera.

https://www.theguardian.com/football/20 ... -listening

It is an interesting article but doesn’t it simply highlight the impact social media and technological advances generally are affecting us all. And of course how businesses will gather information about us to target us with “relevant” advertising.

Its not about technological advances at all really, it is about the fact that people can't be bothered to attend any more and would rather play FIFA on a playstation.. A combination of Apathy, laziness and the fact that football has priced out people from attending. Its a symptom of society in general that people prefer everything to be brought to them.

It is quite sad for sure but a good reason why we cant compare the days of Greenwood and Lyall and the fans of the team then with now

[Whiskyman]

It is an interesting article but doesn’t it simply highlight the impact social media and technological advances generally are affecting us all. And of course how businesses will gather information about us to target us with “relevant” advertising.

Its not about technological advances at all really, it is about the fact that people can't be bothered to attend any more and would rather play FIFA on a playstation.. A combination of Apathy, laziness and the fact that football has priced out people from attending. Its a symptom of society in general that people prefer everything to be brought to them.

It is quite sad for sure but a good reason why we cant compare the days of Greenwood and Lyall and the fans of the team then with now

Nonsense. If people can’t be bothered to attend why are attendances far higher today, despite the cost of attending, than they ever were back in the 70s and 80s.? From a purely WHU perspective we now play regularly in front of nearly 60,000. Back in the 70s and 80s attendances we’re often below 20,000

[terrya1965]

Its not about technological advances at all really, it is about the fact that people can't be bothered to attend any more and would rather play FIFA on a playstation.. A combination of Apathy, laziness and the fact that football has priced out people from attending. Its a symptom of society in general that people prefer everything to be brought to them.

It is quite sad for sure but a good reason why we cant compare the days of Greenwood and Lyall and the fans of the team then with now

Nonsense. If people can’t be bothered to attend why are attendances far higher today, despite the cost of attending, than they ever were back in the 70s and 80s.? From a purely WHU perspective we now play regularly in front of nearly 60,000. Back in the 70s and 80s attendances we’re often below 20,000

I think we have disagreed about this before.

The only real time that we have gone under the average 20,000 was when Football was on it's arse after Heysel and the Bradford Fire and in 1989 when we went down.Every attendance was poor. In 1985/86,Arsenal only averaged 2,000 more and Spurs were below us.


In the early 70s,we averaged over 30,000 and even in the 2nd Division,we were still around the 6th/7th best supported team in the country.The first season we averaged 27,000+..The lowest was 22,000.(League games only)

[Whiskyman]

Nonsense. If people can’t be bothered to attend why are attendances far higher today, despite the cost of attending, than they ever were back in the 70s and 80s.? From a purely WHU perspective we now play regularly in front of nearly 60,000. Back in the 70s and 80s attendances we’re often below 20,000

I think we have disagreed about this before.

The only real time that we have gone under the average 20,000 was when Football was on it's arse after Heysel and the Bradford Fire and in 1989 when we went down.Every attendance was poor. In 1985/86,Arsenal only averaged 2,000 more and Spurs were below us.


In the early 70s,we averaged over 30,000 and even in the 2nd Division,we were still around the 6th/7th best supported team in the country.The first season we averaged 27,000+..The lowest was 22,000.(League games only)

That has nothing to do with the point I was making. The OP said that people can't be bothered to attend and would rather play FIFA on the Play Station. The FACTS are that attendances today are generally, not just in West Ham's case, higher than they were back in pre PL days which tends to contradict that point does it not ?

The London Stadium is regularly sold out, as are many grounds. But even in the days of terraces, when attendances were higher than they were when seating became compulsory, Upton Park rarely saw a full house.

[h69]

Its not about technological advances at all really, it is about the fact that people can't be bothered to attend any more and would rather play FIFA on a playstation.. A combination of Apathy, laziness and the fact that football has priced out people from attending. Its a symptom of society in general that people prefer everything to be brought to them.

It is quite sad for sure but a good reason why we cant compare the days of Greenwood and Lyall and the fans of the team then with now

Nonsense. If people can’t be bothered to attend why are attendances far higher today, despite the cost of attending, than they ever were back in the 70s and 80s.? From a purely WHU perspective we now play regularly in front of nearly 60,000. Back in the 70s and 80s attendances we’re often below 20,000

Nonsense ! 'The OP' didnt say that, a survey conducted by the report developers did. There are more fans overall but the percentage of these attending matches is declining.

"The survey recorded that among all fans only 40% regularly watched professional football in a stadium. Meanwhile 51% said they played Fifa at least once a month." - Quote !
If you look at the number of corporate tickets, casual matchgoers, tourists etc you will find the answer there. It is sad. We are left with those commenting from afar about transfers etc

You are welcome to not believe the report but please dont be so condescending as to blame me for it. I am just commenting on the report that was just commissioned and I do agree with it based on what I experience. You may not when you attend but you would one in a minority. The number of PSG shirts I see people wearing bears that out.

"As football has grown into a global form of entertainment so those who call themselves fans have changed too. The majority no longer watch football live in person but digitally through a screen. Has the sport come to terms with that shift?"

The point I was making which you completely glossed over was that the kind of fan that is more prevalent are the twitter fans explaining the constant moaning on twitter/forums, the abuse of players and the obsession with transfers.

Last year the journalist Dean Van Nguyen wrote a taxonomy of one “extremely online” section of Liverpool’s fanbase, a type he called the “Twitter fan”. They were largely young, he wrote, obsessed with transfers, highly combative and persistently pessimistic. “Not getting what you want from football all of the time seems completely intolerable to them,” Van Nguyen wrote. He argued that similar groups existed in most clubs’ fanbases, something borne out by even the most cursory glance at a Premier League club’s hashtag.

[BlackDiamond]

Nonsense. If people can’t be bothered to attend why are attendances far higher today, despite the cost of attending, than they ever were back in the 70s and 80s.? From a purely WHU perspective we now play regularly in front of nearly 60,000. Back in the 70s and 80s attendances we’re often below 20,000

Nonsense ! 'The OP' didnt say that, a survey conducted by the report developers did. There are more fans overall but the percentage of these attending matches is declining.

"The survey recorded that among all fans only 40% regularly watched professional football in a stadium. Meanwhile 51% said they played Fifa at least once a month." - Quote !
If you look at the number of corporate tickets, casual matchgoers, tourists etc you will find the answer there. It is sad. We are left with those commenting from afar about transfers etc

You are welcome to not believe the report but please dont be so condescending as to blame me for it. I am just commenting on the report that was just commissioned and I do agree with it based on what I experience. You may not when you attend but you would one in a minority. The number of PSG shirts I see people wearing bears that out.

"As football has grown into a global form of entertainment so those who call themselves fans have changed too. The majority no longer watch football live in person but digitally through a screen. Has the sport come to terms with that shift?"

The point I was making which you completely glossed over was that the kind of fan that is more prevalent are the twitter fans explaining the constant moaning on twitter/forums, the abuse of players and the obsession with transfers.

Last year the journalist Dean Van Nguyen wrote a taxonomy of one “extremely online” section of Liverpool’s fanbase, a type he called the “Twitter fan”. They were largely young, he wrote, obsessed with transfers, highly combative and persistently pessimistic. “Not getting what you want from football all of the time seems completely intolerable to them,” Van Nguyen wrote. He argued that similar groups existed in most clubs’ fanbases, something borne out by even the most cursory glance at a Premier League club’s hashtag.

So in essence the analysis concludes: There are more people interested or consuming football in the world in 2022, than were in the 1970s/80s ,however the percentage of those people who actually attend live matches in 2022, has decreased.in comparison.

I think we can agree with that, without too much controversey.

[h69]

Nonsense ! 'The OP' didnt say that, a survey conducted by the report developers did. There are more fans overall but the percentage of these attending matches is declining.

"The survey recorded that among all fans only 40% regularly watched professional football in a stadium. Meanwhile 51% said they played Fifa at least once a month." - Quote !
If you look at the number of corporate tickets, casual matchgoers, tourists etc you will find the answer there. It is sad. We are left with those commenting from afar about transfers etc

You are welcome to not believe the report but please dont be so condescending as to blame me for it. I am just commenting on the report that was just commissioned and I do agree with it based on what I experience. You may not when you attend but you would one in a minority. The number of PSG shirts I see people wearing bears that out.

"As football has grown into a global form of entertainment so those who call themselves fans have changed too. The majority no longer watch football live in person but digitally through a screen. Has the sport come to terms with that shift?"

The point I was making which you completely glossed over was that the kind of fan that is more prevalent are the twitter fans explaining the constant moaning on twitter/forums, the abuse of players and the obsession with transfers.

Last year the journalist Dean Van Nguyen wrote a taxonomy of one “extremely online” section of Liverpool’s fanbase, a type he called the “Twitter fan”. They were largely young, he wrote, obsessed with transfers, highly combative and persistently pessimistic. “Not getting what you want from football all of the time seems completely intolerable to them,” Van Nguyen wrote. He argued that similar groups existed in most clubs’ fanbases, something borne out by even the most cursory glance at a Premier League club’s hashtag.

So in essence the analysis concludes: There are more people interested or consuming football in the world in 2022, than were in the 1970s/80s ,however the percentage of those people who actually attend live matches in 2022, has decreased.in comparison.

I think we can agree with that, without too much controversey.

It concludes that the majority of fans are more interested in writing on forums, social media, playing FIFA and discussing transfers than actually watching matches live. It breeds the kind of fan that wants instant gratification and explains a lot about the type of abuse the players get nowadays on forums and social media.

I think that is sad myself.