- Early departure flags “not true fans”
- Fandom faces identity disputes
- Globalization disrupts traditional metrics
Early departure is somewhat of a red flag. Booing your athletes. It is impolite to wear, purchase, or express any opinion regarding a half-and-half scarf that does not border on pathological loathing. Fake merchandise. Providing support to a club from a location other than one’s own. Contributing to multiple clubs. Achieving a score below 10 out of 15 on a clickbait multiple-choice exam.
Indeed, there are numerous ways to expose oneself as the most abhorrent member of the footballing species: “not a true fan” in the present day. Who is eligible to identify as a football fan? Although this institution purports to be inclusive of all who wish to believe, the very concept of fandom continues to face persistent challenges, disputes, revocations, and devaluations. There are more terms used to refer to fictitious English football fans than to characterize genuine ones: “fair-weather fans,” “glory-hunters,” “plastics,” “casuals,” “fakes,” and “frauds,” “tourists,” and “day-trippers,” “trolls,” and “haters.”
Last week, Ange Postecoglou was incensed by the initial of these terms; the Tottenham head coach interrupted a query regarding ticket prices to object to the characterization of foreign supporters as “plastics.” “That is extremely severe,” he exclaimed. “This club has international supporters.” It does not diminish their level of enthusiasm. “I consider it extremely disrespectful to fans who are willing to travel halfway around the world to attend.”
An intriguing facet of this exchange was how it exemplified the widening cultural chasm at the highest level of English football. Throughout the majority of the Premier League’s existence, foreign supporters have been considered to be the ecosystem’s lowest feeders: estranged by distance, estranged from culture and history, and derided for their recent conversion and the occasional unfortunate practice of referring to it as “the EPL.”
Furthermore, a distinct hierarchy of devotion existed in this context, which was determined by physical attendance at matches and geographical proximity. However, conventional metrics have been disrupted by the globalization of the largest organizations and the growing impact of social media.
The majority of contemporary super-club supporters now reside in different locations, connected to them solely through the internet, and are improbable to visit the stadium more than a few times at most. Given the saturated and mature nature of the domestic market, new admirers will also emerge from this region. When a communal institution is dragged away from the community by the market, what occurs to it?
It describes, from a business perspective, the highly profitable international friendlies, the tour packages, and the network of megastores. NONE of these elements inherently constitute a destructive force. One need only observe a significant Premier League match in an international pub or witness the throngs of Korean supporters at Tottenham, who regard an in-person encounter with Son Heung-min as a sacred pilgrimage, to comprehend how foreign fans enhance and profoundly appreciate a football club.
However, there are also compromises to be achieved, cultural barriers to overcome, and conflicts to resolve, which are frequently discussed on online forums and social media platforms. Consider the “Cobhamsexual” divide, a significant rift that has emerged in recent years concerning the academy between (mostly) domestic Chelsea supporters and (mostly) international Chelsea supporters.
To satisfy the balance sheet, Cobhamsexuals lament the departure of Mason Mount, urge Mauricio Pochettino to give more playing time to youth players, and oppose the sale of homegrown talents such as Conor Gallagher. The rose-tinted parochialism of the Cobhamsexuals is ridiculed by supporters abroad, who shrug off the inevitable accusations that they are “plastic,” “casual,” or “not a true Chelsea fan.” The outcome was possibly the most polarised and perpetually irate fan community in the Premier League.
Two developments are occurring simultaneously here. The initial trend is the progressive reorganization of fan hierarchy according to financial means: an evolution that has been underway for several years but is currently nearing a critical juncture due to escalating costs of living and deteriorating quality of life. Postecoglou, using his customary empathetic and knowledgeable manner, refuted a nonexistent argument.
Access restriction for foreign supporters, who have historically been able to purchase tickets at the venue, is not a topic of discussion. However, by idealizing the allegiance of affluent individuals amidst price increases that have infuriated devoted Spurs supporters, Postecoglou provided a justification that was practically scripted by Daniel Levy and the corporate press office.
The gradual erosion of the big club fanbase as a site of community and assembly is the second. Expanding a fanbase weakens it as well; it erodes the bonds that unite and organize fans and diminishes the ties that bound them to one another. An equal and opposing wave of (mostly foreign-based) Manchester United supporters who opposed the sale of their club to a Qatari bidder met the majority of (mostly domestic-based) supporters who opposed the Qatari bid. Meanwhile, it is unreasonable to expect Chelsea supporters to oppose a prospective Super League campaign when they can no longer even reach a consensus on Armando Broja’s quality.
These are, in a sense, more general existential inquiries that cut to the core of what a football club is and for whom it provides services. How can one reconcile the notion that a football club should be accessible to all with the fact that it is an institution with ties to a particular region and community? How can one reconcile a fandom characterized by a longstanding tradition with one that involves waking up at 3 a.m. to watch Jonny Evans on a diminutive screen? How can the fallacious dichotomies between “wealthy tourists” and “local working class” and “true fans” and “plastics” be refuted?
A fanbase is divided into numerous factions. However, in such situations, the sole beneficiaries are those who possess a vested interest in capitalizing on it.
