Football rivalries 8 years on - What's changed?

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Status
Not open for further replies.
District Line

District Line

Well-Known Member
Forum Moderator
Apr 21, 2011
13,366
968
113
London
Sorry again for the multi-thread but I was just referring back to the Football consesus conducted in 2003 on fan rivalry.

http://www.footballfanscensus.com/issueresults/Club_Rivalries_Uncovered_Results.pdf

Interestingly Arsenal then listed United as bigger rivals than Spurs and I was just wondering if that is still the case or whether that has changed over a period of time.

Also a question I'd like to put towards fellow Chelsea fans is if our rivalries have changed. Back in 2003 we had Arsenal as our biggest rivals, Spurs as 2nd and United as 3rd and I'd probably have agreed with that back then given the circumstances but the recent rivalry that has developed with Liverpool surely eclipses that?

I was also surprised that all of the teams listed as QPR's rivals were all local (as in West London) despite having not played any of them that many times, why is that?

Looking at Spurs, theirs seems to be the only rival list as such that hasn't changed at all and is unlikely to.

Responses would be much appreciated
 
Personally I love a good poll, I think you pretty much have it and I must try not to let my hate get in the way of rivalry as one is sporting and the other is murder. Back then there was the traditional rivalries i.e. West Ham, Spurs occassionally QPR then United.

As Chelsea started to grow in stature these shifted to the teams that were just that bit better than us like Arsenal, United, Liverpool e.t.c. Now it is United, Arsenal, City and then the traditional ones like QPR, Spurs, West Ham. Your comment about Spurs rival list has changed and their main rivals are now Arsenal, Fulham & QPR in that order.
 
As Arsenal fans I think our main rivals are Spurs.

After that, it's United, Chelsea, Man City and Liverpool, in that order. But the rivalries with these clubs aren't mutual.
 
here it is from a QPR point of view..
brentford hate us but we don't really care about them
we hate Chelsea but they don't really care about us..
no-one cares about Fulham!
 
Proper rivalries are with local teams. As such we only really have Arsenal and Chelsea, to a lesser extent. West Ham like to think it's a derby game when we play them but the only real animosity on our side is the disgusting thing's they sing to Defoe and the anti-semitic chanting.

I have a mate who's a Fulham fan. He was showing me videos of the away fans when he went to games in Europe, bless them they could barely get more than 10 singing at a time. Fulham are possibly the only fans without a rival, even QPR fans feel sorry for them <laugh>
 
Schteffen Freund's Top 10 Greatest Goals said:
Proper rivalries are with local teams. As such we only really have Arsenal and Chelsea, to a lesser extent. West Ham like to think it's a derby game when we play them but the only real animosity on our side is the disgusting thing's they sing to Defoe and the anti-semitic chanting.

I have a mate who's a Fulham fan. He was showing me videos of the away fans when he went to games in Europe, bless them they could barely get more than 10 singing at a time. Fulham are possibly the only fans without a rival, even QPR fans feel sorry for them <laugh>
Click to expand...

I would say we only have Spurs and West Ham really, to a lesser extent Arsenal.

I'm sure Brentford are supposed to hate Fulham.

Not knocking Fulham but to be fair they have spent a large period of time in the 3rd and 4th tier of English Football so it's understandable. They are still the oldest London club though <ok>
 
District Line said:
Sorry again for the multi-thread but I was just referring back to the Football consesus conducted in 2003 on fan rivalry.

http://www.footballfanscensus.com/issueresults/Club_Rivalries_Uncovered_Results.pdf

Interestingly Arsenal then listed United as bigger rivals than Spurs and I was just wondering if that is still the case or whether that has changed over a period of time.

Also a question I'd like to put towards fellow Chelsea fans is if our rivalries have changed. Back in 2003 we had Arsenal as our biggest rivals, Spurs as 2nd and United as 3rd and I'd probably have agreed with that back then given the circumstances but the recent rivalry that has developed with Liverpool surely eclipses that?

I was also surprised that all of the teams listed as QPR's rivals were all local (as in West London) despite having not played any of them that many times, why is that?

Looking at Spurs, theirs seems to be the only rival list as such that hasn't changed at all and is unlikely to.

Responses would be much appreciated
Click to expand...

I see our main rivals as The Goons, who I think have been significantly weakened, Liverpool - who may, or may not, improve this year - personally, I think they'll be about the same - and Chelsea, who I think will need to invest heavily soon in their ageing team.

Realistically, I think we can finish ahead of The Goons this year, assuming we don't lose any of our top players, and given a reasonable injury list
 
Sorry, Arsenal fans list Man United as our main rivals? Bullshit. It's the spuds and always will be.
 
The problem with this poll is that it was conducted online, so you're probably not really getting the average fan's opinion.
 
NowsufferinginSpain said:
I see our main rivals as The Goons, who I think have been significantly weakened, Liverpool - who may, or may not, improve this year - personally, I think they'll be about the same - and Chelsea, who I think will need to invest heavily soon in their ageing team.

Realistically, I think we can finish ahead of The Goons this year, assuming we don't lose any of our top players, and given a reasonable injury list
Click to expand...

The average age of our squad is the same as Liverpool's and actually younger than Spurs.

On average:

- Bolton
- Spurs
- QPR
- Stoke

all have older squads than us <ok>

By this time next year the age of our squad will come down even further when Anelka, Malouda and probably Drogba make way.
 
QPR4Me John Gallagher
@
@QPR_Stats QPR CFC and FFC were together in Div 2 in 1979/80 and 1982/83. It will be the first time at the top level!
================================================
never knew that, first time for everything eh!
 
Ensiluokkainen said:
Club rivalry has a number of factors on which it is based.

Historically, and before movement throughout the country became as easy as it is today, rivals were local rivals. - your rivals were the closest (geographical) side to yours that played in the same league or that were played in a cup game. Most clubs have 'league rivals' as well as 'cup rivals'.

With the advent of TV coverage people from other areas, non-game going football fans, were able to see other teams play, admire the way they played and then follow and become a fan of them - bringing about the rise of "competitive" as opposed to "geographical" rivalry.

With the advent of the PL, the coverage provided by Sky and the huge sums of money invested into a small number of clubs and the rise of clubs previously not regarded as 'competitive' but 'geographical' rivals peoples opinions of them changed, resentments built up and these also became "competitive" rivals.

Even today there are 2 sorts of rivals; geographical and competitive. Reading the 8 year old report suggests that little has changed.
Click to expand...

Good post.

Geographically - Spuds (even if we are comparing Monaco with Bagdhad)

Competitively - Chelsea
 
I think that he means that your important players are all quite old, DL.
Barring Cech, I think that you'd agree.
Terry, Lampard and Drogba have all probably seen their best days.

Not sure about your average age claim, though.
Source?
 
PleaseNotPoll said:
I think that he means that your important players are all quite old, DL.
Barring Cech, I think that you'd agree.
Terry, Lampard and Drogba have all probably seen their best days.

Not sure about your average age claim, though.
Source?
Click to expand...

So is Giggs past it given his age?

Or do we need to rethink how we get the best out of these players in the coming years?

Terry was one of the best CB's in the league last year, and Drogbas head and thought process is his downfall...physically he's a beast and has the ability to tear anyone up, see Utd in the 2nd half of the CL 1/4's last year...he came late to the professional game and has the power to boot.

Lampard suffered being out of position in a lot of games...he benefits from being between the midfield and the striker/s.

These players still have the ability to have a big say in our season, it's about the rest of the squad and how we integrate them that will count.
 
While I'd agree that you can still get some incredible valuable contributions from those players SW6, they'll struggle to dominate games every week as they have in the past.
Your mention of Giggs is extremely apt, as Ferguson has continued to get good mileage out of him by picking the correct battles for him to fight.

I agree completely about Lampard and it remains to be seen whether Villas-Boas will put him back into a formation that suits his game, especially when you've got so many forwards available.
McEachran looks like he could be a long-term replacement for him, too.

Squad depth looks like it could be a problem for Chelsea this season, for me.
Not sure if it's been improved enough to win back the title.
 
PleaseNotPoll said:
I think that he means that your important players are all quite old, DL.
Barring Cech, I think that you'd agree.
Terry, Lampard and Drogba have all probably seen their best days.

Not sure about your average age claim, though.
Source?
Click to expand...

http://www.soccerway.com/teams/england/tottenham-hotspur-football-club/statistics/

All of our players are important, how can you just identify two or three.

I would agree Terry and Lampard are past their best, but I've seen nothing to suggest Drogba is on the decline. Top scorer 2 seasons ago, 2nd best assist rate last season despite having Malaria through most of it.

Most Chelsea fans you speak to will tell you our best players last season were Cech, Ramires and Ivanovic. All three of them are in their 20s.

It's funny how our squad is "ageing" but everybody elses is just "experienced"
 
27.41?
Seems unlikely, but I suppose that one or two (Friedel, Gallas) could drag the average age up.

Some players are more important than others, DL.
Lampard seems to be more influential than Mikel, for example.
 
District Line said:
The average age of our squad is the same as Liverpool's and actually younger than Spurs.

On average:

- Bolton
- Spurs
- QPR
- Stoke

all have older squads than us <ok>

By this time next year the age of our squad will come down even further when Anelka, Malouda and probably Drogba make way.
Click to expand...

Look at your starting 11 most weeks. Quite old mate.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom
Back