I didn't deliberately misinterpret it? Hence why I asked? I assumed you meant adults but I didn't know for sure. I think in high pressure environments a lot of people shout or raise their voices.
Yes, Yes it is. The reason why people who just say "Puel out" tend to end the discussion is because they rarely offer any reasoning or alternative to discuss. Not having a manager would be a club not working. Try saying which manager to bring in and why it would work well and you might have more success. Many people who are defending Puel aren't saying they would be unhappy with a new manager. Try reading the thread again.
Interesting music was mentioned. I manage. It's my job. Sometimes I need to bollock, sometimes I need to cuddle. But it's my job. If someone came to a gig and booed the performance because she was having an off day, just because they'd bought a ticket, I'd kick them out and hope they never came back. It would be ruining other people's enjoyment of the gig, and the artist is a human being. Unless she had gone 'full Amy', then I'd haul her out of the firing line. Even on an off day (which to date has never happened) she's doing her best. People can come out of the gig and say 'that wasn't up to scratch' or moan about it on Twitter. Fine, that's their right. To do it during a performance, making the performance worse as a result and denying the opportunity for others to take something from it is 100% 'me me me' and not on. Obviously there's differences (I'm talking about one person vs a team) but if you're going to bring that comparison up...
When I was 24 I was working in a new job in IT sales. My manager gave me good coaching with the occasional mild bollocking. I simply cannot imagine what it would have been like to have thousands of people shouting at me all the time I was doing my job and booing whenever I made whatever they assessed to be a mistake or a lack of skill. Would it have improved my performance? I KNOW you're going to roll out that they are highly-paid professionals but they are also human beings. Young human beings with egos (and little idea of the real world, having been to some extent isolated since childhood). I await the first smartarse sarcastic "poor babies" response but if you think back to when you were in your 20's, how would you have responded to abuse from people who don't know your job as well as you do? Booing for a backpass. Asinine. Vin
I used to play cricket at a reasonable level. If someone shouted "what sort of shot was that, you ****ing cretin" as I was hauling my arse off the pitch it was not water off a duck's back. If I was going through a particularly bad patch, having someone shout out "under bloody ten again, you twat" was not interpreted as encouragement. And then "you couldn't catch a cold you useless ****" never did improve my catching. Then I stopped my mum watching the games and things improved.
What about when it is an "elite" performer that has a disasterous gig? I mean like Amy. People who pay money will voice their disapproval. I went to a gig once by the Happy Mondays years after they were big and it was terrible and lots of people boo'd and lots of people walked out.
Same as the players would. "If you know so much do it yourself, if not then FO" then get back to doing what I am Supposed to do.
Going back to the old days pre-Sky TV money, every supporter who went through the turnstiles was genuinely supporting the club financially, and the more supporters the club could pack in, the better the chances of signing players and doing better in terms of cup runs and league places. Nowadays, for a Premier League club, the financial contribution from supporters in terms of ticket sales is rather less important compared to the riches on offer from BT and Sky, so the question arises, what are crowds at football matches actually for nowadays? Are they to create an atmosphere of unconditional excitement and support (that word again) for their team, or are they a kind of extended panel of judges, who give voice, positively or negatively, only according to the quality of the football being viewed? This all boils down to the fact that since football has been universally televised, the nature of the football supporter has also been modified. The fact that anyone who wants to can watch football from around the world virtually non-stop means that whichever club the average football fan actually goes to watch is constantly, consciously or unconsciously, being compared to Real Madrid or Bayern Munich, or the Chelseas and Tottenhams in our own league. So it's not surprising that people equate paying to watch a match live to going to the theatre or a concert, with a consequent expectation that they'll be entertained. They are wrong. Footballers aren't entertainers, they are competitors trying to beat another team, and if I go to a football match I don't judge my team on the quality of the football they play (if that were the case I would probably have given up on Saints in about 1967), but on how close they come to winning and how hard they try compared to their own best performances. Being part of a football crowd can be entertaining in itself, although that doesn't happen very often at St. Mary's, due to the lack of singing, apart from the Northam's obsessive anti-Pompey dirges. Maybe, just maybe, any lack of belief or confidence in the players in the pitch can be at least partly put down to the luke-warm atmosphere created by the crowd these days.
Oi, she's an elite performer Funnily enough I just spoke to her about this. She said "if someone booed during a gig, I'd either hand them the microphone and say 'go on then, you try it' or more likely I'd get down off the stage and headbutt them". That's my girl
While the "if someone was watching me do my job..." point is an interesting one, it has to be remembered that fans aren't watching someone in their first week of a new job and booing them. The vast majority of the booing is almost certainly down to reasonably long-term dissatisfaction with the team. Similarly, I'd say fans aren't booing one-off "errors"; they're booing because they've seen the same things (the same "errors" if you like) over and over again this season and they're sick of it. I've said before that it has sometimes felt as though I've watched the same match about 20 times this season.
I dont believe either side offers arguments ample enough for a robust debate. the clappers also offer apologies for mitigating circumstances, not necessarily how the team could play better and stuff. I think he is likely to go, people will moan, others will rejoice, amd we will start all the bollocks again over the summer when Virgil stays, leaves or defactes on our beloved flag.
She hates it here, he isn't settled. The fans are starting to turn on his brand on football. It all adds up.
