Whilst I agree up to a point about our stadium. I think that the money we spent with limited funds meant less was available for spending on the team. Agree that our directors etc should have dipped into their pockets or found some more cash from somewhere else but at least we don't have to worry about such things at the moment.
Hi All, If you haven't read it, this book is a must read for any Saints or Pompey fan interested in the rivalry and who's been top dog at various points: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Seventeen-Miles-Paradise-Southampton-Portsmouth/dp/1905328419 In my opinion a very balanced view written by a Pompey fan who's a University lecturer. Anyone else read it? - it will need updating to reflect the last 3 up and down years for both teams!! Btw, mine's currently on loan to a Pompey fan!
Not read that one, have got the Hagiology one by David Bull & Dave Juson at home though. No point denying what Pompey acheived before and after the 2nd world war. But little is ever spoken about how Saints were easily the dominant club not only in Hampshire, but actually south of the Midlands (including London) for around 20-25 years from 1885 onwards. Seven Southern League titles to Pompey's two. You may say "it's only the southern league" but that was the only league that teams south of the midlands could play in up to 1919. Hence also why those northern clubs who boast league titles prior to 1919, are distorting the bigger picture somewhat.
OK I don't particularly want to be seen as taking sides in this debate. For my sins I used to attend Pompey games (as well as Saints) From about 1947 to about 1953. More spasmodically after that until my grandfather died in 1961. I was also Pompey Naval personnel, although I supported saints, which I considered to be my home town. Pompey were considered to be a big club in those days. Their gate sizes compared to saints was enormous. We seemed to rise exactly as they declined, we increased in popularity as we progressed up the leagues. When they changed us to all seating at the Dell making it just over 15000 in capacity, that should have been the death nell for us. For what ever reason we hung on. When we went to St Mary's with our average gates of 29000 odd it redeemed our status to a degree. Then there was our decline just as Pompey went up again but they have never reached the dizzy heights of their past. In modern terms you would not classify Pompey as a large club I am not sure if you would even classify them as a family club any more, the same as Saints. The term Family club no longer exists in modern times, as clubs are now considered a business and are run on those lines only. As for the size of each club that is a debatable point. Do you base the size on its past glories or its current standing. It's following over all, its fan base or what? Saints certainly have a bigger following over all at the moment. Do we really have the right to call ourselves bigger than Pompey because of that? That to me is a bigger issue and debate one I fear there will be a lot of disagreement on too. One final thing......I don't think you were correct CBK about service personnel getting in free. They may have done during the war years. Either side though it was not free we used to get in at a reduced rate it is true, pensioners and disabled got in for the same rate.
Beddy / CBK Thanks for your input. There are some genuinely salient points made, especially the remark about the Southern League. I totally agree that this league gets overlooked in history books which tend to concentrate on the Northern teams probably due to the fact that they attributed to the demise of the "gentlemen's" football clubs such as The Wanderers, The Royal Engineers and the Corinthians. A few years later, they also were importing the better talent from Scotland where teams like Queens Park were startung to experiment with tactics and the passing game. Of course, they were also the first teams to become professional as well. You therefore can appreciate why football history books have neglected the Southern League and overlooked clubs like Southampton who were dominant 110-odd years ago when the likes of C B Fry were turning out for us. I believe that Southampton were also one of the first Southern league teams to turn professional - a fact that brought about the wrath of other teams but instrumental in establishing Southampton as a force in this league at the time. I contally agree that the exclusion of Southern league silverware distorts the hisory books although I believe no Southern team won the FA until 1901 - 29 years after it's creation. Beddytare's experience is particularly interesting for me as my Grandfather regularly attended football matches at Fratton Park, The Dell, Elm Park and ALdershot when he stopped playing for village teams around Basingstoke in his forties. I believe that this must have been around the early fifties and certainly an era when it was possible to watch all clubs without being wholly partisan to any particular team. As far as he was concerned, if it was Saturday afternoon, he would go off to watch football. Shame that he died when I was three as it would have been fascinating to talk football with him as well as many other subjects. Once point that has been missed is that the stability Southampton enjoyed (well, before Rupert Lowe!) definately contributed to the general good fortune we enjoyed from the time Ted Bates took over through to the era of Chris Nicholls when we started to struggle. Much of the success we enjoyed was unde the stwardship of Lawrie McMenemy and this must have co-incided with a time when Portsmouth seemed to be changing managers on a season by season basis with the likes of Ian St John and Frank Burrows trying to outdo each other as to who could mismanage the club the most. Small wonder the fans became dispirited. I would suggest that McMenemy's teams were very much mirrored in the 2000's in Portsmouth when Redknapp assembled a sqaud of England internationals and more cultured players from Europe. Whilst I concur that Southampton's current set-up is better than Portsmouth in all aspects whether you rank this on size of stadium, training facilities, youth set up, marketing or even it's perception as a modern, professional company, I would have to disagree that the appetite for the game in far greater in Southampton. I would have taken the same view as Chocolate Box Kid up until about 6 years ago when I started to work regularly in the Portsmouth area (including the docks) and with fans of the club. This opened my eyes to how football is perceived within the PO postcode although I have had earlier experience back in the early nineties when I spent the best part of 12 months working on a site in Chichester where I was jeered on site every morning my bricklayers from Portsmouth. Working in Portsmouth, you are definately more aware of the club than is the case in Southampton. It has a far more boisterous presence. Having many work colleagues who support the club also reinforces the impression and their aspirations are usually far greater than the more realistic and grounded ones from Saints fans. Many Southampton fans share CBK's view and there are those of us who grew up with PFC plying their trade in the old Fourth Division who will always look down at Pompey. However, if you go outside of the country, I think you will get a very different view from fans of other clubs whose perception of our south coast neighbours is probably a bit mpore generous - especially from those who are much older than me. As I said, the association with the Navy probably earn't Portsmouth a following that went beyond the usualy geographical or "glory-hunting" reasons for following a club. I will add , though, that I think Portsmouth have yet to reach rock bottom and am not at all surprised that they currently remain such an unattractive proposition for investors. The sum of ã17 million touted a few weeks ago was ridiculous. Next season will be fascinating and I wouldn't be surprised one bit if we took 6 points off our rivals if their fortunes don't quickly and radically improve. Although I am a proud Saints fan, I respect Portsmouth's history and culture within the game - it makes it all the sweeter when we beat them. Ian
You make a few good points Ian. I will add Portsmouth had up until the early 60's a fan base of mainly service men. Indeed the combined services ground just outside HMS excellent actually was for many a year a good source of footballing talent for the Pompey ranks. Unfortunately with the decline in the forces personnel around the area seemed to echo in the demise of Portsmouth. I agree wholeheartedly your remarks as to Pompey's club size although I would argue in this modern era they would not be considered a large club with any stretch of the imagination. Nor come to that is Saints. who is the largest.......that is a matter for debate and not one I would relish quite frankly. In the modern era at a guess we and Pompey would be classified as medium sized clubs.....good debate though........<ok.
Why this obsession with the Skates. We have to play them twice next season and we will stuff them twice to put them in their place and then hopefully we will never see them again. As far as I am concerned they will always be a 4th Division club which is something we have never been. My aspirations are for us to be playing better opposition than them. We are on our way to the Premier League and this time our tenure will be longer than 27 years. The Skates meanwhile will be skint with second rate players playing in front of third rate fans while we will be soaring away in the Premier League. I am disappointed if the only aspiration some of you have is to play against a rundown little club that plays in a derelict shed of a football stadium. Why would I aspire to us playing a team and supporters that I pity?
No obsession St godders.........The thread article says "Bring on Pompey".....so we were having a very good debate about them. so why on earth would you assume we had an obsession?
