Will there ever come a day when people are allowed to dislike players?

[The Spurs Lad]

Is it at all possible that some people may not like Adebayor/Gallas because they don't rate them as players, not because they played for Arsenal?

Or they don't like Livermore because they don't rate him as a player, not because he's not called van Livermore and isn't foreign? This could go on and on for Defoe, Lennon, Dembele, Parker, Walker etc.

Yes, it's not fair to give them direct abuse but that doesn't mean people can't criticise them. Where does it stop though, people may see Gallas start and disagree, they have 2 options, criticise Gallas or criticise the manager, either way they will get slated by others and prejudged as having already formed opinions on these people based upon factors outwith their actual playing ability.

Is it at all possible that some people may simply not like a player based on his footballing ability, or is that just too difficult for some to understand? The problem is many people who do dislike players based on their ability get grouped with those who slate them based on past clubs or give them direct abuse. As well as being grouped with those who make decisions based upon one or 2 games.

To clarify for those with limited analytical ability: I do not support people slating players based on anything except their footballing ability such as their previous clubs, nor do i support giving them direct abuse.

 

[chrissivad]

Dont have a problem is someone doesn't rate a player, but there is a big difference in criticising what a player does/doesnt do and just throwing abuse at them.

 

[Gassin's finest]

If it is at all possible to criticise a player based on his footballing ability, or lack thereof, then surely it is possible to simply say that... as in "Gallas is no longer to perform at this level and is a liability", or "Adebayor's attitude is somewhat lacking and despite having some good touches is not driven enough".

As opposed to "OMG, Gallas is a shiiiiiiiiiiiiiit old gooner, get him the fuck off!" or "Adebayor is total ****, doesn't give a fuck the greedy twat, fuck him right off"

Oh wait I forgot... this is the internetz... carry on then.

 

[mpickard2087]

No, there isn't.

My problem is that people tend to just criticise the same old players, when the others next to them are making mistakes as well and sometimes are arguably performing worse than them, but for some reason don't call them out on it. It just looks like bias/favouritism being applied.

People also tend to make wildly inaccurate statements based on one game. For instance, I have seen it said that Gallas is incapable of playing the high line. This ignores the fact that since that Chelsea game earlier in the season he has been in good form when he has played and hasn't had a problem with the high line, in fact he has been calling to offside trap and doing it well. Plus another factor may have been that after pulling out of the Liverpool game, was he 100% fit? I'm not going to dispute that he had a poor game last night, but do we write someone off on one game, ignoring the previous few months of pretty good form?

If you don't rate someone fine, but I think if you are going to make that post then expand on it, back it up with evidence of why you believe this to be the case, and when doing this give examples over a prolonged run of games, not just focusing on one (non) performance. That way you can have constructive debate rather than just statement making.

 

[Misfit]

Have never rated JD. Well, I havent thought of him as the best striker at this club for yrs now. I say it whenever and wherever. I don't give a damn. "More tea vicar? Oh yeah, your boy JD is a brainless footballer. Where's your God now biatch!" That's how I roll. I handle my bidniz.

But yeah, always want him to well when he's playing, it does help THFC after all and would never go to the lengths of booing him or anything. All that can do is have a negative effect for THFC utimately.

The match threads are embarrassing but that's been the case for a while now and is hardly Spurs-specific. People vent in them. The creeping of that kind of crap into other threads though is disappointing and only shows the posters involved not being passionate or caught up in the moment but only half-wits incapable of expressing themselves properly.

 

[The Spurs Lad]

If it is at all possible to criticise a player based on his footballing ability, or lack thereof, then surely it is possible to simply say that... as in "Gallas is no longer to perform at this level and is a liability", or "Adebayor's attitude is somewhat lacking and despite having some good touches is not driven enough".

As opposed to "OMG, Gallas is a shiiiiiiiiiiiiiit old gooner, get him the fuck off!" or "Adebayor is total ****, doesn't give a fuck the greedy twat, fuck him right off"

Oh wait I forgot... this is the internetz... carry on then.

The fuck? I quite deliberately and clearly stated "it's not fair to give them direct abuse" and i would assume the connotations of the thread would have covered that i don't agree with blaming it on their past history.

 

[Bromavinci]

Yeah But Gallas is shit

 

[Francis Gibbs]

Yeah But Gallas is shit

.... and Adebayor is actually a useless, greedy, lazy twat

 

[faze_coys]

i am allowed to dislike livermore.

Dont see the point in 'abuse' tho. Not his fault he is getting played well above his level.

 

[orkneyspur]

We live in a PC world now. Back in the day, you could slag Johnny Pratt off the whole game, just for being alive!!!! Nowadays, you can't hurt anyone's feelings! And yes, booing a player has always been about, Frankie Saul used to get boo'd and you should have heard the racket for David Jenkins.

 

[teok]

Two different things. On a message board I think people can say what they like (with in reason). It doesn't have any effect on the team.

At games, trying to keep the support up is crucial. Look at the chelsea/benitez bollocks. Even if it wasn't directed at them the chelsea team played badly because it was a constantly negative atmosphere.

 

[Damian99]

You cannot "dislike" a person based purely on the fact they may be shit (in our opinions) As angry as i may have been at Kyle Walker the other week at Anfield, i can't say i actually dislike him.

 

[teok]

You cannot "dislike" a person based purely on the fact they may be shit (in our opinions) As angry as i may have been at Kyle Walker the other week at Anfield, i can't say i actually dislike him.

I'm guessing people mean like/dislike in a rate/don't rate sort of way.

 

[Montasura]

Is it at all possible that some people may not like Adebayor/Gallas because they don't rate them as players, not because they played for Arsenal?

Or they don't like Livermore because they don't rate him as a player, not because he's not called van Livermore and isn't foreign? This could go on and on for Defoe, Lennon, Dembele, Parker, Walker etc.

Yes, it's not fair to give them direct abuse but that doesn't mean people can't criticise them. Where does it stop though, people may see Gallas start and disagree, they have 2 options, criticise Gallas or criticise the manager, either way they will get slated by others and prejudged as having already formed opinions on these people based upon factors outwith their actual playing ability.

Is it at all possible that some people may simply not like a player based on his footballing ability, or is that just too difficult for some to understand? The problem is many people who do dislike players based on their ability get grouped with those who slate them based on past clubs or give them direct abuse. As well as being grouped with those who make decisions based upon one or 2 games.

To clarify for those with limited analytical ability: I do not support people slating players based on anything except their footballing ability such as their previous clubs, nor do i support giving them direct abuse.

The problem I have is the way people are prepared to change their opinion so readily based on a single game of football. A few weeks ago and pretty much all of our players could do no wrong, AVB was the messiah himself, etc. Fast forward two matches and I dipped into last nights match thread and read 2 pages of utterly ridiculous comments damning almost everyone involved with THFC...the players were all useless twats...we really are a one man team...Christ, I even read one comment suggesting that AVB actually was a fraud who had simply rode his luck and was now getting well and truly found out. I quit out of the forum feeling utterly ashamed and embarassed to read that crap from my so called Spurs fans.

I also have a problem with posters who like to make sly and veiled digs at other posters on here with underhand and needless comments like "To clarify for those with limited analytical ability".

 

[Wardy]

I'll be honest, I think they're both s*** and wish both of them never signed in the 1st place - was against both transfers. No idea what they're like in person, but I don't care as I rate them based on how they represent Spurs. This has nothing to do with Arsenal.

Adebayor - lazy, which is inexcusable
Gallas - liability - does stupid mistakes on the pitch. Past it

This is my opinion

 

[parklane1]

Nothing like getting behind the team and players, criticising players for poor performances is fine, calling them idiots, brain dead etc is moronic.

 

[The Spurs Lad]

The problem I have is the way people are prepared to change their opinion so readily based on a single game of football. A few weeks ago and pretty much all of our players could do no wrong, AVB was the messiah himself, etc. Fast forward two matches and I dipped into last nights match thread and read 2 pages of utterly ridiculous comments damning almost everyone involved with THFC...the players were all useless twats...we really are a one man team...Christ, I even read one comment suggesting that AVB actually was a fraud who had simply rode his luck and was now getting well and truly found out. I quit out of the forum feeling utterly ashamed and embarassed to read that crap from my so called Spurs fans.

I also have a problem with posters who like to make sly and veiled digs at other posters on here with underhand and needless comments like "To clarify for those with limited analytical ability".

That was only added as a result of Gassins exquisite reply.

 

[JerryGarcia]

It's the classic freedom of speech thingy, people can say what they like about a player but whoever replies to them can also say what they think about the original post.

The main problem is that it's very annoying to to see the same comments over and over again and there are people who pop up in the match threads who only ever post things like "Jenas is shit" or "Jol/Ramos/Harry/AVB out". I guess it's difficult to tell which is the constructive critisism sometimes so maybe people should just say what they think and not worry about what anyone says. Some people also need to think more before they post though, if you're making a case against a player, think about what people are going to say back to you so you can see and present a more balanced view. Nobody will slate you if you give an honest and well thought out opinion.

 

[dontcallme]

I think the problem is the quality of the post.

So often we hear 'x player is shit, lazy and useless.' It's just embarassing. We are 3rd and playing well. None of our players are shit.

I've read good, well-thought out posts on several of our players and these posts don't get too much criticism.

But a lot of the criticism is just moronic and never waivers despite recent events. I wish these posters would just use www.thesun.co.uk.

 

[Bobbins]

If it is at all possible to criticise a player based on his footballing ability, or lack thereof, then surely it is possible to simply say that... as in "Gallas is no longer to perform at this level and is a liability", or "Adebayor's attitude is somewhat lacking and despite having some good touches is not driven enough".

As opposed to "OMG, Gallas is a shiiiiiiiiiiiiiit old gooner, get him the fuck off!" or "Adebayor is total ****, doesn't give a fuck the greedy twat, fuck him right off"

Oh wait I forgot... this is the internetz... carry on then.

How the hell can Francis Gibbs 'disagree' with this?

You disagree with the fact that it's possible to not be a complete twat about something? Does that mean every small complaint in Francis Gibb's life is met with a torrent of abuse and then when someone pulls him up on it he just says 'well I don't think you can be critical of something or annoyed at something without swearing like you're on the internets'?