If you pay to see your team, of course you are a ‘real’ fan
NOT the largest group, probably, but there will still be some Newcastle fans who think Mike Ashley is doing a pretty solid job.
Keeps the club solvent; recruited and held on to Rafa Benitez as manager; as long as Newcastle stay in the Premier League, it could be worse.
Equally, you don’t see as much green and gold at Old Trafford as you used to. There will always be some who love united but hate Glazer, yet plenty more will look at the fortune spent rebuilding Sir Alex Ferguson’s last titlewinning team, the ambitious recruitment of Louis van Gaal and now Jose Mourinho and three trophies won in less than two years and conclude there are worse custodians out there.
Yes, they squeeze the pips financially, but who doesn’t these days? Even lovely old Barcelona are in cahoots with Qatar.
And to flip this argument, there will be disgruntled Manchester City fans. Seriously, there will. Not many, but some will remain who preferred the sincerity of the old days, when City were the antithesis of Manchester united, not their elite companions in a shadowy Big Six.
So here’s the point. There is no such thing as a real fan. There is no such thing as a real anybody. Your preferences, beliefs and lifestyle choices do not by default invalidate into fakery those of the person standing next to you.
If you pay your money and go, it does not make you less real to disagree with the majority.
It does not mean you do not really care about Newcastle if you respect Ashley (right) and his financial prudence; it does not make you less of a Manchester united supporter if you quietly admire the low- profile Glazers; you are not a traitor to Sky Blue if you quite liked City when they stood for something different in the town.
On March 10, before a home fixture against Burnley, there will be a rally against the current owners of West Ham. That’s the supporters’ prerogative. Fans have the right to protest and it is not as if West Ham’s fortunes since moving to the London Stadium have greatly vindicated the move.
They have sold their best players, lost a popular manager, fought relegation and frequently struggled at their new home.
The fans think they were missold a dream and are unhappy. There has not been the great leap forward promised. It is up to the club to demonstrate otherwise.
The problem is the name of this protest movement. The Real West Ham Fans Action Group. Why real? Whose call was that? Why are these fans any realer than those who won’t go on the march?
Why is opposing the move to the London Stadium a more genuine stance than seeing its benefits?
There is something hectoring in that name, something bullying, as if to disagree, or fail to participate somehow invalidates the opinion.
YOu can’t be a real West Ham fan unless you hate the stadium; you can’t be a real West Ham fan unless you distrust the board. Only one opinion allowed. Ours. Get real. The Action Group wants a board member to answer protestors at the rally. ‘This is our open invite for you to come and tell the fans the truth,’ said a spokesman. Again, that presumption. Maybe the truth is already out there. That the opportunity to move, on the cheap, to a much bigger stadium in the locality was too great to turn down. That there was genuine fear West Ham would shrink in relevance and potential if they remained at upton Park. That in getting such a good deal, they actually ceded too much control, making the stadium less appealing. And that, on the field, mistakes have been made — particularly in the transfer market.
Nobody would argue West Ham are having a good time. The latest calamity is a breach of FA antidoping rules, having failed to provide accurate information on the whereabouts of players three times in the last 12 months. The fine is paltry, around £35,000, but the lack of professionalism isn’t impressive. This is routine stuff.
Yet there are plenty of very real fans who understand the stadium move. Plenty of very real seasonticket holders paying very real money who believe that the club had little option but to attempt growth, given the opportunity.
And while they may also be dissatisfied with how it has turned out, short term, they feel that in time the benefits will become apparent. West Ham are getting their biggest crowds now, they are attracting good players, the squad has been misfiring but it is relatively strong compared to many past seasons.
Which is not to say these views are right, either. They are just no less authentic. Real has become a pejorative term. Think of real women. As we know, these are size 14 upwards, maybe 16, maybe bigger, usually the girth of the columnist writing about them.
Yet plenty of women are thin. Some because of diet and exercise, some because it’s their natural physique.
Why are size eight women less real? Who gets to decide this stuff — who gets to choose real men, real women, real fans? We’re now told 52 per cent of the populace is the real Britain; but what of the 48 per cent? That’s quite a lot, too. It would constitute a landslide in most general elections.
Why are those people less real, less representative, why should they be marginalised and their opinions disdained?
If you go, if you pay, you’re real enough. Yours is a real opinion, you are entitled to a real say. And if everyone else is marching in a different direction that doesn’t make you phoney, disloyal or even wrong, necessarily. It just makes you different. So stay real.