SOME football websites exist purely to create controversy.
Shock value is their currency, getting a rise out of a group of fans considered a good day’s work in the minds of their creators and contributors.
The Anfield Wrap is emphatically not among them. I’d be surprised if any of my fellow writers had ever set out to offend, to cause outrage or to provoke anything more than healthy debate and the odd cheap laugh.
A misconception, propagated occasionally by others, is that there is some editorial ‘line’ to be followed, a standard TAW response to any given situation.
Speaking from experience, I can tell you that’s not true. Not a word I’ve written has been shaped or influenced by anyone but myself. The mistakes, omissions and plain misjudgements are entirely my own.
In fact you can check for yourself – on almost every issue that’s arisen in this turbulent season you’ll find a multitude of views given house room.
I’ve agreed with many, disagreed with some, had the direction of my thinking changed by others.
We’re also not unequivocally pro-Liverpool FC, the corporate entity. In fact, TAW has probably been home to more criticism of the club’s owners during the Suarez-Evra saga than any other site.
Because we care about the club bequeathed to us we’re more likely than most to take issue with those enjoying its temporary stewardship.
We’re a critical friend of the club, a friend of the best kind. The kind who’ll tell you when you’re wrong, but still be there for you. A friend who’ll defend you against brickbats that come your way, but won’t shy away from having a quiet word when you’re out of line.
It’s in this context that I read Rob Gutmann’s recent piece, Us and Them – Time to Pull Up the Drawbridge.
I’ve enjoyed the pleasure of Rob’s company a number of times through the site and my occasional podcast appearances (another TAW myth is that we’re all just a gang of old mates who knew each other anyway and share the same experiences and prejudices).
Of all the TAW writers, Rob’s among the least likely to court controversy for controversy’s sake. A passionate fan? Yes. A talented writer? Certainly – at times frighteningly so. An articulate, bearded sophisticate with a taste for fine wine while watching the match? Guilty as charged.
And yet his piece has triggered a flurry of cyber panic. Held up as evidence of TAW’s one-eyed tribalism, branded ‘disgraceful’ and ‘shameful’ in the hothouse atmosphere of a Twitter storm.
The Football Ramble’s Luke Moore branded it ‘holier-than-thou’, before without a trace of irony making the Ferguson-esque claim that ‘if any of the Ramble wrote that, I’d never work with them again.’
Cue lots of Daily Mail-esque ‘look at this and be offended’ tweets between a few usual suspects. And yes, I’m aware there is irony in a Liverpool fan objecting to that.
This time, though, maybe they had a point. Maybe Heysel’s just somewhere we can’t go, not even to support the worthiest of arguments. In the heated atmosphere surrounding the Suarez case it just feels like a step further than we need to take.
It should be made clear that Rob, in both his original piece and his excellent follow-up, was clear in stressing he was in no way comparing the incidents in terms of gravity, merely pointing out how from his own experience the poisonous media atmosphere surrounding the club carried echoes of 1985.
Did he need to? While I disagree with parts of Rob’s original analysis, he made his point with clarity and force. With or without Heysel, the piece reflects and honestly-held and reasoned viewpoint. Unfortunately, in giving the very people the piece despairs of more grist to their mill, the Heysel reference could do more harm than good.
Does it, as Moore claims, ‘do great damage’ to Liverpool? I’m not convinced of that. But it creates a danger that valid points could be ignored by the very people who need to hear them.
The whole row raises important questions about responsibility and the unique grasp history exerts on Liverpool Football Club.
Blame
I’ve always voted Labour, enthusiastically and without a second thought. Does this place some responsibility for the Iraq war dead on my shoulders? I guess it does. The fact the Tories would have been, if anything, more hawkish over Bush’s war doesn’t change that. It was Labour’s call, people died in their hundreds of thousands (or millions, depending on whose figures you use), and like it or not it happened on their watch, in our name.
Does the same collective responsibility apply to Heysel? Technically perhaps it shouldn’t. Many of today’s fans weren’t even born. I was three years old. Are we directly at fault, ‘murderers’ as some more excitable fans of other clubs would have it? No, but that doesn’t mean we can’t accept that crowd violence was at the root of the tragedy, that behaviour common among Liverpool fans as well as those of other clubs contributed directly to – caused – the deaths of 39 people.
I suspect much of the criticism of Rob’s piece is based on the false assumption that none of us accept the ‘blame’, if that’s the right word, for Heysel. Many Liverpool fans do, from people who were there that night to those of us who’ve only heard the stories and seen the nightmarish TV footage.
The ‘amicizia’ efforts before the 2005 Champions League meeting between Liverpool and Juve were heartfelt, the Kop doing what it does best – rising to the big occasion. In truth, though, it was always in danger of feeling like a hollow gesture. Alan Hansen, speaking in 2005, admitted he rarely thought about Heysel even though he was in the Liverpool team that night. But then, what can we do?
A permanent memorial was unveiled outside the Centenary Stand in 2010, but even that drew criticism from those keen to accuse our club and city of seeking victimhood. Trying to make it ‘our tragedy’ was as bad as ignoring Heysel altogether.
It’s a double bind. We can’t win. And maybe that’s the point – who wants to win when it’s very far from being a game? What happened at Heysel was largely the fault of people who fell under our banner. It’s unfair for fans in 2012 to shoulder some of that burden, but shoulder it we must.
As a number of Juventus fans made plain at Anfield seven years ago, for many an apology is not enough. Nothing would be enough – no constructive means for resolution exists. Heysel cannot be undone. Perhaps the best we can do is to commemorate 39 Italians, Belgians and an Irishman who never came home from a game of football. To accept that sometimes unfairness is thrust upon you, and all you can do is walk on, bowing under its weight.
Wow … Measured and sincere article
Thought provoking, read with a heavy heart
TAW mirroring whats happening at anfield.. a second article defending Rob’s original article.. have the powers that be stepped in seeing the bad press?
rob’s original article was a well thought out piece, and speaking to my fellow red mates seems to address how we all feel. so what if theres twitter crazies up in arms.. TAW, do what the article says.. pull up the drawbridge, you dont have to defend what rob said to the fuckwits on twitter.
keep up the excellent work!!
Hi Ste
Thanks for the comment – we don’t really have ‘powers that be’ but we do often have articles putting different sides of an argument – often the same argument.
Hopefully that’s a reflection of the different views different fans hold – as much as anything a powerful argument against the outside view that we’re all sheep who share the same worldview.
Exactly why bother trying to appease bullies ? It didnt work for Neville Chamberlain and it doesn’t work now. Are we bothered about the twatters on twitter and if we are, why ? I for one am tired of wearing the hair shirt and apologising for breathing
If only people were so quick to judge pieces written by mainstream media. Nothing at all wrong with Robs first piece.
It’s disheartening that some among our support lack the understanding to grasp some obvious and accurate comparisons.
A sensible, measured piece.
In many ways we can’t win. The best approach is not to play.
I read Rob’s piece for what it was – a passioned argument from a man who feels his club is being battered by abuse, rightly or wrongly, that puts him in mind of 1985. That’s a personal viewpoint and one he’s allowed.
I was 16 back then and I wanted more than anything for the story about NF nobheads to be true as you can only hope and pray that it’s nothing to do with the thing you love. It’s only human to look around you for other causes before the sickening realisation that these acts have been committed under your banner and you’ve got to bear that shame even though you, as a person, had nothing to do with it.
Criticism of TAW is unfair. Like all good voices from every good football club it sits on the club’s shoulders and nudges it when required. The podcast has had me shouting abuse (Carragher), nodding enthusiastically and laughing myself stupid (Neil Ruddock for England over Kevin Keegan). The highest praise I can offer the podcast is that it’s possible to listen to hear a debate and, bizarrely, end up agreeing with both sides. That’s the quality of debate.
Someone suggested a piece by a fan who feels let down by Suarez and the club and feels uncomfortable about defending both. I think that’s a great idea as this is the place where it would be handled properly. I, for one, don’t like Luis Suarez and didn’t think the club’s stance was close to being anything like professional but I don’t see his support as racist but I’d be happy to hear from others who think otherwise. This place is a voice after all.
Finally, I’d like to add that I don’t know any of the writers other than the odd tweet. I write for it because of Kris Walsh’s Letter to Lawrenson article – a piece which was slated by many but I’ve never read a more passionate piece of writing and I wanted to be involved. It’s not a clique or an old boys network. Anyone can write here as my presence proves. Maybe more should do the same.
The point Rob was quite clearly making regarded the media vilification of Liverpool and its supporters and how this compared to the reporting during the Heysel disaster. He did, however, overlook the fact that this is the default setting for the British media and any story remotely connected to Liverpool becomes about Liverpool.
Although the Heysel tragedy was never subject to an official inquiry and despite many mitigating factors – a dilapidated stadium in which the game should never have been played, ineffectual policing and an inadequate ticket allocation – Liverpool supporters were held responsible by the authorities. Further injustices followed in the official reactions and media coverage. Margaret Thatcher condemned the Liverpool fans injudiciously and pressurised the Football Association into withdrawing all English clubs from European competition thus cementing Liverpool’s pariah status not only in Britain but around the world. It is clear that preconceptions played a part in the response to the Heysel tragedy and while it is difficult to exonerate the Liverpool supporters, the fact that culpability was not extended to the other blameworthy parties suggests the Liverpool people were convenient scapegoats. There was actually an internal investigation by the Belgian authorities which was scathing on policing, the state of the ground and UEFA’s control over the whole of the situation yet this evidence has never been widely publicised. It is clear that UEFA and the Belgian authorities were able to deflect what should have been proportionate blame fully onto the Liverpool supporters with the assistance of the British media and government whose response resembled previous patterns of partiality.
Living in France and not being on Twitter it seems like i have missed out on a lot of indignation. I enjoy TAW for what it seems to be, a weekly podcast on LFC games with a few interviews thrown in and a good mix of journalists, supporters and guests and the articles reflect this diverse mix.
The Suarez-Evra affair has had very biased mainstream media coverage and I have welcomed the attitude of TAW, looking at the episode from a LFC supporters perspective and that perspective covers a multitude of views which has been well covered if you read all articles and listen to all podcasts.
My interpretation on Robs reference was that the last time LFC had such prolonged negative press was Heysel. I think that a fair comparison even though the incidents are miles apart in terms of importance.
What the saga does highlight is that LFC has a very poor if non-existant PR machine compared to other top premiership clubs and we have been completely outmanouevered by Uniteds with their media friendly journalists and David Gill on the FA board. If any good is to come out of this then the club should look at how many PR people are employed by United, Chelsea, Tottenham and Arsenal, find out what they do and how they do it.
We may be getting more money for shirts and sponsorship now, but in many corporate areas we are still run like a corner shop and PR is one of them. Kenny was an ambassador and now he is manager, was he replaced as ambassador? Ian Ayre was commercial director now he is MD, was he replaced as a commercial director?
TAW discusses these type of issues very well and puts the club under scrutiny because as supporters we want the club to do better but at the same time we do not want it to lose the things that we cherish. TAW is great at this and i hope it continues to do so, but why fans of other clubs listen and comment I do not know, do they not have their own witty podcasts?
*MUST….RESIST….URGE…TO….POST* DOH!
Ok, I’ve been all over Rob’s last two blogs that he’s either going to be seeking a restraining order or think I swing another way but here goes;
I think TAW is great, even as a United fan. I love the range of opinions and and the quality of the writing even if I don’t agree with it. I can relate to the emotion even if it’s not United being written about. It’s like watching Liverpool lose, I love it. There I said it. But then the camera pans and focuses on distraught fan and in that moment I’m him because I know just what he is feeling. I used to love watching United win big finals and games and then at the end see Gary Neville’s first response or one of his first to go and shake the hand of the opposition team members before joining in the celebrations more often than not.
I still disagree with the parallels drawn by Rob, his blog be it by design or chance was sensationalistic, I think the two are incomparable, if for no other reason then the fact we live in a 24/7 media age. Not to say Heysel can’t be discussed but not in the context of two players falling out, at least for me.
As for the media witch hunt, I think it’s more perceived than real. The consternation felt by LFC fans is compounded by the 24/7 coverage, amplified by the pain and bitterness at the decision without any conclusive evidence further magnified by LS and LFC protestations of innocence. In the circumstances it IS understandable why LFC fans would react in a certain.
I would be interested in going through articles that people feel paint LFC and it’s fans as a racist club, not as a challenge but merely as an exercise to go through a few objectively & constructively.
Anyway, I’m going to now TRY to avoid this topic again, I’ve said more than enough :)
It’s a joke when we get lectured to by Mancs and Evertonians et al about on what context we should or shouldn’t mention the Heysel stadium disaster. Mind you they are the acknowledged experts, aren’t they?
We should not be afraid of confronting the darker aspects of our history. If we ignore the past, we are destined to repeat out mistakes.
Luke Moore is a Portsmouth supporter and on the few occasions I’ve listened to the Football Ramble he (surprise, surprise) always seemed to have a dig at….Liverpool. *sigh*
Enjoy life in League One, Luke!
The tragedy brought down the Belgian government of the time, apparently because the Belgian people were so appalled that their national stadium had been allowed to fall into such a dilapidated condition.
another excellent article, but I don’t see why it is necessary. part of me wonders whether rob’s original post was a scathing postmodern meta work of art – making a perfectly valid point about media vilification in the certain knowledge that the dimmer tw*atterati would take offence and attempt to vilify him and, by association, liverpool fans for it. if that’s the case, well done…
There are three football podcasts I listen to every week. The anfield wrap is one. The football ramble is another. Football Weekly is the third. All three are brilliant.
Can’t we all just get along?
Steve
I think that only through facing up to our mistakes can we make sure they never happen again. Yes there were a lot of factors that came together that night to cause the tragedy. And yes LFC tried to build bridges against Juventus but to not talk about it is wrong.
What happened cannot be changed but not talking about it is like not talking about Hillsborough. The two events were tragedies that make up what LFC is today.
May sound weird but the final was when I started supporting Liverpool as a 13yr old. Suppose I was a glory hunter back then.
As a 38 yr old who lived through Heysel, I can see why some objected to a perceived problem with Rob’s piece but for what it’s worth, I see that article and this one by yourself Steve, as simply adding lucid, articulate strands to an essential narrative. Frankly, TAW and it’s writers are fuckin’ top.