PDA

View Full Version : Anti-Victory forumites reveal some truths


gweeds
December 24th, 2004, 11:57 AM
There have been lots of 'anti-Victory' messages in this forum recently. Most seems to come from Melbourne Knights supporters who are likely to have a Croatian background. While these messages are intended to stir, and inevitably the threads degenerate into swearing and name calling, their arguments have an element of truth - that Melbourne Victory would ignore at their peril.


It is true that Melbourne Victory is a 'plastic team' if you like. Teams such as Melbourne Knights, South Melbourne have long traditions that a new team such as Victory does not have. There is also another very important aspect which is tied with this: That teams like Melbourne Knights, South Melbourne or even Heidelberg, Green Gully and so on have risen from the community. This means that unlike Victory, where someone like Isling creates an entity from basically nothing, traditional teams have been created from a group of like-minded people a community that got together and built the club with spirit, giving up their weekends etc.

It is perfectly understandable that when the ASA tells them...thanks please go away now, they would feel aggrieved. The advantage of these teams is that because of those community networks and ties, if things do not go well there is always a core group of supporters that will stick by the team through thick and thin. That is because the team represents more than just 11 men on the park kicking the ball around, the team represent part of the fan's identity. The danger for teams such as Victory is that lacking this factor there are less emotional ties to the team, which means that fans numbers may dwindle rapidly.

Of course this strenght of the traditional teams is also their weakness in a sporting market which seeks to broaden their appeal. Inevitably traditional teams have been created by particular ethnic groups, so that as football grew the emotional ties were not attached to a 'place' (which is what happened - in most cases - in Europe) but to the 'ethnic group'. So in most instances (not all) It was a case of the 'Croatian team' vs the 'Italian team'. This create two things: First that it re-enforced the perception that soccer was really a 'foreign sport played by migrants' and secondly it would alienate anyone who does not belong to that particular group. Yes...I know that many clubs have encouraged everyone to participate, but following a team is not rational. It is not like choosing a bank, or buying a car based on the best price. It is an emotional commitment, and I believe that joining a club with an heritage which has a dominant group is alienating for some potential fans.

That is why a new team is the best option for Melbourne. The risk is as I explained above that the new fans won't last, while the potential market for football will stick with their traditional teams and give Victory a miss, or being openly hostile as we have seen in this forum.

The challenge for Victory is to make sure that new members establish an emotional attachment to the team. And to show to all those who currently follow a VSL team that they are not a plot to 'exclude wogs' out of football, but it is a vehicle where everyone, wherever their heritage is, can get behind a team which is representative of their city and, even more important, a team which finally can establish football as a permanent element in this city.

kevin_kyle
December 24th, 2004, 09:17 PM
Well said.
Victory must hope that it will establish a strong base of supporters in its first season. From all backgrounds and previous soccer experience.
To support this it needs to hopefully have a solid season on the pitch results-wise.
It is a huge season for the club, and hopefully it can turn heads.
If it doesn't, the club will struggle to survive.

Zim^zuM
December 27th, 2004, 12:31 AM
Well said.
Victory must hope that it will establish a strong base of supporters in its first season. From all backgrounds and previous soccer experience.
To support this it needs to hopefully have a solid season on the pitch results-wise.
It is a huge season for the club, and hopefully it can turn heads.
If it doesn't, the club will struggle to survive.


So why do you put down the eforts of the Knights at first go instead of putting up with banter and trying to sway people ?

kevin_kyle
December 27th, 2004, 03:03 AM
It is impossible to sway a person who already believes in something so passionately.
Like yourself and the rest of the Knights boys, and that passion is not a bad thing.
We would love to have everyone on board for Victory but it seems that it is impossible.
So it ends up in a bout of local rivalry I guess, because the Knights have been superceded by a club which has appeared by default. Not superceded in terms of tradition or history or even quality or anything like that, just by current position in the Australian football world.
There is nothing wrong with the VPL, and surely there is even a future possibility of the Knights once again becoming a player in the Australian national leagues.
Victory needs as much support it can get, but if you bite us, we will bite back. And that is what has been happening on this forum.

Gooners Away
January 4th, 2005, 11:14 AM
It is impossible to sway a person who already believes in something so passionately.
Like yourself and the rest of the Knights boys, and that passion is not a bad thing.
We would love to have everyone on board for Victory but it seems that it is impossible.
So it ends up in a bout of local rivalry I guess, because the Knights have been superceded by a club which has appeared by default. Not superceded in terms of tradition or history or even quality or anything like that, just by current position in the Australian football world.
There is nothing wrong with the VPL, and surely there is even a future possibility of the Knights once again becoming a player in the Australian national leagues.
Victory needs as much support it can get, but if you bite us, we will bite back. And that is what has been happening on this forum.

Well said (Brazilliant)

atlas
January 4th, 2005, 08:50 PM
Well said.
Victory must hope that it will establish a strong base of supporters in its first season. From all backgrounds and previous soccer experience.
To support this it needs to hopefully have a solid season on the pitch results-wise.
It is a huge season for the club, and hopefully it can turn heads.
If it doesn't, the club will struggle to survive.

It is important that the Victory establish a strong supporter base from all areas. I know that is going to be tough here in major sporting state like Victoria, but this a huge opportunity (and maybe the last opportunity) that football has to establish itself as a major sport in Victoria.

Perth Glory have done this very successfully by being able to unify all groups in its area as one and we see a club, which has set the benchmark for all clubs in Australia to reach.

kevin_kyle
January 4th, 2005, 09:40 PM
Perth Glory attendances as a whole were phenomenal and the success that followed them was crucial in maintaining the support.
There is no reason why Victory cannot do the same.
Melbourne is a relatively large city.

Zim^zuM
January 15th, 2005, 12:04 AM
The way perth started I would say the last seasons crowds were dissapointing