Ultimate sign of the decline of the FA Cup

[Harry - LCFC]

That's the problem though, most real Wigan fans will be there, 20000 is more than they get usually, there's just not many more of them.

Are Wigan warriors playing Saturday as well? The difference between the fans is not as big as it used to be but it's still a factor.

Yes I agree. Small club.

Some people think they're PL standard, if they were they'd get more than this pitiful attempt. Don't know how anyone can think argue really.

[Fox92]

Wigan being tinpot and several hundred miles away doesn't exactly help the matter.

I hate the word 'tinpot'.

But take into consideration Wigan as a place, not just as a football club... Wigan is a rugby town mainly, probably always will be. Also, the location of the football club.. Lancashire. It's a tough region for any football club when the likes of Manchester United, Manchester City, Liverpool and Everton are close. Many people might chose to support them instead, but the real Wigan fans will be at Wembley.

They might not have a massive fan base, look at where they have risen from in recent years. But I'd love Wigan to win the FA Cup because I like them, they play football the nice way.

[ScouseFox]

One day some people might realise attendances don't win football matches. I cannot fúcking wait.

[Harry - LCFC]

I hate the word 'tinpot'.

But take into consideration Wigan as a place, not just as a football club... Wigan is a rugby town mainly, probably always will be. Also, the location of the football club.. Lancashire. It's a tough region for any football club when the likes of Manchester United, Manchester City, Liverpool and Everton are close. Many people might chose to support them instead, but the real Wigan fans will be at Wembley.

They might not have a massive fan base, look at where they have risen from in recent years. But I'd love Wigan to win the FA Cup because I like them, they play football the nice way.

I just find them annoying to be honest but I can see why people might like them too. They do have quite an underdog tag given their location and their history.

I know we love their type in England, smaller clubs beating the bigger ones but I just feel they've had their day. They can't continue forever like this and eventually the investment that made them what they are will stop.

[RowlattsFox]

Yes I agree. Small club.

Some people think they're PL standard, if they were they'd get more than this pitiful attempt. Don't know how anyone can think argue really.

So only clubs with big fan bases are PL standard. No doubt if they'd sold 30,000 then people would be saying where have these fans come from and why are they not filing the ground for league games.

Would rather see smallish proper Wigan fans there then 20,000 plastics.

[purpleronnie]

One day some people might realise attendances don't win football matches. I cannot fúcking wait.

Yep it seems a bit odd that some cant fathom that not all clubs have a mlarge fanbase, anyway I cant see past a wigan win.

[Corky]

I repeal about 20% of my insult then.

I still think they should do better, if you really are a Wigan fan you get yourself down to that game. Car, coach, bike, your five year old's scooter, whatever method of transport there is available.

Most Wigan fans will be there. They've gone from crowds of 2,000 17 years ago to 20,000 now.

There's no arguments about "real" fans missing out, the regulars will be there, if it had been at Villa Park then the allocation would be full.

[Harry - LCFC]

So only clubs with big fan bases are PL standard. No doubt if they'd sold 30,000 then people would be saying where have these fans come from and why are they not filing the ground for league games.

Would rather see smallish proper Wigan fans there then 20,000 plastics.

They don't have to be big, just decent, attendances are the biggest factor that determine the "size" of a club IMO. Fans are what make up a football club.

One day some people might realise attendances don't win football matches. I cannot fúcking wait.

Yes but football isn't all about results as I'm sure you realise. How many times will you hear people on this forum talk about atmosphere, home attendances, away followings?

Fans are so important to the game so while they don't affect the outcome of the game much, the number of supporters at a match definitely matters.

[Fox92]

They don't have to be big, just decent, attendances are the biggest factor that determine the "size" of a club IMO. Fans are what make up a football club.

Yes but football isn't all about results as I'm sure you realise. How many times will you hear people on this forum talk about atmosphere, home attendances, away followings?

You are right in terms of people banging on about followings on here, but I don't think the biggest factor to determine the size of a club are attendances. I think it is important, but then you've got to take into consideration the location of club, imo anyway.

I just find them annoying to be honest but I can see why people might like them too. They do have quite an underdog tag given their location and their history.

I know we love their type in England, smaller clubs beating the bigger ones but I just feel they've had their day. They can't continue forever like this and eventually the investment that made them what they are will stop.

Not sure how you find them annoying. They are a likeable club to me, play good football and have a good chairman. They do carry an underdog tag, but how many good players have they lost in recent years? Lee McCulloch, Jimmy Bullard, Leighton Baines, Antonio Valencia etc were all good players for Wigan. They could be much more than just relegation favourites every year, I hope they are. As I said, I like Wigan Atheletic and I hope they go on to win the FA Cup.

[RowlattsFox]

No one is questioning whether they are a small club or not, that is obvious. Just think the criticism is harsh.

[AdamN]

Wigan had a pretty meteoric rise so they've not had time to build up a fan base, especially when they've faced competition in the form of their historically more successful rugby team and a large amount of Premier League and Championship clubs nearby. Besides, if they suddenly went from crowds of 2,000 to 40,000 in a couple of years, people would just complain about those fans being plastics, so they can't really win.

[Harry - LCFC]

Not sure how you find them annoying. They are a likeable club to me, play good football and have a good chairman. They do carry an underdog tag, but how many good players have they lost in recent years? Lee McCulloch, Jimmy Bullard, Leighton Baines, Antonio Valencia etc were all good players for Wigan. They could be much more than just relegation favourites every year, I hope they are. As I said, I like Wigan Atheletic and I hope they go on to win the FA Cup.

I often think that of other people but opinions differ on a lot of things so I wouldn't be too surprised.

I'd say it's mostly the people fixated with attendances who dislike them, and those who aren't so bothered about gates who just look at the football side of things. We both appear to fall in separate categories there. Personally, I always judge a club on their fans' reputation rather than their players/management as I believe supporters are what make up a club. This quote sums it up for me but you're welcome to your opinion.

[Fox92]

I know it's your opinion, I'm not disagreeing or agreeing with you. You're entitled to your opinion, as I am, as Bobby Robson is.

[Kitchandro]

You are right in terms of people banging on about followings on here, but I don't think the biggest factor to determine the size of a club are attendances. I think it is important, but then you've got to take into consideration the location of club, imo anyway.

But it's only because they are a small club that location matters so much.

It doesn't matter the reasons for clubs not having big support, the simple fact is that some don't. Wigan are a small club which is reflected, proved even, by their attendances.

I don't get the hate for Wigan either. They don't mouth off, they don't try and pretend to be something they aren't. Sure they may have some 'tinpot' aspects like oversized modern stadium and goal music, but generally they're just a small, inoffensive club who have earned the right to be where they are on the pitch.

They'll go down eventually and normality will resume, but they can't help it if they don't have a lot of fans. They're better than some clubs who have very few fans turning up regularly then get a huge amount whenever they play one of the big boys at home or get to a cup final. That's pretty tinpot.

[Corky]

I think Wigan have done exceptionally well to last in the Premier League with their crowds, history, selling their best players.

I like Martinez, he plays attractive football, but I can't stand Dave Whelan.

However, do we want Millwall in a cup final?

[Kitchandro]

I think Wigan have done exceptionally well to last in the Premier League with their crowds, history, selling their best players.

I like Martinez, he plays attractive football, but I can't stand Dave Whelan.

However, do we want Millwall in a cup final?

I'm happy for Wigan to get to the final, but I'd rather Man CIty win it.

Nobody wants anything good for Millwall.

[Corky]

I'm happy for Wigan to get to the final, but I'd rather Man CIty win it.

Nobody wants anything good for Millwall.

One of the few underdogs that no-one will support

[purpleronnie]

millwall v chelsea final...yes please....wont happen though.

[art924]

Don't see what the fuss is about to be honest. The media always jump on the back of the fact that there might empty seats at some Football game or another. They'll be about 75,000 there for Millwall Wigan according to the estimates. That will be the same crowd that went to the Stoke Bolton semi a couple of years ago. I think thats a fantastic turnout from two clubs who have don't have the best numbers in terms of support. Millwall have sold their allocation of 31,000 Wigan have sold 20,000 or so. Wigan were a non league team until the late 70s and until Whealen took over survived on 2-3000 average crowds. Now they consistently get bigger crowds than the Wigan Warriors which would have been unthinkable years ago. Wigan suffer like Millwall to an extent by having big clubs on their doorstep coupled with that having the Warriors in town takes away even more potential hangers on. Love the fact that Wigan are regulars in the Premiership it's what you do on the field which counts not how many are in the stands- i guess the same people who moan about their 'half empty' stadium want us to go to a American Francise system so only big cities get a Premiership space but are banished if their crowds start to decline to be replaced by another team simply because they have a better or bigger stadium

The day before this announcement the FA said that crowds in the earlier rounds of the competition were at the highest in over 30 years. I think the media were just trying to make the FA look a bit silly by running this story a day later.

I sometimes think that some parts of the media love attacking football in this regards - empty seats oh no a sign enough is enough - football is going into decline blah blah. Never see similar headlines when top rugby club games are played in front of much lower crowds at a more than half empty Twickenham like Saracens last week. League crowds are at the highest since the late 50s. I'm the first to moan about high ticket prices etc etc but sometimes people should put it into some perspective do you know how low crowds were in the late 70s and all of the 80s?

Finally I do feel something has been lost with the decline the lustre of the FA cup. However when I was growing it was almost of though the cup was more important than the League Championship in terms of media coverage and crowds. This didn't actually make much sense- The Premiership is now the most important trophy for the big teams and rightly so. It should get the most kudos as it is a true test of who is the best. The Champions League gets a lot if stick like the Premiership it is a big event marketed to the enth degree. However It is another true test of who the best team is. The old European Cup was completely ignored once the English representative was knocked out- indeed no finals were shown on TV in the UK unless they involved an English team until the Champions League started (Marseille- Red Star apart because of Chris Waddle's involvement and Barca-Steau similarly because of El tel). They were some truely dreadful finals like both of the ones Forest played in. Teams adopted a very defensive style of play, playing far less matches and the luck of the draw (no seedings) meant you didn't have to be particularly good to go far in the competition. A complete myth that it was a truely great competition. But I digress sorry.

.

[Kitchandro]

Don't see what the fuss is about to be honest. The media always jump on the back of the fact that there might empty seats at some Football game or another. They'll be about 75,000 there for Millwall Wigan according to the estimates. That will be the same crowd that went to the Stoke Bolton semi a couple of years ago. I think thats a fantastic turnout from two clubs who have don't have the best numbers in terms of support. Millwall have sold their allocation of 31,000 Wigan have sold 20,000 or so. Wigan were a non league team until the late 70s and until Whealen took over survived on 2-3000 average crowds. Now they consistently get bigger crowds than the Wigan Warriors which would have been unthinkable years ago. Wigan suffer like Millwall to an extent by having big clubs on their doorstep coupled with that having the Warriors in town takes away even more potential hangers on. Love the fact that Wigan are regulars in the Premiership it's what you do on the field which counts not how many are in the stands- i guess the same people who moan about their 'half empty' stadium want us to go to a American Francise system so only big cities get a Premiership space but are banished if their crowds start to decline to be replaced by another team simply because they have a better or bigger stadium

The day before this announcement the FA said that crowds in the earlier rounds of the competition were at the highest in over 30 years. I think the media were just trying to make the FA look a bit silly by running this story a day later.

I sometimes think that some parts of the media love attacking football in this regards - empty seats oh no a sign enough is enough - football is going into decline blah blah. Never see similar headlines when top rugby club games are played in front of much lower crowds at a more than half empty Twickenham like Saracens last week. League crowds are at the highest since the late 50s. I'm the first to moan about high ticket prices etc etc but sometimes people should put it into some perspective do you know how low crowds were in the late 70s and all of the 80s?

Finally I do feel something has been lost with the decline the lustre of the FA cup. However when I was growing it was almost of though the cup was more important than the League Championship in terms of media coverage and crowds. This didn't actually make much sense- The Premiership is now the most important trophy for the big teams and rightly so. It should get the most kudos as it is a true test of who is the best. The Champions League gets a lot if stick like the Premiership it is a big event marketed to the enth degree. However It is another true test of who the best team is. The old European Cup was completely ignored once the English representative was knocked out- indeed no finals were shown on TV in the UK unless they involved an English team until the Champions League started (Marseille- Red Star apart because of Chris Waddle's involvement and Barca-Steau similarly because of El tel). They were some truely dreadful finals like both of the ones Forest played in. Teams adopted a very defensive style of play, playing far less matches and the luck of the draw (no seedings) meant you didn't have to be particularly good to go far in the competition. A complete myth that it was a truely great competition. But I digress sorry.

.

Is it? Not for me, Chelsea and Liverpool were woeful winners, far from the best teams in Europe, they just had a lot of luck and the other teams didn't kill the games off when they should have done.

Furthermore you can finish 4th, even 5th on some occassions in a League Season and go onto to win the Champions League. So you're the 4th best team in your own country, yet the best team in Europe?

Obviously I can see why big clubs place more importance on it, but I dont think it's a good indicator of the best team in Europe very often.

It's pretty simple, there's no money in the FA Cup in comparison so nobody takes it seriously. Plus, with football so expensive for fans, they aren't willing to pay more for a competition which they have been told isn't that important, by team selections and players effort as much as anything.

As for crowds, I'd suggest they are now getting lower, they certainly are in our league and lower. Football has grown massively in popularity since the 80s and a wider ranger of people watch it. The attendances in the last 20 years are in spite of ticket prices which are now threatening to derail the progress.

[Super_horns]

Some fair points....I am not old enough to remember the european finals before 1992 (I remember Barca winning at Wembley on the BBC)

My beef with the cups is that clubs would rather get knocked out of the cups so they can come 14th in the Premier league which personally think is quite sad.

At least those fighting for the title or in europe have some sort of excuse although ofcourse the top teams can cope with lots of games anyway due to their big squads.

Hence I thought Swansea winning the league cup playing strong sides throughout was a fresh of breath air to prove mid-table sides can compete on both levels.

Do you remember your mid-table finishes in the 90s or winning the league cup twice in the late 90s/early 00s more?

I think the trouble for many people is that modern football is becoming more of a corporate money making business with footballers becoming celebs rather than just ordinary sportsmen demanding silly wages and really forcing clubs to charge over the top prices (suppose the arguement is you don't have to pay the prices)

Sure most people still love the game as a form of entertaining...just not the why the "product" is sold.

[OzFox]

Just got an email from the FA

Come to Wembley this Saturday to cheer on The FA Cup

http://thefanews.com...req=-1066640366

It wasn't all that different back in the 80s, when you could go down to Wembley in the lead up to the final and pick up tickets if you were prepared to queue for a while. I managed to get into Everton v Watford, QPR v Spurs, Spurs v Man City replay and Wimbledon v Liverpool that way.

[The Year Of The Fox]

I'm incredibly glad it's got this bad for the FA. Complete mismanagement of 1. The best tournament in the world 2. The most famous stadium in the world (more particularly the old Wembley) 3. The best fans in the world (club and country fans)

As everyone has said, the semis should never be at Wembley, it's all about the £££s they need to recoup from building the new ground. They should have never put those executive seats next to the dug outs in view of the tv cameras. They should have never put the club wembley seats halfway around the top of the ground, segregating the lower and upper tier. I can't stand the heavy handed Hitler-esque stewards who enforce seating to a greater extent than Leeds. The way they sell the international match tickets means it's practically impossible for anyone to get a singing section together whether it be near the away fans or not. (which I'm sure has been done intentionally)

Wembley was always going to have an intense but albeit short interest with day trippers tourists and England fans who followed their country at the 'old Wembley.' I really hope the novelty now wears off (I appreciate that a cup game not selling out for Millwall v Wigan is hardly a sign of this but there is hope) and the FA now get what they deserve. They have done their best to ruin the game and I'm glad they're now suffering to some extent.

[art924]

Some fair points....I am not old enough to remember the european finals before 1992 (I remember Barca winning at Wembley on the BBC)

My beef with the cups is that clubs would rather get knocked out of the cups so they can come 14th in the Premier league which personally think is quite sad.

At least those fighting for the title or in europe have some sort of excuse although ofcourse the top teams can cope with lots of games anyway due to their big squads.

Hence I thought Swansea winning the league cup playing strong sides throughout was a fresh of breath air to prove mid-table sides can compete on both levels.

Do you remember your mid-table finishes in the 90s or winning the league cup twice in the late 90s/early 00s more?

I think the trouble for many people is that modern football is becoming more of a corporate money making business with footballers becoming celebs rather than just ordinary sportsmen demanding silly wages and really forcing clubs to charge over the top prices (suppose the arguement is you don't have to pay the prices)

Sure most people still love the game as a form of entertaining...just not the why the "product" is sold.

Spot on- agree entirely. Sam Allardyce at Bolton was one of the first to do this he would have finished 7th in the league than won a cup- didn't even try in the UEFA cup as thought it was beneath Bolton to compete in it. His argument was that he was judged on league results end of. He played weaker sides in Europe to rest his best team for the grind of the Premiership, great and look where Bolton are now. At least Pompey won a cup before their financial meltdown people remember this not an 8th place finish in the league. Harry Redknapp deserves contempt for ridiculing the Europa League (a competition Spurs could have feasibly won) and prioritising 4th place at Spurs, serves him right with what happened in the end. Thats why I like AVB who said he would try and win some trophies in whatever competition they were competing in. Depressing that a lot of the medium to semi big clubs seemingly don't even want to win any trophies prioritising their bank balances in the cash cow of the Premiership.

[art924]

Is it? Not for me, Chelsea and Liverpool were woeful winners, far from the best teams in Europe, they just had a lot of luck and the other teams didn't kill the games off when they should have done.

Furthermore you can finish 4th, even 5th on some occassions in a League Season and go onto to win the Champions League. So you're the 4th best team in your own country, yet the best team in Europe?

Obviously I can see why big clubs place more importance on it, but I dont think it's a good indicator of the best team in Europe very often.

It's pretty simple, there's no money in the FA Cup in comparison so nobody takes it seriously. Plus, with football so expensive for fans, they aren't willing to pay more for a competition which they have been told isn't that important, by team selections and players effort as much as anything.

As for crowds, I'd suggest they are now getting lower, they certainly are in our league and lower. Football has grown massively in popularity since the 80s and a wider ranger of people watch it. The attendances in the last 20 years are in spite of ticket prices which are now threatening to derail the progress.

Yep Liverpool and Chelsea did fluke their wins, but there are always exceptions to the rule. My point was that a lot more mediocre teams could scrape their way to the sewinners mis or finals of the old European Cup. In the 87/88 season Napoli and Real Madrid were drawn against each other in the 1st round- apart from liverpool and PSV the eventual probably the two strongest teams in Europe at the time. Shamrock Rovers and a Cypriot team were drawn against each other in the same round. How is that fair? How is that a measure of who is the best team is? The point about 3rd 4th place teams being in the competition is fair enough it bloats the champions league into the monster it is but the old UEFA Cup was sometimes seen as a stronger competition than the European Cup because it contained all these other teams some of whom would be domestic champions and 'form teams' if you like again another measure against finding Europe's best.

It's certainly true crowds have certainly 'levelled out' in the last 5 or 6 years but they has been no consistent drop like a lot of people have been predicting. Indeed the levelling out process could be attributed to the lack of ground developments in recent years. Indeed with the likes of Spurs, West Ham, Liverpool and Citeh with plans to expand or move crowds could show a rise in the Premiership again. It just seems that some people want football to fail. The post Olympics nonsense in the media shows this. The Daily Mail was at it today saying that 2 of the Europa cup ties last night were played in near empty stadiums. Ignoring the fact that the other 2 ties were sellouts- the game at Lazio was behind close doors and Rubin had to play in Moscow 500 miles from home due to pitch problems, but they ignored the facts as to why the two stadiums were empty spinning it as a cost issue. Funnily enough i never see headlines about empty seats the Rugby, Cricket, the Tennis etc

Sorry I'm just an eternal optimist over the last 30 years following the game there always been a 'doom and gloom' type philopsophy amongst some supporters. Football faces numerous issues today which concern us but I think we sometimes just need to put into some perspective- problems have always faced this great game of ours just different issues in different times. I just don't think we should simply offer a rose tinted spectacle view that somehow everything was fine in the past.