Fighting between ourselves

[Stuntman_Mike]

Ffs I thought football had moved on from this shite.

Whatever happened it's disheartening to see fans fighting each other over whether or not they think the manager is good enough.

Also, the whole "defiance" thing about singing "one Nigel Pearson" is, in my opinion, rubbish. I sing it to support the man who is leading the team I support and follow across the country. "Leading" being a loose term I guess at the moment. It's not some deliberate act to piss off those who think he should go. I sing "Paul Konchesky is a blue..." despite his clear lack of ability at this level. I sing "Wes Wes Morgan" despite his calamitous record of own goals, red cards and poor decisions. I sing "Jamie Vardy's having a party" even though it's obvious he is struggling now coming up against a better class of defender. I do all this to support the team. In no way is the singing aimed at one "faction" of fans. It is purely and simply another way of getting behind the team and trying to encourage the manager when things aren't going our way. I'm actually surprised that some people seem to take it as a direct insult to them because they think Pearson isn't good enough and shouldn't be manager. You don't have to sing along with it, just like I don't sing along to songs I don't agree with. The most important thing is to back the team. Until the board see fit that Pearson isn't good enough then I will continue to vocally support the team by supporting him through the 90 minutes. Outside of that I will question playing Vardy on the wing ahead of Albrighton, I will question starting two in midfield when United play 3 very good players in the middle, I will question not putting someone on Blind like he did last time and I will question pairing King and Drinkwater together who were so weak at both Spurs and at home to Stoke. When he goes I will not "follow him to his next club". I will welcome the next man with open arms and support him through the 90 minutes where vocal support is so important, whilst also questioning his decisions outside of that time when emotions have died down and I can think properly about how the game went.

Maybe that seems hypocritical in a sense but I'm not changing that. But come on. A fight being started over the "One Nigel Pearson" song being sung?! Sure, if someone starts singing about the Munich Air Disaster or making hissing noises while at Spurs, then go and challenge them and stand up to them for singing something so disgraceful. But "One Nigel Pearson"?! Nah, we don't need to start getting all sensitive about that.

Agree with every word. Great post.

People need to grow up! Yesterday was embarrassing to witness.

[GaelicFox]

Fook that "we're the right side ......were the left side "

What i was singing is actually a choral Berlin wall separating the Pro pearsonites and the Sack pearsonites ??

[inckley fox]

Argue, discuss,disagree, chant opposite sentiments fine. Start throwing your weight around because you can't handle somebody supporting the manager of our club? Nah.

It smacks of people who spend all week hiding their pent up rage only to use football as an excuse to behave like the complete fvckwit they keep locked up in daily life.

 

Or maybe they just don't agree with you that he's doing a good job? I mean, he isn't, is he? And I'm still behind him! So they have every right to argue, a lot of Pro-Pearson fans would probably argue too. And should we create the need to argue? Nobody can condone the fighting - nobody - but sadly it's a football match. Debates lead to arguments, if you have enough drunk people arguing you'll get a brawl. So why are we so keen for that to happen?

 

It is a show of defiance, especially when we're losing and Pearson has clearly screwed up, and it's directed at a lot of the people sitting alongside us. When you sing it, you know the guy next to you probably doesn't agree and, unlike chanting Morgan's or Vardy's name (which we do, but we never do when they've just cost us in the way that our manager had yesterday, and against Stoke), it's not going to have a positive impact on the field of play. That's what's unique about it.

 

So of course, sing his name. It's just a matter of choosing our moment to sing his name, and of not doing something which we know could wind up the people around us. Why? Isn't it a good enough reason that we don't want to have an argument?

 

And there's one more very good, almost overlooked reason: are we actually doing any good whatsoever in making him feel more supported in his job? Surely most of us can accept that Pearson has made some fundamental errors. And the opinion that he doesn't demand enough from his players in terms of movement, physicality, work-rate is growing. In a climate of people setting the bar too low, are we really sending out the right message by showing our unflinching support for him at a time when he could do with rolling his sleeves up and taking another look at how he's doing things? Or are we really of the view that he's getting things right at the moment?

 

I've said many times, that there's an unusual aggressiveness in the pro-Pearson camp. An unwillingness to accept criticism of the man, expressions of support for him (rather than sympathy) in confrontations against our own fans, some very abusive language on here, chanting at sensitive moments in a game when opinion is likely to be especially divided, expressions of support for him which appear to prioritise support for the manager over the wellbeing of the club. Now I support him, but this is bizarre stuff when you're bottom of the table and your manager is making some very questionable decisions.

[inckley fox]

Even if we go down this season getting promoted last year has earned the club £150m with the 4 years of parachute payments, if people can't even give the manager credit for bankrolling the club for a few years (probably season after he's gone) they really are quite small minded, let's get the Thais out as well, I'm sure that there is a proper Leicester fan willing to chuck cash at the club.

 

Well, QPR violated FFP one year after going down, it can still be done. And I think the bankrolling has come from the board, hasn't it? After all we were over-spending on wages in Pearson's first two years and have lost over 20m in transfer dealings since he returned to the club.

 

And why would you equate a person wanting rid of the manager with a person wanting rid of the board? I mean, I want neither for a start. I just find it incredible how stubborn, confrontational and closed-minded some of those who share my view are in terms of dealing with criticism of the manager, and of their support for him.

[Fez of Mahrez]

Like I said, sing it. Freedom of speech only works if you accept that people have the right to argue back. And is it really necessary to do something which we know, and largely intend, to cause an argument?

 

 

 

Like I said, I'm all for the idea. But isn't it a better idea for us just to all get behind our team in a manner we can agree on? Do we really want to chant things which are going to cause perfectly understandable differences of opinion? I mean, like I said, it would make far more sense to chant Morgan's name when he's just conceded a silly own goal, because it might actually spur him on. What was the aim of the chant, then? Just to cheer Nige up a bit, make him think that it was right after all to leave out Hamer and Albrighton and play Vardy on the wing?

 

 

I didn't justify violence for one second. I don't even know which side started the fight. But I'm pointing out that it is a very strange time to be chanting your manager's name - not all that common in the modern game for sides in our position, and in our position in the game in question to be doing that - and seems to me like a show of defiance to the critics, to Stringer, and to those fans who criticise Pearson. That, in itself, is divisive. Sing his name before the game, sing it when we're looking good on the field, regardless of whether we're winning or not, don't sing it when he's screwing everything up for us and you just want to stoke a bit of a row.

 

The Pro and Anti Pearson thing is incredibly divisive. It's not hard to accept that a manager who was good for us at a lower level, in an era when plenty of others weren't, is not yet up to scratch at the highest level. But, while I'm pro-Pearson myself, I think a lot of those who share my viewpoint have been very, very confrontational about this matter. The word 'moron' crops up every time anybody disagrees, there's a refusal to accept virtually any blame on Pearson's part, they didn't refuse to condemn him for getting banned shouting 'f off and die' at his own fans, they actively supported him because that's how they felt about a great many of their own fans too and we've had to endure months of posts saying things like 'I'd rather get relegated with Pearson than stay up without them', which frankly smacks of supporting a failing manager over your own club.

 

So why not just focus on that? Park your love for Pearson for a minute, for the sake of unity, and save it for the same moments when other fans of other clubs who don't beat the crap out of one another tend to let those emotions burst forth. And get behind the team, properly, and without trying to prompt a good old debate, or argument, or bout of insults, or brawl, in the process.

 

 

 

Actually I think you're guilty of two things that crop up time and again on this forum.

 

1) Lumping everybody in together as though there aren't hundreds of different people with opinions across a broad spectrum on here. Putting people into pro- and anti- Pearson camps is fine if you want to do that but there are massively different opinions within those two pigeonholes. You must understand that as you say you are pro-Pearson yourself. I like him and I sing his name at games but I had severe doubts during both our terrible runs over the past three seasons. I don't call people morons every time they disagree, I think he gets things wrong often including yesterday and I'd rather stay up without Pearson than get relegated with him.

 

2) Short-termism. We sang his name at the end of the Spurs game because we'd just won a difficult game. Suddenly, half an hour or so of playing time later, we're not supposed to show our support for him because we're losing away to Manchester United? If other people are so angry with him that they can't abide someone singing his name then, again, that's fine, but I'd like to think football fans aren't such precious petals that they can't cope with their fellow supporters singing the name of their manager during

any game we're losing.

 

You mention in one of your posts about not many sets of fans singing their manager's name when they're doing badly - that's something I'm glad we stand out from the crowd on. At West Ham, when we hadn't won for about 12 games, there were a hell of a lot of us singing his name and I was proud of that. It shows a bit more of a long-term view - appreciating what he's done for us and showing faith that we can survive this season. Sure enough, the next game we dominated and were unlucky to lose and since then we've won four out of seven.

 

On a separate note, if I ever bothered getting offended by things posted on internet forums then "park your love for Pearson for a minute, for the sake of unity" would be up there. The unity has been demonstrated by the board in sticking with Pearson and by Pearson in sticking with this squad. Singing his name is buying into that unity and building on it. If someone disagrees then that's fine. I'm not going to call them a moron. But Pearson is not separate from the club. The owners appointed him and have stuck with him. He signed the players and lots of them have signed new contracts under his management.

 

And even if we lose our next ten games, I'd still rather sing Pearson's name than 'left side, right side'...

[Goddard]

I have it on good authority that the known leicester face was in fact Bernie. He apparently went windmilling in with morrisons bags.

[Corky]

You are one of the top3 "oinks" Boring and humourless to the extreme, I doubt you ever smile, being witless and dull.

 

I feel sorry for you.

 

You stick to your imaginary friends.

[Snooty Fox]

Your twat rating has gone up another notch, you don't know me or my son,we are both ufs. We don't fight, or encourage fighting, but in your case I could make an exception, don't bother replying,

I'm not part of the Pearson Out camp, nor am I one of these with blind faith who believes he is the Messiah. But I'm willing to shout Pearson Out if it means you're going to start a fight with me.

[shade]

I'm gonna read this thread tonight when I want to sleep.

[Gary Eatfood]

I'm not part of the Pearson Out camp, nor am I one of these with blind faith who believes he is the Messiah. But I'm willing to shout Pearson Out if it means you're going to start a fight with me.

 

Can someone explain to me how I can block posters please?

[Ashley]

Oh for **** sake people grow up

[inckley fox]

Actually I think you're guilty of two things that crop up time and again on this forum.

 

1) Lumping everybody in together as though there aren't hundreds of different people with opinions across a broad spectrum on here. Putting people into pro- and anti- Pearson camps is fine if you want to do that but there are massively different opinions within those two pigeonholes. You must understand that as you say you are pro-Pearson yourself. I like him and I sing his name at games but I had severe doubts during both our terrible runs over the past three seasons. I don't call people morons every time they disagree, I think he gets things wrong often including yesterday and I'd rather stay up without Pearson than get relegated with him.

 

2) Short-termism. We sang his name at the end of the Spurs game because we'd just won a difficult game. Suddenly, half an hour or so of playing time later, we're not supposed to show our support for him because we're losing away to Manchester United? If other people are so angry with him that they can't abide someone singing his name then, again, that's fine, but I'd like to think football fans aren't such precious petals that they can't cope with their fellow supporters singing the name of their manager during

any game we're losing.

 

You mention in one of your posts about not many sets of fans singing their manager's name when they're doing badly - that's something I'm glad we stand out from the crowd on. At West Ham, when we hadn't won for about 12 games, there were a hell of a lot of us singing his name and I was proud of that. It shows a bit more of a long-term view - appreciating what he's done for us and showing faith that we can survive this season. Sure enough, the next game we dominated and were unlucky to lose and since then we've won four out of seven.

 

On a separate note, if I ever bothered getting offended by things posted on internet forums then "park your love for Pearson for a minute, for the sake of unity" would be up there. The unity has been demonstrated by the board in sticking with Pearson and by Pearson in sticking with this squad. Singing his name is buying into that unity and building on it. If someone disagrees then that's fine. I'm not going to call them a moron. But Pearson is not separate from the club. The owners appointed him and have stuck with him. He signed the players and lots of them have signed new contracts under his management.

 

And even if we lose our next ten games, I'd still rather sing Pearson's name than 'left side, right side'...

 

I'm saying 'Look, I'm a Pearson fan too but if chanting his name is going to cause an argument when we're playing badly, best chant something else because one thing we could do without is a big row. We'll get our chance next week, maybe...'

 

That would offend you?

 

And you're making a massive error in terms of the word 'unity', and you're confusing support for your club with support for individuals within it, stewards who will come and go. When Blair united the Labour Party in 97, he knew that there were differences of opinion in it, and on key issues. But they focused on common goals, avoided debating the points of contention, and won. They couldn't do that in 2010, they can't now, so they lost then and they'll probably lose again now.

 

Unity between fans and club, with us buying into the idea that Pearson is a part of the club and therefore we are at one with him, and the board, and the players, and the canteen staff and the groundsmen and god knows who else, is a very nice romantic notion. But we pick and choose the people within that structure that we identify with, and they don't have to include all of the players, or the manager. Even some of the players will have their doubts about the manager. We're united in our purpose, not necessarily with specific individuals.

 

I am talking about unity among fans, that unity which typically places the club first, its players on the field second, and its fellow fans there or thereabouts too.

 

And as for 'precious petals', I think Pearson responding to a bit of grief from the stands by turning to a whole section of them and shouting 'f*** off and die', or refusing to speak to local media because somebody kept asking him horrid questions, has got to rank quite highly. And it was just a bit divisive, wasn't it?

 

But I'm honestly surprised that people can't see that cheering a name at a time when they know it will be a little bit contentious is, well, a bit contentious. Do you want the friction or not?

 

If the same principles had applied to players on the field who were having a nightmare, which would make a great deal more sense, then I'd be more understanding. But there have been people on both sides of the 'Pearson In/Out' argument, if we want to treat it homogeneously, who have been very confrontational, and continue to be. In fact, the Pearson In group is so utterly divisive that it even manages to fall out with itself when somebody questions Pearson, or the actions of other fans who are pro-Pearson.

[theessexfox]

I think you're reading way too much into a simple song of support for the man at the helm of the club, predominantly aimed to tell the players and staff that the fans are behind them. 

[Sir Fynwy]

I'm saying 'Look, I'm a Pearson fan too but if chanting his name is going to cause an argument when we're playing badly, best chant something else because one thing we could do without is a big row. We'll get our chance next week, maybe...'

That would offend you?

And you're making a massive error in terms of the word 'unity', and you're confusing support for your club with support for individuals within it, stewards who will come and go. When Blair united the Labour Party in 97, he knew that there were differences of opinion in it, and on key issues. But they focused on common goals, avoided debating the points of contention, and won. They couldn't do that in 2010, they can't now, so they lost then and they'll probably lose again now.

Unity between fans and club, with us buying into the idea that Pearson is a part of the club and therefore we are at one with him, and the board, and the players, and the canteen staff and the groundsmen and god knows who else, is a very nice romantic notion. But we pick and choose the people within that structure that we identify with, and they don't have to include all of the players, or the manager. Even some of the players will have their doubts about the manager. We're united in our purpose, not necessarily with specific individuals.

I am talking about unity among fans, that unity which typically places the club first, its players on the field second, and its fellow fans there or thereabouts too.

And as for 'precious petals', I think Pearson responding to a bit of grief from the stands by turning to a whole section of them and shouting 'f*** off and die', or refusing to speak to local media because somebody kept asking him horrid questions, has got to rank quite highly. And it was just a bit divisive, wasn't it?

But I'm honestly surprised that people can't see that cheering a name at a time when they know it will be a little bit contentious is, well, a bit contentious. Do you want the friction or not?

If the same principles had applied to players on the field who were having a nightmare, which would make a great deal more sense, then I'd be more understanding. But there have been people on both sides of the 'Pearson In/Out' argument, if we want to treat it homogeneously, who have been very confrontational, and continue to be. In fact, the Pearson In group is so utterly divisive that it even manages to fall out with itself when somebody questions Pearson, or the actions of other fans who are pro-Pearson.

It looks like you've spent more energy writing long dull posts on here today than you have supporting the team all season.

[hackneyfox]

Everyone seems to have assumed that it was the pro Pearson singers being picked on.

 

If I started singing 'Nigel Pearson can **** off and die' would I get away with it?

The answer is no, I shouted 'Pearson Out' at QPR and was told to 'Fcuk off you cnut'

[Captain...]

Ffs I thought football had moved on from this shite.

Whatever happened it's disheartening to see fans fighting each other over whether or not they think the manager is good enough.

Also, the whole "defiance" thing about singing "one Nigel Pearson" is, in my opinion, rubbish. I sing it to support the man who is leading the team I support and follow across the country. "Leading" being a loose term I guess at the moment. It's not some deliberate act to piss off those who think he should go. I sing "Paul Konchesky is a blue..." despite his clear lack of ability at this level. I sing "Wes Wes Morgan" despite his calamitous record of own goals, red cards and poor decisions. I sing "Jamie Vardy's having a party" even though it's obvious he is struggling now coming up against a better class of defender. I do all this to support the team. In no way is the singing aimed at one "faction" of fans. It is purely and simply another way of getting behind the team and trying to encourage the manager when things aren't going our way. I'm actually surprised that some people seem to take it as a direct insult to them because they think Pearson isn't good enough and shouldn't be manager. You don't have to sing along with it, just like I don't sing along to songs I don't agree with. The most important thing is to back the team. Until the board see fit that Pearson isn't good enough then I will continue to vocally support the team by supporting him through the 90 minutes. Outside of that I will question playing Vardy on the wing ahead of Albrighton, I will question starting two in midfield when United play 3 very good players in the middle, I will question not putting someone on Blind like he did last time and I will question pairing King and Drinkwater together who were so weak at both Spurs and at home to Stoke. When he goes I will not "follow him to his next club". I will welcome the next man with open arms and support him through the 90 minutes where vocal support is so important, whilst also questioning his decisions outside of that time when emotions have died down and I can think properly about how the game went.

Maybe that seems hypocritical in a sense but I'm not changing that. But come on. A fight being started over the "One Nigel Pearson" song being sung?! Sure, if someone starts singing about the Munich Air Disaster or making hissing noises while at Spurs, then go and challenge them and stand up to them for singing something so disgraceful. But "One Nigel Pearson"?! Nah, we don't need to start getting all sensitive about that.

Thank you for posting that as it saves me the effort. I agree with all of it.

[DANGEROUS TIGER]

I've already explained this. If you sing it at a moment when we are bottom and, in the game in question, losing comfortably because of some astoundingly strange decisions by that manager, and you know full well that a large section of your support isn't of the opinion that it's the right thing to chant, and - on top of that - the norm is for people who criticise the manager to be dismissed by his biggest fans as 'morons', then you can expect arguments. And are you really that desperate for a row?

 

So yes, sing it when he's screwing things up for us if you want, as opposed to when he's getting it right. It might make him feel that little bit more like he's getting things right which he's clearly getting wrong, won't do anything to buoy the players who are out there on the field, who might not mind hearing their name sung when they're struggling to get the midfield going, or they've given away a daft penalty when they're carrying an injury, or have scored a daft own goal, and it'll probably cause a fight with all those people you've spent ages insulting, and are trying to show up by singing it in the first place... but yes, of course, do it if you want

 

It's not as if there's nothing else to sing, though, is it?

They were doubtless singing it to purposely  goad  the anti Pearson faction. Bunch of sad clowns.

[AKCJ]

Imagine wanting to punch someone because they're singing a song SUPPORTING the man who brought us back to the top flight.

 

You wouldn't have been at Old Trafford without him you ignorant *****.

[Sir Fynwy]

Imagine wanting to punch someone because they're singing a song SUPPORTING the man who brought us back to the top flight.

You wouldn't have been at Old Trafford without him you ignorant *****.

They'd all be happier in league 1

[L1HT]

I, nor none of my pals who have been mentioned were involved in the fighting, we were just in the same area it kicked off.

 

The majority of comments on this thread are wrong.  The 'fight' WASN'T Pearson in V Pearson out. 

 

It was by a pathetic bunch of people (pearson in lot) turning and shouting things at pearson out people like 'Your a ****', then getting in their faces saying 'Who would you have insted' blah blah.  This caused pushing and shoving - then when it got more serious the pathetic bunch of people who'd been shouting insults had gone. 

 

If people had only shouted Pearson in, or Pearson out, nothing would have esculated.

[inckley fox]

It looks like you've spent more energy writing long dull posts on here today than you have supporting the team all season.

 

I enjoyed writing them. You're the guy who bored himself reading them.

 

In a discussion about how confrontational the pro-Pearson support can be, how they can even turn on themselves if someone recognises a chink in his armour, or questions whether blind wailing of the messiah's name is actually having any positive impact on the club, it's interesting to see who it is who finally makes the debate personal.

 

If you knew the miles I have to travel to support this club week-in week-out, how many years I've done for that, and how much noise I make at the game, you might wish to delete the bit which questions my support, though I appreciate that you belong to that brand of fan who confuses not only support for the manager, because I do support him, but unconditional outpourings of love for the manager with actually supporting my club. And if you had the capacity to actually debate any of these points with me, then the bit about them being 'dull' might be justifiable, but you don't, so it isn't.

 

Basically, and in terms you'll understand and be able to process without your little brain getting tired, I'm having a whale of a time. It's a pity you aren't.

[Sir Fynwy]

I enjoyed writing them. You're the guy who bored himself reading them.

In a discussion about how confrontational the pro-Pearson support can be, how they can even turn on themselves if someone recognises a chink in his armour, or questions whether blind wailing of the messiah's name is actually having any positive impact on the club, it's interesting to see who it is who finally makes the debate personal.

If you knew the miles I have to travel to support this club week-in week-out, how many years I've done for that, and how much noise I make at the game, you might wish to delete the bit which questions my support, though I appreciate that you belong to that brand of fan who confuses not only support for the manager, because I do support him, but unconditional outpourings of love for the manager with actually supporting my club. And if you had the capacity to actually debate any of these points with me, then the bit about them being 'dull' might be justifiable, but you don't, so it isn't.

Basically, and in terms you'll understand and be able to process without your little brain getting tired, I'm having a whale of a time. It's a pity you aren't.

I've flown in from Japan for a game so guess I trump your miles

[inckley fox]

The majority of comments on this thread are wrong.  The 'fight' WASN'T Pearson in V Pearson out. 

 

It was by a pathetic bunch of people (pearson in lot) turning and shouting things at pearson out people like 'Your a ****', then getting in their faces saying 'Who would you have insted' blah blah.  This caused pushing and shoving - then when it got more serious the pathetic bunch of people who'd been shouting insults had gone. 

 

If people had only shouted Pearson in, or Pearson out, nothing would have esculated.

 

That's not the first time I've heard this. Nor, knowing how militant and hysterical fellow 'Pearson supporters' can be, does it surprise me. I mean, just look at the sort of stuff some of these people are posting. It's very clear that there is an extreme viewpoint among this section of the support which values the manager more highly then the club, and are going to support him even if/when it adversely affects the club, and other fans.

 

I have to go all the way back to the days of football hooliganism to remember a more silly group of people supporting this club, if indeed that's what they're doing. Back your club, don't back your manager at the expense of the club. If singing his name is going to cause an argument, don't do it. If people do argue with you about it, as they will, don't get into a fight over it. Try, for once, to be united in purpose and put your Pearson Ins and Pearson Outs to one side for once.

I've flown in from Japan for a game so guess I trump your miles

 

Oh no you don't.

[fleckneymike]

That's not the first time I've heard this. Nor, knowing how militant and hysterical fellow 'Pearson supporters' can be, does it surprise me. I mean, just look at the sort of stuff some of these people are posting. It's very clear that there is an extreme viewpoint among this section of the support which values the manager more highly then the club, and are going to support him even if/when it adversely affects the club, and other fans.

 

I have to go all the way back to the days of football hooliganism to remember a more silly group of people supporting this club, if indeed that's what they're doing. Back your club, don't back your manager at the expense of the club. If singing his name is going to cause an argument, don't do it. If people do argue with you about it, as they will, don't get into a fight over it. Try, for once, to be united in purpose and put your Pearson Ins and Pearson Outs to one side for once.

 

Oh no you don't.

 

Are you Neil Armstrong?

[Sir Fynwy]

Oh no you don't.

Go on then I flew in from Milan for Walshys testimonial and often have to change travel plans to get to a game, over the last 20 years I'd be seriously surprised if you had travelled further to go to our games (I've missed about 15 games in all that time). You aren't debating, you are writing long boring essays about nothing.