Influence of non football issues on football

Lawrence1895

I just noticed, that the Neil Lennon Thread was closed.

This made me think about one aspect: Why does every thread, which has something to do with Celtic vs Rangers end up in a discussion about politics and or religion?

And why do supporters on both sides of the Old Firm divide still bring those issues into the match?

For me, the focus should be on football and not on politics, and what's the big fuss about religion? I suppose, there is only one God in Christianity, and not two...one of them a Catholic Celtic supporter, and the second one a Protestant Rangers supporter.

Nalz

Because quite simply, people are idiots

Dempsey

'Old Firm' faultline

greendom

Celtic vs Rangers is not just about football though. Above all other fixtures, this one is probably the one with most non-football baggage attached. There are others of course - Real Madrid vs Barcelona comes to mind

Broxi_Bear_Eire

Lars1916 wrote: »

I just noticed, that the Neil Lennon Thread was closed.

This made me think about one aspect: Why does every thread, which has something to do with Celtic vs Rangers end up in a discussion about politics and or religion?

And why do supporters on both sides of the Old Firm divide still bring those issues into the match?

For me, the focus should be on football and not on politics, and what's the big fuss about religion? I suppose, there is only one God in Christianity, and not two...one of them a Catholic Celtic supporter, and the second one a Protestant Rangers supporter.

Your right in what you say unfortunately over a hundred years of bigotry amongst certain sections of both teams support won't disappear overnight

Oh and not all Rangers fans are Protestants and not all Celtic fans are RC

Chucky the tree

People follow Celtic being of the religion/political position they take. You support Celtic because they are seen to be "irish" and "catholic". If Celtic weren't such an Irish club no one would bother supporting them(Hibernan).

Lawrence1895

greendom wrote: »

Celtic vs Rangers is not just about football though. Above all other fixtures, this one is probably the one with most non-football baggage attached. There are others of course - Real Madrid vs Barcelona comes to mind

Considering, it's 'only' a football match, sometimes political issue seem to be a major role. The same we can find in the Belgrade Derby, Milan, Rome, and so on and so forth. Even in Germany, when a club from the former Eastern part plays a club from the Western part, always trouble.

But as far as I know, the Old Firm is the only derby in Europe, where politics and religion play a role

karma_

Chucky the tree wrote: »

People follow Celtic being of the religion/political position they take. You support Celtic because they are seen to be "irish" and "catholic". If Celtic weren't such an Irish club no one would bother supporting them(Hibernan).

That's not altogether true, a lot of older people follow Celtic because they were a very successful team in the 60's & 70's. My uncle still talks about the 1967 European Cup game and he's over 70's. They attracted a large following then because they played a great style of attacking football. I do know a good few Protestants who also are Celtic fans.

Indeed there are some idiots who you describe who simply associate themselves with Celtic or Rangers because of some sort of perceived socio-religious factor, but I would think that they are in the minority and it has little to do with being a football fan.

I think the Celtic fans on here get too much of a hard time and I have sympathy for them as they have a lot of detractors, and in fairness they do get provoked quite a lot. Sure there are a few hotheads amongst them but If I had to put up with some of that crap I'd feel the same way.

In regards that particular thread, it's a shame it was allowed to be derailed as it most definitely merited it's own discussion. Yet, one solitary poster was allowed to steer it toward a massive clusterfúck.

karma_

Lars1916 wrote: »

But as far as I know, the Old Firm is the only derby in Europe, where politics and religion play a role

Barca v Madrid, although not a derby runs deep with politics, as I would imagine are the St. Pauli v Hamburg matches. There are also a few clubs in Italy where there are Left/Right political tensions. Cannot think of any others where religion plays a role in fairness.

Oat23

Lars1916 wrote: »

But as far as I know, the Old Firm is the only derby in Europe, where politics and religion play a role

Take away religion/politics and what have you got? A derby equal in importance to that of the Tyne-Wear derby. It needs it.

I'm in the same boat as you. I hate when religion and politics are brought into sport and that is why I have no time for the old firm.

Suprised this thread isn't more popular tbh.

Lawrence1895

Oatesy23 wrote: »

Take away religion/politics and what have you got? A derby equal in importance to that of the Tyne-Wear derby. It needs it.

I'm in the same boat as you. I hate when religion and politics are brought into sport and that is why I have no time for the old firm.

Suprised this thread isn't more popular tbh.

Maybe the usual suspects will turn up and bring some life into it

Anyway, there are derbies with tension and they don't need politics or religion. Sometimes you just need a local rivalry (Borussia Dortmund vs Schalke 03+1) or the fact, that one team is from the Northside, the other one from the Southside.

For some reason, I never went to a Bohemians vs Shamrock Rovers match...

Dempsey

Its not the religion or politics that is the problem, its the resorting to bigotry, sectarianism, anti-social behaviour, violence/assault, death threats that inevitably follows when the extremes of the spectrum cant handle loosing or a slagging.

Lawrence1895

Dempsey wrote: »

Its not the religion or politics that is the problem, its the resorting to bigotry, sectarianism, anti-social behaviour, violence/assault, death threats that inevitably follows when the extremes of the spectrum cant handle loosing or a slagging.

In many cases, religion or politics is not a vital part in all the trouble, but some sc****** still use it as an excuse

OhNoYouDidn't

Lars1916 wrote: »

But as far as I know, the Old Firm is the only derby in Europe, where politics and religion play a role

This is a very interesting thread, but that is frankly a daft statement.

Politics? Rome, Milan, Athens, Hamburg Barca v Real, Barcelona v Espanyol, Bilbao v Real, Moscow, Warsaw, Prague, Budapest, Stockholm, Lisbon, Ajax v Feyenoord, Tel Aviv etc.

Even Rovers v Bohs has an element of politics

Religon? Linfield v Cliftonville, Gala v Fenerbace, any iteration of Maccabi versus Beitar clubs in Israel

Football reflects the society around it. Some places like Italy are split left right, some like Spain are on a regional basis.

Lawrence1895

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

This is a very interesting thread, but that is frankly a daft statement.

Politics? Rome, Milan, Athens, Hamburg Barca v Real, Barcelona v Espanyol, Bilbao v Real, Moscow, Warsaw, Prague, Budapest, Stockholm, Lisbon, Ajax v Feyenoord, Tel Aviv etc.

Even Rovers v Bohs has an element of politics

Religon? Linfield v Cliftonville, Gala v Fenerbace, any iteration of Maccabi versus Beitar clubs in Israel

Football reflects the society around it. Some places like Italy are split left right, some like Spain are on a regional basis.

Bohs vs Rovers has a political background? I thought, it is just Northside against Southside

OhNoYouDidn't

Lars1916 wrote: »

Bohs vs Rovers has a political background? I thought, it is just Northside against Southside

God no. Rovers have never considered themselves a 'southside' team.

Bohs were founded by the British army as the team of the Irish Hibernian Regiment school. That regiment shot the 1916 leaders and was at the fore in breaking the 1913 strikes. They used to fly Union Jacks and wear Rangers shirts to wind Rovers up as recently as the 1990's.

Lawrence1895

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

God no. Rovers have never considered themselves a 'southside' team.

Bohs were founded by the British army as the team of the Irish Hibernian Regiment school. That regiment shot the 1916 leaders and was at the fore in breaking the 1913 strikes. They used to fly Union Jacks and wear Rangers shirts to wind Rovers up as recently as the 1990's.

Interesting, it seems, I learn something new every day

The only thing, I knew until now, was that some Rovers supporters mentioned, that they are the 'Real Hoops' when I pointed out, that they have the same colours as Celtic, giving out to them because of sectarianism.

Nalz

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

God no. Rovers have never considered themselves a 'southside' team.

Bohs were founded by the British army as the team of the Irish Hibernian Regiment school. That regiment shot the 1916 leaders and was at the fore in breaking the 1913 strikes. They used to fly Union Jacks and wear Rangers shirts to wind Rovers up as recently as the 1990's.

And the cowboys shot the injins. Any respectable sport loving person with a brain could be as passionate and involved without BS like that entering their heads

Paully D

Quite frankly, I'm ****ing sick of listening to talk of or reading about Celtic and Rangers.

Virtually every football forum I frequent is infested with people saying ''Celtic are fenian bastards'', ''Rangers are orange bastards'', then you have the media with their ''Lennon is right'', ''no McCoist is right'', ''Diouf's a scumbag'' bull****, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.

Another thing I'm sick of is people saying that they support Celtic or Rangers as a second team. Why anyone wants or needs to have a second team is beyond me.

Every single time without fail that the two clubs are brought up in conversation it reverts back to the same old ****, both of them are as bad as each other too, despite both sets of supporters claiming the other is worse. The last time the football was actually brought up in a conversation about them must have been a long, long time ago.

As far as I'm concerned no-one outside of the two sets of supporters would give a **** about them if it wasn't to do with the sectarian bull**** etc that's attached to the two sets of clubs.

If I had my way I'd send them all over to some godforsaken island off the coast of Tanzania, let the two sets of them kick seven shades of **** out of each other like the tribes over there do and let everyone else get on with things back in the real world without having to constantly hear about them.

1mcampo1

Paully D wrote: »

Quite frankly, I'm ****ing sick of listening to talk of or reading about Celtic and Rangers.

Virtually every football forum I frequent is infested with people saying ''Celtic are fenian bastards'', ''Rangers are orange bastards'', then you have the media with their ''Lennon is right'', ''no McCoist is right'', ''Diouf's a scumbag'' bull****, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.

Another thing I'm sick of is people saying that they support Celtic or Rangers as a second team. Why anyone wants or needs to have a second team is beyond me.

Every single time without fail that the two clubs are brought up in conversation it reverts back to the same old ****, both of them are as bad as each other too, despite both sets of supporters claiming the other is worse. The last time the football was actually brought up in a conversation about them must have been a long, long time ago.

As far as I'm concerned no-one outside of the two sets of supporters would give a **** about them if it wasn't to do with the sectarian bull**** etc that's attached to the two sets of clubs.

If I had my way I'd send them all over to some godforsaken island off the coast of Tanzania, let the two sets of them kick seven shades of **** out of each other like the tribes over there do and let everyone else get on with things back in the real world without having to constantly hear about them.

This part's true though...

Dempsey

Thankfully, you dont have your way and you can get back to supporting your bland EPL club ASAP.

Xavi6

Paully D wrote: »

Quite frankly, I'm ****ing sick of listening to talk of or reading about Celtic and Rangers.

Virtually every football forum I frequent is infested with people saying ''Celtic are fenian bastards'', ''Rangers are orange bastards'', then you have the media with their ''Lennon is right'', ''no McCoist is right'', ''Diouf's a scumbag'' bull****, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.

Another thing I'm sick of is people saying that they support Celtic or Rangers as a second team. Why anyone wants or needs to have a second team is beyond me.

Every single time without fail that the two clubs are brought up in conversation it reverts back to the same old ****, both of them are as bad as each other too, despite both sets of supporters claiming the other is worse. The last time the football was actually brought up in a conversation about them must have been a long, long time ago.

As far as I'm concerned no-one outside of the two sets of supporters would give a **** about them if it wasn't to do with the sectarian bull**** etc that's attached to the two sets of clubs.

If I had my way I'd send them all over to some godforsaken island off the coast of Tanzania, let the two sets of them kick seven shades of **** out of each other like the tribes over there do and let everyone else get on with things back in the real world without having to constantly hear about them.

That is an awesome rant.

/subscribes to thread

seafood dunleavy

Paully D wrote: »

Quite frankly, I'm ****ing sick of listening to talk of or reading about Celtic and Rangers.

Virtually every football forum I frequent is infested with people saying ''Celtic are fenian bastards'', ''Rangers are orange bastards'', then you have the media with their ''Lennon is right'', ''no McCoist is right'', ''Diouf's a scumbag'' bull****, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.

Another thing I'm sick of is people saying that they support Celtic or Rangers as a second team. Why anyone wants or needs to have a second team is beyond me.

Every single time without fail that the two clubs are brought up in conversation it reverts back to the same old ****, both of them are as bad as each other too, despite both sets of supporters claiming the other is worse. The last time the football was actually brought up in a conversation about them must have been a long, long time ago.

As far as I'm concerned no-one outside of the two sets of supporters would give a **** about them if it wasn't to do with the sectarian bull**** etc that's attached to the two sets of clubs.

If I had my way I'd send them all over to some godforsaken island off the coast of Tanzania, let the two sets of them kick seven shades of **** out of each other like the tribes over there do and let everyone else get on with things back in the real world without having to constantly hear about them.

You'd think that someone who hates Celtic and Rangers wouldn't comment on threads about us,but you seem to always pass judgement on us.

mikemac

Chucky the tree wrote: »

People follow Celtic being of the religion/political position they take. You support Celtic because they are seen to be "irish" and "catholic".

Wouldn't say that now
I started supporting them as I used to play in goals when young as Packie Bonner was my favourite player.
I didn't know anything about the religion side back then, only later

ColeTrain

Paully D wrote: »

Quite frankly, I'm ****ing sick of listening to talk of or reading about Celtic and Rangers.

Virtually every football forum I frequent is infested with people saying ''Celtic are fenian bastards'', ''Rangers are orange bastards'', then you have the media with their ''Lennon is right'', ''no McCoist is right'', ''Diouf's a scumbag'' bull****, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.

Another thing I'm sick of is people saying that they support Celtic or Rangers as a second team. Why anyone wants or needs to have a second team is beyond me.

Every single time without fail that the two clubs are brought up in conversation it reverts back to the same old ****, both of them are as bad as each other too, despite both sets of supporters claiming the other is worse. The last time the football was actually brought up in a conversation about them must have been a long, long time ago.

As far as I'm concerned no-one outside of the two sets of supporters would give a **** about them if it wasn't to do with the sectarian bull**** etc that's attached to the two sets of clubs.

If I had my way I'd send them all over to some godforsaken island off the coast of Tanzania, let the two sets of them kick seven shades of **** out of each other like the tribes over there do and let everyone else get on with things back in the real world without having to constantly hear about them.

It's a footballing rivalry that gets debated like any other on this forum. I couldn't give a toss about religion, I'm not saying nobody does but you'd be surprised with the folk on this forum, most are very decent in that regard.

It can get tiresome with the general tit for tat but a lot of disruption comes from people like yourself coming into match threads looking down on the SPL. By doing that you're just adding fuel to the fire with your condescending attitude.

You won't see any Celtic/Rangers fans going into the Man United vs Arsenal thread later and telling people to be quiet and posting rants like the above. Rightly so too.

Zebra3

Lars1916 wrote: »

I just noticed, that the Neil Lennon Thread was closed.

This made me think about one aspect: Why does every thread, which has something to do with Celtic vs Rangers end up in a discussion about politics and or religion?

And why do supporters on both sides of the Old Firm divide still bring those issues into the match?

For me, the focus should be on football and not on politics, and what's the big fuss about religion? I suppose, there is only one God in Christianity, and not two...one of them a Catholic Celtic supporter, and the second one a Protestant Rangers supporter.

Professional football was originally mainly a WC sport. People didn't just walk througha turnstile and forget about the outside world as football was part of that wider world.

Some clubs were set up so people could kick a ball around, others were set up on social/political/religious grounds.

It's only in recent years with the gentrification of football (attracting large amounts of middle class consumers) and big business seeing it as a way of marketing their crap has the issue of politics/religion etc become an issue as the these major brands want a nice cleansed version of the sport to attach their brand to.

Look at how many times during a game the tv cameras focus in on somebody wearing a jester hat or with their face painted. Now how often do the cameras focus in on lads wearing no colours? That's Sky and their ilk trying to promote a particular version of the fan they want their company associated with.

There's a great book of footie pics (can't remember the name of it) that had great snaps in it from the last 140 years or so. They had a picture of Ireland fans at an away game in Belgium in the early 80s with a huge banner in support of the H Block and Armagh hunger strickers. And that reflected the people who went to Ireland games back then. WC (mainly urban) nationalists.

Nowadays you get people going to Ireland games who can't understand why nationalists from the north don't support NI and who shout at people to sit down when there's an attack on.

WTF?!??!?!

Eirebear

Personally supporting Rangers and completely and utterly despising Celtic, for me, has absolutely nothing to do with religion or politics.

It's a tribal thing, and it always will be.

When you have two massive clubs, in a country which offers them absolutely no competittion playing eachother 7 times a season it is always going to get insular, petty and aggressive.

Even with other clubs around them as competittion, could you imagine the fall out if Man Utd and Liverpool where to play eachother 4 times in the space of 6 weeks? This forum would go into melt down.

Add to that the "Second team" syndrome, and you'll find the root of where most of the trouble starts, most of the actual Rangers and Celtic fans on this particular forum will get along fine the majority of the time - it may be grudged, but there is an underlying respect for eachother as there is in most rivalries.

OhNoYouDidn't

Paully D wrote: »

Quite frankly, I'm ****ing sick of listening to talk of or reading about Celtic and Rangers.

Virtually every football forum I frequent is infested with people saying ''Celtic are fenian bastards'', ''Rangers are orange bastards'', then you have the media with their ''Lennon is right'', ''no McCoist is right'', ''Diouf's a scumbag'' bull****, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.

Another thing I'm sick of is people saying that they support Celtic or Rangers as a second team. Why anyone wants or needs to have a second team is beyond me.

Every single time without fail that the two clubs are brought up in conversation it reverts back to the same old ****, both of them are as bad as each other too, despite both sets of supporters claiming the other is worse. The last time the football was actually brought up in a conversation about them must have been a long, long time ago.

As far as I'm concerned no-one outside of the two sets of supporters would give a **** about them if it wasn't to do with the sectarian bull**** etc that's attached to the two sets of clubs.

If I had my way I'd send them all over to some godforsaken island off the coast of Tanzania, let the two sets of them kick seven shades of **** out of each other like the tribes over there do and let everyone else get on with things back in the real world without having to constantly hear about them.

And the Celtic and Rangers fans are sick of hearing people like you with a false understanding of the rivalry lecturing them.

Its a massive derby, with politics, religion, nationality, tribalism, identity.

The problem with posters like you is that you are too used to sanitised English football where the derbies are nothing in the scheme of things.

Tribalism and rivalry IS football. If you don't get that, you are a consumer, not a fan

seafood dunleavy

I think politics will always be a part of some football clubs,in my opinion.I don't actively engage in politics within football but I don't really think its a bad thing.Football is a social release for people.

Paully D

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

The problem with posters like you is that you are too used to sanitised English football where the derbies are nothing in the scheme of things.

Tribalism and rivalry IS football. If you don't get that, you are a consumer, not a fan

I support Sunderland. I'm well used to proper derbies as the Tyne-Wear derby is very intense and arguably the most hate fuelled derby in England.

Just because the two sets of fans don't constantly bang on about how they're catholic or protestant or go around with a superiority complex doesn't mean that a derby is sanitised.

Eirebear

Paully D wrote: »

I support Sunderland. I'm well used to proper derbies as the Tyne-Wear derby is very intense and arguably the most hate fuelled derby in England.

Just because the two sets of fans don't constantly bang on about how they're catholic or protestant or go around with a superiority complex doesn't mean that a derby is sanitised.

So tell us then, what makes the Tyne-Wear Derby so hate filled and passionate?

Isnt the blind hatred of someone, simply because they happen to be located less than 20miles down the road and somehow feeling superior to them because your from somewhere less than 20 miles up the road, every single bit as ludicrous as the perception and misunderstanding of the Old Firm that you hold?

OhNoYouDidn't

Paully D wrote: »

I support Sunderland. I'm well used to proper derbies as the Tyne-Wear derby is very intense and arguably the most hate fuelled derby in England.

Just because the two sets of fans don't constantly bang on about how they're catholic or protestant or go around with a superiority complex doesn't mean that a derby is sanitised.

If thats what you think the Glasgow derby is, good for you. But you are wrong.

But that derby is nothing like as intense as the derbies I listed because its solely based on geography. Because England doesn't have the extremes of anything.

That is why the Gah will never have the passion of football.

Lawrence1895

For some reason I think, this ends up in the old Celtic vs Rangers rant...okay...I started it, I mentioned it in my opening post

So just a piece of information, football derbies worldwide: http://www.footballderbies.com

There is also some good information to be found in a documentary calles 'The real football factories Europe'.

OhNoYouDidn't

Lars1916 wrote: »

For some reason I think, this ends up in the old Celtic vs Rangers rant...okay...I started it, I mentioned it in my opening post
.

But its not. The Celtic and Rangers fans are united in telling people that they fundamentally do NOT understand the Glasgow derby and what it is all about.

OhNoYouDidn't

Trilla wrote: »

And the cowboys shot the injins. Any respectable sport loving person with a brain could be as passionate and involved without BS like that entering their heads

Who said it does? Like it or not politics and sport do mix. It might not be the biggest component in the Dublin derby these days but it exists.

Tallaght Saint

Lars1916 wrote: »

) or the fact, that one team is from the Northside, the other one from the Southside.

For some reason, I never went to a Bohemians vs Shamrock Rovers match...

That's not necessarily the reason for the Bohs Rovers rivalry. It's not even a historical rivalry. Rovers' rivals would be Shels as both were founded in the Ringsend area

Lawrence1895

Tallaght Saint wrote: »

That's not necessarily the reason for the Bohs Rovers rivalry. It's not even a historical rivalry. Rovers' rivals would be Shels as both were founded in the Ringsend area

The Bohs/Rovers Rivalry dates back to the 1970s, so I heard. But for Groundhoppers from Germany it is the most important match to watch in Ireland