Pablo ZZZ Peroni said:
tregyblue61 said:
Good piece by Andy Dunn in the mirror today.
Sorry, can't post a link
Bang on the money:
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/maybe-manchester-city-fans-bored-4378576" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/ ... ed-4378576</a>
Bored watching the cocney derby, so here you are:
Maybe Manchester City fans are bored of the Champions League - and who could blame them
High-profile names such as Rio Ferdinand and Paul Scholes stuck the boot in but their criticism just came off as crass, writes Andy Dunn
Maybe, just maybe, a good few Manchester City supporters are BORED with the Champions League.
They are relatively new to it, haven’t seen their team win it, have only seen one knockout match, but maybe they are already BORED with it.
That is in comparison to their interest in the Premier League, of course, where every game matters in City’s quest to become the dominant domestic force.
The Etihad will be rocking for the visit of Spurs on Saturday week – it was yawning for the visit of Francesco Totti’s Roma.
At best, those good few supporters are probably only half-interested in the Champions League – and you don’t fork out 50 quid to watch something you’re only half-interested in.
Let’s face it, for all the hype, for all the music, the group stages of the Champions League are getting duller by the season.
To attract 37,509 to watch a match against Roma, which would not be decisive, is actually a good effort.
There were 16 Champions League fixtures last week, one of which – CSKA Moscow versus Bayern Munich – was played behind closed doors.
The average attendance for the other 15 games was 32,981. When the matches become do-or-die is when interest will go up a level.
You get the odd gem at this stage – Paris St Germain’s 3-2 win over Barcelona, for example – but, mainly, it’s mundane stuff. Shown live, Manchester City’s predictably insipid 1-1 draw with Roma pulled in an average of 3.264million viewers on ITV.
That’s OK, but still over a million less than Holby City on the other side.
Rio Ferdinand – clearly bored himself – wondered whether some City fans had stayed at home to watch Gordon Ramsay on telly.
No, but they might have taken advantage of the match being free-to-air.
Most top-level football is on a subscription channel and the average cost to the viewer in England is £51 per month. That compares to £21 in Germany, £25 in Italy and £10 in France.
If you go to the match regularly, the chances are you subscribe to one or both of the stations showing Premier League and Champions League football.
Add that cost to the cost of your tickets – on average, Premier League tickets are the most expensive in Europe – and you realise what a cash-draining exercise your passion has become.
When Ferdinand and Paul Scholes bemoaned the turnout and atmosphere at the Etihad last Tuesday, they clearly forgot that punters had to PAY to get in. Their criticism of City supporters was, quite simply, crass.
It is nothing short of incredible that English clubs continue to fill their grounds for so many fixtures when the cost of living is about to lap average wage increases for the common man and woman.
City have two further home fixtures in the Champions League and the second of those – against Bayern Munich at the end of November - could be decisive. That’s when proceedings might be remotely exciting. That’s when it might be worth going further into debt to support your team.
Don’t forget, there’s a reason why two Premier League clubs are sponsored by payday loan companies.
English clubs continue to enjoy astonishing support at matches. But soon, something will have to give for a lot of supporters.
In the case of the City followers who stayed away from the stadium last week, it already has – and it’s the numbing routine of the Champions League group stages.
And only players with millions in the bank could blame them.
