Terrible Norman still living in the Sky
Tuesday, November 3, 2009 at 12:00PM I know I love to use irony in oh so subtle doses in my blog articles and on occasion some of you don't quite grasp the context of the point being made and react with a four letter word, slating me for being pessimistic or negative, screaming that I'm detrimental to all things Spurs and that I do more harm than good. And blah blah blah. You get the picture. Sometimes writing style or satire or opinions can be lost in translation because what's been written is a little raw and not that obvious at first glance.
I'm not here to appease every single Spurs fan because its nigh impossible thanks to the uniqueness of human kind and the countless levels of humour we possess (or don't). I write for my own sanity and hope that somewhere in the depths of these articles there is something that can stir emotion and discussion. I don't ever expect every single reader to be impressed or agree. Much like I may not bother to concern myself with the opinions of, lets say, one or two cultured folk who frequent the official Tottenham Hotspur message board. Because I can't possibly articulate to their Oracle-esque level of astuteness and insight.
Bloggers/blogs in general are an acquired taste. Much like people you hang around with. Friends. Or acquaintances at home or away games. You like some, you don't like others and some of them you hate and can't even fathom how you even support the same team. Football journalists are in essence bloggers that get paid full-time to write up their educated and respected opinions on the game for national newspapers and their on-line equivalent web-pages. Their writing is more refined. And more professional. And mostly short and concise. And has the safety net of an editor. It has to be because of the targeted audience and the fact that they need to appeal to a wide cross-section of people. Not everyone agrees with them and at times their bias might shine through. And on other occasions there's a far more obvious agenda to their piece. Much like anything in the written press. Much like anything anywhere. Including the blogosphere.
Now we know Tottenham get bad press most of the time, mainly because we are an easy target made easier by the people associated with the club mouthing off or mugging themselves off. And I don't ever expect to read anything pro-Spurs all of the time and there are moments when there is more than enough decent coverage of our never-boring existence. Other fans of other clubs will probably say the same thing about the press and their team. But Spurs tend to get the most negative coverage outside of the Top 4.
Sky are obsessed with just four clubs and we usually find ourselves in for more Mickey Mouse jokes and Keystone Cop mock-ups than we can handle compared to other teams who suffer similar fates. And when things do go right, they have to remain impartial. Although they tend to be clever here by overplaying and overstating the positives because they know it will be easier to write up a damning effort at a later date when we tumble back down.
And then there's Matthew Norman.
This morning, a work colleague walked up and muttered, "Have you read this?", passing me yesterdays edition of the Evening Standard and before he could turn to the page I answered yes. He was laughing, not so much at my expense (the article was a match review of the NLD) but more so at the content of the article, asking why they had allowed an Arsenal fan to take the piss out of Spurs so publicly and blatantly. He laughed even louder when I informed him that Norman is a Spurs fan and that it should be more than obvious to most that only a Spurs fan could take the piss out of Spurs in such a blunt self-deprecating fashion.
"That makes sense" he replied. Bless him, he's a gooner. And French. So some of the subtleties of the English media are still lost on him.
Norman is basically the quintessential representation of what other supporters believe Spurs fans to be most like. Miserable depressive melters, always complaining. He does however make some valid (if more than obvious) points about the game, but they are lost in the midst of some of the usual twaddle we come to expect from the esteemed members of the press.
Its as though Norman is trying so hard not to be biased (in our favour) towards us that he has lost himself at the other end of the spectrum. He hardly ever has a good thing to say about Tottenham (I'm not sure whether he did after our initial 100% start to the season or whether this harks back to the Levy/Standard incident, although his doom and gloom pre-dates that) so when things don't go to plan be certain he'll be there to point and laugh. Because he can. Because he's Spurs. And because we are obviously devoid of other supporters and media-people pointing and laughing at us. Until the club start playing 'Grande Marche Chromatique' at home games when the team trots out, Norman and friends will remain relentless.
He could have quite easily made all the points he needed to make without it sounding so arse-kissy. Or maybe he does hate us for the torture of failure the club have put him through over the years. Perhaps this is akin to a comedian taking the piss out of a certain type of person and being able to get away with it because he is of the same ilk. I have to be careful here because I could be called a hypocrite, mainly because my letters to the chairman are not too dissimilar in self-deprecation. There's a number of Spurs fans that went into melt-down over the weekend who were far more angry and upset. But Norman will be read by many. Angry Spurs fans on a message board by few in comparison.
Like I said, his opinions are valid. His delivery is questionable because of the arena it sits in. If I'm being blind to the fact that there are journalists out there who do the very same thing to their own team, then name names.
I know I'm not the only person who laughed out loud at his description of Huddlestone (an oak tree in central midfield) and lambasting Robbie Keane's pre-match fighting talk. But to dismiss all the progress we've made under Redknapp - unquestionable progress - well, this reeks of institutionalised hack-talk as though he was contractually obliged to always be on hand to slaughter us.
I'm not requesting Norman or anyone else for that matter write up something complimentary when there is nothing complementary to write. And I'm also fully aware that if he was a Chelsea or West Ham fan writing up articles of this manner about Spurs, then people would bemoan the blatant agenda. So what we have in Norman is the token eternal Spurs sufferer exaggerated tenfold who has been beaten down season upon season by transitional and false dawns. He would make a far better Spooky than me. But he ruins it all by appeasing to the consensus (sponsored by Sky Sports) and is left drowning in a sea of typical stereotypes. It's the way he conforms that blights him every single time.
The first gem:
Every win this season, apart from the increasingly devalued opener against Liverpool, have come against weak opposition, with all three away victories at bottom three clubs.
Does Andy Gray ghost write for Norman? So basically, the Liverpool win no longer matters because everyone is beating them, well, everyone apart from Manchester United. And our away wins, given to us by virtue of the Prem League fixture list computer, are not relevant because the opposition are considered unworthy and happen to find themselves bottom of the table, including West Ham who managed to secure a point against Arsenal, when we took all three off them (WH that is) when we visited Upton Park. Are we meant to only beat weak teams who are mid-table or above because the rest of them don't truly count?
Traditionally, we hardly ever have success away and get dicked over by weak opposition all the time. Yet this season, we've lost twice away - both at Top 4 clubs when we know the likelihood of that happening is fairly likely. But have faired more than decent since Harry's arrival and had the best away record going into Saturdays match.
In addition there is no mention (much like Andy Gray failed to do so) of Arsenal's opposition at the Emirates thus far this season: Pompey (20th), Wigan (12th), Blackburn (17th) and Birmingham (14th). But it would be blasphemous for anyone to point this out. I'm guessing the reason why we never do well in the league is because we never beat the weak teams, and when we do its not considered good enough because we still can't beat the strong teams. We beat Chelsea at home last season. But that doesn't mean anything if we don't follow it up with wins against the likes of West Ham or Hull. Something is definitely lost in translation. Because the suggestion is, Spurs are up in 5th place because we've flattered to deceive by defeating the shit teams that reside in the Prem therefore the fixture list has created another illusion that came to a sudden and final abrupt ending at the Emirates. Arsenal have lost to Man Utd away and Man City away and have beaten a host of shit teams at home. Including crappy Tottenham. So I guess they're also flattering to deceive too and their dream is soon to be over.
Perhaps the paradox is too much for the likes of Norman and we should resume acceptable service. Harry, I suggest two points every eight games will do the trick.
His second nugget concerns a curious nod towards Martin Jol's tenure at White Hart Lane.
This time there is no hotel chef to scapegoat, and the question posed by their lily-livered capitulation concerns not how far Tottenham have progressed under Redknapp, but how far they've regressed since the comparative glory days of Martin Jol.
2006 was special because the side ticked over consistently and arguably had it been for a more active Jan transfer window we would have had 4th spot wrapped up long before the last game of the season. But where exactly is the sense made by comparing Harry (who has only recently made it past 12 months) to Martin Jol? Considering that Jol's teams choked on so many occasions I'd say that it's a little premature to start comparisons. How on earth have we regressed exactly considering the mess the club was in under Ramos? And Ramos won us a Cup, but you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who rates his time at Spurs and even less people who would have him back. Our points accumulation thanks to Harry has been more than impressive. But who cares for stats when the lack of performance proves that it’s the same old Tottenham and the Top 4 monopoly remain completely uncontested once more. Which has the vast majority of Normans counterparts across the country wiping away the single drop of sweat that had hoped to begin a journey downwards across their forehead.
Perhaps in another parallel dimension where Prem games are live on terrestrial TV and Richard Keys has no hair, Spurs visited the Emirates last weekend with Modric, Lennon, Woodgate and Defoe in their line-up. Arsenal however had Fabregas, van Persie, Gallas and Arshavin all out through injury and suspension.
If we won we'd not actually read about it in the press the following day because Norman would probably spend the best part of the match review telling us how under-strength Arsenal were and how they were missing key players in key positions and that a side lacking the best forward and their main creative outlet along with their playmaker and seasoned centre-back stood no real chance. And that this one game, this collection of 90 minutes found within the blow of a whistle at both ends is not season defining nor conclusive or relevant to the past or future in the manner it is being depicted in.
Who am I kidding? He'd never find himself in that position. Probably because we'd still manage to lose the game. Altogether now...
doot doot doodle oodle OOT doot do do
doot doot doodle oodle oot doot do do
doot-doodle oot oot
doot-doodle oot oot
doodle-oodle-oodle-oodle-oodle-oodle doot doot...
Reader Comments (61)
Yep I think we do mate. My first comment was a specific reply to the thesis advanced by da Spookster in this blog post (and indeed many others). Absolutely pertinent to the topic, absolutely NOT an example of "seiz[ing] on a relatively trivial part or aspect of a person's post", and not in an anyway anti-Spurs either.
No-one wanted to talk about that though, so I got accused of bragging about Arsenal victories (which I haven't done anywhere btw LOL).
When I pick a short quote to illustrate that this trend is continuing, (I mean, I'm not going to quote the entire diatribe am I LOL), I get accused of it again. And I mean this ain't just any short quote taken out of context, this is you relating your wider point back to the matter at hand, since it is what you describe as a "good example". But yeah, I'm just seizing on a trivial point ain't I mate.
My guess is that the reason you take this tack might be 'cos you all know I am right, and that deep down you all realise that claiming there's an anti Spurs bias in the national media is a pretty dumb position to adopt. That's just a hunch tho, feel free to disagree! LMFAO.
Cya later boys!
It's also called shooting the messenger. Outside of this incestuous foursome, the other clubs are fighting a battle to remain viable as a Premier club in the face of almost never being in with a chance of a league title or cup final win. And when one does achieve the latter, the big four and their infatuated, one-eyed, single brain-celled fans, lable the competiiton a second rate one, as with the Carling Cup, or the teams put out were their reserves or, as with Portsmouth beating United, the referee was to blamet. Either one or more of these reactions almost always accompany such success. We had two flung at us after beating Chelsea.
Anyone with half a brain can see that, unlike any other period of English football, the first division is divided into three broad or basic categories almost before the season has begun:
1. The top four,
2. The second tier or level,
3. The relegation fighters.
I imagine there would be fans of the big four who would see this state of affairs as worrying for the game long-term, but one thing is as sure as night following day, he or she has not yet made an appearance on this site.
Which is nothing to do with what I said, or really even what Spooky said. So well done there. Of course talking past me cos you can't address anything I've said in a rational manner is your MO, we all know that by now. PMSL
Also try reviewing that comment about "fir[ing] off a self-comforting anti-Spurs dig", in relation to these always hilarious digs about "one-eyed, single brain-celled" big 4 fans, etc etc. A case of do as I say but not as I do I suppose? As per usual from the Cliffster! ROFL.
And really, you're not even talking about inequality in the Prem/Champs League/elsewhere in top European leagues are you? You claim you are, but all it amounts to is pages of unsubstantiated wittering about big 4 fans this, mean old Sky Sports that, we're so hard done by. And funnily enough, that's exactly what I talked about in my first post! See how that works? LMAO!
The discussion I describe is absolutely a legit one to have, obviously. But are you capable of having it? Step 1 will be moving past your tired guff about "big 4 fans". Not gonna hold my breath on that one!
INNABIT LADS!
The other thing you can't help noticing is the self delusion of many of the fans of these top four teams, particularly those who prattle their nonsense on other teams' sites cos with all due respect to freedom of speech and so on, there's only one basic reason why a Chelsea/United/Arsenal fan would habitually post on a Spurs' site, for example, and that's to ridicule, take the piss, disagree with any pro-Spurs comment.
But the self-delusion is the main thing - you can't understand how even the most single-celled, one-eyed fan of the above mentioned teams, can't see the sheer pointlessness of many of the 'honours' their teams are now winning.
Chelsea, for example, have set a number of records and won a number of trophies since Abromovich stepped in yet what do any of them really mean? All they basically show is that money can buy anything. For me personally, none of Chelsea's 'achievements' under Abromovitch - and let's face it, the manager's identity is largely irrelevant - come anywhere near their great cup final win against Leeds.
In the transfer market you see the same nonsense, with United shipping out Sturm or whatever his name was, because he was a little critical of the club, and just buying another international player to take his place or Veron, not fitting in so just ship him out and buy someone else. That's light years away from what managing used to be.
And wasn't Ferguson close to getting the sack before Murdhoch and Sky stepped in? What saved him was not his managerial ability but the club's marketing power and potential.
Me: "The discussion I describe is absolutely a legit one to have, obviously. But are you capable of having it?"
Cliffster: "No. Now, about those Big 4 fans..."
Sigh!
Has anyone got a fly swat?
So much bluster, but to so little effect. Quite sad really. Well, either sad or hilarious. LMFAO
Gooner Jake, even though as a Spurs fan, life-long and so proud of our great footballing tradition and the wonderful players I've seen play for us, the magnificent Nicholson and his profound love for Spurs, the great Blanchflower and his words of wisdom regarding this sport, and brought up to hate Arsenal with a passion, one time only in my life, I admit,
I wanted Arsenal to win, and that was in that game against Liverpool at Anfield when you needed to beat them by two clear goals to win the league and they decided to play the game in an anti-Spurs fashion. I watched rhat game, and I was so glad you won.
So two direct questions for you to answer.
David Rocastle cried when Graham sold him to Leeds because he so loved Arsenal. Can you think of an Arsenal player who would do that today?
Have you ever wanted Spurs to win a game?
And pray tell, Cliffytits, how either of those questions in any way refute the comments I've made in this section? Oh wait they don't... LMFAO
Do you want to have a sensible discussion, or do you want to carry on trotting out tired crap about "Big 4 fans" and media conspiracies? Are you even capable of sensible discussion, or only churning out paragraphs or regurgitated, verbose nonsense? Let me know if it's the latter and I'll know that I don't have to put the effort in! PMSL
I'll play along though, cos I'm nice like that:
- I very much doubt that any current Arsenal player would cry for sorrow after being sold, even to Leeds. Perhaps some of the local lads in the academy in few years time, but even that would be a stretch. Of course, this makes Arsenal players identical to 99% of the rest plying their trade in the Premier League and other elite sporting Leagues, doesn't it? Including those lovable Lilywhites in fact! LOL
- I fervently wanted Spurs to win one day in 1999. I believe that some guy called "Sturm" was playing for the other side. ROFL
Cya later Cliffster!
I knew I shouldn't have bothered asking you. You have to try and think outside that 'Everything in the garden is rosy because Arsenal are still sitting pretty' square.
The question about David Rocastle is to show the decline in the base and depth of meaning between players and the clubs they play for, their relationship with them, not just something that pertains to Arsenal per se, but obviously I'm going to ask you about him because you're an Arsenal fan.
But as, in your opinion, it applies to 99% of Premier League players, than that simply endorses today's reality - that the viability and honours and successes of clubs generally, is centred soley around money. I'd strongly argue that football has never been so based. The successful managers of yesteryear are far superior to today's breed because they had to marry the skills and talents of wildly differing players, ranging from world class to quite average. Tottenham's great double team, for example, had four world class players in my view, but Nicholson's ability to weld them into a force that could inspire lesser lights like Medwin, Allen, Smith, Norman, Henry and the like, to consistenly raise their game, as well as the likes of players like Baker and Dyson who I'd regard as being very average players, just can't be compared with Ferguson or Wenger or whoever Abromovitch has appointed or Hughes, because these puppet managers simply go out and buy the player, usually an international at that. Just think for a second of what happens when these top four or so wankers have on their bench as subs, internationals. It doesn't show their strength at all, despite what the lick-spittling media and commentators try to make out and nor does it show managerial acumen. It merely shows that that particular club has more money than most, as Manchester City now pitifully and nakedly illustrate And is it not the case that that Russian Mafiaesque billionaire toyed with half a dozen clubs or so before his monetary tentacles wrapped themsevles around Chelsea? There but for the grace of Abromovicth go I. Thank the lord he turned down Spurs. Chelsea are welcome to him.
In terms of decline, surely anyone with half a brain or who professes to love this sport can see that those same internationals whose well paid arses are now warming those clubs' subs benches, years ago would have been playing for other clubs, thus ensuring a much greater and more exciting system because the talent was much further spread. Christ,look at the decline of the F.A. Cup and you couldn't imagine it but its very decline - Jesus, it used to be a dream of probably forty clubs supporters or so each year - and now, the very people you'd be wanting to safeguard it, are actually primarily responsible fir its decline.
And I'm sorry but apart from the one-eyed, single brain-celled supporters of the 'top' clubs - and I know they're not all like that - fans of clubs everywhere, in England and overseas, realise just how bad this is for the game.
But obviously the question, while it could be asked of many clubs, wouldn't have anywhere near its force and meaning if it was directed at any one of the more peripheral clubs, as it were.
In many ways, Rooney leaving Everton is valid in this context because Everton should be considered one of England's elite and premier clubs. Would such a player twenty years' ago have left such a club as Everton, for United, or come to that, Arsenal or Spurs? I'd say definitely 'No!'
And you take Blanchflower leaving Aston Villa for Spurs or Cantana leaving Leeds for United. Both are so differemt to little Mr. Berbatov leaving Spurs for United that it should appal lovers of the sport. With the latter, yes, he is a great talent, but he is a little man; with the two formers, you have managers at Leeds and Aston Villa who just weren't aware of the great talent and the potential they had at their club.
As for your second answer, I'd predicted it would take the path it took - rather than wanting Spurs to win that game, you really wanted United to lose it, as you've fundamentally revealed., simpy because it suited Arsenal. Liverpool losing that game to you, had no bearing on Tottenham's fortunes so try again.
I see you haven't responded.
I notice that once again we're plagued with an imbecile on this Spurs site, posting petty insults to people, writing semi-illiterate posts and with a name so chock full of irony that you couldn't drive a punctuation mark through it, which is probably why the imbecile doesn't use any.