[madders94]

I hate John Terry but I like Di Matteo and I'd like him to do well because he did well for us at West Brom. Either team's country doesn't come into it and I don't care about fans or plastic flags or whatever else it is you're all foaming at the mouth about, I support Real Madrdid (STFU haters, if I want to say support I will) and as Bayern beat Real Madrid, obviously I'd like Chelsea to beat them. However, I'm not really that bothered and won't even be watching the match (not out of lack of interest; because I'm at a party that night), so if Bayern win, good for them because they have a good team and, as others have said, haven't bought greatness, they've worked for it.

[madders94]

(Original post by nonotrly)
Two neg reps so far, but no-one with the balls or self-confidence to even explain which part and why. I can therefore only assume my views are good.

I think they're expressing their utter outrage that "ZOMG other people have opinions and don't share my hatred/adoration of Chelsea/Bayern". Apparently, it is now a crime to not let who wins a football match take over every fibre of your being I didn't see a problem with what you said.

[anillatoo]

Not British, though I do watch the Barclays Premier League, just want Bayern to win because they play better football and I don't want to picture John Terry lifting the trophy with his murky smile!

[bhoy 1888]

(Original post by Isometrix)
Getting to the final of the CL is harder than finishing 4th in the PL?

not really to reach a champions league final you have to turn up for 12 or so BIG games but, fair enough the oppositions much tougher.But to finish 4th in the BPL is much harder its about performing for a whole season not just 12 games. And to have a squad like Chelsea with so much strength in depth they should be expected to be competing for champions league finals.

I don't personally believe Chelsea should be six i would rate them higher than Spurs, who i feel would be lucky to finish top 4.

[nonotrly]

(Original post by madders94)
I think they're expressing their utter outrage that "ZOMG other people have opinions and don't share my hatred/adoration of Chelsea/Bayern". Apparently, it is now a crime to not let who wins a football match take over every fibre of your being I didn't see a problem with what you said.

That just means you're not a true fan.*

*sarcasm

[Jim_Metrin]

Because Terry is a Bastard and they bought all their success.

[rockrunride]

I did want Chelsea to win.. before Wigan beat Newcastle. For fairly obvious reasons, I don't now I still think we deserve a CL spot.

[Flying Cookie]

At the end of the day it's a battle of the football clubs, not countries. With football players being intermingled between countries like they are, it's hardly a matter of patriotism or a country's own football value. It's football club versus football club. They are private so the whole matter of a country's involvement in a football club just seems misplaced. As players, owners, managers, coaches and so forth need not be and are in fact not of a certain citizenship or de facto national affiliation, so supporting a team just because they should be, or are somehow pertaining to a certain country, seems unnecessary or even irrational to some.

Personally, I think it's a good thing to be patriotic and support your country's representatives in sport - but if it surpasses the point of mere patriotism and goes into frenetic, aggressive bull**** type supporting, then just drop it.

[KingMessi]

Personally I don't see why we're having this issue - that is to say, why support anyone if you're not affiliated with the two teams or a Tottenham/Newcastle fan who would miss out on fourth otherwise? A poster a while back said that he was just hoping for an entertaining match with a lot of quality, and if my club won't be directly affected, why would one do anything else?

[Jordan_1]

(Original post by Notwithstanding)
Conversely, I really don't understand the idea of supporting a team just because you're in the same country (although this does, as you say, seem to be the majority view across Europe and in the UK media too). Regardless of personal interests (top 4 situation this year), the club game is unpatriotic by nature. It is full of inter-geographical rivalries. Outside of your own club, the closer a team the more you dislike them (i.e. local rivalries). Surely the natural standpoint is to extend this on a multi national level.

Because you can go and actually support them by going to the games? Thought that would be a little obvious...

[nonotrly]

(Original post by Jordan_1)
Because you can go and actually support them by going to the games? Thought that would be a little obvious...

Seems weird to pick random extra teams to support just because you then have an excuse to go to a game. Sounds like addict talk.

Neutrals can watch games too, especially finals. Plus why force yourself to support one of the teams and go to the match live when you can support both or neither and watch it at home, then go on holiday?

[KingGoonIan]

Meh if Newcastle don't make 4th I am fully behind Chelsea.

[Jordan_1]

(Original post by nonotrly)
Seems weird to pick random extra teams to support just because you then have an excuse to go to a game. Sounds like addict talk.

Neutrals can watch games too, especially finals. Plus why force yourself to support one of the teams and go to the match live when you can support both or neither and watch it at home, then go on holiday?

You really don't get it do you? It's not 'random teams'. They're usually local teams or teams people have a connection with, such as a family member who supports them.

Plus it's not an excuse to go to a game, people go for the atmosphere and the thrill of watching it live. It's like asking why would people go to concerts when they can just watch it on tv? In fact why have sex? I have porn...

[River85]

(Original post by Jim_Metrin)
Because Terry is a Bastard and they bought all their success.

They were never succesful before 2003? They weren't the third most successful English club between the mid 1990s and 2003?

I must have imagined the European trophy they won in 1998 and FA Cups in 1997 and 2000.

I'll keep making this point until someone replies to me. The "they bought their success" is ****ing boring now. They were already a reasonably successful team with a solid foundation. They money helped to establish them as title contenders but they're hardly the first to do this, even in the PL era.

(Original post by bhoy 1888)
not really to reach a champions league final you have to turn up for 12 or so BIG games but, fair enough the oppositions much tougher.But to finish 4th in the BPL is much harder its about performing for a whole season not just 12 games. And to have a squad like Chelsea with so much strength in depth they should be expected to be competing for champions league finals.

I don't personally believe Chelsea should be six i would rate them higher than Spurs, who i feel would be lucky to finish top 4.

No, not lucky, Newcastle and Tottenham have just been better and more consistant. It is rare to "fluke" a high league finish.

Whether Tottenham finish higher than Chelsea next season, well, that remains to be seen. But it remains that Tottenham are higher due to being the better team and not through luck.

[nonotrly]

(Original post by Jordan_1)
You really don't get it do you? It's not 'random teams'. They're usually local teams or teams people have a connection with, such as a family member who supports them.

Plus it's not an excuse to go to a game, people go for the atmosphere and the thrill of watching it live. It's like asking why would people go to concerts when they can just watch it on tv? In fact why have sex? I have porn...

This flys in the face of what you previously said. If you mean something, it would be wise not to state the opposite, then whine about someone reacting to said reverse-message.

[checkolad]

Just support who the **** you want to!