FA Cup - In or Out?

[lyb]

So who reckons it will be Etihad-sponsored Man City picking up the Etihad FA Cup? All a bit incestuous.

 

[eatonparkboy]

Thats the point though, its not special any more. Its only special to smaller clubs who can go on a run, and that is probably more financially orientated than anything.

You talk about Norwich there like we should feel privileged seeing a team like Man City at Carrow road, the fact they will be here again in the league hardly makes it some special treat for fans.

No not privileged at all. But I don't know whether we categorise games any more but ManC would be an A, in other words a top match, in any competition. And to dismiss the FA Cup as merely only special for smaller clubs means the bigger clubs should make even more of an effort.

If we are going to put the FA Cup out to pasture then we consign whatever happened in the past as trivia.

 

[morty]

No not privileged at all. But I don't know whether we categorise games any more but ManC would be an A, in other words a top match, in any competition. And to dismiss the FA Cup as merely only special for smaller clubs means the bigger clubs should make even more of an effort.

If we are going to put the FA Cup out to pasture then we consign whatever happened in the past as trivia.

Well the club priced at £20, which was about right. And nearly 25,000 people went, a lot of people took the opportunity to get to a match because it is so difficult to get tickets for league games. And I think both sides put out good teams, yes ours wasn't totally first choice, but not that far off.

So really the fans came out in numbers, neither club showed disrespect to the cup, and we got beaten by a very good team.

I don't have any complaints, but like everyone else, recognise that staying in the Premier league is our priority.

 

[Canaryboy]

I don't really understand this assertion that we didn't take the game seriously. Alex Neil seems to have picked a fairly strong side, not a single member of the starting XI is a fringe player or deadwood, all in or around the first team in the league?

We've got two really important winnable away games coming up on the 13th and 16th, so its obvious we needed to rotate for this fixture. Three games in 7 games including two long journeys to Bournemouth and Stoke. 

If we go and get a win in one of those away fixtures, hopefully the Bournemouth one, then rotating the squad would be vindicated? 

Stoke played a heavily rotated side and rested several key players yesterday. So if we didn't do the same they'd have the advantage of being fresher, and they haven't got to do the travelling, we're the travelling side.

Can completely understand why we didn't put out the absolute strongest side we could yesterday. If we had a few more points on the board in the league, or met Man City in a later round, then perhaps we would have done. 

The team put out yesterday was good enough to beat most sides in the FA Cup yesterday, including the XI's put out by many Premier League sides. It was a strong XI in the grand scheme of things, just not when you're lining up against a team with a genuine world class striker and two £55m players in the squad. 

 

[Canaryboy]

but ManC would be an A, in other words a top match, in any competition.

First time I've heard anybody complain that tickets should have been more expensive 

If the attendance was 25,000 then that suggests we got the pricing just right for this one? 

Wasn't there a cup game a couple of years ago, Spurs I think, where tickets were priced at almost league game prices (£30 or something?) and we only got around 16,000 in the ground.

The fans were highly critical of the price of the game and McNally's argument was that the revenue from 16,000 at £30 was higher than it would be at £20 for a full house. 

Didn't go down well at all with the fans, in fact the backlash was around the time that we saw McNally use twitter much less. Also a lot of debate about the amount the extra people would be spending on beer and food in the ground. 

So the debate here seems to be between pricing at equilibrium to achieve maximum revenue, or pricing to achieve maximum attendance, and last time this argument was had the fans preferred the latter in the cup. 

Also got to remember the time of the year, January is a month of austerity and cold weather. Fans turn up in the league despite the weather because most of them are season ticket holders and they've already paid for their ticket, and with supply restricted as it is the casual tickets go early. 

A lot more difficult to tempt people to part with money and drag themselves out into the cold and wet when every ticket is a casual one. 

 

[eatonparkboy]

 
I don't think you are understanding my point. I did say that I have no complaints about the line up, and I didn't see the game so won't comment about the performance even though some have questioned the tactics. I'm not doing that.

It is the dismissal of yesterday's game by the club, and many on here, as unimportant. What a sad state that the most famous domestic cup competition has come to that.

I have heard too many times that once we become established we can take cup games seriously. I very much doubt we will ever be an established PL club. So if we wait for that we might as well not bother.

Sorry, haven't a clue why this happened. I was responding to Canryboys reply to my post.

 

[eatonparkboy]

First time I've heard anybody complain that tickets should have been more expensive 

If the attendance was 25,000 then that suggests we got the pricing just right for this one? 

Wasn't there a cup game a couple of years ago, Spurs I think, where tickets were priced at almost league game prices (£30 or something?) and we only got around 16,000 in the ground.

The fans were highly critical of the price of the game and McNally's argument was that the revenue from 16,000 at £30 was higher than it would be at £20 for a full house. 

Didn't go down well at all with the fans, in fact the backlash was around the time that we saw McNally use twitter much less. Also a lot of debate about the amount the extra people would be spending on beer and food in the ground. 

So the debate here seems to be between pricing at equilibrium to achieve maximum revenue, or pricing to achieve maximum attendance, and last time this argument was had the fans preferred the latter in the cup. 

Also got to remember the time of the year, January is a month of austerity and cold weather. Fans turn up in the league despite the weather because most of them are season ticket holders and they've already paid for their ticket, and with supply restricted as it is the casual tickets go early. 

A lot more difficult to tempt people to part with money and drag themselves out into the cold and wet when every ticket is a casual one. 

Once again I think you have misunderstood.No, I wasn't complaining about ticket prices. That they are vastly overpriced is another and huge topic. I was just responding to Morty's thought that I thought because the game was ManC we should feel privileged, whereas, for the moment we are in the same division as them.

I asked whether the club still employed a category system for matches as they did in the past and as many clubs still do. If so, then surely ManC would be an A whereas Bournemouth would be a C. Therefore the club was assuming that ManC were more "important" than Bournemouth.

 

[Canaryboy]

"It is the dismissal of yesterday's game by the club, and many on here, as unimportant. What a sad state that the most famous domestic cup competition has come to that"

A team gets less prize money for winning the FA Cup than the winner of the Men's singles gets at Wimbledon. 

In addition, the winner qualifies for the Europa League instead of the Champions League. And of course its now got a sponsor, people now compete to win the 'Etihad Cup' or the 'Capital One cup'. Its been cheapened. 

Then there is the situation with FA Cup final tickets. You reach Wembley and get an allocation of something like 22,500 per team and the rest go to corporate sponsors as freebies and ultimately work their way to ticket touts who somewhere around a grand for a ticket. 

It would be almost twice as hard for normal fans to get an FA Cup final ticket than a play-off final ticket, and it was hard enough to get one of the latter for exiles. 

In fact it would be 1 ticket per season ticket holder at Norwich. That's it. Meaning that many or possibly even most of the 25000 people who went yesterday (like Morty said, many of them people who struggle to get casual tickets in the league) wouldn't even be able to get a ticket for either the semi-final (also played at Wembley) or the final.

I agree that its a shame the competition seems to be losing its prestige, but perhaps the FA are to blame for that. It has become unattractive commercially to clubs, and cheapened to fans.

How about the winning team gets £10m and the fourth Champions League spot? Then you'll see teams suddenly taking it far more seriously. How about corporate tickets for any Wembley fixture limited to 5000 instead of half of the stadium? Perhaps then fans will respect it more. 

But then you'd get the probably valid argument that the bumper prize post for the winners is more money staying at the top of the game though, as this would surely mean taking prize money away from the minnows who go on a cup run, an essential part of the revenue of clubs in League Two for example. You get non-league sides building a new stand off of the back of the FA Cup 1st round proper. 

 

[eatonparkboy]

"It is the dismissal of yesterday's game by the club, and many on here, as unimportant. What a sad state that the most famous domestic cup competition has come to that"

A team gets less prize money for winning the FA Cup than the winner of the Men's singles gets at Wimbledon. 

In addition, the winner qualifies for the Europa League instead of the Champions League. And of course its now got a sponsor, people now compete to win the 'Etihad Cup' or the 'Capital One cup'. Its been cheapened. 

I agree that its a shame the competition seems to be losing its prestige, but perhaps the FA are to blame for that. 

How about the winning team gets £10m and the fourth Champions League spot? Then you'll see teams suddenly taking it far more seriously. 

Then you'd get the probably valid argument that this is money staying at the top of the game though, as this would surely mean taking prize money away from the minnows who go on a cup run, an essential part of the revenue of clubs in League Two for example. You get non-league sides building a new stand off of the back of the FA Cup 1st round proper. 

I go along with everything you say. The FA is a disgrace. Dyke inspires little or no confidence and it cannot be run by self interest groups.

Can I prevail upon your patience to offer an example of lower leagues status.

In Cornwall, there is not one decent ground/stadium. Clubs in both football and rugby have been denied promotion because their ground didn't meet the required standard.

A long campaign to get a "Stadium for Cornwall" has finally got the planning permission to go ahead. However the parochial attitudes have come to the fore and Cornish Pirates, striving for promotion to the top tier of English club rugby do not really want to share with Truro City, currently in National League South and aiming for Football League status.

So where we didn't have one ground, by 2017, we will have two!! But neither will be really large enough for what they want because of finance. But both of these clubs, in their respective codes, have climbed from the lower leagues and have conveniently forgotten where they come from. And where their future really lies.

A joint ground and the money that is saved could be handed to other clubs to lay all weather 3G pitches. Then the grass roots will improve because they will be practising their skills on proper pitches.

Exeter Chiefs rugby club, are a shining example of how to progress. Get the ground in place first, then build a team around first class facilities, and now they are challenging rugby's elite. Now internationals have emerged from their system. And they have the finance now to bring in overseas players.

 

[Canaryboy]

Historically we've always fared much better in the League Cup.

3 x League Cup Quarter Finals since last winning it in 1985. 

Never reached the FA Cup 6th round (Quarter Final) in that period.

So perhaps if anything we should be trying seriously to win that cup again. The prize is effectively the same, Europa League qualification, and each team gets 31500 tickets for the final, 9000 more than the FA Cup. 

Now that both cups has a corporate sponsor perhaps the League Cup now deserves not only parity in terms of respect but perhaps even more respect, considering its much less of a means for Corporate Executives to enrich themselves by selling off their freebie tickets to real fans at a grand a pop. 

That extra 18000 tickets, at a grand a pop = £18m less lining the pockets of ticket touts in that final, and 9000 more real fans getting the chance to see their team in a domestic cup final. 

Never thought about this before, but I now want us to win the League Cup more than the FA Cup! 

 

[Canaryboy]

I go along with everything you say. The FA is a disgrace.

Amazing how Blatter and FIFA are finally getting held to account, yet we pay so little attention to the parasites in our own domestic game.

 

[eatonparkboy]

Amazing how Blatter and FIFA are finally getting held to account, yet we pay so little attention to the parasites in our own domestic game.

The oligarchs at the top only get there because of the thirty pieces of silver grabbed by those keeping them in power. And they start at County level. I've seen them in action down here in Cornwall.

 

[eatonparkboy]

Historically we've always fared much better in the League Cup.

3 x League Cup Quarter Finals since last winning it in 1985. 

Never reached the FA Cup 6th round (Quarter Final) in that period.

So perhaps if anything we should be trying seriously to win that cup again. The prize is effectively the same, Europa League qualification, and each team gets 31500 tickets for the final, 9000 more than the FA Cup. 

Now that both cups has a corporate sponsor perhaps the League Cup now deserves not only parity in terms of respect but perhaps even more respect, considering its much less of a means for Corporate Executives to enrich themselves by selling off their freebie tickets to real fans at a grand a pop. 

That extra 18000 tickets, at a grand a pop = £18m less lining the pockets of ticket touts in that final, and 9000 more real fans getting the chance to see their team in a domestic cup final. 

Never thought about this before, but I now want us to win the League Cup more than the FA Cup! 

Maybe if winning either of both cup competitions meant CL qualification, then we really would have exciting seasons after the beginning of January.

 

[gerryinromania]

Thanks for the replies. No stream, no t.v = no whisky. Will have the glass/bottle ready for the Stoke game

 

[ZLF]

3 x League Cup Quarter Finals since last winning it in 1985. 

Never reached the FA Cup 6th round (Quarter Final) in that period.

I seem to recall 2 dreams I had going to Hillsborough and villa to see fa cup semi finals in that period. V vivid they were

The fa continue to struggle, but a cl place will mean the strongest teams entered so why not seems a no brained to most base those running the premier league.   At least they will have won something. 

 

[Canaryboy]

I stand corrected 

 

[Killiecanary]

I am sure the players who played yesterday took the game perfectly seriously. They just weren't good enough.

I paid my money and was there yesterday, I perfectly understand why we put the team out that we did. 

I was there too.  Absolutely agree with Morty here.  We played a cup tie against a team who could put out better players from  2-11, and generally when that happens the team with the better players will win 9 times out of 10.  

Every single outfield player who played for Man City on Saturday would walk into our team - and that's without Kompany, Silva, Bony, Hart, Toure!   

 

[GJP]

It wasn't a particularly great Man City performance though. We set up quite negatively and lacked a bit of belief.

It's another one of those situations where I think if Hughton had been manager there would have been a few more complaints about the way we handled it.

 

[dj161]

It's another one of those situations where I think if Hughton had been manager there would have been a few more complaints about the way we handled it.

I agree with that, wasn't at the game due to work, but couldn't believe it when I saw the line up, 5 at the back at home in the cup? what was he thinking? sure Man City are a good side but what did we have to lose, may as well of gone for it and see what happens, if we lost we lost and if we win its a bonus, as opposed to setting up negatively and losing anyway, you look at the game on TV between Exeter and Liverpool, Exeter went 4-4-2 and got a great result and they had nothing to lose, same as us just they displayed no fear and just went for it

 

[morty]

Yeah we weren't some minnows having our own little cup final though, were we?

We set up to stifle a very good side, not far off first choice, and hopefully win by the odd goal.

I certainly don't think we set up for a draw, or to deliberately lose the game, as I said before, we were just beaten by a very good side.