Author Topic: Attitudes and behaviour.  (Read 76511 times)

ProfessorDavey

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17606
Re: Attitudes and behaviour.
« Reply #350 on: October 27, 2015, 07:22:44 AM »
Yes they did - owlswing - which was the start of the whole discussion.

You're going to have to point out the post in which he said that, because I can't find it. I did find a couple of posts in which he called it soccer and posts in which he defended his use of the term, but no posts in which he claimed everybody should call it soccer.
And where did I ever claim that. Where did I say that this discussion was about someone thinking that everyone should use the term soccer - I didn't. I claimed that this was about the suggestion that football should be called soccer rather than football.

Reply #323
Quote
I think you are rather drifting away from the point. That was the suggestion that football should be called soccer rather than, well, football.
That is clearly implying that you think somebody said that football would be called soccer instead of football.

Quote
Clearly owlswing thinks football should be called soccer

No, that is not clear at all. Owlswing certainly thinks it is OK to call it soccer and has defended his rationale for doing so himself, but he has not said that football should  be called soccer in general by everybody.

Quote
- why - because that is the term he choses to use himself and when pulled up on it by Rhiannon justifies its use.

The pulling up was incorrect. defending his own use does not mean he thinks everybody should use the term.
I ask again - where did I say that this discussion was about someone thinking that everyone should use the term soccer - I didn't.

You are adding 2 plus 2 and making 5, Jeremy.

Post #334

quote- Clearly owlswing thinks football should be called soccer - why - because that is the term he choses to use himself - unquote

NOW STFU!

It is your football - take it play whatever you want to call it
The issue isn't what I call it - I use the accepted term in Britain - the term used by and preferred by people who are part of the football community. No, the issue is the term you choose to you - a term that isn't an accepted term in the UK, one that isn't used by the football community, is disliked by the football community and is usually associated with a derogatory attitude toward the game.

So if I use the term 'triple jump' for the olympic sport but you insist on calling it 'hop,skip and jump' then the issue is with you, not me.

ProfessorDavey

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17606
Re: Attitudes and behaviour.
« Reply #351 on: October 27, 2015, 07:23:46 AM »
I think to bring light to this very significant argument, we should compromise and all call it soccerball.
No thanks NS - football works fine ;)

ProfessorDavey

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17606
Re: Attitudes and behaviour.
« Reply #352 on: October 27, 2015, 07:46:12 AM »
Moving on from the knockabout stuff - I think the origin of the term soccer and understanding the context within the game when it was coined may allow us to understand why football fans are so negative toward the term.

Remember the term arose from a public school and Oxbridge slang approach - i.e. associated totally with the elite in Britain. It was first coined in the 1890s and usually attributed to Charles Wreford-Brown, who was very clearly part of that elite (Charterhouse school, Oxford).

Now although it is not as well recognised as in rugby (schism between union-amateur vs league-professional) the same battle was raging in football at the time. In other words between those that wanted football to be a 'gentleman's sport played in a purely amateur manner and therefore only by the wealthy, as they were the only ones who could afford the loss of time/earnings associated with the elite sport and those that thought that the sport should be professional and allow working class to play at the top level. The former were linked to teams from public schools (Old Etonians, Old Carthusians etc) who remember dominated the early years of the FA cup.

The battle reached its peak at just about the point when soccer as a term was coined and would undoubtedly have become synonymous with the elite, public school, amateur, gentleman game. Indeed Wreford-Brown was apparently the leader of those trying to ensure that football was amateur and the fiercest critic of those trying to ensure the game could be professional. So he would, undoubtedly have been a bogey man, a figure of hate to those that felt he was trying to prevent the game being widened to the working classes, and in particular the northern working class clubs as he really wanted the sport restricted to the southern teams that were linked to public schools, universities etc and wanted it to be resolutely amateur (in the manner that rugby union was for decades).

Now those from the professional 'side' associated with clubs embedded in the working class areas won the day (and the public school clubs vanished from the elite game). At that point the game became a resolutely working class game, with the public school elite largely disowning the sport and shifting to rugby etc.

Given that background it is not surprising that even back at the turn of the 19th to 20th centuries the majority of football fans (supporting as they did the professional working class clubs) would have seen those, including Wreford-Brown, as bogey men and therefore hated the term that was inextricably associated with the public school elite who had tried to prevent their clubs from succeeding and had wanted to restrict the sport to a small public school, elite. And of course that term was soccer.

So a brief glance at history explain why, even decades ago, football fans have always used the term football and be deeply suspicious of the term soccer. And that attitude remains to this day, albeit there has been a shift in the focus of the negativity - away from people trying to restrict their sport to a public school elite, but rather a view that the term is american. But actually a theme does remain - a view that those that use the term soccer in Britain do so in a derogatory manner, effectively looking down their nose at the sport, exactly as Wreford-Brown did about the professional game all those years ago.

Gonnagle

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11106
Re: Attitudes and behaviour.
« Reply #353 on: October 27, 2015, 09:59:06 AM »
Dear Prof,

Aye!! but why soccer, is it something to do with socks and more importantly, what is this thread about :o :o

Gonnagle.
http://www.barnardos.org.uk/shop/shop-search.htm

http://www.twam.uk/donate-tools

Go on make a difference, have a rummage in your attic or garage.

Rhiannon

  • Guest
Re: Attitudes and behaviour.
« Reply #354 on: October 27, 2015, 10:04:16 AM »
I feel really bad now. It was only supposed to be a flipping joke.  :(

Udayana

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5478
  • βε ηερε νοω
    • The Byrds - My Back Pages
Re: Attitudes and behaviour.
« Reply #355 on: October 27, 2015, 10:18:44 AM »
Who was to know it was a vital issue in the class war?
Ah, but I was so much older then ... I'm younger than that now

ProfessorDavey

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17606
Re: Attitudes and behaviour.
« Reply #356 on: October 27, 2015, 11:11:50 AM »
I feel really bad now. It was only supposed to be a flipping joke.  :(
I wouldn't feel bad.

I think the origins of the term and its link to the social history of football is quite interesting. That football was once the preserve of the public school, amateur elite seems rather strange to us now as we tend to consider it to be very much the game of 'the people' rather than the establishment.

But of course it was once dominated by the amateur clubs associated with public schools (check out the early winners of the FA cup) and there was a major battle between the gentleman, amateur view and the developing professional game which started off being dominated by the amateur view (professionals banned, or rarely picked for international matches, or even forced to wear different colours in matches), but ultimately was won by the developing professional clubs.

And I strongly suspect that the animosity toward the term soccer by British football fans down the decades actually has its origins in that battle.

ProfessorDavey

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17606
Re: Attitudes and behaviour.
« Reply #357 on: October 27, 2015, 11:37:52 AM »
I think there is an equivalent in rugby.

Remember that 'soccer' for association football has the same public school, Oxbridge slang derivation as 'rugger' for rugby.

And I think that just as 'soccer' probably was synonymous with the amateur, gentleman's game during the battle between amateur and profession, the same is true for 'rugger' and the amateur version. So in the case of rugby there was a complete split between the amateur rugby union and the professional rugby league. And I believe that 'rugger' remains a term used in conjunction with union (and specifically with a posh public school image of the sport) and shunned by league fans.

Gonnagle

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11106
Re: Attitudes and behaviour.
« Reply #358 on: October 27, 2015, 11:55:06 AM »
Dear Prof,

Quote
Late 19th century: shortening of Assoc. + -er.

Maybe we call it football because the above is bloody stupid.

Gonnagle.
http://www.barnardos.org.uk/shop/shop-search.htm

http://www.twam.uk/donate-tools

Go on make a difference, have a rummage in your attic or garage.

ProfessorDavey

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17606
Re: Attitudes and behaviour.
« Reply #359 on: October 27, 2015, 12:27:03 PM »
Dear Prof,

Quote
Late 19th century: shortening of Assoc. + -er.

Maybe we call it football because the above is bloody stupid.

Gonnagle.
Indeed - but that's how the slang went in the 'Oxford - er' approach. See also breakers (for breakfast), shampers (for champagne), divvers (for divinity), bodders (for the Bodlean library), twickers (for Twickenham) etc.

Or even, err footer for football.

I can't remember people using footer when I was a kid - footy, yes, but not footer.

Nearly Sane

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 64357
Re: Attitudes and behaviour.
« Reply #360 on: October 27, 2015, 12:36:17 PM »
Dear Prof,

Quote
Late 19th century: shortening of Assoc. + -er.

Maybe we call it football because the above is bloody stupid.

Gonnagle.
Indeed - but that's how the slang went in the 'Oxford - er' approach. See also breakers (for breakfast), shampers (for champagne), divvers (for divinity), bodders (for the Bodlean library), twickers (for Twickenham) etc.

Or even, err footer for football.

I can't remember people using footer when I was a kid - footy, yes, but not footer.

Footer is a verb in Scotland - there has been a lot of footering about on this this thread

Samuel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1011
  • geology rocks
Re: Attitudes and behaviour.
« Reply #361 on: October 27, 2015, 12:51:10 PM »
... something about putting your foot in it.... nobody thinks its funny... I sheepishly leave the thread feeling mildly embarrassed
A lot of people don't believe that the loch ness monster exists. Now, I don't know anything about zooology, biology, geology, herpetology, evolutionary theory, evolutionary biology, marine biology, cryptozoology, palaeontology or archaeology... but I think... what if a dinosaur got into the lake?

ProfessorDavey

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17606
Re: Attitudes and behaviour.
« Reply #362 on: October 27, 2015, 12:51:17 PM »
Dear Prof,

Quote
Late 19th century: shortening of Assoc. + -er.

Maybe we call it football because the above is bloody stupid.

Gonnagle.
Indeed - but that's how the slang went in the 'Oxford - er' approach. See also breakers (for breakfast), shampers (for champagne), divvers (for divinity), bodders (for the Bodlean library), twickers (for Twickenham) etc.

Or even, err footer for football.

I can't remember people using footer when I was a kid - footy, yes, but not footer.

Footer is a verb in Scotland - there has been a lot of footering about on this this thread
;D

ProfessorDavey

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17606
Re: Attitudes and behaviour.
« Reply #363 on: October 27, 2015, 12:54:02 PM »
... something about putting your foot in it.... nobody thinks its funny... I sheepishly leave the thread feeling mildly embarrassed
Nope - I think it means fiddling or fidgeting with something, usually rather aimlessly or pointlessly. NS will confirm.

Nearly Sane

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 64357
Re: Attitudes and behaviour.
« Reply #364 on: October 27, 2015, 12:56:47 PM »
Indeed it covers slightly more than that, pointless discussions might be described as footering about. It's originally more physical meaning applies to anything now.

ProfessorDavey

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17606
Re: Attitudes and behaviour.
« Reply #365 on: October 27, 2015, 12:59:47 PM »
Indeed it covers slightly more than that, pointless discussions might be described as footering about. It's originally more physical meaning applies to anything now.
Although this thread may be 'footering about' rather more than some others, I think this term applies rather well to the whole MB ;)

Sassy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11080
Re: Attitudes and behaviour.
« Reply #366 on: October 27, 2015, 01:16:26 PM »
Sassy said:
Quote
Soccer is the Americans word for it.

Would you like to rethink that darling?


Quote
The word soccer comes from an abbreviation for Association (from Association Football, the ‘official’ name for the game) plus the addition of the suffix –er. This suffix (originally Rugby School slang, and then adopted by Oxford University), was appended to ‘shortened’ nouns, in order to form jocular words. Rugger is probably the most common example, but other examples included in the Oxford English Dictionary are brekker (for breakfast), bonner (for bonfire), and cupper (a series of intercollegiate matches played in competition for a cup).

From here: http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/words/whats-the-origin-of-the-word-soccer

You'll note that it was British universities that invented the words rugger and soccer. No need to apologise - glad to help you to come to a new understanding of the origin of these words.


We are not talking origins of word. It is a fact that Soccer is the American word for our FOOTBALL the true football. Now I could go through all the additions to the Oxford dictionaries but they WON'T give you origin of word or when first used. It will say when first added, I have to go from my experience and the fact that football was always football here and in America Soccer.

It does not and never can equate to the fact our language has changed both here and in the USA. If you look at grave stones in graveyards you will find our words in old English were spelled differently. But each was acceptable to every area.
I believe you are trying to make something acceptable NOT acceptable in English football. It is football never soccer for the English.

Sorry if it hurts you. But fact is fact not assumption as you reflect on this from your own living and modern writings in books. English is FOOTBALL. IN America it is soccer. Use of both words would be acceptable here and everywhere but it won't change the fact FOOTBALL is English and Soccer American in use for the English football game. Both used world wide but FOOTBALL represents different games in both countries What is foortball in America.
We know we have to work together to abolish war and terrorism to create a compassionate  world in which Justice and peace prevail. Love ;D   Einstein
 "Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind."

Aruntraveller

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11087
Re: Attitudes and behaviour.
« Reply #367 on: October 27, 2015, 01:24:34 PM »
Oh piss off sassy.

I have only ever pointed out that the two words exist to describe the same game. You denied it. You were wrong.

And this site certainly testifies to the fact that the word soccer was widely used by the sport itself in the 60's.

http://www.soccerbilia.co.uk/acatalog/World_Soccer_1960.html
« Last Edit: October 27, 2015, 01:41:59 PM by Trentvoyager »
Before we work on Artificial Intelligence shouldn't we address the problem of natural stupidity.

Nearly Sane

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 64357
Re: Attitudes and behaviour.
« Reply #368 on: October 27, 2015, 01:32:43 PM »
Indeed, the message board is a bit of footering about, but one that has brought me a number of friends, some footering is almost a necessity. No footering and I dread to think what would happen.

ProfessorDavey

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17606
Re: Attitudes and behaviour.
« Reply #369 on: October 27, 2015, 01:57:58 PM »
Indeed, the message board is a bit of footering about, but one that has brought me a number of friends, some footering is almost a necessity. No footering and I dread to think what would happen.
Life gets dull without some footering now and again.

Nearly Sane

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 64357
Re: Attitudes and behaviour.
« Reply #370 on: October 27, 2015, 02:11:48 PM »
Just to note that rather like using ashet for a dish, I suspect footer or fouter is based on the French foutre.

ProfessorDavey

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17606
Re: Attitudes and behaviour.
« Reply #371 on: October 27, 2015, 02:17:23 PM »
Oh piss off sassy.

I have only ever pointed out that the two words exist to describe the same game. You denied it. You were wrong.

And this site certainly testifies to the fact that the word soccer was widely used by the sport itself in the 60's.

http://www.soccerbilia.co.uk/acatalog/World_Soccer_1960.html
I must admit I can't remember soccer being a term actually used by fans in my lifetime, and certainly none of the people of my father's generation (born 1934) I knew who were football fans used it. Nor did my grandparents (born 1902 and 1910 and supporters of Burnley and Man C respectively). I think (as you point out) there was some use of the term in the media - news, magazine's etc but that's a bit different to it being the accepted term or a regularly used term by fans themselves. And you might want to ask who was running those media outlets that took an editorial decision to use soccer rather than football.
« Last Edit: October 27, 2015, 02:28:14 PM by ProfessorDavey »

Owlswing

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6945
Re: Attitudes and behaviour.
« Reply #372 on: October 27, 2015, 02:17:45 PM »
Dear Prof,

Quote
Late 19th century: shortening of Assoc. + -er.

Maybe we call it football because the above is bloody stupid.

Gonnagle.
Indeed - but that's how the slang went in the 'Oxford - er' approach. See also breakers (for breakfast), shampers (for champagne), divvers (for divinity), bodders (for the Bodlean library), twickers (for Twickenham) etc.

Or even, err footer for football.

I can't remember people using footer when I was a kid - footy, yes, but not footer.

Oh dear - a Professor who can't spell - breakers (for breakfast) should read "brekkers", shampers (for champagne) should read "champers" and "twickers" is capitalised. 
The Holy Bible, probably the most diabolical work of fiction ever to be visited upon mankind.

An it harm none, do what you will; an it harm some, do what you must!

ProfessorDavey

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17606
Re: Attitudes and behaviour.
« Reply #373 on: October 27, 2015, 02:26:21 PM »
Dear Prof,

Quote
Late 19th century: shortening of Assoc. + -er.

Maybe we call it football because the above is bloody stupid.

Gonnagle.
Indeed - but that's how the slang went in the 'Oxford - er' approach. See also breakers (for breakfast), shampers (for champagne), divvers (for divinity), bodders (for the Bodlean library), twickers (for Twickenham) etc.

Or even, err footer for football.

I can't remember people using footer when I was a kid - footy, yes, but not footer.

Oh dear - a Professor who can't spell - breakers (for breakfast) should read "brekkers", shampers (for champagne) should read "champers" and "twickers" is capitalised.
Sack me then - oh I forgot I'm not a professor of spelling.

Actually you are right on brekkers (and this was an autocorrect anomaly), and also, sure Twickers not twickers - but not shampers which (according to wikipedia) is a accepted Oxford 'er' for champagne, although champers is also an alternative spelling.

Aruntraveller

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11087
Re: Attitudes and behaviour.
« Reply #374 on: October 27, 2015, 02:29:39 PM »
Oh piss off sassy.

I have only ever pointed out that the two words exist to describe the same game. You denied it. You were wrong.

And this site certainly testifies to the fact that the word soccer was widely used by the sport itself in the 60's.

http://www.soccerbilia.co.uk/acatalog/World_Soccer_1960.html
I must admit I can't remember soccer being a term actually used by fans in my lifetime, and certainly none of the people of my father's generation (born 1934) I knew who were football fans used it. Nor did my grandparents (born 1902 and 1910 and supporters of Burnley and Man C respectively). I think (as you point out) there was some use of the term in the media - news, magazine's etc but that's a bit different to it being the accepted term or a regularly used term by fans themselves. And you might want to ask who was running those media outlets that took an editorial decision to use soccer rather than football.

I'm not making the argument that it is used by fans - I never have used it - but was always aware that it was an alternative name for football which is what I have tried (in vain) to explain to Sassy.
Before we work on Artificial Intelligence shouldn't we address the problem of natural stupidity.