Fans have always been a massive part of football.
Whether it is turning up every week to watch their beloved team play, or funding the club by buying memberships, they always seem to be there.
But supporters know a lot more about the game than people might think. If a crowd of people yell shoot, it probably is a good idea to shoot, because – in that split second that the player’s got the ball on the edge of the box – he can’t look around at every possible angle.
However, the fans, whether they’re sitting behind or around the goal, all can look different ways. This means that if they all yell for the player to shoot, it shows that they have confidence in the player to win something good out of it, whether it’s a corner or a goal.
And fans will always be there. Managers and players may come and go, but a fan will almost always know more about the club due to them being there through thick and thin.
But why don’t football clubs listen to their fans more? Is it out of pride, showing how they are paid to do their job, therefore they are smarter and know more?
How much money could clubs save if, instead of hiring managers they had scouts, fitness coaches and all the normal behind-the-scenes people, but instead of reporting to the manager, they were reporting to the fans? Fans would probably even pay to make those decisions to feel as if they were a part of the club.
But what would it look like?
(AAP Image/Paul Miller)
Well, fans can’t make all of the decisions. The financial ones would still have to stay with the club.
Say the club needs a new winger. The club and scouts would do research, finding which ones are the best and which ones are affordable, like usual. Then the scouts would research the shortlist and put together the videos for the fans to watch.
The fans would then watch the videos and vote which ones they think would best suit the club. Then the votes would be counted and the order of the winger the club was going for would be prioritised.
They would try and get the first one, but if his wage demand was higher than what was first thought, then they would re-evaluate, using the fans.
I am a firm believer that a die-hard football fan isn’t just some crazy person who has a weird obsession with a club. To be a die-hard, it is more than saving up money each week to go to the games and to travel to away games – you have to have a love for the football club.
This would mean that, usually, a die-hard fan would still love the club even if they are losing consistently, and would want to do something to help the club, out of the team’s best interest.
So if fans were to make decisions, they would do it purely for the club, whereas a manager does it very passively as they are usually scared of losing their job.
If they are down 2-0 at half time and there is a young striker on the bench with nothing to lose, then they will most likely wait until the last five minutes before putting them on. This is because that way they can defend themselves by saying, “Well, I did put him on” while not taking the risk of looking like a complete idiot as the striker might not have a good game.
Fans would risk that, as they will always be a fan of that club and they are usually the people that a manager or head coach is most scared of.
But would putting fans in charge of their football team work?
Pedro The Fisherman
Roar Rookie
They have to become Members of Central Coast where all of the decisions turn sour!
AR
Guest
Fans already run clubs in some leagues...to a point. They’re called member-owned clubs, as opposed to privately-owned franchises. They are usually the best way to secure a club’s future whilst giving the members a true sense of ownership and community. (But fans shouldn’t be involved in the football department.) The members vote in a board. The board runs the club, including appointing the club employees (CEO, Coach, etc). The club constitution determines the powers the members have - eg deciding club colours, board members, home stadium issues etc.
Buddy
Roar Rookie
I have attended professional matches as an adult from the 1970’s to current and never cease to be amazed at many fans lack of knowledge and understanding of the game, and especially the LOTG. I am not talking about interpretation here but the actual laws. There again plenty of players, ex players and commentators or pundits often show their ignorance in that area. I’d rather not dip my toe in the water on this one thanks. I’ll have to trust the coach. My problem is that I am often highly critical of the boards that hire the coach in the first place. I swear there are many that don’t understand the first thing about recruitment and finding the right person for the job.
Ronaldo McDonaldo
Guest
So, if the coach or scout at a club makes a decision and it backfires, as paid employees of that club they must take responsibility and possibly be relieved of their position. If fans are allowed to make some of those decisions, what would the repercussions be if those decisions turn sour ?
Redondo
Roar Rookie
Maybe not...as someone once said: “The best argument against Democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.”
Waz
Roar Rookie
Fans can’t possibly see all the angles, it’s not like they’re the Borg and acting as a collective mind (or is that the Daleks??). Nor can they know team instructions. More often that not a shoooooooot is ignored and it’s a rare occasion when it does go in even when not ignored - and a missed shot is also called a turnover and 10 seconds later you can be defending and even conceding down the other end lol. I’m all for greater fan engagement and even ownership, but running the team and tactics is down to the coach. Not fans.
Jack George
Roar Guru
It may not go in, but it will get the crowd cheering. The fans energy energises players, and although it may not be a good idea the crowd wants to see spectacular and sometimes ridiculous shots, and spectacular and ridiculous shot can sometimes end up as spectacular and ridiculous goals. I can think of countless times where the fans have yelled shoot and the player has obeyed. Many of those occasions have led to goals.
Nemesis
Guest
What A-League clubs need to do is leverage the skills, or just leverage the passion to be involved, that will be found across their fan base. Be it consultants, lawyers, tradesmen, statisticians, canteen workers, scouts, physios, doctors, etc. etc. If 2 people are qualified for a job, give me the person who is willing to put in the extra effort because they have a commitment to help the organisation succeed. I reckon if ALeague clubs gave a free Season Ticket to 50 people who are competent in analysing football skills & assign them to watch one team in the NPL 1 & 2 every week. Costs $15k which is far less than it would cost to hire even 1 professional scout.
Jack George
Roar Guru
Like I mentioned, Manager's and head coaches often make more passive subs to avoid critisism from the fans. If the fans were in charge of the subs, they would have nothing to be afraid of and would make bold moves.
Fadida
Roar Rookie
Being a passionate fan and knowledgeable about football aren't the same. Sit in a stand surrounded by fans of any team and you'll soon find out why it's a terrible idea.
c
Roar Rookie
large committees do not make efficient decision makers keep writing young man :happy:
josh
Guest
I approve of the photos used in this article.
Waz
Roar Rookie
“If a crowd of people yell shoot, it probably is a good idea” ... ha, ha. Nothing could be further from the truth lol.
Luke
Guest
Have a look at German football. All the clubs are “owned” by the fans. Its a requirement that a bloc of members are the majority shareholders. Its actually quite a big issue in the Bundesliga with RB Leipzig, Red Bull and the ownership of the club.
Jordan Klingsporn
Roar Guru
Interesting article. There are some clubs whose financial decisions go to the fans. AFC Wimbledon is one of them. But I'd love to see fans take care of the subs at HT. E.G. It's currently HT in the Spurs/Newcastle game' AND I WANT ERIKSEN AND VERTONGHEN BROUGHT ON!