Acknowledgements

I would like to give special thanks to Tessa Borg for her understanding and patience as an

outstanding student support member of staff over the past 6 years. Thank you for encouraging

me to persist with my studies, despite the extenuating circumstances that made things

extremely difficult for me to focus on the degree when I nearly gave up. I would also like to

thank the participants of the focus group, which I think helped me to make this a much more

comprehensive study.

Abstract

1
The fundamental objective of the study was to build on the lack on research into the positive

side to football, in an attempt to change people’s preconceived notions about its supporters and

the culture of fandom. The investigative study endeavoured to probe the social tendencies of

consumers, specifically the supporters of Manchester City Football Club (MCFC). The

researcher discusses existing literature in the subject area of consumer behaviour in an attempt

to understand how and why football supporters interact & identify with one another socially. The

study used major theories cited by Richardson concerning fan identification, in addition to

research conducted by Barber (2002), which focuses on the history of football fandom to date.

The background to the study was based on the ‘Football Passions’ report (2008), which

influenced the methodology design. The methodology employed a questionnaire-based survey

in conjunction with a focus group of 4 MCFC fans. The most significant discoveries revealed

that a majority of fans derive a high level of enjoyment from their fandom and displayed a great

capacity for loyalty to the team. Conclusively, it was found that MCFC supporters enjoyed the

atmosphere of a match as much as winning. They valued the sense of community with the fans

above everything else.

Contents

2
Pg 4-7: List of Figures, tables & graphical representations of results.

Pg 8-9: Introduction

Pg 10-20: Literature Review

Pg 21-25: Methodology

Pg 26-39: Results & Discussion

Pg 40-42: Conclusions & Recommendations

Pg 43-44: Bibliography

Pg 45-55: Appendix

3
4
5
6
7
 Introduction

This investigative study into football fandom at MCFC holds a high personal interest to the

researcher, who has been a lifelong supporter of the club. The researcher wanted to know how

MCFC supporters perceived each other and what their attitudes were towards the club itself.

The rationale for this study came from the only other of its kind to date; the ‘Football Passions’

report produced by the Social Issues Research Centre (SIRC, 2008). This study has adapted

the theoretical framework of the ‘Football Passions’ report by modifying its methodology for a

regional application with MCFC.

The objectives of the study were to collect, analyse and interpret data on the attitudes, thoughts

and feelings of MCFC supporters. The researcher utilised a qualitative approach to obtain

results. The aim was to combine existing theories on football fandom to reveal unique

characteristics of MCFC fans and how this compared, contributed and contradicted with

previous research. The subject area was consumer behaviour, specifically focusing on social

tendencies of the subjects. The study was intended to impact on the sport & leisure industry,

encompassing other sports with a popular fandom culture.

The report was structured to initially analyse the primary research collected, in order to form an

appropriate methodology for obtaining data. This was then analysed and interpreted so that

conclusions and recommendations for further research could be made. The literature review

was intended to set the foundations of the project by looking at every aspect of being a football

supporter. Football fandom incorporates factors such as emotional attachment and loyalty of

fans, including how they interact as well as the effects that commerce and media have had

upon them. The researcher was mindful to only collate material which held a valid application to

the study in providing background information or facilitating the formation of an appropriate

methodology.

8
The methodology justifies why a qualitative approach was preferable to a quantitative advance

to obtain useful results from the sample and discusses the limitations, reliability, validity and

constraints of the research. This section also explains how the researcher attempted to avoid

bias within the desired sample. The results and discussion section inter-links the results to

reveal trends amongst different types of fans, and attempts to explain these trends using

theories from previous research. Findings from the respondents of the survey are mostly

supported by the transcript of the focus group, which helped to elaborate on the underlying

reasons behind responses.

The conclusion cites the most useful information that the findings of the study yielded, such as

the explanations for majority and minority response amongst the participants and the major

differences between a high identifier (a fan that derives high enjoyment from their fandom) and

a low identifier (a fan that displays disloyal tendencies to the team). The researcher describes

the main problems encountered throughout writing the project, including suggestions on

countering the limitations of the study if further research was continued.

Literature Review

9
Researchers such as Richardson, Jones and Madrigal have long studied consumer behaviour

within sport. According to Funk (2009) consumer behaviour in sports can represent spending

patterns, brand loyalty, social tendencies and other factors including changing economic and

environmental circumstances. This investigative study shall endeavour to probe the social

tendencies of consumers; specifically the supporters of MCFC. The researcher will discuss

existing literature in this field in an attempt to understand how and why football supporters

interact with one another socially, before using the resulting application with the fans of MCFC.

The investigator believes that the sport warrants more research into the consumers or the

phenomenon of football fandom as it is widely known, according to The Social Research Centre

(SIRC 2008). SIRC states that most European media coverage dating back to the late 1960s

was fixed on the negative side to football, being hooliganism which implied violence. This study

will attempt to uncover the positive side to the beautiful game and its fanatical supporters,

because the everyday exchanges of enthusiastic football followers are too often disregarded

throughout research within this field.

Existing literature into the positive side of football is sometimes conveyed using statistical

analysis to show how committed football fans are to the sport in terms of match viewing and

attendance figures. For example, research conducted by Mintel (2008) has revealed that

football in the UK has a huge following at a professional level. The ‘Football Business’ report by

Mintel (2008) describes an ‘avid fan’ as someone who watches football every week on TV or in

person. The ‘casual fan’ is described as somebody who is interested in football but does not

watch games every week. The findings of this research deduced that there are as many avid

fans as there are casual fans but they differ considerably in character. The study was based on

2,000 respondents that participated online. The researcher of this study into football fandom

aims to focus on how attitudes and perceptions differ amongst these different types of fans at

MCFC.

10
The conclusion of the Mintel research ultimately states that football is the most popular sport in

the UK:

“Football’s status as the national game is confirmed by the majority of UK adults who

have some degree of interest in the sport”.

(Mintel 2008: Football Business (The), section 1.2)

The report cites that football has undergone resurgence in popularity post-Hillsborough and also

attributes the sport’s growing status to the inception of the premier league. MCFC has seen a

massive increase in media interest and international recognition recently, following the arrival of

the new Abu Dhabi owners. There have been national tabloid newspapers such as the Daily

Mail writing about the club’s new found spending power with numerous articles such as

‘Extreme Measures’ (01/05/09) and ‘It’s almost like watching brazil’ (03/05/09) according to the

official MCFC website (‘what the papers say’). This makes the study into fandom at the club a

contemporary subject matter to investigate. The research can probe whether or not there is a

renewed optimism amongst the fans because they are now part of the richest football club in the

world. The telegraph newspaper (2008) wrote an article about how the credit crunch is affecting

the premier league and it described Manchester City as financially stable:

“Bought out with oil billions from Abu Dhabi, City are probably as safe as it is possible to

be. The oil price is tumbling but such is the fortune of their backers, those losses amount

to loose change.”

(Telegraph online, 2008)

This study cannot make assumptions on how the club’s fans are feeling based purely on the

wealth of MCFC or the recently positive media attention, it must acknowledge the theories on

football fandom before an appropriate methodology can be formed.

Supporters: Active vs. Passive

11
This sub-chapter shall explore several studies and theories proposed on football fandom; which

appear to consistently differentiate between the passive and the active fan / supporter. SIRC

(2008) supports the generic consensus; being that the active fan regularly attends matches and

the passive fan will follow his or her team from the comfort of their own home, thus referred to

as the ‘armchair fan’. According to Richardson, (2004, pg 89) Madrigal has a theory which

attempted to distinguish between football fans in terms of the underlying reasons behind their

actions. He proposed two forms of behaviour exhibited by fans watching their club at a match:

• BIRGing: basking in success.

• CORFing: dissociation following failure.

This theory categorised fans into two sub-groups: high identifiers and low identifiers. High

identifiers have fewer tendencies to ‘CORF’ and were described as being more loyal and

emotional. These fans have a greater inclination for self-serving bias. They would provide lots of

vocal support and explain failure through uncontrollable external factors, such as cheating and

poor refereeing. High identifiers have greater expectations than low identifiers (more ‘wishful

thinking’). The researcher of this study intends to survey Manchester City fans on this theory to

find out if they knowingly distinguish between people that ‘CORF’ or ‘BIRG’. This could affect

the group dynamics of supporters in terms of the atmosphere created at matches. The vast

majority of MCFC fans continue to support their team without question, even when the costs

(losing) often outweigh the rewards (winning). This suggests that they are highly socially

committed to their role as fans. These instances can be linked to Madrigal’s research where a

loyal supporter would never dissociate (CORF) themselves from the team due to failure.

Richardson (2004) states that Belk says high identifiers derive more enjoyment from their

fandom than low identifiers, as the team is perceived as part of the extended self. This is

thought to make CORFing more difficult, it may even not be an option as it could be perceived

by other fans as disloyal. Richardson advocates that Belk’s research on loyalty has focused on

fan identification with the team. This has lacked explanations into how one fan identifies with

12
another. Richardson (2004) also speculates that the advantages of close identification with the

'in-group' of associate fans of their beloved team entail higher self-esteem, less depression and

superior levels of life satisfaction. It is possible that the positives of group or fan community

membership far outweigh the negatives of team failure. Fundamentally, once we are aware of

the reality of group membership, it advocates that factors such as compliance with group norms

out of a need or longing for ongoing acceptance and group membership, could well be

important determinants of fan behaviour. This theory as proposed by Belk and cited by

Richardson (2004) can be applied to the study at MCFC with regards to the community aspect

at the club. The researcher wishes to look at how strongly fans feel about other fans as a whole

community of individuals identifying with each other and if this could be as important to them as

the result of any given match.

Madrigal’s research as referred to by Richardson can be linked to a report produced by the

Social Issues Research Centre (SIRC, 2008). This piece of research, entitled as the ‘Football

Passions’ report, was an extensive sociological study carried out across 18 countries in Europe.

The objectives of the study were to liberate the emotions of being a football fan and to measure

up to the feelings, expressions and behaviour of fans associated with support of their football

teams. The researcher can utilise the results of this report by adapting its framework from an

international scale to a regional scale at MCFC. The report suggested characteristics which

compose different types of fans, which is something that warrants research at MCFC in order to

generate a comprehensive study. This relates back to the overview of a real fan / armchair fan

and BIRGing / CORFing. A fan was defined by SIRC (2008) as not just a spectator but a

participant. Match attendance is seen as credible but it comes with an obligation to engage

emotionally in order to positively impact on the team’s performance. This definition of a ‘true fan’

supports Madrigal’s theory on BIRGing as cited by Richardson (2004), in the sense of providing

vocal support and commonly being more emotional and loyal to the team.

Moreover, the Football Passions report (2008) highlighted that across many countries the fan

would refer to themselves as the ‘twelfth man’. They would provide their club with support from

the stands by means of songs, chants and huge banners. The larger multi-square fabric

13
banners would require cooperation, planning and precision amongst the supporters. This

creates prevailing bonds and friendships which might not otherwise exist in the absence of

football. These fans really do believe that their presence will help their team to win, they are not

just there to observe. Away from the stadiums it was found that these same followers found the

internet to be a useful tool in checking fixtures, results, injuries and the sales and purchases of

players. A minority of dedicated individuals would even trawl the internet for up to 6 hours a day.

In contrast, the fans with a tendency to CORF as discussed by Richardson (2004) were referred

to in the Football Passions report as ‘fair-weather supporters’. These stereotypes were

described by the participants of the study as not constituting what it is to be a ‘real’ fan. They

lack an in-depth knowledge of their team’s statistics and history. Regular match-goers are

entitled to a legitimate opinion, whereas the opinions of the ‘fair-weather’ or ‘armchair’ fan are

mostly ignored. SIRC (2008, p14) obtained this example of how people portray an ‘armchair

fan’:

“The bloke in the pub who never goes who starts telling you how [Coventry] City should

be playing…It's like people who [talk politics but] don't vote.”

This quote appears to summarise how the opinion of someone who does not regularly attend

matches is largely discredited and ignored by a season ticket holder for example. The

researcher of this study shall be looking into how important it is to MCFC fans to watch a match

in person and how vital the atmosphere is to them. This may help to establish the difference

between a participant and an observer.

Gender

Football has long since been a male-dominated sport across the globe and has evolved from its

violent past as more rules and regulations have been implemented by governing bodies of the

sport. For example, following the Hillsborough Disaster and subsequently Lord Justice Taylor’s

14
report in 1989, all standing terraces in England were phased out according to Barber (2002).

Williams (2006) refers to how gender dynamics play a role in the consumption around global

sport today. Williams observes that throughout major football championships, mainstream

department stores successfully promote young women’s clothes which mimic national football

uniforms. He proceeds to note that recently David Beckham appeared as the first ever male to

grace the front cover of popular women’s magazine Marie Claire (June issue, 2002).

Conclusively, Williams advocates that the wider shift of these actions of the “ubiquitous and

androgynous” England football captain and global idol opened up genuine possibilities of a new

realisation of national community, and also a new sporting identity for English Football.

The potential reasons for the low level of women watching and attending football matches have

been unearthed by Jones (2008) in an investigative study carried out in England. The

researcher interviewed 38 female fans at English men’s football matches and analysed their

responses to offensive or insulting behaviour by male fans. It could be argued that the data was

collected from a small sample, and is therefore unrepresentative; however it does provide an

insight into women’s perceptions of men’s football. The findings illustrated that women

employed three strategies to respond to sexism and homophobia. First, they articulated their

disgust at abuse, occasionally redefining fandom to exclude abusers. Secondly, they

downplayed sexism. The final strategy was to embrace gender stereotypes, arguing that

femininity was not consistent with “authentic” fandom and that abuse was a deep-seated part of

football. In conclusion, Jones suggests that probing non-traditional male fans using a similar

framework might generate useful results. The Football Passions report (2008) reflects Jones’

findings in the respect of football’s male dominance. The report considers Sweden to have the

best women’s football team in the world, although the supporter culture of women for women is

not very well developed. Once again, it transpires that match attendance for women’s football

leagues is significantly less than that of the professional male leagues.

In the UK, Sport England (2006) has recognised the importance of social inclusion within

football from grass root to elite level and has launched an initiative called the ‘FitC’ scheme.

Brown et al. (2006) understands that many football clubs and their FitC schemes have

15
undertaken a great deal of facilitating access work over the past 15-20 years with groups

including girls and women. The Women’s Sport and Fitness Foundation (no date) is working

alongside Sport England to increase the level of sports participation for women. The ‘It’s Time’

report aims to highlight the critically low levels of women’s participation in sport and exercise. It

cites football as being the most popular national team sport (and also fastest growing), yet it is

only played by 1% of women, making it the 12th most popular activity equal with Pilates

according to Sport England’s ‘Game Plan’ initiative (2002). Women’s low participation rates in

football could be attributed to the lack of female football fandom.

Costs vs. Rewards of Football Fandom

Research conducted by Jones (2000) acknowledges a theory proposed by Stebbins into the

‘profit hypothesis’. In summary, the theory dictates that the perceived benefits of taking part in

an activity exceed the perceived costs. This can be used to explain a continued engagement in

a serious leisure activity. The rewards consist of self-actualisation or self-gratification, such as

the elation experienced by a fan when their team wins a match. The costs could be

embarrassment or anxiety triggered by conceding goals and ultimately losing a match. The

16
study at MCFC will investigate to what extent the costs of fandom can potentially outweigh the

benefits and how supporters feel about this. In terms of monetary costs incurred by Football

Fandom aside from the purchase of ticket sales and club merchandise, the Football Supporters

Association (FSA) was born in the late 1980s. In accordance with Barber (2002) various FSA’s

had a significant impact on clubs across the whole country. The notion of the FSA was formed

following the 1985 Heysel disaster according to Barber. The author advocates that the FSA was

created so that fans could organise themselves in a way in which their voices would be heard

and respected.

One such Liverpool fan called Rogan Taylor described their impact:

“The organisation was sucked into a football vacuum where real supporter

representation was virtually unknown. It was gratefully discovered by a media that had

never had a fans' outfit it could rely on to deliver something that sounded like an

authentic voice of the supporters.”

(Barber 2002, section 3.1):

The FSA subsequently reaped the ‘rewards’ of their efforts, most notably in enabling refunds to

be made available following abandoned football matches:

• 70% of FA Cup Final tickets to be given to supporters of the two participating clubs.

• 10% of available space at Premiership grounds to be allocated to away supporters.

• Campaigning for safe standing areas to be retained at football grounds (implemented in

bottom two divisions of the Football League)

• The establishment and maintenance of Fan Embassies at major international

tournaments (Italia '90 and Sweden '92).

17
 (Barber 2002, section 4.1)

It is largely debatable today whether or not fans have any real say in the decisions influencing

their club, especially in the Premier League. The negative influences of fandom within the

Premiership would appear to be attributed to the arising economics. Sport England (no date)

cited that monies generated through TV coverage from Sky and the BBC were worth £600m

from 1997-2002. Supporters had little say in these contracts, yet it affected them directly.

The BBC won a landmark Football League contract in 2007 in a joint bid with Sky. They can

now show Football League and Carling Cup matches from 2009-2012 worth £88m per season

according to the BBC website (2007). According to Barber (2002), as more money is pumped

into football and competition increases amongst the major TV networks to secure the rights to

matches, more fans have become shareholders of large clubs yet most lack voting rights.

Barber also states that local clubs are now in international markets and outside of local

influence. The author goes on to describe the 1990s as the decade of ‘Fan Power’.

At Manchester City, during the 1993-94 seasons, the fans objected robustly to the club’s

chairman Peter Swales. This campaign eventually led to former player Francis Lee taking over

the club. Swales later admitted that the roots of the Maine Road 'fan power' movement ran

deeper than this single initiative:

“I always think that when Howard Kendall left Manchester City the supporters appointed

Peter Reid... the supporters had decided that he was the man and they weren't going to

accept anybody else... From then on they were always going to have a say in any major

decision, whether that was a player coming in or a player going out, a manager going

out or a manager coming in, a chairman going out or a chairman coming in.”

18
 (Barber 2002, 4.3):

The MCFC study will explore how much of an impact fans are making today with decision

making at the club as opposed to 15 years ago when the above quote was indicative of the

times. The researcher shall endeavour to find out how things might have changed in the last

decade in terms of what fans today are able to influence at the club. Conn (2009) has offered

some insight into the changes which the club has recently undergone. Khaldoon Al Mubarak,

Sheikh Mansour's emissary has insisted that they are not about to replace MCFC Manager

Mark Hughes. They have backed Hughes to spend £135m on players, describing him as "the

brightest young manager in the Premier League". Conn discusses the unwavering loyalty of the

Abu Dhabi owners as they recognise the experience and solid virtues of Hughes. The writer

speculates that the new owners of the club and the strategic advisor Simon Pearce are ‘torn’

about what to do with Hughes and with the club itself. This is between:

“...their commitment to loyalty and to long-term planning and the instinct to see their

money bear instant results”. The limitless cash of the Sheikh makes it an exciting time to

be a Manchester City supporter, and there is a great deal of talk about the summer

signings to take place with the intention of securing more big names for the team.”

This study investigating fandom at MCFC is concerned with how hopeful supporters are about

the club’s future. Considering the club’s new found fame and fortune, coupled with Mark

Hughes bringing a fresh face with innovative ideas and promises to sign world-class players,

the principal investigator predicts a majority of optimistic fans. Not long after Hughes became

the new Manager for MCFC, he made the following statement:

(MCFC official programme 2008, pg5)

“It has been quite a fortnight for Manchester City, hasn’t it? The news of an imminent

club takeover followed by the breaking of the British transfer record all in one day

ensured that the football spotlight was well and truly on the blue half of Manchester on

1st September 2008!”

19
 Methodology

The descriptive nature of the research carried out so far within the leisure and tourism industry

is referred to by Veal (2006) as explanatory. This is because it endeavours to explain trends

observed when mapping patterns of behaviour in areas or activities. The author adds that

explanatory research can assist in the process of identifying causality, providing that the

investigator is thorough in the collection, analysis & interpretation of data. The issue of causality

can determine why for example there has been a rise in A and a decrease in B; although to

establish that a rise in A has been directly caused by a decline in B is a much more challenging

task.

The principal investigator decided that an entirely qualitative approach was appropriate for this

study in order to obtain useful data from participants. The aim of the study was to analyse and

interpret the attitudes, behaviours, thoughts and feelings of MCFC supporters. Firstly, a multiple

choice questionnaire-based survey was utilised to conduct the research which employed a

respondent-completion format for participants. The participants read the questions and wrote

their answers down on paper. Veal (2006) advocates that a qualitative research project can

20
collect reasonably little information on, for example 200 people because it is the way in which

the data is analysed that can yield comprehensive results. Veal states that research about

interactions between members of a group including the attitudes and beliefs of those individuals

warrants a qualitative approach. In contrast, a quantitative project is more concerned with

acquiring a limited amount of information from a large number of people. For these reasons, the

researcher of this study justified the former advance.

A desired sample size of 200 participants was intended to complete the questionnaire-based

survey. The research design entailed collecting data via a printed copy in addition to an

electronic version posted online. The questionnaire design was split into three categories:

• Affiliation with the club

• During the match and preparation

• Attitudes towards the club

Splitting the questions amongst these sub-headings had two main advantages. The structure of

the survey was easier for respondents to understand and it also facilitated the analysis of data

for the researcher.

The Marketing Manager of MCFC (Ian Howard) granted permission for the investigator to select

participants at random within the grounds of the club. The specific location of where the surveys

were carried out was at the City Store, which is an official retail outlet representing the club to

sell its merchandise. This was preferable in order to obtain a more diverse sample from mixed

age groups and both sexes. The research was conducted on both match & non-match days

between 12 and 2pm. As per Ian Howard, the investigator was required to wear clothing that

displayed the University logo.

21
The study relied more heavily on the online survey (identical to the hard copy) and adapted the

framework used in the Football Passions report (2008) produced by the Social Issues Research

Centre. Questions 3, 4, 5, 7, 11 & 14 were borrowed from the SIRC report, albeit modified

slightly to make them more relevant to MCFC. The online survey was posted on three popular

websites that act as unofficial forums for users to discuss any topic relating to the club. The

selected websites were as follows:

➢ http://bluemoon-mcfc.co.uk

➢ http://www.bluewatchmcfc.co.uk

➢ http://www.mancityforum.com

The survey was modified so that users could reply to the online post by copying + pasting its

content, then deleting the choices to leave the desired response for each question. One of the

reasons for submitting it online was down to the success and enthusiasm of respondents from

the Football Passions report (2008) and also the Mintel report (Football Business, 2008).

Secondly, after reviewing the literature relevant to this study it was apparent that the internet

was widely used by football fans as a convenient resource for information on players, transfers

and issues affecting their teams. Additionally, by putting the survey online it helped to reduce

bias. Veal (2006, pg 284) states that:

“The researcher seeks to achieve representativeness and to minimise bias by adopting

the principles of random sampling”.

This statement suggests that ‘random sampling’ is not methodical, which is certainly not the

case. It simply means that all members of the given population have an equal chance of being

included in the sample. This can be related to the online version of the MCFC survey as the

total number of members on a supporter forum makes up the population. Moreover, according

to the blue moon website there are 12864 members in total. The respondents were selected at

random in the sense that they were logged on to the website at the time of the questionnaire

being a ‘hot topic’ (most viewed), and a percentage of users who viewed the post decided to

respond. Every time a user responded to the online post, the questionnaire would rise to the top

22
of the discussion forum, thus causing more users to see it as they logged on and generating

additional respondents.

The dedicated users of the online forums made for an ideal target audience. Furthermore, for

the online participants the absence of the researcher allowed them to complete the survey in

their own time. Gratton et al. (2004) suggests that a postal questionnaire (or online in this case)

can increase the chance of obtaining genuine responses to questions of a sensitive nature, as a

respondent is not inhibited by the presence of a researcher. Gratton et al. also highlight the

potential problems arising from this form of questionnaire. If a researcher is not present there

will be no chance for the respondent to seek clarification, which is why questions have to be

clear enough for each participant to understand. This is why the investigator used simple

statements for respondents to agree or disagree with.

According to Gratton et al. (2004), another problem with using postal / online questionnaires is

that there is “no opportunity to probe”, meaning that a respondent cannot elaborate on their

answers or justify their selections. In an attempt to uncover the underlying reasons behind the

selections made by respondents the researcher held a focus group with four fans. There were

eight of the multiple choice questions chosen for discussion so that the group could expand on

their answers and provide further insight towards their perceptions of the club, its fans and its

future. The definition of validity, as per Veal (2006) is:

“The extent to which the data collected truly reflects the phenomenon being studied”.

The researcher intended the focus group to further substantiate findings from the survey to

make for a much more comprehensive analysis. Veal also advocates that the idea of

interviewing a group of people together as opposed to individually is becoming popular amongst

researchers. According to Veal (2006) the researcher becomes the facilitator of a discussion

instead of the interviewer as such. This format encourages the participants to interact with other

members of the focus group, as well as with the researcher.

The focus group was conducted at the researcher’s main residence and lasted for

approximately 54 minutes. The researcher picked out questions which were not self-explanatory

23
and consisted of a more open-ended nature. From the ‘affiliation with club’ section, questions 3

& 4 were chosen because the researcher expected a varied response from fans. This was

depending on how socially committed they were to their role and whether it was family or other

peers such as friends that led to them supporting MCFC. Only question 7 was chosen from

section 2 ‘experiences before and during a match’ as the researcher was particularly interested

in how fans would describe the atmosphere in the grounds when around other fans, in relation

to watching the match itself. The final section regarding the ‘attitudes’ of fans towards MCFC

was a major component of the study and therefore all 4 questions were brought into discussion

at the focus group.

The session was structured so that each participant would answer the question before the

researcher shifted to the next. In this way the group was in sync, which opened up to the

possibility of debates and individuals making more in-depth contributions. All dialogue was

recorded using a laptop and Dictaphone as a double precautionary measure in case one failed.

The session was recorded so that the researcher could easily type up transcripts for analysis

afterwards. Whilst transcribing the recording into a word processed format, the laptop recording

was found to be of much higher quality in its clarity and volume. Another reason for the laptop

file being preferential over the Dictaphone recording was the ability to pause, rewind and fast-

forward the dialogue with ease. The participants gave their permission to be recorded prior to

the session commencing. In between questions the researcher would only interject if it was felt

to be necessary, for example if the conversation was detracting from the topic or occasionally to

ask a group member to elaborate on a point made. These prompts were infrequent and mostly

occurred when the researcher believed that a relevant secondary issue had been raised, as a

result of the group discussing their answers with each other surrounding a particular question. If

the researcher did ask the group an unplanned question he was careful not to lead them or

express any opinion whatsoever. It was especially pertinent for the host to remain neutral in

order to avoid researcher bias. In conclusion, through the means of collating previous research

and literature on football fandom, obtaining results from the questionnaire-based survey and the

focus group, the researcher created a triangulation which formed the project.

24
 Results & Discussion

Once the researcher had collated all data obtained via the questionnaire-based survey it

became immediately apparent that the sample was made up of predominantly males, which

represented a majority 87 respondents of the entire sample, only 16 were females (103

participants in total). However, the researcher was not especially concerned with this disparity,

as the aims were to investigate the attitudes, beliefs and feelings of MCFC fans in general.

Moreover, as a post-research evaluation the researcher acknowledged that both gender and

age could have been a non-essential variable to analyse. This was due to noting that a similar

methodology used by SIRC (2008) as referred to in the literature review did not record the sex

or age of its participants. It was unfortunate that the desired quota of 200 participants was not

achieved, which could be seen as disadvantageous in terms of the reliability of this study, in

addition to its representativeness of MCFC supporters. The breakdown of where the completed

surveys were obtained is as follows:

• 70 online

• 29 at the MCFC Eastlands stadium

• 4 from the participants of the focus group

The researcher found it difficult to find many willing respondents at the grounds of the club as

many cited a lack of time or interest to partake in the questionnaire, this was despite several

trips on both match and non-match days. In contrast, the online respondents added additional

information which will be referred to whilst interpreting these results. The high response rate

online coupled with the occasional opinion expressed by respondents supports the theory

proposed by Gratton et al. (2004), which advocates that a respondent is uninhibited by the

absence of a researcher and has their own free time in which to respond. For instance, within

25
the section of the survey ‘Your affiliation with MCFC’, 32 online respondents added to their

multiple choice answer to justify it. In response to question 3, many (that agreed with the

statement) wrote something to the effect of “I would dump a girlfriend but never MCFC”,

“Girlfriends come and go – MCFC is for life”. This question had a majority of males that either

agreed or strongly agreed (73%), and an 88% agreement for females, which can be linked to

the positive majority response of Q5 (94% / 93%) as per fig 1.4 & 1.5:

Q5. I feel a stronger sense of loyalty to MCFC than I do for the national side

Fig 1.4 Males

Fig 1.5 Females

One respondent online commented “always club before country”. The positive feedback as

reflected in the graph above and also some of the comments made (online) in relation to Q3
Age of
indicate that MCFC supporters are less inclined to CORF (dissociation through failure) as

discussed by Richardson (2004). The fact that most respondents agreed that their relationship
Age ofsuggests that they are loyal fans who would not
to the club is like having a long-term partner

abandon their team if things were going badly. One participant from the focus group described

how his girlfriend can irritate him and sometimes make him cry just like MCFC can when they

lose consecutive matches, yet he strongly agreed (in Q5) that his allegiance to the club is

greater than it is for the England side. Similarly, another member of the group said that the older

he gets the more involved he has become with the club in the same sense that his relationship

with his wife gets stronger. He also mentioned that “City gets into your blood”, suggesting that it

is a life-long commitment just like marriage.

These statements reveal that they view the team at MCFC as an extended part of themselves,

making it difficult for them to CORF. Richardson (2004) cited Belk’s theory in these

circumstances, whereby if a fan believes that (s) he is part of the team, CORFing may not even

be an option because it might be perceived as disloyal by fellow supporters. Fans with fewer

26
tendencies to CORF are referred to by Richardson (2004) as being both loyal and emotional,

which reflects on the results of this study showing that of the 103 respondents, 51% of males

and 81% of females admitted to having cried when watching MCFC play. In addition, 81 % of

both males and females admitted to hugging or kissing a stranger when MCFC have scored,

which suggests that the fans have a strong emotional attachment to the team.

When the researcher asked the focus group about whether their presence at a match can

directly affect the way it is played, the contributions were in unanimous agreement. An individual

referred to himself as the ‘twelfth man’ at every game, he speculated that when 48,000 fans are

shouting a player’s name it must give them a lift and help them to play better. This contributes to

previous research that was carried out by SIRC (2008) that recorded most of the fans they

surveyed referring to themselves as the ‘twelfth man’, because of the massive support that they

give their team by providing huge banners, songs and chants. Two other participants added that

the club has had the best win-at-home ratio in the premier league, whereas only 2 games have

been won away all season (2008-2009). One person insinuated that as there are only usually

5,000 seats available at an away match (for MCFC fans) the vital crowd support is missing.

The survey results support the opinions of the focus group and the research conducted by

SIRC, as shown by fig 1.8 – 1.9:

Q7. As a fan, I feel that our presence has a direct effect on how the game is played

Fig 1.8

Males

Fig 1.9

Females

27
In contrast to the ‘twelfth man’ citation, figs 1.8 & 1.9 also highlight a small number of fans who

do not believe that their presence at a match makes any difference to how MCFC play. There

were 6% of female fans and 19% of male fans that either strongly disagreed or disagreed with

the statement. It could be argued that this minority of respondents constitutes what it is to be a

‘fair-weather supporter’ as discussed within the Football Passions report (2008). The fair-

weather supporter is described by SIRC as someone who lacks an in-depth knowledge of the

team and does not attend regularly. However, the researcher can only speculate on this point

because the survey did not have any questions relating to the frequency of matches attended

by fans, or their knowledge of the club’s history and statistics. There is only some evidence

within the findings of this study to support this. The minority of respondents also disagreed to

providing vocal support at a game and disagreed that it is equally as important to be around

other fans, as it is to watching the game.

Within ‘Experiences before and during a match’ all 4 members of the focus group strongly

agreed on how important the atmosphere of the grounds is during any given match. One

member talked about the singing amongst the fans and how he “loved the banter” between the

two sets of supporters, adding that he sometimes spends more time singing, laughing and

shouting than he does actually watching the game. Another person pointed out that if, for

example the away supporters were banned from attending a game the atmosphere would suffer

as a result, especially during an end-to-end game (away supporters situated directly next to a

home stand). This person described the presence of the away supporters as “electrifying the

atmosphere” and also referred to the atmosphere as part of the enjoyment of the game. He

called MCFC supporters a “breed of people” who are “real fans” because of all the trials and

tribulations they’ve been through.

One individual called the singing at football matches a competition as to who is the loudest and

ultimately the most supportive of their team. He explained that providing strong vocal support

for the team gains the respect of away fans which boosts his self-esteem. It is clear from these

28
comments just how valuable the atmosphere is to fans and how much they enjoy revelling in it.

Therefore these members of the focus group can be described as high identifiers, because as

stated by Richardson (2004) a high identifier derives more enjoyment from their fandom than a

low identifier, plus they are more emotionally involved with their team and are loyal. This also

supports the definition of a ‘true fan’ as cited by the Football Passions report (2008), described

as someone who is not just a spectator but a participant who wants to positively impact on their

team’s performance.

Figs 2.6 – 2.7 illustrate an overwhelming positive response from the survey’s respondents

answering Q11: Being around other fans in the atmosphere of the grounds is as important

as watching the game itself

Fig 2.6 Males

Fig 2.7

Females

The sample could be described as biased due to the 18-24 year olds making up 46% of the total

sample, yet such is the risk of random sampling. However, the researcher did not target this age

group over any other and as per Veal (2006) using a random sampling technique gives all

members of a given population an equal chance of being included in the sample. These

graphical representations echo the answers of the focus group, with all 18-24 year old

respondents of males and females answering agree or strongly agree. The only exception was

a 6% anomaly (3 male respondents) who disagreed. One explanation for this anomaly can be

29
examined by a contribution from the focus group, which debated why some people might

disagree with question 11. The group implied that a marginal number of MCFC fans are scared

of success because they literally don’t know what it feels like. A participant who joined in with

this discussion talked about an older fan that stands behind him every home game shouting

constant abuse at the players even when they are performing well and MCFC are winning. He

said that this man criticises the team at the first sign of weakness and only praises them when

MCFC score. This type of fan fits the profile of a low identifier, as cited by Richardson (2004).

This is someone who does not derive much enjoyment from their fandom and will immediately

dissociate himself from the team following failure. The low identifier is not emotionally involved

when ‘supporting’ and lacks a distinct sense of loyalty to the team.

The general trends of the questions (to agree or disagree) can attempt to vaguely distinguish

between the ‘true fans’ that enjoy basking in success (BIRGing) as mentioned by Richardson

(2004) and the ‘fair-weather supporters’ as described by SIRC (2008). However the responses

from the survey and focus group can provide some insight into the positives and negatives of

fandom with regards to the costs against the rewards of being a fan of MCFC. Question 12 was

intended to make respondents of the survey decide how much joy they derive from being a fan

of the club and how big a part this plays in their lives by including the words ‘self-esteem’ and

‘life satisfaction’ within the statement. Research conducted by Jones (2000) acknowledges a

theory proposed by Stebbins into the ‘profit hypothesis’. The theory dictates that the perceived

benefits of taking part in an activity exceed the perceived costs. This can be used to explain a

continued engagement in a serious leisure activity. The rewards consist of self-actualisation or

self-gratification, such as the elation experienced by a fan when their team wins a match. This

theory however, fails to explain why a fan would continue to support their team when the costs

of fandom potentially outweigh the rewards. The participants of the focus group made

contributions that contradict with Stebbins’ profit hypothesis theory. One person talked about a

match against Hamburg, where MCFC were knocked out of the UEFA cup competition, yet it

was still a thoroughly enjoyable day for this individual:

30
 “The Hamburg game changed my life! I had never seen anything like it [thousands of

MCFC supporters brought inflatable objects into the grounds]. I want the atmosphere to

be like that every game. I left the stadium feeling great”

(Appendix 1, pg 37)

Despite the huge cost of fandom on this occasion, the reward of a life-long unforgettable

atmosphere outweighed the cost to the individual. This contradicts with Stebbins’ theory as cited

by Jones (2000). Despite such a great loss as a fan, this individual will continue to engage in

their fandom, experiencing self-actualisation and self-gratification. Another member of the focus

group added that he had never left a football match with such mixed emotions, feeling so high

about the match result, yet so dejected at the same time.

The results from the survey highlight that the majority of the sample agreed or strongly agreed

with the statement from question 12:

I believe the community of supporters at MCFC gives me a high level of self-esteem and

life satisfaction

Fig 2.8 Males

Fig 2.9 Females

31
These results outline that the 18-24 year olds appear to derive the most enjoyment and

satisfaction from the community of supporters at MCFC, with the 25-35 year olds evenly split.

This suggests that the 18-24 year olds are more actively involved with the club and socially

committed to their role as fans. A 24 year old from the focus group described the community of

supporters at MCFC as a family. He talked about a hugely popular pub themed for MCFC

opposite the stadium, saying that everybody likes each other. He compared this to a pub in the

centre of Manchester filled with 1200 people that could potentially see trouble and fighting break

out.

Another 24 year old from the group added to this, describing the eclectic mixture of people in

this pub for MCFC fans:

“There could be a criminal, a priest...but it’s all just one big family of MCFC supporters

brought together”

(Appendix 1, pg 37)

This high importance placed on community by the participants of the survey and the focus

group contributes towards extending the research conducted by Belk, which according to

Richardson (2004) has lacked explanations into how one fan identifies with another. It would

appear that an MCFC supporter can socially identify with a fellow fan in a place like the

aforementioned pub, which is exclusive and creates a tight-knit community of like-minded

people. One focus group member mentioned that during busy periods, an MCFC supporter is

required to show a season ticket in order to gain entry. This suggests that the patrons of the pub

are mainly ‘true fans’ by the definition of the Football Passions report (2008), as they literally

have to prove that they are regular match attendees to gain entry.

In response to question 13 about how optimistic fans were about the future of MCFC, the

researcher had anticipated a unanimous agreement with the statement. Overall, 97% of males

32
and 94% of females either agreed or strongly agreed. This could be attributed to the club’s new

found fame and fortune, after MCFC was taken over by Abu Dhabi (the sheikhdom of eastern

Arabia and capital of the United Arab Emirates). The focus group was in agreement about

feeling highly optimistic about the club’s future. One member described the take over as raising

the profile of the club and putting MCFC “on the map”.

Another member was equally as enthusiastic:

“We’re riding on the crest of a wave. We have the foundations of a decent club, the

making of a good Manager”

(Appendix 1, pg 38)

When the researcher introduced question 14 to the focus group, he quoted literature previously

collected within the primary research of the study, by a former chairman of MCFC Peter Swales:

“I always think that when Howard Kendall left Manchester City the supporters appointed

Peter Reid... the supporters had decided that he was the man and they weren't going to

accept anybody else... From then on they were always going to have a say in any major

decision, whether that was a player coming in or a player going out, a manager going

out or a manager coming in, a chairman going out or a chairman coming in.”

(Barber 2002, 4.3):

Through providing this background information to the question the researcher intended for the

focus group to comprehend the relevance of the statement, in terms of the extent to which fans

held an influence over MCFC in 1993-94, compared to the present day. This was followed by

the group raising sub-issues surrounding the statement and offering different perspectives on

33
their opinions. For example, a 49 year old group member agreed that the above quotation was

indeed reflective of those times, although today things have changed significantly. He mused

that the outside influence of commerce and media interest has caused football to revolve

around money, taking it away from the “working man’s game”. He also linked this to the Arabs

that have bought the club, referring to their vast power. He summarised that the culture of the

game has changed. These comments can be directly related with research conducted by

Barber (2002) who described local clubs as being in international markets now and outside of

local influence. Barber describes the 1990’s as the decade of ‘fan power’ which has long since

passed.

A different group member offered an alternative perspective; he described the decision making

at MCFC as a pecking order:

“I answered ‘strongly disagree’ (to question 14). It’s a 5-tier hierarchy and we [the fans]

are at the bottom. The owners have got the final say, but the board can pressure the

owners. The media can twist things and say whatever they want; look at what they did to

get rid of Sven (Goran Erikson) as the England Manager. Then you have the players

who can say if they are not going to play...”

(Appendix 1, pg 40)

This statement shows that the fan fully grasps that there are factors out of his control that

influence major decisions at MCFC, yet when the researcher asked if he resented this he

replied that it is “just how football is” and he accepts that. This is also reflective of another point

made by Barber (2002). The author suggested that as more money is pumped into football and

competition increases amongst the major TV networks to secure the rights to matches, more

fans have become shareholders of large clubs, yet most lack voting rights.

Figs 3.2 & 3.3 below show a majority disagreement from respondents to question14:

34
The results show that 98% of males disagreed with the statement, and 88% of females

respectively. However, 3 of the online respondents added that MCFC is trying to listen to the

fans more by concentrating on the operational end of the club. A member of the focus group

elaborated on this issue. He said that the fans have been demanding cheaper tickets and

cheaper season ticket prices, and that they have now been going down in cost. He cited how

the fans had originally requested a special ‘singing section’ to be built to raise the atmosphere in

the grounds; this has happened. Also, he mentioned that fans have expressed a wish to make

the stadium safer:

“Fans have said they want a cop, like at Anfield [Newcastle United Football Club

stadium] so that the away fans can’t break up our singing section”.

It is apparent that the members of the focus group are ‘avid fans’ as referred to by Mintel (2008)

as they have an up to date extensive knowledge of most things going on at MCFC, and they are

all season ticket holders.

Conclusion & Recommendations

Following a comprehensive analysis of the qualitative data collected for both the survey and

focus group session the researcher is able to make several deductions about MCFC supporters.

The vast majority of the fans which took part in the study had few indicative tendencies to

35
CORF (dissociate themselves from MCFC due to failure). The findings distinguished between a

high identifier, being someone that derives a high level of enjoyment from their fandom and a

low identifier, which can be described as a disloyal individual. Graphical representations of the

results indicated a general trend of 18-24 year olds being cited as the most emotionally

attached to MCFC and the most loyal (predominantly high identifiers). The focus group

supported the survey results by revealing that MCFC fans make a long-term commitment to the

team, in a similar way to having a long-term relationship with a girlfriend or boyfriend.

The findings of the study proved to have direct links with previous research into football fandom.

With regards to how fans felt about their role as fans, 97% of survey respondents genuinely

believe that their presence at a match positively impacts on the team’s performance. This was

backed up by the results of the focus group, with an emphasis being placed on fans referring to

themselves as the ‘twelfth man’ as cited in the Football Passions report (2008). The members of

the focus group feel like participants at a match and not just spectators, because they are

emotionally attached to the team. The focus group revealed that the community aspect of being

an MCFC supporter is very important to them and that providing strong vocal support at a match

is crucial. This is not just to positively impact on their team’s performance, but also to gain the

respect of away fans and to be recognised by other MCFC supporters as a true fan.

A significant 98% majority of respondents to the survey either disagreed or strongly disagreed

that they have any influence over major decisions at MCFC. This was discussed at length

during the focus group, which attributed the outside influences of commerce and media interest

as uncontrollable factors that have changed the culture of the game. This was also in stark

contrast to the 1990’s, when fans did have a major say in the decisions at their club in relation

to a player, manager or chairman coming in or going out of MCFC. These beliefs of the focus

group supported research by Barber (2002) that described local clubs as now being in

international markets which were outside of local influence. The focus group did however

unearth the fact that fans can and have influenced decisions regarding club operations.

Members of the group speculated that MCFC are listening to fans’ ideas on reducing ticket

prices and implementing a designated police officer to protect fans from away supporters.

36
After triangulating the academic research with the results of the focus group and the survey, the

researcher addressed the research problem and revealed a more positive side to football at

MCFC. The researcher found that the most difficult part of forming the project was collating

existing literature that was relevant to its aims and objectives. It became apparent that the

phenomenon of ‘football fandom’ is a relatively new field of research, hence why all the referees

used in this study are post year 2000. Having combined existing theories into fandom

concerning how fans identify with each other and interact with their team, the researcher was

able to illustrate the group dynamics of MCFC fans.

The most useful information to come from the results was the unwavering loyalty of the fans that

valued the atmosphere at a match as equally important (if not more) as winning. The researcher

believes that he has contributed towards the innovative study of football fandom and added to

previous research significantly by examining and interpreting the mindset of an MCFC football

supporter. Furthermore, to the best of the researcher’s knowledge it is the first time that a study

of this kind has focused on a specific sample through considering the variables: age, sex,

regional location and an exclusive target audience. However, if the study were to be replicated

the researcher recommends that age and sexes are non-essential variables to consider. This is

partly because the researcher struggled to make many useful observations about trends relating

to the age or sex of a respondent, but mainly due the random sampling technique which was

employed. Random sampling will always produce an unpredictable sample, but it is entirely

appropriate in order to gain a representative sample for this type of study concerning the

attitudes, thoughts and feelings of people who all support football. If further research conducted

obtained a sample that was equal in the number of males, females and age groups it would

conflict with the umbrella of fandom, which is inclusive not exclusive. In addition, both the

primary and secondary research undertaken in this study has showed that football is still a

largely male-dominated sport; therefore obtaining a sample as described above would prove to

be difficult.

37
 Bibliography

Barber, G (2002). University of Leicester. [online]. Fact Sheet 7: ‘Fan Power’ and Democracy in

Football, 3.1 – 4.3, Last accessed May 1 2009 at http:www.le.ac.uk/

Gratton et al (2004). Research methods for sport studies. [online]. 284, Last accessed 4 May

2009 at http:www.dawsonera.com/

Funk, D (2009). Consumer behaviour is sport & events. [online]. Article from Business Source

Premier last accessed 7 May 2009 at http://web.ebscohost.com.lc.proxy.shu.ac.uk/

38
Jones, J (2000). University of Luton, Leisure Studies Vol. 19 Issue 4. [online]. A model of

serious leisure identification: the case of football fandom. Article from Business Source Premier

last accessed 4 May 2009 at http://web.ebscohost.com.lc.proxy.shu.ac.uk

Jones, K (2008). Female Fandom: Identity, sexism, and Men’s Professional Football in England.

[online]. Last accessed 5 May 2009 at http://dialnet.unirioja.es/

MCFC (2009). What the papers say. [online]. Last accessed 7 May 2009 at http://mcfc.co.uk/

Mintel (2008). Mintel Marketing Intelligence. [online]. Football Business (The), 1.2, Report last

accessed 7 May 2009 at http://academic.mintel.com/

Richardson, B (2004). Irish Journal of Management, Vol. 25 Issue 1. [online]. New Consumers

and Football Fandom: The Role of Social Habitus in Consumer Behaviour. Article from

Business Source Premier last accessed 1 May 2009 at

http://web.ebscohost.com.lc.proxy.shu.ac.uk

SIRC (2008). Social Issues Research Centre. [online]. Football Passions report, 14. Last

accessed 7 May 2009 at http://sirc.org/football_passions/

Sport England (2002). Game Plan Initiative. [online]. Last accessed 3 May 2009 at

http://sportengland.org/

Telegraph Staff & Agencies (2008). [online]. Last accessed 5 May 2009 at

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/

Williams, J (2006). Soccer & Society. [online]. ‘Protect me from what I want’: football fandom,

celebrity cultures and ‘new’ football in England. Last accessed 1 May 2009 at http:lra.le.ac.uk/

Veal, A.J (2006). Research methods for leisure and tourism: a practical guide, 3rd edition.

[online]. 284, Last accessed 4 May 2009 at http://dawsonera.com/

39
 Appendix 1: Transcript of Focus Group

This focus group was conducted at the main residence of the principal investigator with four

supporters of MCFC:

• Participant 1 (P1) 24 yrs old

• Participant 2 (P2) 18 yrs old

• Participant 3 (P3) 49 yrs old

• Participant 4 (P4) 24 yrs old

40
The researcher selected 8 questions from the questionnaire-based survey for general

discussion with the group.

The session lasted for 54 minutes and was recorded with the permission of participants using a

laptop.

Audio Transcript

Q3. Being a fan of MCFC is like having a long-term girlfriend / boyfriend.

P1: I answered agree. My girlfriend can regularly p** me off and upset me, sometimes I think

that the things she does are ridiculous – in the same way that City can disgust me with

shambolic performances and even make me cry occasionally.

P2: I also answered agree, because you are committed to a girlfriend in the same way that you

are to MCFC, you have to see your club play just as you have to make time to see a girlfriend.

P3: Agree. It gets into your blood, the older I get the ‘worse’ it gets; football on a Saturday

afternoon has become a way of life for me during my lifetime.

P4: I disagreed. I can see my girlfriend whenever I want and can get rid of her too! But MCFC is

for life.

Q4. I think that supporting the same team as my parent (s) is an important part of our

relationship.

P1: I agree. I spend time with my Dad and we bond together at the pub when watching City

games...I can’t imagine what it might be like if he was a Manchester United supporter, I don’t

think that we would talk about football as much.

P4: I disagree because neither my Mum or Dad have ever taken me to a game – it was my

Uncle that introduced me to MCFC so I’d have to say yes to family but no to parents.

P3: I would disagree because when I was a kid my Dad was never that interested in football, it

was more the mates that I knocked about with that influenced me, so it was my own discipline.

41
This is why I steered more towards the blue side than the red. Luckily, all of my side of our

family are MCFC supporters today.

Q7. As a fan, I feel that our presence has a direct effect on how the game is played.

P1: I would be amazed if anyone put disagree for this because you are the twelfth man at every

game. The atmosphere is buzzing & pumping, the team picks the game up when 48,000 fans

are screaming players names, it must give them a lift.

P3: I agree. After Hamburg (16/04/09 City won 2-1) the atmosphere in the ground was as good

as I can ever recall at a City game. There was a Derby game years ago when we beat MUFC 5-

1 and a European game against Valencia with a memorable atmosphere similar to Hamburg.

P1: On the other hand, when we lost against Nottingham Forest (03/01/09 0-3) the atmosphere

was awful the whole match, there was no singing at all and the team played badly.

P2: We have had the second most home victories in the league this season, it speaks for itself.

Yet we have only won 2 away games all season; only a small number of fans can attend away

games and the maximum capacity is usually only 5,000 seats available.

P4: I agree. We have the best win ratio at home, so I have to agree with what P1 said about

being the twelfth man. I still have to point out that we can sing our hearts out but the game does

not always go our way!

Q11. Being around other fans in the atmosphere of the grounds is as important as

watching the game itself.

P4: I strongly agree. I can sometimes spend more time singing / laughing / shouting at the away

fans than actually watching the game – I love the banter between the 2 sets of supporters.

42
Songs that are sung about players, the away supporters and MCFC as a club are usually

constant at a home game.

P2: I strongly agree. I cannot imagine a game without any singing or shouting, it would be weird.

P3: I agree. If, for example the away supporters were banned from the ground the atmosphere

would be no way near as good as it is, especially when a game is end-to-end (away supporters

situated directly next to a City stand) this electrifies the atmosphere. Obviously we want to win

but the atmosphere is still very important to me, its part of the day, and part of the enjoyment of

a game.

P1: I strongly agree. At times I have listened to the away fans’ songs for 10 minutes, it’s all

about singing as a competition as to who is the loudest and the most supportive of their team.

You want City to win but not it’s not just about that. You want to be respected as a better set of

fans, you want the opposition to leave thinking that City fans give great support. I’ve missed

goals in the past by getting so caught up picking their fans out to taunt, it’s just all part of the

banter. A good example is that I left the Middlesbrough game (07/02/09 City won 1-0)

remembering the Bloke who lifted his kilt up when we were taking the p** out of him!

Researcher: You raised another interesting point there, about MCFC having a reputation to

protect as fans?

P1: Oh yeah, the whole point of us moving to the singing section this season was to get more

involved, to be recognised and respected by both home and away supporters.

P3: I think that the fact that we’ve supported the team that we support shows that we are real

fans, unlike MUFC for example, who only have their level of support due to their success. If they

had gone through the trials and tribulations that we (MCFC supporters) have gone through over

the past 30 years I bet they would have much less support today. We’re a breed of people, City

supporters...So many ups so many downs – we are a unique set of supporters.

43
P1: A lot of City fans are scared of success, as they don’t know what it feels like [refers to a fan

who sits behind him every home game who constantly shouts abuse at players, even when the

team is doing well].

P4: Chelsea & Manchester United don’t have many songs, City have loads even if some of

them are stupid [cites song: “We are not, we’re not really here, we are not we’re not really here,

it’s just like the fans of the invisible man, we’re not really here”!].

P1: Did you know that this song originates from a match played against Millwall when City fans

were disallowed from attending for fear of trouble, but we won. During the game after a few

weeks later, a small number of fans sung ‘we’re not really here’ because of the previous victory

in the total absence of support.

P3: Ok, so where did the bananas come from? (At the Hamburg game thousands of City

supporters brought giant inflatable bananas)

P1: When we once played Southampton FC a City player at the time had a strange name

similar to a brand of bananas, so they fans started singing about him and it caught on.

Q12. I believe that the community of supporters at MCFC gives me a high level of self-

esteem and life satisfaction.

P2: I agree. The Hamburg game changed my life! I had never seen anything like it; I want the

atmosphere to be like that every game. I left the stadium feeling mint! – (Mancunian P4: That

game made a lot of people very happy, apart from P1!

P1: I’ve never before walked out of the ground with such mixed emotions; I felt so high about

the win, but so dejected at the same time, it was the strangest feeling I’ve ever had. (Even

though City beat Hamburg 2-1 it was not enough on aggregate, so the team did not go through

to the next stage of the competition).

P4: The community of supporters at MCFC is like a family. When I meet someone that is a City

fan I instantly like them. Whereas, if they are a Manchester United fan I’m a bit so-so.

44
P1: I look forward to going to City, having a few pints with the boys, a bit of banter then

watching the Blues play football.

P4: Like in Mary D’s (hugely popular pub themed for MCFC opposite stadium)...it’s a pub filled

with 1200 City fans, & everybody likes each other. You could go to a pub in the centre of

Manchester filled with a bunch of rowdy lads and potentially see a lot of trouble.

P1: What you were saying before P4, it is such a mixture of people – there could be criminals, a

priest but it’s all just one big family of MCFC supporters brought together.

P3: [Tells anecdote of how a friend of his (Manchester United supporter) was once brought to

Mary D’s & he thought it was “the rummest pub I’ve ever been in” – meaning very intimidating /

rough.

P4: It’s such a tight-knitted community at MCFC that sometimes (during very busy periods) you

need to show a season ticket in order to gain entry to Mary’s.

Q13. I am optimistic about the club's future.

P2: I strongly agree. Look at where we are now; we bid for Kaka, and it got to the point where it

was a 50/50 chance on the night of signing him. If we’d of been successful it might have

changed a lot of things for City.

P4: I also strongly agree. The transfer window for Robhino was £32.5m, as opposed to

Samaras at £5m 5 years ago. The foundations have been built now. If you’d of asked me this

question 10 years ago I’d of disagreed. It is a fact that MCFC is now the richest club in the

world; 10 years ago not many international clubs even knew who we were. Now, the likes of

Barcelona & AC Milan recognise us. Everyone knows us now; I think a lot of big players will

come.

P2: The whole profile of the club has been raised. Barcelona have started talks with us, 5 years

ago they would never have spoken to us. Now they see us in the press and they want to

negotiate terms for player transfers.

45
P4: The money brought in by the Sheikh has put us on the map.

P1: I agree, I’d like to strongly agree but something always seems to go wrong. If anyone can

screw up having the richest club owners in the world, it is MCFC.

P4: Well, it’s not going to happen overnight is it! We’re talking 3-5 years down the line.

Researcher: If the Sheikh abandoned the club and sold MCFC would your answers be

different?

P2: Yes. Until now we had never dreamed of bidding for the likes of Robhino.

P3: I have to strongly agree. I think that we’re on the crest of a wave, got the foundations of a

decent team, the makings of a good Manager. Elano said in the papers last week that he is

hoping to stay on at the club. In previous seasons players have always wanted to leave. I feel

as though what may potentially happen with bringing some bigger names in; people are going to

start taking notice – and long may it continue. I feel that the team in the last 2 or 3 performances

is starting to fit.

P4: Yeah, and it’s a young squad that can only grow and get better.

Researcher: Would you go as far as saying that the players are fighting for their futures at the

club now?

P4: Definitely, Mark Hughes can get his cheque book out and sign anybody!

Q14. I believe that the fans, including myself have a real say in major decisions, such as

a manager, player or chairman coming in or going out.

Researcher: Advises the group of some background information on the reasoning behind this

statement. As mentioned in the literature review, during 1993-94 when Peter Swales was

chairman the fans vigorously contested his position and he stepped down in the end. He

described how he had underestimated the power of the fan movement:

46
 “From then on they were always going to have a say in any major decision, whether that

was a player coming in or a player going out, a manager going out or a manager coming

in, a chairman going out or a chairman coming in”.

P3: I think that was most certainly the case in those times, but not today as the premiership has

moved 20 paces forward. Back then it was the old division one.

Researcher: Why do you think that things have changed?

P3: More outside influences have come into the game, not so much about the fan base

anymore. It is more commercialised today with the media interest and it revolves around money.

I think that as loud as (fans) may shout, they (MCFC) won’t listen. Take Manchester United;

when the Glaziers took over there was uproar from the fans but it made no difference.

P1: They have (MCFC) started to listen to fans a bit more lately, but not in terms of players or

chairmen coming in or going out.

P2: You can now e-mail your thoughts to Cook (Garry Cook, Executive Chairman) and he will

reply to you giving his opinions and justifying the actions of the club.

P3: I think it is a bad thing, because it is a working man’s game but the outside influences of

commerce have taken it away from us a bit. Whether it will return I don’t know. The pressure of

the fans doesn’t seem to make a difference. Take the Arabs that have bought our club; they

have so much power and they’re not from the same culture as us. I think that the culture of the

game has changed.

P4: I answered ‘strongly disagree’ too. I looked at it from a different angle. I put it as the owner

has their say in any decisions [yes or no] then the board (of directors) then the media then the

players, with the fans at the bottom.

Researcher: So you see it as a hierarchy?

P4: Yes, it’s a 5 tier hierarchy and we are at the bottom. The owners have got the final say, but

the board can pressure the owners. The media can twist things and say whatever they want;

47
look what they did to Sven to get rid of him as the England Manager. Then you have the players

who can say that they are not going to play, they can fake injuries. Look at Robhino (MCFC

player), he is supposed to have a major say; they’ve said in the papers that he is rumoured to

have a direct line to the Sheikh. I don’t know if this is true or not, but I do know that big stars at

major clubs do have talks with their Managers to suggest players for the national side; you hear

about it all the time.

P2: The Sheikh has a huge say in decisions now. When we made a bid for Kaka I don’t think

that Hughes even wanted to sign him, but he probably had only a 20% stake in the matter. If the

Sheikh wants to buy a player he will try to get him no matter what.

P1: [Discusses the influence on MCFC fans over the club]. Football matters no, other things,

maybe. The fans have been demanding cheaper tickets and season ticket prices; they have

been going down. The fans asked for a special ‘singing section’ to be built to raise the

atmosphere; they (MCFC) have put one in. Fans have said “we want a cop like at Anfield

(Newcastle United Football Club Stadium) so that the away fans can’t break up our singing

section. There are rumours that the club is thinking about it. City fans said they wanted bananas

and the club said “ok we’ll have an inflatable day”.

P4: That is more petty things thought isn’t it?

Researcher: This is more the operational end of things then?

P1: Yeah it is, I think that the club is starting to listen to our ideas. Garry Cook is now holding

regular chairman meetings, focus groups with fans, supporter groups – just to try and

understand what we want.

P4: I would agree with those points. I disagree with the statement (Q14) but I agree that the little

things to do with the operations of the club – they are trying harder.

P1: I do get the impression that the Sheikhs do want to make it a fan’s game. In contrast if we

look at the Glaziers who own Manchester United it’s all about making money. They don’t know

48
anything about football, they rarely go to a match and when they do, if United score the Glaziers

just sit there emotionless. They have no loyalty to the club whatsoever.

Researcher: Going back to the fact that everyone here disagreed with the statement of question

14; do you resent this?

P4: Well it’s just how football is, I accept it. Although if it wasn’t for the fans there wouldn’t be

these high cost player transfers and wages; the fans make the game what it is today.

Q15. Football is like a religion to me.

P4: I’m a Christian but I don’t really follow the religion. I can think of City as my religion because

I constantly follow it. Everyday I’m on the MCFC website and the Blue moon forum (unofficial

online supporter forum). City is the biggest part of my life. Church for me is like Eastlands

(MCFC stadium); I go there and I worship the players, so my answer is strongly agree.

P3: I also strongly agreed. It’s part of being a football fan just as I answered one of the earlier

questions; it’s in your blood. I don’t have a season ticket these days, and partly because – and

don’t take this the wrong way P1, I was paying to get him through his education with University

fees. Before then I had always held a season ticket, but now I just go at any available

opportunity that I have. If I’m not at a match, the radio is on or I’m looking at every Sky Sports

channel that I can see. My Saturday afternoon, if City are playing is dominated by whatever

their activities are; who they are playing and where it’s taking place.

P1: If you are a religious man you might read the bible. If you are a City fan you will read

everything possible on the club; whether that is online news, match day programmes or any

form of literature relating to MCFC. I buy every single programme, every book on my heroes

and favourite players both past & present. When I was a kid I used to buy the Pink (popular

insert about football from the Manchester evening news during the nineties).

P4: You know what I used to do, I used to skive school (play truant) at lunch to go and buy the

Pink. I couldn’t wait because sometimes if I went after school instead it was sold out!

49
P3: Half the reason that the game of football has become as powerful as it has done is because

that is the power it has over people. The marketing effect of what football does; the

sponsorship, the kit, the boots and kids skiving school to buy the Pink.

P1: Religion can cause war and football causes war. How many scraps are there amongst City

and United fans because of the rivalry between them? How often do families fall out because

one person supports City, another, United.

P4: How about the fact that City has always been known as a largely Protestant club, whereas

Manchester United is generally Catholic.

P3: That is going back a very long time though!

P4: Yes I know but this is why City has always had a close bond with Glasgow Rangers (known

to be traditionally Protestant in their fan base). [Refers to the UEFA cup final on 14/05/08:

Glasgow Rangers vs. Zenit St Petersburg] We were singing Rangers’ songs alongside their

fans, and they were singing City songs with us. There is actual religion within football as well.

50
51