Column

Weaving away ? from the party line

I seriously hope - and suspect - that Michael, Lyndon and the whole team can (and will) treat this whole ?blame Toffeeweb? recent culture as water-off-a-duck?s-back. Of the leading Evertonian debate sites (as opposed to the likes of info-based services like evertonresults.com): so in my view that?s Blue Kipper, NSNO, Toffeeweb and WSAG (to put them alphabetically), this one is by far the easiest to have a lame pop at. And having a dig at ToffeeWeb most definitely seems to be the de-rigeur, ?too kool for skool? thing to do now around Evertonian circles.

A lot of that, IMO, is due to Toffeeweb?s superior functionality, presentation, design and navigability which makes it far more ?auditable? (though I?m stretching it a bit here) than the others. For it?s so much more easier to gain a perception (rightly or wrongly) of what ToffeeWeb and its contributors think about any given Blue issue because of the easier accessibility.

As a rule I only use ? whether it?s to read or post ? just two of the Evertonian sites: Toffeeweb and WSAG. On the positive side, I choose WSAG and TW because in the former instance I like it?s culture (however harsh some may find it) and it?s not-arsed, anything goes, what-you-see-is-what-you-get, laissez faireism, plus Mark O?Brien seems to call most everything spot-on; and in the latter there?s the ability on ToffeeWeb to really deconstruct any and every Evertonian subject, as long it?s only about Everton.

On the negative side, I purposefully don?t frequent some of the other Evertonian sites because in one particular instance (no names) I feel it?s just too cosy with the club itself and in another I simply can?t find my way around it (despite repeatedly being told how good it is, there?s a little too much petulant, knife-and-fork banging ?mum, I want me dinner? Apple Mac mentality in me and if I can?t negotiate my way around some sites after five seconds then I just don?t bother). Get me, big lix cyber-discerner!

You could never accuse ToffeeWeb of being difficult to negotiate, though, and you can see, in an instant, the moment you arrive at the home-page, before you?ve even clicked, what the current debates, praises and bete noirs are.

Therefore Toffeeweb is always gonna be in the firing line to a certain extent; although I appreciate that the reason it?s been held to account of late is because of the (perceived) negativity of some contributors (i.e. fellow Evertonians). Yet in my view, you can get equally as much negativity on the WSAG forum, for example, but it?s just not so readily identifiable in an arena where there can be as many as 30 different posts an hour debating everything from Cristiano Ronaldo?s bird (hywell), BIGGA peas, the PLO and of course the progress or otherwise of the tricky Blues.

Yet whenever the WSAG forum crew does debate the minutiae of Everton matters it?s surprising how ToffeeWebbish it suddenly gets (especially concerning Kirkby). But the difference is that within minutes the action has moved on and suddenly the superiority of a chippy in Tuebrook is being discussed and any given post about Moyes, Kenwright, Carsley, Neville, Kirkby can be two pages away.

Over the last weekend, for example, the WSAG forum carried a considerable thread about KEIOC and it was all very, er, very, well, er ToffeeWeb (which has now become a verb in Everton fan circles, as in ?he?s been Toffeewebbin on for the last half-hour about Carsley? which I overheard in the Spellow before the Newcastle game).

Unlike on WSAG (and I can?t really comment about the other sites so it wouldn?t be fair) any given subject matter can stay on the home page of ToffeeWeb for days and the perception is wholly different, not least because the contributors, by and large, have got the guts to put their names alongside their viewpoints (which isn?t a dig, far from it, at WSAG?s highly amusing ?user name? informality and long may it remain; for both sites have got two totally different, quite distinct cultures that you couldn?t recreate again if you tried ? but all credit nonetheless to TW for insisting on personal accountability as much as it?s possible).

But to say, though, that one particular site is wholly negative, positive, or even fair-minded is a bit like saying one particular part of Goodison has got a uniform mindset. Laughable. For example, I sit in the middle of the Park End and within 10 feet of me there?s two blokes on either side of the Phil Neville debate ? and fierce with it ? but at the same time they both seem to agree about Fernandes (to sign him).

And that?s the thing about trying to portray an homogenous nature about any given section of Evertonia: you can?t because it isn?t true and never will be.

For instance: I?m vehemently anti-Kirkby, yet I?m still pro Bill Kenwright (yes, it is possible) and I think that, Kirkby aside, Wyness would actually have been judged to have done a good job at EFC so far; meanwhile I swung back and forth twice about Yakubu last season, I really believe Fernandes could be the answer, I was defiantly pro-Carsley, but oddly still retain a few doubts about Cahill especially in a four, and for good measure I?ve come to the conclusion that Andy Johnson isn?t the answer; while all that?s swirling in my head, I?m of the view that David Moyes has saved Everton FC from a slow-death (genuinely believe that) and I?m losing sleep about him not yet having signed his contract but (like Michael Kenrick) I got to a point last season where I just couldn?t handle his hoof-ball tactics anymore and wondered how he couldn?t see what we all could that playing long-balls towards opposition centre-halves like Zat Knight was pointless.

Meanwhile, back to the ground move, I support KEIOC in principle but not on the ?city? part, for I have to say that I wouldn?t be arsed if we played in certain parts of Sefton but there?s no way I?d go to Speke. So I suppose that makes me a Keep Everton Out Of Kirkby subscriber (KEOOK - might catch on).

Now if you can find a pigeonhole for all that lot then good luck.

But I?d say that type of ?all-over-the-place? thinking is about par for the course for most Evertonians. For some reason, though, if you?re anti-hoofball then it?s automatically assumed that you?re anti-Moyes (far from it) and before long you?re into the ?we should be grateful, who are we gonna get to replace him?? row. Similarly with Kirkby. If you?re anti-Kirkby (and I couldn?t try any harder to be) then you?re automatically pro-KEIOC and by proxy anti-Kenwright. Not so.

To suggest, then, that ToffeeWeb ? as an entity, albeit virtual ? or indeed any Blue site has one codified mindset is ludicrous in my opinion.

One area, perhaps, where you could say that there?s a uniformity of viewpoints (certainly among its editorial team) concerns Kirkby as it seems the whole ToffeeWeb crew are anti it (though, again, there?s different aspects of light and shade within that). That, though, just reflects my own Evertonian experience for my group of match-goers is 9 against and just 1 for (but he holds his own when it all gets a bit sparky, as he should and we all sit and listen to him).

Anyway, what should Toffeeweb do given that most of its editorial board have real concerns about Kirkby? Falsely say that some of them are for it and some of them are against just to serve the interests of the ?balance? brigade? That way lies a typical Talk Spewt phone-in: ?You can?t blame Rangers fans per se, Rhoddri, it?s more of a societal problem.? ?Oh, I?m not so sure, Ray.? Give us strength.

But we really have reached an ironic point, in my view, when national media channels start having a pop at fansites, especially Everton ones. For it?s now 20 years ago that WSAG (still the finest paper fanzine in the country, in my view) first appeared, chiefly to provide fans with an alternative to the force-fed party line of the club which certainly I?d had my fill of.

WSAG paved the way for everything else that?s emerged and whether they?ve survived or not (Blue Wail, anyone?) or evolved gradually as in the case of ToffeeWeb, we should be grateful for them because prior to the ?unofficial? era, the club-to-fan communications, certainly within Evertonia, were woeful.

Now, though, in a media era when Sky Sports daren?t ask a searching question because it simply has to keep the Big 4 onside, when print-hacks are afraid to penetrate issues in case they get barred from the press box, when MOTD has to rely on Carlos Quieroz being wheeled-out because of Alex Ferguson?s long-running spat with the Beeb (ironically because he?s seen fit to tar the whole corp. with the same ?Alan Green? brush), we?ve reached a point where fansites like Toffeeweb are being targeted for having the temerity to be democratic and the guts to present an alternative viewpoint.

Frankly, if Tony Marsh or whoever, even in the midst of a Uefa Cup qualifying campaign, wants to rail against certain aspects of David Moyes?s managerial style then we?ve surely reached a point in the post-Hillsborough era of football supporting where he should be allowed to say so. Like me, I?m sure Tony Marsh or whoever, will decide for himself when Everton are having a good season; and not because we?re being told that we are or that we should be grateful and must view everything through Goodison?s prism of relativity i.e. remember what it was like under Walter Smith, so stop bleating.

As it happens, I?m pretty sanguine (aside from Kirkby) about all things EFC at present but if there?s someone out there who isn?t ? for whatever reason ? then so be it. But to read under the auspices of a national press title that the likes of ToffeeWeb ? and therefore the Evertonians who use it ? really should be more accepting, conforming and in agreeance with how the Club and the national media perceives things to be, is a bit alarming in my view.

I also have to say that David Moyes?s recent quote that some fans need ?educating? is a bit sinister, certainly to my easily-twitched, admittedly oversensitive ears; although in context I can see the broader aspect of what he was driving at. But it works both ways, Davey, for while we?ve just recorded a Premier League best points haul, moving up a place from 6th to 5th and achieved Uefa Cup football on our own merits this season (i.e. not relying on the Sky 4 to win the domestic cups), it has to be said that ahead of some games in the post-Fiorentina phase I?d sooner have gone to the dentist!!! Conversely some of the footy we played pre-Christmas (and indeed last day versus Newcastle) was the best I?d seen from the Toffs in years.

So yeah, I can see the bigger picture behind Moyes?s ?educating? quote (but he?d have been better off just issuing a shrug or an ?each to their own? blandishment because lines as colourful as that have a nasty habit of returning to bite); but at the same time that shouldn?t mean that fans can?t voice their opinions about incidental, as-you-go aspects of a season (such as the Goodison derby, when I felt that a certain Mark Clattenburg conveniently distracted the attention away from a worryingly negative tactical mindset we?ve developed against Liverpool in particular, who were utterly crap that day at our patch, a trend which was really seen to the fore in March at Anfield). Or do we now have to meekly label every post and every article with the caveat: ?Look I know we?re having a great season and I love David Moyes and in comparison to Walter things are really fab but about Mikel Arteta?s corners....?? Not at £540 a pop for a season ticket I won?t. Not when it?s £70 to fill your car for Arsenal with a £40 ticket on top and then factor in the rest of the spends.

We?re blessed with a plethora of quality ?unofficial? communications channels within Evertonia and certainly we have the best fanzine in WSAG and the best website in ToffeeWeb in the country (I really mean that - have you ever looked around at some of the dross out there, particularly in London?).

Indirectly, the club, in turn, has had to seriously raise its game regarding its communicative output over the last decade and I happen to think that by-and-large we get a pretty decent service from the club these days ? certainly in, ahem ?relative?, comparison to the early 90s and earlier eras ? (although I can do without yet another ?rally cry? from Phil Neville) and I feel that likes of Darren Griffiths and Co do a vastly undersung job.

But the likes of WSAG (which has copped a lot of flak down the years) and ToffeeWeb will only remain the best if they stay as forthright, irreverent and independent as they have every right to be. Wasn?t the whole basis of the fanzine culture (a phrase which itself seems a bit twee these days) in the first place based on the ?we?ll say what we want? premise?

Anything else takes us right back to the dark days of Dr David Marsh and an old-school Everton set-up which hadn?t quite got to grips with the fact that the (un)golden age of football-spectating deference had died and grimly it had taken the fatalities of 96 supporters to bring it about.

Anyway, as for ToffeeWeb, it?s surely better to be talked about than not and if I were Michael, Lyndon, Colm et al I?d take all the recent drum banging as a back-handed compliment.

Personally I think the affected, semi-elitist yawn about decrying all things ToffeeWeb is now tiresome in itself. About as tedious as some people thinking that Evertonians can be dictated to about how good we should feel and when we should feel it. We?ll decide that for ourselves, thanks.

Basically I?ll clap when I want, read what I want and I?ll click where I want - grateful that I?ve now got the choice.

Long may it remain the case.

Reader Comments

Note: the following content is not moderated or vetted by the site owners at the time of submission. Comments are the responsibility of the poster. Disclaimer