Display:
Thanks for the historical detail -- I didn't know it went back that far -- but this still seems to me to beg the question. Why should a working-class sport be subject to disunion? Is there something proper to the working-class essence that makes it so, or is it intervention from above (ie upper classes), or is it (as I suggest) that football has the numbers (players, supporters) to make division possible and therefore envisageable?
by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 09:52:50 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Would you said below seems quite valid (just look at the West Indies ... each island has so few cricket players - precisely because it's a middle class sport - that they have to gang up).

But then again maybe working class sports are so much a way for the working class to be heard that they don't want to share the glory of being heard with distant others?

by Alex in Toulouse on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 09:58:18 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I would have expected the upper and middle classes to be much closer personally than the working classes: they would have gone to the same - or at least overlapping - schools, the parties, the universities. They would have done business with each other. Working class Protestant Belfast and Catholic Dublin would hardly ever have met. That wouldn't be true of the richer classes.
by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 10:05:25 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:
Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password
Occasional Series