The golden rule of online interaction is that anger and negativity carries a far weighty punch than a more balanced (happy clappy) point of view. Not too dissimilar to someone informing you about a product or service they hate rather than one they enjoy. It's the way of the world. We love to hate.
Post-match North London derby was fascinating. Like most, I'm certain Spurs fans around the world were p*ssed off with not winning. It was gutting. In the grand scheme of things even though we dominated (give or take) for 75 minutes, the last quarter is hardly a separate entity that doesn't co-exist with everything that preceded it. In the end a draw was a fair result based on what happened in the final fifteen.
So, when looking back, if you're going to be all sweary about it - what exactly is there to bemoan? Some are angry that we didn't win (which is fair, I hate the scum) and some are really angry at the rest of us because we're not as angry as they are. Why? Because maybe we don't fixate on the fact we didn't win and self-loathe to the point of frenzy. God forbid anyone talks about the positives from the game.
As for the happy clappers, we're not lapping up the score draw or celebrating it. We're measured and considered and place faith in expecting more of the same next time, just with a bit of improved refinement. Believe it or not, there isn't just two default emotions. You don't have to choose to be either euphoric or spitting blood.
We should have won. We didn't. Move on.
X player(s) played well. Team mentality was spot on. A couple of things done differently could have influenced the game completely in our favour. Where exactly is the blame being tagged? How far into the ether are you going to scream until all that's left is echo?
Are they hating on the dropped points or the fact that other supporters prefer to shout about what made them smile? Why is talking about the good such a bad thing? It's hardly small-time or a weakness to take the game and slot it in amongst the prior performances to get better clarity on how our progress is going. When you're done with the shouty reaction, what then? Fair enough if it's how you process a game of football. I guess escapism can double up as a means to channel general angst bottled up in every day life.
Worse is seeking an alternative opinion that is completely stripped of context just to promote a patronising view to serve nothing more than ego. LOL, is that what I'm doing now? Meta Klaxon.
In the game we had players that (on paper) sat in a particular position in the line-up but had to adapt with responsibility in both deep and forward positions. No game is identical, especially the ones with extreme intensity and pressure like the derby.
Dele Alli was excellent - in the context of the game and how it was played out and how we matched up. If you couldn't see this, if you couldn't wire yourself into the nerve-wrecking disposition on display, then you're doing it all wrong. It's about heart beats not heat maps. If you're pulling out stats in an attempt to build foundations to support that X player wasn't very good then you might want to stop relying on the data that are nothing more than breadcrumbs. What next? Tim Sherwood was an outstanding Spurs coach because his win ratio says so?
Eric Dier was also excellent but at the time I found his performance understated. Solid and supremely focused for sure. It wasn't until second viewing that I clocked on how good he actually was. He was dominant, perhaps not as direct as the gliding Mousa Dembele, but still a rock. I've come to expect passion and grit from him so maybe I distorted his involvement, spending more time watching the younger Alli. So I'm not ignoring the fact that perception can sometimes be ambiguous from one supporter to the next. But it's not like I have a single detrimental thing to aim at either of them. Did you watch the game? Tottenham, as a team, were superb.
What's it all for then, the bile? Why are people more in-tuned with the potential for failure than success? Yes, we're Tottenham supporters and we should be familiar with the former - but since when have we not reached for the stars? Aim high, right? Self-deprecation is one thing, but the desire to box up emotions like it's a scary monster under the bed feels like a low(er) grade TalkSport tactic. Go against the grain for reactionary discourse that sucks up more bandwidth. No story, then make one up.
But then this isn't about Spurs and it's not about exaggerating or drowning in hyperbole either.
It's about persona.
It's about disassociating yourself from other supporters because it's somehow beneficial (for some) to be at odds with the mainstream because it gives them an opportunity for identity. It's never about gaining respect, it's all about stealing attention. It's a form of cowardice. You don't want to get burnt by affiliating yourself with something that's fledgling, be it an ideology or a footballers ascension.
They don't want to get burnt because they refuse to be wrong and they hate others being right. Some prefer to stand back and get noticed for being different, with utterly no consistency other than to scapegoat players or supporters that don't struggle with their self-esteem and aren't likely to come up in a rash when smiling. Talking of which, stick on that record by Barry Manilow if you're conflicted.
It's got nothing to do with football and everything to do with being miserable. I can't change that. Got no intentions to police it or change peoples method of consumption and opinion either. Guess all I have is to mock them the way they mock us.
Peace to all happy clappers.