THE subject matter of this dissertation pertains mainly to footer but, if your interest in 22 muddied oafs obsessing over a sphere is limited, fear not.
I’m sure that, in the course of proceedings, I will conjure a spurious metaphor for life generally.
Now, what do I mean exactly when I say “glory hunting”? That’s a good question. Unfortunately, I don’t have time to answer it here, but I will say this: I’m referring to chiels supporting football teams that win everything, rather than their local team.
Manchester United fans famously attract the accusation. Celtic and Rangers do too. But what’s the problem with it? If you live in a remote area, for example, why should you not decide to support the team you see on telly winning all the time?
There’s something thrawn and Scottish about the idea that you should support your local team, no matter how bad. The basic ideal is that you turn out on a miserable February afternoon, in a tumbledown stadium with a few hundred other sad cases, and stoically watch your inelegant 11 being beaten 5-0 by the galumphing villagers up the road.
I can understand the native patriotism to a degree with larger communities and middling teams. I grew up supporting Hibs — the stadium was five minutes away — and it could have been worse. But it’s still been a curse around my neck. It says: “Loser.” Or as the motto of Leith has it: “Hibs — they always let you down.”
Locality needn’t be the be all and end all of football anyway. You may want to support a team that stands against prejudice or has a beautiful football philosophy.
Heck, listen: you can do what you want, back a winner, and stop associating with stoical, losing miserabilists. Just like in life generally.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article