Tribalists vs Ideologists. How do we better understand each other

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sep 15, 2007
50,401
46,706
Where i need to be
AFL Club
Geelong
There appear to me to be two distinct types of Geelong supporters and they do not understand each other and therefore end up in giant fighting matches that result in them not understanding each others point of view. I have a feeling after last nights loss this will get worse and it will be a long summer on here.

And before I go through this I will put in the obvious caveat that this is an extreme simplification of a population that doesn't cover everyone and probably completely explains no one. But nonetheless these simplifications can be a usefull way understanding a population.

First of all there are the tribalists. These are the supporters who started following the team because they see themselves as belonging to the Geelong tribe. Usually because their other family members supported Geelong or they lived/moved to Geelong at some point in their lives. The tribalists follow the club unconditionally. through thick and thin. No matter what the club does they will continue to follow Geelong just as strongly as before. However, if in an alternative reality the tribalists family followed a different team instead or they never lived in Geelong but lived in another location instead the tribalists would probably support another football team just as strongly as they currently support Geelong. The reason they value Geelong is because its their tribe. If they were born into another tribe then they would be a tribalist for another club.

The second group is the ideologists. These supporters may also have started following Geelong because of their family or their location just like Tribalists but that's not the reason they follow Geelong so strongly. They follow the Geelong football club strongly because they see something special about the Geelong football club that makes them distinct from other teams. For many ideologists it was because of their attacking nature the club had for so many decades. But there are other reasons as well. It might be because the club never got unjust advantages like the big clubs, grew its young talent rather then raided other clubs talent pools, had rural values, could rise up against a better team when it got its momentum going (i.e. a team that could run on emotion which means they were always a shot). Geelong has had a lot more ideologist supporters then other clubs over the years because of the attacking nature they have employed. A lot of new supporters who didn't start with a tribe from an early age choose Geelong as their club of choice over the years because of these factors. Ideologists will not support the club unconditionally. This is because Geelong is special and if you take away what is special then Geelong is no longer Geelong to an ideologist. Some ideologists may always follow the club no matter what but the strength of that support will change depending on how the club evolves. And some ideologists have a tipping point when they will stop following the club altogether even though they might not know it. However, if in an alternative reality the ideologists had different family or lived in a different location then they probably wouldn't follow another team as strongly as Geelong. Or they may have found their way to supporting Geelong anyway. Unlike the tribalists. Geelong ideologists were only ever meant for Geelong.

Now why does this matter. Many of the ideologists have been wounded by the clubs approach to football over the past decade. They feel like Geelong is losing what has made them special (or has already lost it). The club has lost its attacking flare and become the club of control football. It has turned to stealing players from other clubs like the Carltons and Hawthorns of the past rather than recruit young kids and train them up. Geelong has lost the ability to rise up on emotion and momentum football and pile on goals in quick succession against anyone. For many ideologists the club right now looks like the clubs they used to hate. And this makes these supporters angry and sad as they see part of what they love drift away. Its not about the win loss record (although they are often positively correlated).

Tribalists confuse this loss of love or anger with bandwagonism or being spoiled. Tribalists feel Ideologists are not real supporters. Ideologists on the other hand don't understand why Tribalists aren't as upset by the change in the club. They also see Tribalists as not real supporters because what they love about Geelong doesn't appear to be loved by the Tribalists. I.e. the ideologists have come to the realisation that the tribalists don't see what was special and perhaps never did.

And this is where we are at. Tribalists don't see Ideologists as real supporters and Ideologists don't see Tribalists as real supporters. Ideologists are drifting away from the club as they feel the club lose what made it special to them in the first place. A number of supporters have drifted away from this board over the years and they appeared to me to be the ones that fit more into the ideologist category and these boards have been left with mostly Tribalists.

For many ideologists they would rather the club go back to its roots even if that means a number of poor performing years. Its better to be a Geelong struggling with a path to a future then to not be Geelong at all.

Now no one fits perfectly into these descriptions. They are simplified descriptions after all. But I do see many lean one way or the other. How do we better get along? Can we atleast understand our point of views or where they are coming from? Can tribalists understand the pain some supporters are going through is not just because of the results but is an existential threat to what they value about the club? They are not just non stop whingers.

Can we learn to be more like each other? Can Tribalists also think about what they love about the club that is distinct from others so we can share in what is special about Geelong? Can ideologists come to terms with the idea that there is value in tribe identity for no other reason then that is your tribe. I.e. Can they embrace unconditional support for geelong no matter where the club goes? As an ideologist this last concept is something I struggle with but I'm trying. All the data suggests belonging to tribes does make people happier and happiness is the meaning to life (or as close as we will get one). So there must be good in it. Plus no matter why we started following geelong we have become a family in some ways. And family stick together.

Anyway that's all I have. Hope people are recovering ok from last night. Regardless of who you are.

Go Geelong
 
Last edited:

Log in to remove this ad.

Great post Seeds.

I have anoher category in my mind, and that is, the "footy card collector"supporter. They don't just support players. They frickn worship them. I copped some flak in here when Dangerfield came over. I detest the "stars" concept. Don't worry everyone! God has come to save us! These type of supporters annoy me. They are always salivating at some star we could poach from another side. The influx of aged players cost us for instance, Narkle. And I know I'm going to get lectured about Narkle's weaknesses, but any player worth his salt should walk after being overlooked for a bunch of mercenary geriatrics like that.

We have no educators, it seems. If we have a skilled player like Parfitt, its because he came to the club skilled. Dangerfield has not learned a thing since he came here. Think about that for a moment. Esava Ratugolea was a much better kick for goal 2 years ago than he is now. Miers is not as good as he was 2 years ago. All this seems lost on supporters who can only see the stars.

As for tribal or ideologist, I'm firmly in both camps. ;)
 
I like it. We are different to most clubs because we had Gary Ablett.
We have far more ideologists than any other club in the present day.
Yes lots of fans came across during the ablett/blught years.we may not of tasted ultimate success but the way the club approached the game was highly appealing.


as to the thompson years. We had a lot of dour defensive teams during that era (roos swans, worsfold eagles, the crowbots, clarkos clusters, lyon saints, the malthouse foward press and kick it to the boundary pies). Yet geelong played the game the right way. In some ways that geelong team saved the competiton by bringing back fast ball movement.

the fifties and sixties im told were similar as well. The reason we got the handball tag was cos of lou richards envy of our flashy fifties flags sides.
 
As someone who's had a crack at you before Seeds (because from my limited visits here, it seemed to me you only ever had negative things to say about the club) I'd like to thank you for this post because it goes some way to explaining where you (and others, perhaps) are/have been coming from with the negativity over the past few years.

I see myself as in-between the groups you described. I followed Geelong because my Dad did/does and was lucky to grow up with Ablett Snr. in the team and then get spoiled in my early-twenties with the 2007-11 squad. I'm tribal in the sense that I'll always follow Geelong and, even though I don't actually CARE about football that much (if we lose, I'm over it within minutes - it's entertainment to me and I wouldn't get sad or angry about a bad movie I watched, for example) I also loved the attacking brand of footy Geelong used to play. I have remarked in the past that I don't get as excited for Cats games as I used to because they're quite often dull, dour and slow. I like that we win, I like that we show heart in that we are almost always a chance to come back if we're losing a match but I don't like the super-slow control game, especially with some of the players we have at our disposal.

I've been a defender of Scott and thought some of the Scott-bashing to be verging on hysterical but it does make more sense to me when put in the context of fans seeing him as deconstructing what they loved about the club. The cynical part of me does think the "Play the kids and stop topping up!" crowd might also be the first to complain if we did that and spent a few years losing more than we win. The sustained success we've had (purely in terms of winning roughly 2/3 games - or more - over a 15 year period) absolutely breeds a sense of entitlement in supporters, even ones who are self-aware and try not to be that way.

My response feels meandering but I guess what I'm trying to say is I do see the issue some have if they think the topping up and ultra-defence/slow-gameplan has eroded Geelong's "identity". I too would like to see more focus on speed, pressure and taking the game on. You watch Melbourne or the Dogs or, hell, even Essendon this year and could feel a sense of envy for their fans watching that brand of footy. I'd love to see a shift back to our attacking DNA but I am also okay with topping up to try and constantly challenge, as long as we weigh that up with actually playing the kids who show promise. We've been astute so far in that nobody aside from Caddy and Lincoln McCarthy who we've let go has gone on to make us look foolish. Whether players like Narkle, Clark and Constable would make us look silly if they go for more game-time elsewhere, I don't know but they are guys I would have been playing ahead of "top-ups" like Dahlhaus, Rohan and Higgins.

So, olive branch accepted and I do echo the sentiment that I hope fans are feeling okay enough today and that we can hopefully be decent to each other and productive rather than just bitter and vitriolic when discussing how we think the club should move forward and what failures led us to last night's dismal performance.
 
Yes lots of fans came across during the ablett/blught years.we may not of tasted ultimate success but the way the club approached the game was highly appealing.


as to the thompson years. We had a lot of dour defensive teams during that era (roos swans, worsfold eagles, the crowbots, clarkos clusters, lyon saints, the malthouse foward press and kick it to the boundary pies). Yet geelong played the game the right way. In some ways that geelong team saved the competiton by bringing back fast ball movement.

the fifties and sixties im told were similar as well. The reason we got the handball tag was cos of lou richards envy of our flashy fifties flags sides.
Yeah. I know back in the day plenty of people went for a club because of where they grew up, a socio economic identity and religion. Some clubs were Cataholic some were protestant.
But that is mostly gone now. Collingwood are based in East Melbourne, religion isn't a thing etc
But we have many people who are still alive that remember Ablett.
A player that people changed clubs for, a player that got non football lovers to follow football, who neutrals paid money to watch.
He and the style of footy which allowed him to turn it on.
No other club has close to as many ideological people who are still alive right now.
 
Great post Seeds. I’m sure as you elude to there are nuances but it seems a pretty accurate summation.

One observation of your “tribalist” group is that they frustratingly accept everything that the club does. It’s almost sect like worshipping. And if decisions are made that draw the ire of the “ideologists” they are quickly shut down with “I’m sure Scott would know more than you blah blah”. The tribalists rarely if ever question any decision or direction the club is taking.

I’m sure they are also more scammed than the ideologists in life. Sitting down at home wondering why the $900 penis enlarger they bought from an anonymous text hasn’t arrived. Gullible fxxks that they are. I’ve got no need to understand them any better. 😉
 
Last edited:
Post of the year!
I’m probably an ideologist - if I had to label- as I stem from a family of tribalist bombers

and as mentioned above, senior is ‘the reason’ I follow the cats, probably why I played and love footy as well
 
There appear to me to be two distinct types of Geelong supporters and they do not understand each other and therefore end up in giant fighting matches that result in them not understanding each others point of view. I have a feeling after last nights loss this will get worse and it will be a long summer on here.

And before I go through this I will put in the obvious caveat that this is an extreme simplification of a population that doesn't cover everyone and probably completely explains no one. But nonetheless these simplifications can be a usefull way understanding a population.

First of all there are the tribalists. These are the supporters who started following the team because they see themselves as belonging to the Geelong tribe. Usually because their other family members supported Geelong or they lived/moved to Geelong at some point in their lives. The tribalists follow the club unconditionally. through thick and thin. No matter what the club does they will continue to follow Geelong just as strongly as before. However, if in an alternative reality the tribalists family followed a different team instead or they never lived in Geelong but lived in another location instead the tribalists would probably support another football team just as strongly as they currently support Geelong. The reason they value Geelong is because its their tribe. If they were born into another tribe then they would be a tribalist for another club.

The second group is the ideologists. These supporters may also have started following Geelong because of their family or their location just like Tribalists but that's not the reason they follow Geelong so strongly. They follow the Geelong football club strongly because they see something special about the Geelong football club that makes them distinct from other teams. For many ideologists it was because of their attacking nature the club had for so many decades. But there are other reasons as well. It might be because the club never got unjust advantages like the big clubs, grew its young talent rather then raided other clubs talent pools, had rural values, could rise up against a better team when it got its momentum going (i.e. a team that could run on emotion which means they were always a shot). Geelong has had a lot more ideologist supporters then other clubs over the years because of the attacking nature they have employed. A lot of new supporters who didn't start with a tribe from an early age choose Geelong as their club of choice over the years because of these factors. Ideologists will not support the club unconditionally. This is because Geelong is special and if you take away what is special then Geelong is no longer Geelong to an ideologist. Some ideologists may always follow the club no matter what but the strength of that support will change depending on how the club evolves. And some ideologists have a tipping point when they will stop following the club altogether even though they might not know it. However, if in an alternative reality the ideologists had different family or lived in a different location then they probably wouldn't follow another team as strongly as Geelong. Or they may have found their way to supporting Geelong anyway. Unlike the tribalists. Geelong ideologists were only ever meant for Geelong.

Now why does this matter. Many of the ideologists have been wounded by the clubs approach to football over the past decade. They feel like Geelong is losing what has made them special (or has already lost it). The club has lost its attacking flare and become the club of control football. It has turned to stealing players from other clubs like the Carltons and Hawthorns of the past rather than recruit young kids and train them up. Geelong has lost the ability to rise up on emotion and momentum football and pile on goals in quick succession against anyone. For many ideologists the club right now looks like the clubs they used to hate. And this makes these supporters angry and sad as they see part of what they love drift away. Its not about the win loss record (although they are often positively correlated).

Tribalists confuse this loss of love or anger with bandwagonism or being spoiled. Tribalists feel Ideologists are not real supporters. Ideologists on the other hand don't understand why Tribalists aren't as upset by the change in the club. They also see Tribalists as not real supporters because what they love about Geelong doesn't appear to be loved by the Tribalists. I.e. the ideologists have come to the realisation that the tribalists don't see what was special and perhaps never did.

And this is where we are at. Tribalists don't see Ideologists as real supporters and Ideologists don't see Tribalists as real supporters. Ideologists are drifting away from the club as they feel the club lose what made it special to them in the first place. A number of supporters have drifted away from this board over the years and they appeared to me to be the ones that fit more into the ideologist category and these boards have been left with mostly Tribalists.

For many ideologists they would rather the club go back to its roots even if that means a number of poor performing years. Its better to be a Geelong struggling with a path to a future then to not be Geelong at all.

Now no one fits perfectly into these descriptions. They are simplified descriptions after all. But I do see many lean one way or the other. How do we better get along? Can we atleast understand our point of views or where they are coming from? Can tribalists understand the pain some supporters are going through is not just because of the results but is an existential threat to what they value about the club? They are not just non stop whingers.

Can we learn to be more like each other? Can Tribalists also think about what they love about the club that is distinct from others so we can share in what is special about Geelong? Can ideologists come to terms with the idea that there is value in tribe identity for no other reason then that is your tribe. I.e. Can they embrace unconditional support for geelong no matter where the club goes? As an ideologist this last concept is something I struggle with but I'm trying. All the data suggests belonging to tribes does make people happier and happiness is the meaning to life (or as close as we will get one). So there must be good in it. Plus no matter why we started following geelong we have become a family in some ways. And family stick together.

Anyway that's all I have. Hope people are recovering ok from last night. Regardless of who you are.

Go Geelong

No it wont.

If you think there will be all out bellyaching over this across the Board, you are sadly mistaken.

There will be the usual swill in the CS thread, and there will be one other thread of venting and derision (totally understandably) that is not CS related.

It will not pervade the entire existence here.

You can bang on about being pissed off and all that s**t all you want - and fair enough - but thinking its gonna be everywhere and a long summer bc of it... forget that s**t

GO Catters
 
Ridiculous post clearly designed to strawman people who disagree with the particular criticisms you have of the club.

Agreeing with particular choices the club have made that *you* think are wrong does not make someone "unconditionally supportive of the club". It just means that they agree with *those particular decisions*. You're erroneously conflating people happening to agree with club decisions that you think go against club identity with the idea that these people are unwilling to criticise the club.

Case in point: I am highly supportive of the club's recruitment policy of the past decade. I think it was both a) the right thing to do and b) mostly executed extremely well (with some notable exceptions of course). However, I am STRONGLY critical of our appalling finals record, and I attribute that mainly to the fact that Chris Scott's coaching, for whatever reason, breeds mentally weak players who cannot stand up under finals pressure. I also think the match committee have been cowardly over the last decade when it comes to their refusal to make tough but necessary decisions to drop senior players like Dahlhaus and Higgins, and this has resulted in an opportunity cost for the development of our youth.

I have many other criticisms of the club as well. I know that others you would include in the tribalist category of your reductive "tribalist vs. ideologist" framing have their own strong criticisms of the club too, but you just selectively choose to ignore these criticisms so that you can act like these posters only ever agree with what the club does.
 
Last edited:

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Seems likes Seeds law aint so fool proof.

Maybe this does nt need its own thread.

Go CAtters
 
There's a group in the middle too, people like me.
Have a bit of both.
Happy to trust the club in most things but also happy to be critical in areas I feel they lack in.
There's nothing wrong with pragmatism.

I'd suggest this describes the overwhelming majority of people. The whole "everyone's either a tribalist or an ideologist" premise of this thread is absurd.
 
There appear to me to be two distinct types of Geelong supporters and they do not understand each other and therefore end up in giant fighting matches that result in them not understanding each others point of view. I have a feeling after last nights loss this will get worse and it will be a long summer on here.

And before I go through this I will put in the obvious caveat that this is an extreme simplification of a population that doesn't cover everyone and probably completely explains no one. But nonetheless these simplifications can be a usefull way understanding a population.

First of all there are the tribalists. These are the supporters who started following the team because they see themselves as belonging to the Geelong tribe. Usually because their other family members supported Geelong or they lived/moved to Geelong at some point in their lives. The tribalists follow the club unconditionally. through thick and thin. No matter what the club does they will continue to follow Geelong just as strongly as before. However, if in an alternative reality the tribalists family followed a different team instead or they never lived in Geelong but lived in another location instead the tribalists would probably support another football team just as strongly as they currently support Geelong. The reason they value Geelong is because its their tribe. If they were born into another tribe then they would be a tribalist for another club.

The second group is the ideologists. These supporters may also have started following Geelong because of their family or their location just like Tribalists but that's not the reason they follow Geelong so strongly. They follow the Geelong football club strongly because they see something special about the Geelong football club that makes them distinct from other teams. For many ideologists it was because of their attacking nature the club had for so many decades. But there are other reasons as well. It might be because the club never got unjust advantages like the big clubs, grew its young talent rather then raided other clubs talent pools, had rural values, could rise up against a better team when it got its momentum going (i.e. a team that could run on emotion which means they were always a shot). Geelong has had a lot more ideologist supporters then other clubs over the years because of the attacking nature they have employed. A lot of new supporters who didn't start with a tribe from an early age choose Geelong as their club of choice over the years because of these factors. Ideologists will not support the club unconditionally. This is because Geelong is special and if you take away what is special then Geelong is no longer Geelong to an ideologist. Some ideologists may always follow the club no matter what but the strength of that support will change depending on how the club evolves. And some ideologists have a tipping point when they will stop following the club altogether even though they might not know it. However, if in an alternative reality the ideologists had different family or lived in a different location then they probably wouldn't follow another team as strongly as Geelong. Or they may have found their way to supporting Geelong anyway. Unlike the tribalists. Geelong ideologists were only ever meant for Geelong.

Now why does this matter. Many of the ideologists have been wounded by the clubs approach to football over the past decade. They feel like Geelong is losing what has made them special (or has already lost it). The club has lost its attacking flare and become the club of control football. It has turned to stealing players from other clubs like the Carltons and Hawthorns of the past rather than recruit young kids and train them up. Geelong has lost the ability to rise up on emotion and momentum football and pile on goals in quick succession against anyone. For many ideologists the club right now looks like the clubs they used to hate. And this makes these supporters angry and sad as they see part of what they love drift away. Its not about the win loss record (although they are often positively correlated).

Tribalists confuse this loss of love or anger with bandwagonism or being spoiled. Tribalists feel Ideologists are not real supporters. Ideologists on the other hand don't understand why Tribalists aren't as upset by the change in the club. They also see Tribalists as not real supporters because what they love about Geelong doesn't appear to be loved by the Tribalists. I.e. the ideologists have come to the realisation that the tribalists don't see what was special and perhaps never did.

And this is where we are at. Tribalists don't see Ideologists as real supporters and Ideologists don't see Tribalists as real supporters. Ideologists are drifting away from the club as they feel the club lose what made it special to them in the first place. A number of supporters have drifted away from this board over the years and they appeared to me to be the ones that fit more into the ideologist category and these boards have been left with mostly Tribalists.

For many ideologists they would rather the club go back to its roots even if that means a number of poor performing years. Its better to be a Geelong struggling with a path to a future then to not be Geelong at all.

Now no one fits perfectly into these descriptions. They are simplified descriptions after all. But I do see many lean one way or the other. How do we better get along? Can we atleast understand our point of views or where they are coming from? Can tribalists understand the pain some supporters are going through is not just because of the results but is an existential threat to what they value about the club? They are not just non stop whingers.

Can we learn to be more like each other? Can Tribalists also think about what they love about the club that is distinct from others so we can share in what is special about Geelong? Can ideologists come to terms with the idea that there is value in tribe identity for no other reason then that is your tribe. I.e. Can they embrace unconditional support for geelong no matter where the club goes? As an ideologist this last concept is something I struggle with but I'm trying. All the data suggests belonging to tribes does make people happier and happiness is the meaning to life (or as close as we will get one). So there must be good in it. Plus no matter why we started following geelong we have become a family in some ways. And family stick together.

Anyway that's all I have. Hope people are recovering ok from last night. Regardless of who you are.

Go Geelong
Interesting take... and a different type of post that deserves credit.

My take is that while its difficult is what is the real alternative. Geelong do not play the type of football they have traditionally been associated with... does anyone play that way? I do not see Rich or now Melb as playing the type of football that was traditionally what I suspect an "idealist" is craving.

I suspect the idealist taste you are referencing was developed 60 years ago, maybe earlier. It was the Davis mindset, allow players to play with skill etc .. it an era when our song was developed... play the way it should be played etc.I wonder if thats possible any more in this professional era. Its like yearning for the days hand to hand spartan warfare..and we have moved on to trenches and attacking people we do not even see.

The comp evolves and what was can probably not be anymore.

I would say even in that era... did we steal players? How did Polly get to our club? The only era that I remember where mostly focused on development was the Thompson era.... But even then..did we steal Ottens? If FA had been in then would we have tried to add a FA? Where we are on field and off , is a response to professionalism. In the AFL across the board, players no long playing in free space able to show skills. Look at lower levels and one can see talent being allowed to surface. At AFL level, its a different game.

We are at a point where one arrives when winning and always staying competitive is the mantra. I can understand how we get to this point because seeing only a few sides dominate and bully sides in the 70's and the 80's , watching us fail.. I can see how all sides just do what ever they can to win. And as defence winning, and stopping talent became successful most coaches copied it. Less talent is need to be defensive that to be attacking and creative.

Was it as good as we think. 60's thru to the 90's Do we yearn to return to those days of being an enigma. A talented side that failed in finals? Id say no. There is only one era in my life time that gave some semblance of equity to both style and success ... and I doubt its repeatable.

The side we built thru the draft and thru Father Son was a convergence of judgement, work and luck. That we could play the way we could was a combination of a superior group ..and opposition that had yet to tactically build a response to it. One can only play a certain way if you are allowed to , if you are good enough to determine game style or the opposition is not strong enough to stop you.

The last time I watched vision of the 07 GF, I was amazed at how open play was. The MCG looked twice as big. I think the days of Spartan football are gone and never coming back while we have 18 super trained athletes that focus so intently of the negatives.

Im not sure where I fit in you tribe V idealist theory...but I can say..whether its just age or the style of the game , that winning and losing no longer has that same leverage over me. If we win by playing a certain way ... does it entirely satisfy. If we lose trying to play a certain way is that acceptable? Traditionally , idealistically, we have been a side of skill. We often recruited from the west, often because players from there were outside and skill. I do not see any side in the afl that plays like that now. Chaos and high intensity rules the roost. Maybe a super side of the best players in the league could beat it. How you build that side Im not sure.

And the Draft is not cure all. If it was others sides would have won flags with the picks they have had. Yet I do not see sides being successful without paying for its core thru the draft with early picks.
 
I'd suggest this describes the overwhelming majority of people. The whole "everyone's either a tribalist or an ideologist" premise of this thread is absurd.
I do say that people lean one way or the either and no one actually fits the description as they are extremes. To explain everything in a nuanced way you would need many more pages. I thought the post was long enough as it was.
 
As someone who's had a crack at you before Seeds (because from my limited visits here, it seemed to me you only ever had negative things to say about the club) I'd like to thank you for this post because it goes some way to explaining where you (and others, perhaps) are/have been coming from with the negativity over the past few years.

I see myself as in-between the groups you described. I followed Geelong because my Dad did/does and was lucky to grow up with Ablett Snr. in the team and then get spoiled in my early-twenties with the 2007-11 squad. I'm tribal in the sense that I'll always follow Geelong and, even though I don't actually CARE about football that much (if we lose, I'm over it within minutes - it's entertainment to me and I wouldn't get sad or angry about a bad movie I watched, for example) I also loved the attacking brand of footy Geelong used to play. I have remarked in the past that I don't get as excited for Cats games as I used to because they're quite often dull, dour and slow. I like that we win, I like that we show heart in that we are almost always a chance to come back if we're losing a match but I don't like the super-slow control game, especially with some of the players we have at our disposal.

I've been a defender of Scott and thought some of the Scott-bashing to be verging on hysterical but it does make more sense to me when put in the context of fans seeing him as deconstructing what they loved about the club. The cynical part of me does think the "Play the kids and stop topping up!" crowd might also be the first to complain if we did that and spent a few years losing more than we win. The sustained success we've had (purely in terms of winning roughly 2/3 games - or more - over a 15 year period) absolutely breeds a sense of entitlement in supporters, even ones who are self-aware and try not to be that way.

My response feels meandering but I guess what I'm trying to say is I do see the issue some have if they think the topping up and ultra-defence/slow-gameplan has eroded Geelong's "identity". I too would like to see more focus on speed, pressure and taking the game on. You watch Melbourne or the Dogs or, hell, even Essendon this year and could feel a sense of envy for their fans watching that brand of footy. I'd love to see a shift back to our attacking DNA but I am also okay with topping up to try and constantly challenge, as long as we weigh that up with actually playing the kids who show promise. We've been astute so far in that nobody aside from Caddy and Lincoln McCarthy who we've let go has gone on to make us look foolish. Whether players like Narkle, Clark and Constable would make us look silly if they go for more game-time elsewhere, I don't know but they are guys I would have been playing ahead of "top-ups" like Dahlhaus, Rohan and Higgins.

So, olive branch accepted and I do echo the sentiment that I hope fans are feeling okay enough today and that we can hopefully be decent to each other and productive rather than just bitter and vitriolic when discussing how we think the club should move forward and what failures led us to last night's dismal performance.
Thanks great post. The aim of this thread is to help posters understand each other motivations. we can disagree but at least if we understand a bit why we disagree then i think we will get along better.
 
Last edited:
There's a group in the middle too, people like me.
Have a bit of both.
Happy to trust the club in most things but also happy to be critical in areas I feel they lack in.
There's nothing wrong with pragmatism.
Yep will be plenty of people in the middle too. Thats probably where the mode is.
 
I do say that people lean one way or the either and no one actually fits the description as they are extremes. To explain everything in a nuanced way you would need many more pages. I thought the post was long enough as it was.
Exactly. I saw this as a debate. Not an argument. A philosophical idea to ponder if you will.
Nothing in life is black and white.
But no. A mod has already wanted it to be an argument not a debate of ideas and wants it gone.
 
Ridiculous post clearly designed to strawman people who disagree with the particular criticisms you have of the club.

Agreeing with particular choices the club have made that *you* think are wrong does not make someone "unconditionally supportive of the club". It just means that they agree with *those particular decisions*. You're erroneously conflating people happening to agree with club decisions that you think go against club identity with the idea that these people are unwilling to criticise the club.

Case in point: I am highly supportive of the club's recruitment policy of the past decade. I think it was both a) the right thing to do and b) mostly executed extremely well (with some notable exceptions of course). However, I am STRONGLY critical of our appalling finals record, and I attribute that mainly to the fact that Chris Scott's coaching, for whatever reason, breeds mentally weak players who cannot stand up under finals pressure. I also think the match committee have been cowardly over the last decade when it comes to their refusal to make tough but necessary decisions to drop senior players like Dahlhaus and Higgins, and this has resulted in an opportunity cost for the development of our youth.

I have many other criticisms of the club as well. I know that others you would include in the tribalist category of your reductive "tribalist vs. ideologist" framing have their own strong criticisms of the club too, but you just selectively choose to ignore these criticisms so that you can act like these posters only ever agree with what the club does.
i think you may have misread the post. I was using examples That reflect on my values and those I see of many other supporters. I did state that they werent constrained to these examples. You can support the chris scott approach and be an ideologist. Not that being a tribalist is bad either. i thought i posted a lot of postivies about that type of supporter as well. There is no good or bad here. Just different supporters who approach the club differently.
 
Exactly. I saw this as a debate. Not an argument. A philosophical idea to ponder if you will.
Nothing in life is black and white.
But no. A mod has already wanted it to be an argument not a debate of ideas and wants it gone.

I saw it likewise, I don't think Seeds meant it as a literal this side vs that side thing but just differing views and ideas regarding the club.
Although in fairness to those who have/might bite, Seeds does at times post like that (like plenty of others too).
 
Yep will be plenty of people in the middle too. Thats probably where the mode is.

What's the point of the thread then if your whole premise ("there appear to me to be two distinct types of Geelong supporters") is by your own admission completely negated by the fact that most people do not fit in to one category or the other?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top