From Russia With Love

I’m very fortunate that in my working life that I get to visit some pretty interesting places. I’ve been a regular and frequent visitor to various parts of Russia over the last few years and yet various factors have conspired to keep me away from experiencing a Russian game. At times this has not seemed such a bad thing, Russian football suffers from a very negative press here in the UK, some of it no doubt deserved, and at times colleagues and work associates have attempted to dissuade me when I’ve voiced my desire to visit a Russian ground. Foreigners won’t be welcome, the supporters are all hooligans and the Police can be a little, ahem, aggressive are some of the reasons used to try and warn me off.

Despite all of these things I’ve been determined to take in a game. I’ve seen Newcastle play at some pretty fearsome venues over the years, the (old) Den, Roker Park, Ayresome Park, Filbert Street, Victoria Ground, Upton Park, Stamford Bridge, just how bad could a UEFA league tie between Lokomotiv Moscow and Anderlecht be? The chance arrived, I’d be landing in Moscow five hours before the game and a friend and work contact who spoke Russian was up for going along. Decision made, tickets bought and studying a little history of the team and players seemed appropriate, I was starting from a position of zero knowledge after all.

Lokomotiv Moscow were formed in 1923 as the Club of the October Revolution, and this was where the connection with the Russian railways began as many players connected to the railroads were signed up to the team. After a name change to “Kazanka” in 1931 the club eventually stuck with the name of Lokomotiv from 1936 onwards when the club was part of the “Lokomotiv Voluntary Sports Society” controlled by the Soviet Ministry of Transportation. The name change seemed to benefit Lokomotiv as in 1936 they became the first winners of the Soviet cup after a 2-1 victory over the Georgian side Dynamo Tblisi, quite how Stalin (himself Georgian) let that happen I’m not really sure, perhaps playing in a stadium called “Stalinets” at the time helped. Despite being seen as one of the big Moscow sides Lokomotiv have had a relatively moderate history, winning two league titles, two Soviet cups and five Russian cups through their history whilst being runners up in league and cup with great frequency. They did win their first national title in 2002 and repeated the feat in 2004, impressive when you consider the competition from CSKA, Spartak, Zenit, and more recently Rubin. Indeed the first title was secured after what was termed a “Golden Match”, Lokomotiv having finished level on points with CSKA at the end of the season and winning the title after a 1-0 victory in the play off, quite a way to win your first league championship. Oh how I’d love to see Newcastle United achieve such a feat.

More recently Lokomotiv fans hit the headlines for the wrong reason especially in the UK when their fans displayed a banner featuring a banana in order to send Peter Odimwengie on his way to West Brom. A disgraceful incident that can only be condemned was blown into a wider debate about Russian football with the 2018 world cup having been awarded to the country for the first time only recently. As per usual with the British media the incident was used to paint a very negative image of all Russian football supporters and whilst having learned on my travels that there are certainly problems with right wing extremism in Russia I was really keen to see for myself the supporters of Lokomotiv and test the impression created through coverage of the racist banner incident.

My day began with a truly terrifying plane journey. My flight was delayed from Kazan to Moscow and when I boarded the plane I really had second thoughts about the flight and contemplated getting off, the only thing that kept me on the Tupolev 154, the same kind of aircraft that was involved an accident that killed the Polish President Lech Kaczynski last year, was the thought of being able to get to the match! Still, I landed and made it to my meeting point with my friend, a Russian speaking American resident in Moscow for some years and Russia for longer.
The journey to the game was of interest to me and it took barely twenty minutes to travel from Red Square to the Lokomotiv Stadium. What was noticeable was the Police presence as dozens of Russian coppers lined up at each station on the way. A few Lokomotiv supporters looked on with interest & intrigue as my friend and I yapped away in English but there was no edge to them, no surprise as it was hardly a local derby. Arrival at the stadium saw yet more police lining the route to the ground, my mate explaining that it was fairly standard for the Russian Police to swamp the area around a game. Security at the ground was pretty tight, I was frisked twice and had my ticket checked on three separate occasions before being able to take my seat as stewards and paramilitary looking Police looked on.

The stadium was a very impressive sight, modern and well sized for the level of support Lokomotiv attract without looking too identikit like many modern British grounds. Outside is a locomotive representing the relationship with the railways that is a key part of the identity of the football team and its supporters to this day, the club is presently sponsored by the Russian national train company. Our seats were right in the middle of the stadium and provided an impressive view not only of the pitch but both ends of the stadium. One held the main body of “Ultras”, the “South Way”, and the other another group of “Ultras” calling themselves “Reactive”, who were smaller in number but impressive in voice. Not too far from the Ultras shoved in the corner of the stadium were the Belgian travelling support who numbered 43, I counted each and every one of them. Apparently the reason for the ultras being seperated into two groups was a split that led to "Reactive" heading off to the North end of the stadium. Whatever the reason, both sets of fans provided an excellent atmosphere in a stadium that held about half the number of people its near 30,000 capacity can accommodate. If only English football had the same kind of supporter culture rather than sanitised, music after goals nonsense, this was truly impressive.

The game was something of a damp squib from the perspective of us visitors supporting the home side. Whilst Lokomotiv dominated the ball and possession for long periods it was the incisive attacking play of Anderlecht that counted when they scored with their first chance through Argentine Mathias Suarez. For Lokomotiv Russian international Dimitri Sychev and Brazilian forward Maicon were the main dangers but they failed to turn their possession into any meaningful threat or clear chances. What danger they created was a greater threat to the empty plastic seats in the crowd and the Ultras, Victor Obinna ex of West Ham United wasting a series of decent situations to trouble the Anderlecht goal. Obinna was one of two former West Ham players from the side that was relegated from the Premier League last season along with Manuel Da Costa at centre half who put in a competent enough performance. It was a shame as Lokomotiv played pretty well but having added a second through that man Suarez again Anderlecht completed an excellent smash and grab raid much to the delight of the 43 visiting fans who went crackers when they scored.

From the perspective of the visiting fan it was great to see how the Russian supporters got behind their team, or in many cases berated their profligacy in front of goal. It took not 15 minutes for a man with some serious prison tattoos to ask my friend and I “Anderlecht?” as we spoke in English. A quick explanation that we were a Brit and a Yank taking in a game saw my American friend ignored and my being questioned on friendly terms on which team I supported. Surprisingly it wasn’t Man United or Arsenal that my new friend seemed to favour but Spurs and Everton. I turned my nose up at both and he nodded approvingly as I told him I was a Newcastle United supporter. Our friend then turned his attentions back to the game and as proceedings went against Lokomotiv the quality of his insults towards referee and his own team grew and grew. Plenty of questions as to the player’s mother’s promiscuity and the Lokomotiv players “taking it up the arse again” were thrown out in evermore creative ways as all around giggled and the Russian cop just next to us ignored him. It was fine until the second goal went it and then my tattooed friend span around and looked at me, the Englishman, and spat out “it’s all Tony fucking Blair’s fault”! I didn’t disagree.

The walk out of the stadium was interesting; the streets were lined with even more Police to the Metro station and in order to regulate the flow of the crowd every person heading for the train was funnelled between six mounted Police horses, three on either side. This created something of a bottle neck, nothing sinister, but it was imperative to stay away from the horses as they tried to sniff and nibble those who were unfortunate enough to be pushed and shoved closest to them. Once on the other side we walked through the lines of Police back to the metro. I’m not sure that crowd control methods in Russia are particularly advanced compared to the UK and I wouldn’t have liked to have gone through those horses had the stadium been full to capacity.

The experience of Lokomotiv was fantastic, horses aside, with an excellent stadium, good people and zero racism on display at any point in proceedings. One in the eye for the British media was the presence of black Lokomotiv supporters in our section, not exactly the hot bed of racism I’d imagined from tabloid tales. I later that evening discussed the issue of racism in Russian football with a Lokomotiv supporter and was told that the banner had been an act of a few idiots wanting to attract attention to themselves, it worked, and that the majority of Lokomotiv fans were well known as being among the most tolerant in Russia. I’d certainly support that from what I saw. Russia isn’t a stable democracy of decades standing; it’s a country with great income inequality and is to all intents and purposes a one party state. The likelihood is that there will be extremism on show in sporting arenas, it is of course inexcusable, however it is equally inexcusable to imply that all supporters of Russian football teams are racist bigots or that black players will be necessarily be treated any worse than they would be in Italy, Spain or even England. I look forward to my next visit and wish Lokomotiv the best of luck this season, I’ll be keeping an eye on their results.

Mike Ashley Ate My Hamster*

As we all know football began in the 1992-1993 season with the advent of the Premier League. Before then football was a barren wasteland, full of hooliganism and bad behaviour, of talentless cloggers who prevented the emergence of “tiki taka” football the likes of Arsenal and Barca now bless us with. Players drank their way through the season rather than training and observing foreign professional standards in terms of diet and application. Crowds were low and inhabited dark, foreboding terraces that were unsafe in every way. Football was no place for families, women or children and racism was rife. The viewing experience is now vastly superior. Stadiums, no longer described as grounds, are now the best we’ve ever had, we’re told. We get to watch the “best league in the world” and have some of the best footballers on the globe representing the highly successful England national team. Except England, in major tournaments, are generally awful; a lot of clubs play in soulless, flat-pack stadiums that see supporters ejected for daring to stand in front of their seat and create an atmosphere; football is a sanitised marketers paradise where a glossy image is created for global consumption; where away support is marginalised and isolated in the pokiest corners of grounds away from the cameras; where games are rescheduled to suit the needs of international tv audiences the excuse being that we get to see the overpaid and over hyped best players in the world for this gross inconvenience; where prices rocket year on year despite the product or service not improving; where clubs accrue millions of millions in debt as footballers, directors and managers are paid whilst local businesses go to the wall as clubs are saved, immune to the rules of their own market ethos; violence and racism are still visible but its Johnny foreigner in Spain and Bulgaria who has the real problem. My point? No picture, no view of the present or history is ever that clear cut, different perspectives create and fit different narratives, different stories that the teller wants to get across are emphasised with a selective view of the facts. Things aren’t really better are they? They’re just different.

In Newcastle Mike Ashley and his acolytes are currently causing no amount of disquiet over the running of the football club. In truth, he’s been a divisive figure since the acrimonious split with former manager and club legend Kevin Keegan, his own appointment. The owner and the Chairman, installed in 2008, Derek Llambias have been derided for their personal behaviour and the policies the club has pursued, particularly in terms of recruitment and retention of players. Now every move, every (rare) public utterance or action of either man is immediately met with outrage, often venomous, appearances engender similar reactions such as the reported reception Llambias received at the friendly match with Darlington, a farce for many reasons. The list of perceived grievances are many; sacking Keegan; appointing Wise, Jimenez & Vetere and showing loyalty to the former; buying and loaning certain players for questionable reasons; selling Milner; appointing Joe Kinnear; selling Nzogbia & Given; sacking Hughton; selling Carroll without a replacement; leaving the squad paper thin in certain areas; failing to communicate with the supporters since the departure of Chris Mort as Chairman, I could go on but you get the picture if you didn’t know it already. However the ongoing reaction to Ashley and the policies the football club he owns confuses and confounds me in many ways because it seems to ignore certain key facts as well as appear deeply contradictory. I look at the mistakes he has made but struggle to reconcile them with the outpouring of venom and even reasoned disagreement. I look at the paucity of alternatives to the Ashley plan and don’t wonder if a re-conceptualisation of the club strategy is required even if the man himself remains anathema to many.

You will get no argument from me that, in my opinion, the supporters of Newcastle United deserve a greater level of communication from the club in terms of its strategies and plans into the future. Some clear outlining of what the owner foresees the future to be, what aims and goals we want the team to achieve, would go a long way to resolving the concerns of many; it may even reduce the level of bile towards the man himself. I similarly agree with many who complain the decisions made in the first three years of Ashley’s ownership proved disastrous for the football club and that many of the problems we have encountered were brought on the owner by him and him alone. However constantly revisiting what has happened in the past is not healthy or productive and this is where I disagree with many of my fellow supporters. Nobody gets everything right; learning from your mistakes is the key.

The accounts of Newcastle United are something of a mystery, the club has a tendency to compile the figures and release them to the public some time after the end of the financial year although I claim no expertise in this field. As such the 2010-2011 accounts are still outstanding and are likely to be for some time. To the end of the financial year 30 June 2010 NUFC made an operating loss of £33.5 million, as opposed to £37.7 million in the year that preceded it (figures from NUFC website). Overall losses after player trading is taken into consideration are cut across both periods to £17.1 and £15.2 million respectively but it’s clear that in terms of income and expenditure the club continues to function due to the largesse of the owner. In simple terms, whoever owned the club would have to be prepared to stump up large amounts of cash to keep it running at its present level or take out loans with significant interest rates as was previously the case.

That is not to excuse relegation or to agree with every decision made by the owner or his executives. Income from match day revenue rose, gate receipts improved, and NUFC maintained the fourth highest football attendance in England whilst in the Championship. It’s true that income fell due to relegation but looking at the Swiss Ramble’s excellent assesment of the finances of NUFC the club has not been profitable for some time “The last time Newcastle made a profit was back in 2005 – and that was a very small one of £620,000. Since then, the club has registered pre-tax losses of £12 million in 2006, £34 million in 2007, £20 million in 2008 and £15 million in 2009”. Whilst the Swiss Ramble point out that the mix of revenue is good at NUFC the club is still reliant on TV money and cannot compete with clubs who qualify for the Champions League, our position as competitors for top four places being lost under the ownership of Hall/Shepherd. In fact balancing the books, reducing wages and relying on loans from Ashley can be said to have saved NUFC from a perilous financial position, loans at interest rates of 11.72% were secured by Shepherd and this was not something that could continue, banks are not keen to refinance debt at football clubs anymore as the situation at other teams in the Premier League shows. In short, neglecting due diligence may have been a mistake but in my opinion Ashley has turned around that situation by putting his own money into the club to keep it running. It may be hard to palate for some, but he deserves credit for that.

The mistake of Ashley and his charges appears to me to have been walking blindly into football and trying to implement ill conceived changes whilst seemingly trying to figure out what they were going to do. A number of appointments in key roles, and I include Kevin Keegan and Alan Shearer, were in my opinion massive errors that were badly handled and resolved. But I think the man has learned from these errors. I was as shocked and appalled at the treatment of Chris Hughton as anybody else at the time of his dismissal but Hughton was not a great manager; he was a good man who did a good job. This is a ruthless results driven business with no permanence in terms of employment contracts, you can be dispensed with at a moment’s notice, at least you get paid off. Whilst Hughton could feel aggrieved at the manner of his being dispatched he knew who he was working for when he took on the role and he knew the terms of his contract. He knew that Shearer and Keegan had been dispensed with clinically. We’ve adopted a much more palatable style since Hughton left with a progressive approach built around passing players, with pace in the side, that is surely much more preferable than Hughton’s hit Carroll and Nolan might get the knock downs style. All of the outpouring of anger at the departure of Nolan ignores the fact that many, me included, doubted he could hack it in the Premier League last season with his lack of pace and that we feared relegation.

Similarly all of the supporters who condemn Ashley for failing to make significant investment in the transfer market are no doubt the same people who looked upon the performance and wages of Owen, Duff, Geremi et al with disdain as I did. However, spending millions on players has proved a busted flush in the past. The new strategy of recruiting hungry, young, promising talent from across Europe, of building a youth system from which Vuckic, Ferguson, Krul and others are emerging is far more promising than the boom and bust policy of Ashley’s predecessors or the early part of his ownership. Is it not time that we gave this methodology a chance? Had we signed Brian Ruiz, if indeed there ever was any bid, for £10 million would it have solved any problems or potentially created another Luque or Xisco situation? I like caution. I like that we won’t be taken for mugs in the transfer market anymore paying the loyalty bonuses of players like Joey Barton as component parts of transfer fees, as well as tremendous wages that judging by past performances don’t represent value for money. What benefit have we had from offering or extending significant contracts of ageing players in the past? Butt, Carr, Viduka, Geremi, Cacapa, Owen were all at NUFC far too long for me, or should never have been recruited in the first place. We should be making money out of Kevin Nolans at appropriate points, it’s what successful clubs like Arsenal (Henry) and Man United (Van Nistelrooy, Beckham) do. Who really believes that Nolan will be scoring 12 Premier League goals in three years time earning £50k plus a week or that Barton will have five good seasons looking at his recent history?

Buying Tiotes, Ben Arfas and Cabayes is an eminently more sensible approach. To those who argue we will certainly sell them on if they perform, well that is how football works, especially when you look at our finances. Andy Cole left, Les Ferdinand too when good offers came in. What is different now from the past? Not all players will stick around as Shearer has, it’s not realistic. Andy Carroll left NUFC because Liverpool agreed to pay an amount of money that even in the context of modern football was obscene, he’s no more a £35 million footballer than I am a £5 million player, and then I can point back to those club finances again. Did we have any choice? Why should our football club not be ran as any other business is, with balanced books? Would we rather caution was thrown to the wind and more debt accrued? Look at what happened to other clubs who maxed out their credit cards, Leeds, Sheffield Wednesday, Bradford City and now maybe Everton. It’s no guarantee of success. Players and agents are well aware of the tricky relationship between club and supporters and I don’t doubt that in specific instances the loyalty of fans is used to protect the image of players as they move for bigger pay deals and longer contracts at the end off their relatively mediocre careers. Players don’t simply move because they don’t like Ashley, they move for money and other reasons as well, its too simplistic to argue otherwise surely?

The argument is made that Ashley should splash the cash, but why? After he has made mistakes the supporters were rightly angry and upset and heaped abuse on him, some of it excusable. However, Ashley could quite easily have pulled the plug and called in his loans. Instead we have 10 year season ticket deals freezing prices something Arsenal and QPR fans are envious of I’m sure. We might not have a top four team but then we don’t have top four finances. I’m happy that we aren’t in the position of other clubs in the Premier League, how dispiriting must it be to support Everton right now? Would we rather the “ambition” (Joey Barton) of QPR? A 40 per cent season ticket increase and a £4.5 million Anton Ferdinand? No thanks. We could show the ambition of Sunderland and sign two 30 something ex Manchester United players on big salaries that will be paid whether they’re injured or past it in two years? Again, no thanks. Players can pontificate about ambition and praise the abilities of their close colleagues but are they qualified to comment on the operation of a football club, not in my mind. They play football. How many ex footballers occupy senior executive positions in football or any other industry, very few.

The anti Ashley brigade have little argument in the main. There is no coherent voice. I hear rhetoric, “get out of our club”, “never come back to the city” but there is little in the way of suggestion of plausible alternatives. NUST wanted to buy the club with private pensions, how would it then be run? We wouldn’t be spending millions on top players looking at the finances, we wouldn’t be able to resist big offers for players. Would Enrique and others hang around if Liverpool or another team came knocking with massive wages or European football? The fact is we have no guarantee that if somebody does buy NUFC they will be an improvement on Ashley. If ticket prices were hiked up by 40 per cent, if we were saddled with debt a la Glazer would we be really happy, is that preferable to rid us of Ashley? It might be nice seeing us win trophies with an Abramovich figure in charge but I’d still rather develop local and international talent and build a team following the methodology of Lyon, Lille, Udinese than sell out to international markets and become the play thing of an oligarch or sheikh. Give me a man who makes a twat out of himself drunk ahead of that fate, it reflects me more. The team can at least retain its pride of place at the centre of the community, as a local institution and source of pride that reflects the identity and culture of its support and the city.

In summary we’ve won nothing and achieved little since 1969. Countless talented players have left our side to win things, mainly mediocre managers have raised expectations beyond their limited abilties. A lot of money, mainly ours outside of the Sky tv revenue years, has been expended on mediocrity or worse. Ashley has made errors, he continues to make one with his uncommunicative approach in my opinion, but he does seem capable of learning from his mistakes and making hard decisions that bring furious reaction. I’m cynical and don’t wonder if some of the negative response is fuelled by a media peeved that they have limited access? Wouldn’t it be conciliatory to acknowledge the errors and move on? Wouldn’t we have a better argument for dialogue and transparency if we removed the bile and the furious reaction to every utterance or Chinese meal? Yes, he’s dropped some bollocks but we’re a damn sight better off now than we were in the latter days of Hall and Shepherd in my opinion. We’re a lot better off than Everton and others and we have a promising young side that encourages me more than teams who have invested significantly greater resources in players. I for one am pleased that the situation is as it is, for football surely cannot sustain the massive expenditure of the past, what industry can function like that in the long term? Teams that adjust will do better than teams that continue to operate at a loss and we should hope that we can be profitable and competitive in the future without needing to rely on Ashley or anybody else. That is the direction his current plan is taking us in looking at the figures, sustainability that other clubs don’t appear to have without their sugar daddies or their champions league revenue. It would be nice to hear it from Mike or Derek, whatever my opinion of them as people, to affirm where we are going because in many ways it appears positive to me. Simply picking over the bones of every past error isn’t helping anybody looking to the future and is no starting place for an argument for dialogue.

FOOTNOTE: I’ve been called a t**t and a c**t more times than I can remember. If you disagree and are militantly against Mike Ashley and his apparent vision then it’s your right, I’d (seriously) love to hear your alternative to the status quo. Please at least construct an argument or just ignore me. You’ll be a better person for it.

*He didn’t really, it’s a joke

The two “Meister der Schmerzen” (Champions of Pain)

Schalke 04 entertain Manchester United in the first leg of the Champions League Semi Final on Tuesday night, here’s why all Newcastle United supporters should consider backing the German side even more than they were probably going to anyway.....

The cities of Newcastle upon Tyne and Gelsenkirchen were twinned in 1947 just two years after the end of the Second World War formalising a friendship that endures to this day. The cities share a unique industrial, social and footballing heritage that is worthy of further investigation and promotion as Schalke 04, the football team of Gelsenkirchen, gather more attention in the British media in the run up to their Champions League semi final with Manchester United this week.

Whereas Newcastle upon Tyne has been a major British city since 1400, asserting its dominance over the towns of the Tyne and the wider North East as a trading centre and strategic outpost, Gelsenkirchen developed as the result of the discovery of “black gold”, coal rather than oil, in around 1840. From this point the twin cities share a history intertwined in the industrial revolution and the exploitation of natural resources the profits of which seem to have passed by many of the citizens of the respective municipalities. Gelsenkirchen developed as the industries coal, steel and iron grew rapidly much as Newcastle was built on the back of the coal mining and ship building industries from the 16^th century onwards. While the phrase “coals to Newcastle” is synonymous with the Tyneside city, “the town of a thousand fires” is the slightly more romantic sobriquet given to the Westphalian twin. The towns share surprisingly similar, and equally turbulent, industrial pasts and the economic degradation suffered by Gelsenkirchen’s traditional industries from the 1950s onwards, followed by a regeneration and reinvention, bear close resemblance to the effects of the closing of the Northumberland and Durham coalfields and Tyneside shipyards from the 1970s to the present day. Gelsenkirchen has reinvented itself as a centre for service industries and science innovation, not unlike the call centre and emergent Science City developments Newcastle has embraced. Gelsenkirchen like Newcastle is a staunchly working class city with some of the most deprived areas of the country within its boundaries and these shared experiences extend to football as well as our pasts rooted in coal mines and labour.

The cities share similar sized populations of around 300,000 and are gloriously one club towns sharing a rivalry with near neighbours, for Sunderland read Dortmund, although I’m obliged to point out that Borussia are vastly more successful than NUFC’s poor relations from down the road (they’ve played in Europe in the last 30 years and won). However, it is both the passion of their supporters and the failure of the football teams that Newcastle and Gelsenkirchen define their twin status from the perspective of this Newcastle United supporter. Schalke 04 takes its name from its formation in 1904 in a pub in the Gelsenkirchen suburb of Schalke. In 1929 the club is renamed “FC Gelsenkirchen Shalke-04” in honour of the entire city, not unlike the earlier merger of Newcastle East and West End to form United, clubs representative of their respective cities entire populations. The club’s own website describes its history as “a rollercoaster” and the ups and downs are certainly many.

The most striking similarity between Shalke and NUFC is the shared spirit of their supporters in the face of adversity and, as the Schalke nickname bestowed by a newspaper, “Meister der Schmerzen” (Champions of Pain), suggests, the ability to snatch despair from the jaws of victory is always on show at the Veltins Arena, their home as it is at St James' Park. Schalke were embroiled in a match fixing scandal in the 1970s and been relegated from the Bundesliga three times and yet are still the best supported club in the Bundesliga over time, without the European Cups or recent Bundesliga titles of Bayern Munich or Dortmund. 

Whilst Newcastle have reached cup finals and famously passed up the opportunity to win the League Title in 1995/96 Schalke have a gross habit of choking in the Bundesliga like no other side inflicting misery on their supporters that is worn as a badge of honour, sound familiar? Schalke fill their 61,000 capacity stadium regularly, even for games in tournaments like the Intertoto Cup. Not only have they finished second in the Bundesliga five times since they last won the competition in 1958, they’ve managed to embarrassingly blow chances to wrap up the Bundesliga title in that time. In 2001 Schalke fans celebrated on the pitch as title rivals Bayern Munich were losing 1-0 at Hamburg until a 94^th minute, dubiously awarded, free kick allowed the Bavarians to equalise breaking hearts in Gelsenkirchen and sending the trophy to Munich. In 2006/07 Schalke were seven points clear at the top of the Bundesliga two months before the season’s end and again hopes were raised of a title. On the last day 04 led at home to Bielefeld whilst title rivals Stuttgart played a nervous draw with Cottbus until a Thomas Hitzelsperger goal brought Schalke back down to earth with a bump once again, the parallels with 95/96 are there for all to see. Incredibly as in Newcastle the support has stayed loyal to the team despite complaints from supporters of mismanagement within the club and investment in players who were paid more than their worth and application, signed for ridiculous transfer fees, a kick in the face in a working class post-industrial city as we know from our own bitter experience, eh Damian and Michael? In the disappointing 06/07 season Schalke drew in a home crowd of 61,780 fans, for an away game. Their defeat in the local derby at Dortmund was shown live on big screens in the Veltins Arena, still committed support that most clubs can only dream of.      

However despite all of this doom and gloom, perhaps NUFC fans could also use Shalke’s recent history as a source of inspiration; it is certainly more recently glorious than Newcastle United's. In May 1997 Schalke beat Inter Milan over two legs to secure the UEFA Cup, their first major trophy in 25 years, a wait Geordies can sympathise with. In 2001 Schalke ended a barren run of 29 years without a domestic trophy picking up the German Cup a trophy they went on to retain the following season. These cups were won with the support of Russian gas company “Gazprom” and their significant investment in the Westphalian side that had suffered a financial meltdown and a subsequent renaissance not unlike our own in the early 1990s, outside investment that has brought with it both joy and despair, but at least trophies. What NUFC fans would give for one of those.

So come Tuesday night I’ll settle down, perhaps with a carefully sourced bottle of Veltins beer, and I’ll be supporting Schalke, because like us they never really come up with the goods, their fans don’t often get much joy and are often derided as a laughing stock, but they’re always there, the people from the coal city, supporting their team and town, like us, their twins. I'd love it, just love it if they won.

Good luck Schalke.