- This topic has 64 replies, 20 voices, and was last updated 10 years ago by
.
-
Posts
-
I’ve read sporadic posts about the ‘FA Cup Champions’ song and the arguments as to whether or not it is correct. I see myself as being a bit of a pedant as far as use of the great English language is concerned, and I must say that, on balance and on points, I agree with the great unwashed that ‘FA Cup Champions’ is correct as far as carrying vocal weight to opposing fans and self satisfaction is concerned. Though not of lingual perfection, ‘Champions’ conveys the warmth, gravity, and the syllables, that ‘Winners’ and ‘Holders’ do not.
The latter are not certainly incorrect, in a lingual sense, but lack considerably in comparison to the former as far as singability is concerned.
My point being, no other club in the 142 year history of the FA Cup has ever referred to themselves as FA Cup champions, literally correct or not! No more to say on the subject – it’s been done to death, and I’m sure we’re all bored to tears with it.
However, your comment about warmth and gravity is the biggest load of cheesy, luvvie, thespian bullshit I have ever seen written on this forum ;)[/quote]
I doubt that you have done enough research, or indeed would be able to find out that no club in the 142 history of the fa has referred to themselves as FA Cup champions, either officially, via the terraces or local folklore.
The reason why nobody has used it is a perfectly good argument though. It isn’t true. We are not the Champions of the FA Cup. We are the winners of the FA Cup.
Did Liverpool and Man Utd trade “Championees Championees” chants in 2001 when one won the cup and the other won the league? No, because Liverpool were the cup winners not the champions.
The club have produced a t-shirt with it on now and it still doesn’t make it true just like my belly would not be the fuel tank for a sex machine should I purchase one of those t-shirts from Benidorm.
It isn’t a perfectly good argument though – all you & Griff (& others) are talking about is your own personal preference (& admittedly the preference of the vast majority of others) for the word winners over champions
Unless there is an official FA regulation stating that the team that wins the FA Cup must be referred to as winners & not champions (& there isn’t) & as the Oxford dictionary’s definition of champion is “a person/team who surpassed all rivals in a sporting contest or competition” then I’m sorry but a team who wins the FA Cup can quite rightly claim to be the FA Cup champions
For what it’s worth I was at a cup final involving United at some point in the 90’s & when they won, their fans (& players) were singing “championees” so they considered it acceptable too. I didn;t hear any pedanitc feckers in the crowd round me whinging that people should stop singing it coz they were the “winners” & not “champions”I have neither met you, nor seen you getting down & dirty, to be able counter your argument that your belly is not the fuel tank for a sex machine – Mine is & I’ve got the t-shirt to prove it!! ;) :woohoo:[/quote]
As mentioned I would say the fact that the FA had big boards printed saying WINNERS and announced as we lifted the trophy that we were the cup winners and have displayed on their website that we are the cup winners that we are indeed the cup winners.
Unfortunately the “well nobody has ever used that phrase to describe themselves before” is hardly the most convincing argument around. All words & phrases originate somewhere
At the end of the day it is grammatically acceptable & (more importantly) it fits in with the song far better than “winners”
Mind you, I’m also the kind of guy who has always found the use of “Crwho?” amusing to describe our friends from Gresty RoadYou’ve said this before and it doesn’t!
Winners is two syllables / two beats: ‘FA Cup Wi ners’
Champions is three syllables unless they change it to ‘Champ yuns’
You’ve said this before and it doesn’t!Winners is two syllables / two beats: ‘FA Cup Wi ners’
Champions is three syllables unless they change it to ‘Champ yuns’
It does!!
To fit in with the beat & rhythm of the chant if you use the word winners it has to become “wi-ii-inners” coz “win-ners” is to abrupt & the chant finishes fractionally too early
Champions with the “i” part pronounced quickly & almost merged with the “ons” fits better.
Two words can have the same number of syllables but take longer to pronounce & have a different rhythm/beat to each other. This is the case with “winners” and whatever the part of the original song was!!I am reet
Unfortunately the “well nobody has ever used that phrase to describe themselves before” is hardly the most convincing argument around. All words & phrases originate somewhere
At the end of the day it is grammatically acceptable & (more importantly) it fits in with the song far better than “winners”
Mind you, I’m also the kind of guy who has always found the use of “Crwho?” amusing to describe our friends from Gresty RoadYou’ve said this before and it doesn’t!
Winners is two syllables / two beats: ‘FA Cup Wi ners’
Champions is three syllables unless they change it to ‘Champ yuns’[/quote]
I suppose the same way as everyone enunciates the classic “blue and white army”
or is that adapted to fit the chant also.
Lets move on shall we its the most childish debate I’ve seen on here for a long while. We must have all sung it at some point and it lets other fans know that we have won the fa cup, end of. It’s just the same toffee in a different wrapper. :P
Now then, should I call my dads dad grandad, grampa, gramps, pappa…..
From Matlock to ManU
What a journey!Now then, should I call my dads dad grandad, grampa, gramps, pappa….. Fuckin ell – don’t get me started on that one!!
re childish names, sunderland have banned the SUN for printing their line up in the paper so all week they have been refered to as derland, now that is childish.
It isn’t a perfectly good argument though – all you & Griff (& others) are talking about is your own personal preference (& admittedly the preference of the vast majority of others) for the word winners over champions
Stopped reading, right there. That is all we were ever saying. The vast majority think that Champions is not the right description.
You’re perfectly entitled to be different. The Elephant Man was different, too. Just saying…
http://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english-thesaurus/champion
Never seen it as a problem!
So when we are out numbered 5 to 1 against the Arsenal and us ES2 crowd are singing our hearts out “ FA CUP CHAMPIONS, WE KNOW WHAT WE ARE” and we are winning 4 – 1 in the 89th minute your telling me after a couple of shandy’s your not going to join in .How are we going to fit FA CUP CHAMPIONS TWICE into the song ?
So when we are out numbered 5 to 1 against the Arsenal and us ES2 crowd are singing our hearts out “ FA CUP CHAMPIONS, WE KNOW WHAT WE ARE” and we are winning 4 – 1 in the 89th minute your telling me after a couple of shandy’s your not going to join in .How are we going to fit FA CUP CHAMPIONS TWICE into the song ?I can’t see what this debate is even about other than ‘griffopinion’ being law, every dictionary describes the winning person, team or institution as champions.
Nobody is questioning the validity of calling the premier European football competition the CHAMPIONS League which is so wrong on every level, not one person disputes that Andy Murray winning a knockout tennis competition is not Wimbledon Champion, or the that a single Golf tournament can be called the British Open Championship and its winner the Champion.
Even Wigan Warriors recent trip to Australia was described by the media as the battle between the Champions of both countries, good god Wigan won an end of season knock out trophy to qualify for that match, they were not even the champions of the domestic league, a league system which is an argument some of you are putting forward as the only rightful method to be called ‘champions’
Why on earth does it matter one way or another what kids sing at a football match or if it is factually correct or not, we all know that “here we go, here we go”, “wanky, wanky wanderers”, or “what’s it like to see a crowd”, “who’s the bastard in the black”, “in your liverpool slums” or a whole host of football fan related songs are anything but the truth, why get hot under the collar from this one.
Let me leave you with this, no doubt the rendition of ‘FA Cup Champions’ will be belted at some stage next Saturday and may be heard by Arsenal fans, if the worst happens and they go on to win the cup, if a club of their size and stature start to sing that song will it be legitimate then, the lads in ES2 have invented that song and there is only us that can sing it, perhaps next year someone else may do so, and we will always be the ones to say ‘that was our song’
So when we are out numbered 5 to 1 against the Arsenal and us ES2 crowd are singing our hearts out “ FA CUP CHAMPIONS, WE KNOW WHAT WE ARE” and we are winning 4 – 1 in the 89th minute your telling me after a couple of shandy’s your not going to join in .How are we going to fit FA CUP CHAMPIONS TWICE into the song ?
I can’t see what this debate is even about other than ‘griffopinion’ being law, every dictionary describes the winning person, team or institution as champions.
Nobody is questioning the validity of calling the premier European football competition the CHAMPIONS League which is so wrong on every level, not one person disputes that Andy Murray winning a knockout tennis competition is not Wimbledon Champion, or the that a single Golf tournament can be called the British Open Championship and its winner the Champion.
Even Wigan Warriors recent trip to Australia was described by the media as the battle between the Champions of both countries, good god Wigan won an end of season knock out trophy to qualify for that match, they were not even the champions of the domestic league, a league system which is an argument some of you are putting forward as the only rightful method to be called ‘champions’
Why on earth does it matter one way or another what kids sing at a football match or if it is factually correct or not, we all know that “here we go, here we go”, “wanky, wanky wanderers”, or “what’s it like to see a crowd”, “who’s the bastard in the black”, “in your liverpool slums” or a whole host of football fan related songs are anything but the truth, why get hot under the collar from this one.
Let me leave you with this, no doubt the rendition of ‘FA Cup Champions’ will be belted at some stage next Saturday and may be heard by Arsenal fans, if the worst happens and they go on to win the cup, if a club of their size and stature start to sing that song will it be legitimate then, the lads in ES2 have invented that song and there is only us that can sing it, perhaps next year someone else may do so, and we will always be the ones to say ‘that was our song’[/quote]
The point is, nobody, but nobody calls the WINNERS of the FA Cup the ‘champions’ except Wigan Athletic supporters, and that makes us all look a little bit thick.
Yes, ‘champions’ is correct as per the dictionary definition, but it just sounds like the fat kid who fluked a win at sportsday and whose mother refers to him as ‘her champion’ at every opportunity, while everyone else sniggers behind their hands.
If Arsenal win it, I’ll bet you £50 now they won’t sing ‘FA Champions’.
Lets move on shall we its the most childish debate I’ve seen on here for a long while. We must have all sung it at some point and it lets other fans know that we have won the fa cup, end of. It’s just the same toffee in a different wrapper. :PNow then, should I call my dads dad grandad, grampa, gramps, pappa…..
Speak for yourself. I’ve not.
You’ve said this before and it doesn’t!
Winners is two syllables / two beats: ‘FA Cup Wi ners’
Champions is three syllables unless they change it to ‘Champ yuns’
It does!!
To fit in with the beat & rhythm of the chant if you use the word winners it has to become “wi-ii-inners” coz “win-ners” is to abrupt & the chant finishes fractionally too early
Champions with the “i” part pronounced quickly & almost merged with the “ons” fits better.
Two words can have the same number of syllables but take longer to pronounce & have a different rhythm/beat to each other. This is the case with “winners” and whatever the part of the original song was!!I am reet[/quote]
Nope, you’re wrong.If they sung ‘wi-ii-inners’ they might as well sing ‘champ-i-ons’
They don’t. They sing ‘champ-yuns’, so they might as well sing ‘wi-nners’.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
