Talk:Millwall F.C.–West Ham United F.C. rivalry

Adding missing results

The results on this page were very misleading, only counting statto.com's league results is way off and you miss out on 35 years of results. User:'Arry Boy is right. Millwall's record at the old Den alone is Won 8, Drawn 7, Lost 5. There are still a lot missing, but I added the few I could find. The Millwall and West Ham early 1900's up to 1920 history, before both joined the league seems to be very elusive. Maybe when I get my hands on either Millwall: The Complete Record or West Ham: The Complete Record, will this table be complete, unless anyone else has accurate results from this period. NoOneLikesUs (talk) 14:09, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

On May 15, 2011 while West Ham were drawing with Wigan Athletic and hence will be relegated a plane flew over the DW Stadium with a sign, although it read: 'Avram Grant: Millwall legend —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.178.82.34 (talk) 16:44, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Who uses the term East London derby?

Can find no reference other than Wiki for this term. Millwall is in South London! Unlikely they would describe themselves as East Londoners.--Egghead06 (talk) 07:20, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Bermondsey is in South London, Millwall is in East London. (00:23, 6 January 2011 (UTC)) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.10.87.105 (talk)

Millwall FC haven't been based in Millwall for quite some time. Timrollpickering (talk) 22:33, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

But they originated there, bear the name, and is the reason there is a derby to begin with. The 2 clubs originated less than 100 yards from each other. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.10.87.105 (talk) 23:03, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

This article is not accurate

There is something seriously wrong with this article. My records show that at The Den alone, Millwall played 20 Games against the Irons: P20, Won 8, Drawn 7, Lost 5, Goals for:31, Goals Against:25, and that's excluding games played at Upton Park, and at The New Den. Cheers, 'Arry Boy (talk) 18:09, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Headline text

THAMES IRONWORKS

SEASON LEAGUE P W D L F A P POS

1896-97 LOND-1 12 7 2 3 17 17 16 2/7 1897-98 LOND-1 16 12 3 1 47 15 27 1/9 1898-99 SOUTH-2L 22 19 1 2 64 16 39 1/12 1899-00 SOUTH-1 28 8 5 15 30 45 21 14/15

F.A. CUP 1899-00 5Q MILLWALL ATHLETIC H 1-2

1900-01 SOUTH-1 28 14 5 9 40 28 33 6/15 1901-02 SOUTH-1 30 17 6 7 45 28 40 4/16

         WEST-1    16    6    2    8   30   20   14      7/9

1902-03 SOUTH-1 30 9 10 11 35 49 28 10/16

         WEST-1    16    2    4   10   15   29    8      9/9

1903-04 SOUTH-1 34 10 7 17 39 44 27 12/18

         WEST-1    16    2    4   10   13   31    8      9/9

1904-05 SOUTH-1 34 12 8 14 48 42 32 10/18

         WEST-1    20    8    4    8   37   42   20      5/11

1905-06 SOUTH-1 34 14 5 15 42 39 33 11/18

         WEST-1    20    7    5    8   32   35   19      8/11

1906-07 SOUTH-1 38 15 14 9 60 41 44 5/20

         WEST-1B   10    7    1    2   25   14   15      1/6

1907-08 SOUTH-1 38 15 10 13 47 48 40 10/20

         WEST-1B   12    1    1   10   16   27    3      7/7

1908-09 SOUTH-1 40 16 4 20 56 60 36 17/21

         WEST-1B   12    5    0    7   21   23   10      5/7

1909-10 SOUTH-1 42 15 15 12 69 56 45 9/22 1910-11 SOUTH-1 38 17 11 10 63 46 45 5/20 1911-12 SOUTH-1 38 13 7 18 64 69 33 13/20 1912-13 SOUTH-1 38 18 12 8 66 46 48 3/20 1913-14 SOUTH-1 38 15 12 11 61 60 42 6/20 1914-15 SOUTH-1 38 18 9 11 58 47 43 4/20

MILLWALL ATHLETIC

1899-00 SOUTH-1 28 12 3 13 36 37 27 7/15 1900-01 SOUTH-1 28 17 2 9 55 32 36 4/15

         WEST-1    16    9    5    2   33   14   23      2/9

1901-02 SOUTH-1 30 13 6 11 48 31 32 6/16

         WEST-1    16    8    1    7   25   29   17      4/9

1902-03 SOUTH-1 30 14 3 13 52 37 31 7/16

         WEST-1    16    6    3    7   23   29   15      5/9

1903-04 SOUTH-1 34 16 8 10 64 42 40 7/18 1904-05 SOUTH-1 34 11 7 16 38 47 29 15/18

         WEST-1    20    7    3   10   29   32   17      7/11

1905-06 SOUTH-1 34 11 11 12 38 41 33 12/18

         WEST-1    20    7    5    8   28   29   19      6/11

1906-07 SOUTH-1 38 18 6 14 71 50 42 7/20

         WEST-1B   10    1    3    6    5   15    5      6/6

1907-08 SOUTH-1 38 19 8 11 49 32 46 3/20

         WEST-1B   12    9    2    1   31   13   20      1/7

1908-09 SOUTH-1 40 16 6 18 59 61 38 11/21

         WEST-1B   12    8    2    2   24   11   18      1/7

1909-10 SOUTH-1 42 15 7 20 45 59 37 16/22 1910-11 SOUTH-1 38 11 9 18 42 54 31 15/20 1911-12 SOUTH-1 38 15 10 13 60 57 40 8/20 1912-13 SOUTH-1 38 19 7 12 62 43 45 6/20 1913-14 SOUTH-1 38 11 12 15 51 56 34 15/20 1914-15 SOUTH-1 38 16 10 12 50 51 42 8/20

The Wiver

"One other theory of their rivalry is because of the strong similarities between the supporters. Both sets are seen as loyalists and Protestant compared to some club rivalries being based on Catholic beliefs to Protestant beliefs, ..." is so far from an explanation as to be worthless!

Do none of the people who wrote this section know about the intense rivalry in general between the East End and South East London? Its all about "what side of The Wiver you was born on aintit?".[1] -- PBS (talk)#

1926 General Strike

The article referenced at Ref 14 perpetuates a long held myth and appears to be lazy journalism. I have investigated the general strike in great detail and have never discovered any detail of the strike being broken by Isle of Dogs workers (dockers, shipyard workers, Millwall supporters or otherwise). The concept of anatagonism roused by varied opinions of strike action appears at some stage to have been "borrowed" from the Portsmouth/Southampton rivalry, and fuelled by articles similar to the reference that have shown little evidence of genuine research, relying instead on apochryphal tales.

JSGB 82.34.45.215 (talk) 22:48, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Supporters section

I believe removing this and leaving the heavily sanitized version in history of the rivalry is a step too far to get it through FA. It is has to become so bland to get it through FA I would rather it contained a strong element of the supporters rivalry than water it down. Surely the rivalry for many years now has been between the supporters and not between the clubs? --Egghead06 (talk) 18:12, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Yeah. I thought dividing up the football from the trouble was a good idea, but they seem to want more of the fan rivalry in the history section to establish why we're rivals in the first place. You also find the Upton Park riot stuff is just repeated in the supporters section too, in slightly more depth. It was weak as it stood. If you want to help out and throw ideas into the FA, it's best to do it on that talk page. You contributed heavily to the GA. It'd be nice if this is the first association football rivalry made a featured article. BillyBatty (talk) 21:19, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Also, what's bland and been sanitised? They've only changed the mostly journalistic wording to a more encyclopaedic prose, as it should be. This is wikipedia, not The Sun. What do you think is missing? Add it to the article. BillyBatty (talk) 22:08, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

I think the football and the supporters should be separate. The modern day rivalry is almost all focused on that between the fans. There is no articulated rivalry between the clubs anymore. However, you have run with this and shown great endeavour to get to GA and to push for FA. Only fair I don't muddy the waters. Good luck- oh and think the next phase of the rivalry could be next season!!!!--Egghead06 (talk) 23:25, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Nah, mate. Without your help I wouldn't have even bothered with the GA, let alone got this far with a FA. I agree, I like it separate too and it's why I changed it originally, but it's definitely not been watered down at all. No point doing it otherwise. I actually wondered where you were during the FA! Your input is valued and we need a viewpoint from both sides. Looking up info about Agent Avram ain't really my forte. As for next season, we shall see! Holloway is quite a step up from Lomas. He should save us. What about Big Sam? You reckon he should stay or go? BillyBatty (talk) 07:32, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Well, have been in New Zealand for nearly a year now (Mrs Egghead06 (who was the originator of that ID on Wiki until she got fed-up with the pettiness) is doing a horticulture project) and it is now high summer here so my thoughts strayed away from Fat Sam and his dogsh*t style of football. Won't be back for any of this season but next year for another Championship season when I hope he has gone. I won't go while he is still there!

Does anything need doing for the FA or are we only waiting for the nod now? Let me know if you need any specific input.--Egghead06 (talk) 18:52, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Blimey, you're in Hobbiton! Lucky. Stuck in muggy fog here today. Next season would be decent if you came down and Brentford and Orient came up. Try to bring Palace and Fulham too and it'd be London derbies every week. As for the FA, he's up to the results part. So if you see any comments or edits needed from the reviewer before me, have a go at them. Cheers. BillyBatty (talk) 08:53, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Not in the article but linked, I've done Alf Twigg. If you know any Millwall league info please add.--Egghead06 (talk) 05:26, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Brilliant and what a great pic of him! Makes me want to get out my panini album. Btw, that took ages to source. Had to go through every game and add up the goals for each player. Didn't have every West Ham goal from 1899 to 1910 tho. If you have the resources and time, you might want to check there isn't a Hammer with 11 or more. BillyBatty (talk) 10:02, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Offensive Material

A while back I [removed] the line "West Ham boys, we've got brains, we throw Millwall under trains." The information was reverted back into the article [here]. At the time I removed the material, I noted (see [diff]) that I removed it because it did not comply with WP:SHIT and it also did not have a valid source. Seeing as my edit was reverted with the claim that it did have a valid source I will explain my reasoning in more detail:

• The material could perceivably be taken in an offensive manner if not be viewed as obscene and/or vulgar. It is not informative, it is simply a football song about something described elsewhere in the article. Therefore it does not add anything to the article. Removing the information would not affect the article's accuracy or relevance in anyway. Since there is an alternate source that already describes the events in a non-offensive way these are moot points anyway. Therefore in accordance with WP:SHIT, it should not be included in the article.
• The source of the article is this citation: (Spaaij, p.136). This is not a valid reference, it does not uniquely identify the source. For more information on what a valid citation should contain please see WP:CS.

Levelledout (talk) 00:16, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

Aren't you familar with WP:CS#Short citations? It does have a valid source from a noted book on hooliganism, see here The author Spaaij is clearly linked in the Millwall F.C.–West Ham United F.C. rivalry#Bibliography. A valid way to reference, as suggested by featured article reviewers, It should be included as it is related to the murder of a fan, a vulgar act itself and clearly shows the hatred between the two sets of supporters (the whole point of this article, a rivalry). BillyBatty (talk) 01:21, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

I stand corrected on the citation issue, please accept my apologies regarding that. I understand that the article is about a bitter rivalry. I also think that the hatred is made perfectly clear by the fact that the article already describes for instance that a person was killed and that there were threats of reprisals. Consequently I still fail to appreciate how a vulgar song adds anything much to this.Levelledout (talk) 22:58, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

Writing as someone who was an active West Ham supporter at the time of this incident, the use of the song highlights the rivalry in as much as it shows the complete disregard some West Ham fans had for Millwall fans and for the loss of life. So little that they used it as the subject for a song to taunt Millwall fans and intensify the rivalry.--Egghead06 (talk) 07:41, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

References

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Millwall F.C.–West Ham United F.C. rivalry. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit User:Cyberpower678/FaQs#InternetArchiveBot*this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20131203162833/http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/sport/football/2582091/1964-FA-Cup-final-colour-picture-special-West-Ham-3-Preston-2.html to http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/sport/football/2582091/1964-FA-Cup-final-colour-picture-special-West-Ham-3-Preston-2.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 17:17, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Millwall F.C.–West Ham United F.C. rivalry. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20131004222439/http://www.thefa.com/Competitions/FACompetitions/TheFACup/History/historyofthefacup/1975westhamfulham to http://www.thefa.com/Competitions/FACompetitions/TheFACup/History/historyofthefacup/1975westhamfulham

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 23:36, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Millwall F.C.–West Ham United F.C. rivalry. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.thefa.com/Competitions/FACompetitions/TheFACup/History/historyofthefacup/1975westhamfulham
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111003145800/http://www.wharf.co.uk/2009/08/millwall-angered-by-carling-cu.html to http://www.wharf.co.uk/2009/08/millwall-angered-by-carling-cu.html
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.wharf.co.uk/2011/09/london-wide-policing-for-millw.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141111233344/http://www.whufc.com/articles/20141108/u21s-handed-millwall-tie_2236884_4284527 to http://www.whufc.com/articles/20141108/u21s-handed-millwall-tie_2236884_4284527
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121001154410/http://www.millwallfc.co.uk/club/history/ to http://www.millwallfc.co.uk/club/history/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110604154848/http://www.whufc.com/articles/20110601/sams-the-man_2236884_2369787 to http://www.whufc.com/articles/20110601/sams-the-man_2236884_2369787
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131202225003/http://www.whufc.com/articles/20120203/millwall-match-preview_2236884_2597456 to http://www.whufc.com/articles/20120203/millwall-match-preview_2236884_2597456

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:01, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Millwall F.C.–West Ham United F.C. rivalry. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140305153253/http://www.whufc.com/articles/20130610/memorial-grounds_2236884_3185247 to http://www.whufc.com/articles/20130610/memorial-grounds_2236884_3185247
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150912062702/http://www.liverpoolfc.com/history/records/matches to http://www.liverpoolfc.com/history/records/matches
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121001154404/http://www.millwallfc.co.uk/club/Whos_Who/ to http://www.millwallfc.co.uk/club/whos_who/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:25, 31 January 2018 (UTC)