Anyone that has ever been Fulham away will know it is always a good day out.

Not only is it an easy stadium to get to, surrounded by many decent pubs that are not “home fans only”, we have also got a huge away allocation (around 6,000 seats).

Fulham’s away end is split into two sections – the normal away end and a “neutral” end. The original plastic club, under Mohamed Al-Fayed they attempted to become a “day out” for those visiting London and wanted to catch a game.

When Arsenal visited, however, the neutral end was combined with the away end, and the entire stand was for sale through Arsenal’s website to away fans only. This took the allocation from around 3,000 to just shy of 6,000 in the Putney End. It was never an issue for fans to get credits.

However, with the £30 cap on away tickets, Fulham have rescinded this agreement.

The £30 price cap for Premier League away tickets was introduced at the start of the 2016-17 season following sustained campaigning by supporters. It meant that loyal away fans would no longer be affected by Category A price rises – it would cost Arsenal fans £4-500 more a season in tickets to go to every away game in comparison to smaller clubs like Burnley.

For visiting London clubs, the Putney End would be given over to the away team to sell tickets. This meant that every ticket in that end would be capped at £30.

Last season, I noticed a lot more Fulham fans under the stands, mixing with Arsenal fans. It was something I had not seen before as previously the Putney End was exclusive to Arsenal fans. This exposed that Fulham had reigned on their agreement and decided to keep the end split – 3,000 away Arsenal fans paying £30 a ticket and 2,000 “neutral” fans paying £79 (2025/26 prices).

I would say 90% of those fans in the neutral end were Arsenal. That means that they have paid £49 more for a ticket in the same end, just because Fulham have decided to re-categorise it neutral fans.

An additional £49 over 2,000 tickets is £98,000. If we assume the previous agreement was for all London clubs and Manchester United and Liverpool, this decision generates Fulham an additional £784,000 a season. And it is probably less than that if games against the smaller London clubs such as Crystal Palace and West Ham are not priced at the highest category.

So a decision by Fulham generated them an additional quarter of a million pounds. Really not much in modern football finance terms. But it then more than doubles the price of tickets.

Yesterday morning, I struggled with my 37 credits to get a ticket. Only limited tickets went on sale to 35+. I ended up with two tickets, not sat next to each other, with a restricted view. I won’t complain, I am going to the game and we will all find a place to stand together.

But Fulham’s decision is denying fans tickets to a brilliant away day. It is meaning that only 3,000 tickets were available (and many of them disappear into the hands of players, coaches, sponsors, box holders, et al), rather than 5,000.

A game that was never an issue to get tickets for has now become an issue. And if you miss out on the away end, you will have to pay an additional £49 to sit in the neutral end. Which is the same end as the away end, drinking in the same bars, surrounded by away supporters.

I have never really warmed to Fulham as a club beyond it being a decent away day. They have always come across as very plastic, with a fanbase of people who just want a day out at the football regardless of who it is. They are the epitome of Against Modern Football.

Their decision to no longer combine the neutral end with the away end for Arsenal fans is a decision driven by greed. They should hold their hands in shame.

Keenos

The latest trend of ex-footballers is to go onto podcasts and peddle lies in an attempt to create a narrative that you were better then what you were.

What these players forget is they all played during the internet-era, when games were live on TV and incidents documented onlines. So why they think they can lie and get away with it is beyond me.

The likes of Troy Deeney and Jay Bothroyd have already done the podcast rounds. And both consistently use the name of Arsenal Football Club in an attempt to highlight how great they were. Both have shown themselves to be liars.

Now we have Tony Pullis doing the rounds. And like Deeney and Bothroyd, he loves telling stories about how he had one over Arsenal.

Now granted, Pullis had an unbelievable record against Arsenal, considering he was managing a small club like Stoke City. And that is why I do not understand why he feels the need to lie about his experiences in playing us.

He has countless examples of getting one over Arsene Wenger, so it is baffling that he decides to embellish the truth in an attempt to boost his own standing in the game.

In a recent podcast I watched, Pulis said:

And Patrick Vieira and Jens Lehmann were on a coaching course with me. They were waiting for me afterwards and I was thinking “what are they going to say to me, two Arsenal players, we absolutely mullered them most of the time at the Britannia”.

Whilst Pullis had that great record against us, “mullered” is a little bit of an over exageration. But one to expect when they are just looking for viral clips. It is what comes next though that Pullis should hang his head for:

So they wait for me and they tell me this story that the only time Arsene Wenger coached defensive work was in that cup game.

Arsenal played Stoke City twice in gthe FA Cup with Pullis and Wenger in charge of their relative clubs – 2005 and 2010. The 2005 game, Stoke were not a Premier League club and Wenger had only played once against them – back in a 1996 League Cup game. It is highly unlikely that Wenger would have specially prepared for Stoke in 2005, so we can assume he is talking about 2010.

They say they get there and Rory [Delap] is not playing. Not only does Rory not play, but you murder us 3-1.

The 2005 game, Arsenal won 2-1. And Rory Delap was a Southampton player. The 2010 game was a 3-1 victory to Stoke. So this is conclusive evidence that Pullis is talking about the 2010 game.

What Pullis is clearly trying to do is show that he masterminded a victory over Wenger. That by not playing Rory Delap, he got in Wenger’s head and they cruised to victory. But how true was this?

The 2nd paragraph of the BBC match report states Fuller headed home Rory Delap’s long throw inside two minutes. Delap started the game, and was taken off on 84 minutes. So why has Pullis tried to change history when it is very clear that Delap played, and was highly infleuntial in the game?

But it is not just the Delap playing or not playing that Pullis is embelishing as he continues:

They say Wenger comes in afterwards and he is lost for words.

But did they really say that? In 2010, neither of Patrick Vieira or Jens Lehmann played. But it gets deeper, they were not even at Arsenal football Club.

Patrick Vieira left us in 2005, and was playign for Inter Milan in 2010, whilst Jen Lehmann was playing VfB Stuttgart; he did not return to the club until 2011.

Now cast your mind back to 2005. Arsenal won 2-1. Which two Arsenal players played in that victory? Vieira and Lehmann.

Pullis has embellished a conversation he had with two Arsenal legends about a game neither played in, to promote himself as a great manager. And that is highlighted in his final words on the matter.

Usually he would blame [thrown ins] “We should ban throw ins and that and the other”. He had nowhere to go.

This shows that Pullis was just trying to show how he mastermidned a victory against Wenger, got in his head, and Wenger could not point to Delap’s long throws. Except it was all a lie.

Remember that 2nd paragraph of the BBC’s match report? Fuller headed home Rory Delap’s long throw inside two minutes.

Pullis has peddled this story mutiple times across many podcasts.

I am not sure why a podcast mic and a few cameras are leading managers and players to lie about what happened. Especially when they know everything is documented in this internet-era.

It would actually be quite fun for clubs, management or players to take these average players and management to court over what they say. It is an attempt to damage the reputation of those they are speaking about. Is is slander.

Of course, that will never happen and our legends will rise above it.

But we just all need to remember, when listening to podcasts are those speaking actually telling the truth? Or are they lying in an attempt to raise themselves up and bring us down.

Keenos