Media discussion - 2024/25

Status
Not open for further replies.
petrusha said:
The problem for City in this regard is that the three decades between, say, 1978 and our takeover in 2008. Gary Neville was born in 1975 so he won't remember City winning at Wembley a year later, or chasing Liverpool for the title another year on (when we twatted Spurs 5-0 to almost confirm their relegation), or even the 1981 final and replay.

What he does remember is 30 seasons from 1978/79 in which we finished in the top ten of the top flight on only seven occasions (only three times higher than ninth and twice above eighth). He'll remember the twenty-year period in which we spent nine seasons out of the top flight (if we take Spurs, Everton and Villa as a comparison, they had one between them in the same period). He'll remember us, after 1981, not even playing in another domestic semi-final until the second decade of the new millennium.

He won't remember Maine Road in the seventies, when it was in the words of Joe Royle a good friend to a good team and one of the best stadiums in the land. He'll certainly remember it when no one could seriously attempt to give it that label after a grievously botched reconstruction.

He won't remember the Manchester derbies in the seventies, when City often started favourites and regularly won. He will, however, recall the more than two-decade stretch from February 1981 to November 2002 in which City often weren't even good enough to be in the same division as United and, when they were, rarely threatened a derby win. The 5-1 trouncing at Maine Road in 1989 was a great day but a lobe victory over the enemy in over 20 fixtures during the above period.

At any time up until the late fifties, City would probably have been regarded as a bigger club than Spurs. The Londoners had a golden period in the early sixties as City declined, which no doubt put them ahead, but I'd argue that our resurgence under Mercer and Allison restored us to a similar level. In the late seventies and early eighties, no one would have questioned the right of either City or Spurs to be labelled genuine big clubs.

Our subsequent under-achievements, for what we can primarily thank that twat Swales, have skewed the perception, but represent an outlier in our history. Unfortunately, our performance was abysmal for a club of our size and it definitely affected the view of us in the wider football world. There are loads of media people of a similar age to Neville who think similarly to him, unfortunately, so this is a common narrative.

It's really irrelevant, though. Plenty of major clubs have, through a combination of external cash and top management, come from humble pasts to sit at the top table.

United themselves, funded by James Gibson and managed by Busby, came to the fore post-War. Before then, the club had been a complete nonentity for decades apart from a four-year spell when they were hugely advantaged by having been able to sign four top players from City in highly unusual circumstances.

Liverpool were firmly in Everton's shadow until Shankly arrived and inspired a resurgence in the early sixties. That was abetted by director Eric Sawyer, an appointee of John Moores, who funneled Littlewoods Pools money into the club to finance Shankly's lofty transfer ambitions.

Arsenal, the Woolwich Nomads, were Charlton Athletic's slightly less popular forerunner before becoming football's first franchise club. The tainted owner, Henry Norris cheated the club's way into the top flight, then lured Herbert Chapman from Huddersfield, before finally being banned from the game for financial impropriety.

If City play the cards right, then in 20 years time, City's less successful days in the past will be swept under the carpet by the media just in the manner of the three above examples. City-supporting FOCs like me, if I survive that long, will enjoy the memory, while Neville will be howling at the moon claiming we're not a real big club. Idiot.
Click to expand...
brilliant,spot on, Swales destroyed a 100 year reputation , i think the Times newspaper put a chart together in
the year 2000 ,Ranking clubs by cups won,league standings throughout history attendances ect,
if i recall ,each club got a points total.Ithink it went something like.
utd
liverpool
arsenal
eveton
 
1964 said:
brilliant,spot on, Swales destroyed a 100 year reputation , i think the Times newspaper put a chart together in
the year 2000 ,Ranking clubs by cups won,league standings throughout history attendances ect,
if i recall ,each club got a points total.Ithink it went something like.
utd
liverpool
arsenal
eveton,and then city spurs and newcastle pretty much grouped together and that was before the take over,
Click to expand...
 
Jam Tomorrow said:
I didn’t see what the rat had to say about City yesterday as the telly is switched off once the comedy ends, plus I have it virtually muted so don’t hear the sad twat droning on, however, him mentioning City aren’t as big as “insert club” is pure deflection. The rags are a skip fire on and off the pitch. Don’t take the bait, the **** is just being a ****.
Click to expand...
He was trying to make the point about what he perceives as Tottenham's underachievement as a club under ENIC/Daniel Levy. He spoke for several minutes (in my eyes, this was to mainly deflect and deny the opportunity for any analysis of United's current plight, which was almost ignored in the studio).
To illustrate his point about Spurs, he made the observation that he considered that, at the time of the ADUG takeover of City in 2008, he considered Spurs were a bigger club than City. He made no historic references to the 2 clubs before 2008. Why he chose City to make his point is very questionable, other than to stir the shit storm ? What he did say was that since 2008, City (through astute management and sound investment) have leapt ahead of Spurs in every way - not exactly stating anything other than the very obvious. As I said earlier, City did finish higher than Spurs (by 9 points in fact) in the season immediately prior to the takeover so I don't entirely accept his point even taken at face value - which was probably a not so subtle dig at City.
 
There is a Light said:
Tottenham are a big club, same as Villa, Everton, Newcastle, City. I’d say all of these clubs were in the next tier of clubs after United, Liverpool and Arsenal. We’ve been fortunate with our takeover and success in the last 15 years and we’ve moved up a level, but I see no shame in being grouped with the clubs mentioned. There are plenty of “big” clubs in English football, and does it even matter at the end of the day anyway?
Click to expand...
It's all playground stuff
 
Neville has come out with some shite over the years but this takes the biscuit. The punditry for English football is at an all time low, all ex dippers or rags and worst of all they’re all relatively young so we’re stuck with them for the foreseeable. It’s all about these little soundbites and youtube videos, everything is sensationalised.
 
Jwoody19 said:
Neville has come out with some shite over the years but this takes the biscuit. The punditry for English football is at an all time low, all ex dippers or rags and worst of all they’re all relatively young so we’re stuck with them for the foreseeable. It’s all about these little soundbites and youtube videos, everything is sensationalised.
Click to expand...
I find the best way to cope is the mute button.

However whilst that helps my blood pressure I do get totally peed off that they continue to spout their lies, bs and vitriol unchallenged.
 
stan bowles said:
He was trying to make the point about what he perceives as Tottenham's underachievement as a club under ENIC/Daniel Levy. He spoke for several minutes (in my eyes, this was to mainly deflect and deny the opportunity for any analysis of United's current plight, which was almost ignored in the studio).
To illustrate his point about Spurs, he made the observation that he considered that, at the time of the ADUG takeover of City in 2008, he considered Spurs were a bigger club than City. He made no historic references to the 2 clubs before 2008. Why he chose City to make his point is very questionable, other than to stir the shit storm ? What he did say was that since 2008, City (through astute management and sound investment) have leapt ahead of Spurs in every way - not exactly stating anything other than the very obvious. As I said earlier, City did finish higher than Spurs (by 9 points in fact) in the season immediately prior to the takeover so I don't entirely accept his point even taken at face value - which was probably a not so subtle dig at City.
Click to expand...

Not just Spurs but every other English club….
 
69FACUPfinal said:
I find the best way to cope is the mute button.

However whilst that helps my blood pressure I do get totally peed off that they continue to spout their lies, bs and vitriol unchallenged.
Click to expand...
I’m with you on that one. Never thought I’d watch football in silence but I’ve done it a few times this season
 
Giovinco said:
Spot on mate why did bring us into the conversation?

The agenda is disgusting
Click to expand...

There’s a weird obsession with anything Rag or Scouser to keep talking about the size of clubs.
The obsession Rags have with being the biggest club in the world is as weird as it is incorrect.

They have a larger global following than us but the gap is closing. There’s folk approaching 20 years old that will barely remember a competitive United.
Their stadium is in total disrepair, they are sacking anyone from the tea ladies to scouts and analysts. They’re scrimping on everything. Their 15th in the league and CL football is now a rarity not a given. They’re signing second rate players.
What makes a club bigger than another?
If United manage to create a truly elite player, he’ll want out in weeks.
They’ve always bent over for Madrid on and off the field.
They are only a big club in terms of global fans. And they don’t really help.
 
deano ou812 said:
Neville and carragher have gotten worse,simply down to them now constantly commentating on their clubs on the tv games when they play,they are basically just fans who can’t separate the bias when things don’t go right in matches for their teams ..
Click to expand...
Yes they’ve got worse ever since we started to dominate the league.
Don’t worry though Deano in twenty years time it will be Mainoo and Harvey fucking Elliott spouting the same shite.
 
schfc6 said:
There’s a weird obsession with anything Rag or Scouser to keep talking about the size of clubs.
The obsession Rags have with being the biggest club in the world is as weird as it is incorrect.

They have a larger global following than us but the gap is closing. There’s folk approaching 20 years old that will barely remember a competitive United.
Their stadium is in total disrepair, they are sacking anyone from the tea ladies to scouts and analysts. They’re scrimping on everything. Their 15th in the league and CL football is now a rarity not a given. They’re signing second rate players.
What makes a club bigger than another?
If United manage to create a truly elite player, he’ll want out in weeks.
They’ve always bent over for Madrid on and off the field.
They are only a big club in terms of global fans. And they don’t really help.
Click to expand...
The biggest club shite,is like my dads bigger than your dad bollocks on the playground as kids,the rags spout it as it’s a comfort blanket for them or the default fall back option..
 
Protein Junkie said:
Yes they’ve got worse ever since we started to dominate the league.
Don’t worry though Deano in twenty years time it will be Mainoo and Harvey fucking Elliott spouting the same shite.
Click to expand...
What a thought with those two. Jeez.
Let's hope Braydon Bent ( little boy in taxi with Pep in 2016) now 16, very articulate, knowledgeable and already has a media career comes through to carry the Blue flag in future.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top