Open Letter on Season Tickets and Pricing | Club announce price freeze on "general admission season tickets & PL match tickets" for next season (p163)

pottsy said:
Prestwich Blue. Concerned about xenophobia ?

No, just a hypocrite and a clown with no self awareness
Click to expand...
What's xenophobic about that? I'm keen to hear.

My criticism of 1894 was about their obsession with "tourists" which was implicitly xenophobic and contributed to getting an American City fan beaten up.

I know that was mentioned to them in last night's meeting between the club and the various fan groups, and they apparently agreed to stop using the term. If that's the case then I'm happy because it's divisive and encouraging violence.
 
Tim of the Oak said:
Thanks Dave. It’s always good to hear from the Couldn't Handle 2 Cans of Woodpecker Branch of the OSC. It’s clear you have the strategies to unite our fanbase and secure a reduction in season card and match day ticket prices.

Anyway you’ve put me in exalted company with Colin. A Blue who led the fight (along with City Rabin) against the CAS FFP conspiracy against the mighty Blues.

I’ve done nothing in comparison but I have done a few things like buying up 10 tickets and given them away on here to Blues who couldn’t afford to go to Zabba’s last game. I’ve also made the rip off Ticket Exchange less popular and signposted many Bkues to affordable tickets.

I don’t know what you’ve done for any fellow Blues but if you genuinely care for fans being priced make a ticket available for free to somebody on here for Saturday’s game and I will do likewise.

Thanks
Click to expand...
Hi Tim,

Post deleted, blame the Guinness and even worse, I have no idea why you were included in the quote as I was replying to Prestwich Blue and you got dragged into it. Hopefully you can accept my apology.
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
What's xenophobic about that? I'm keen to hear.

My criticism of 1894 was about their obsession with "tourists" which was implicitly xenophobic and contributed to getting an American City fan beaten up.

I know that was mentioned to them in last night's meeting between the club and the various fan groups, and they apparently agreed to stop using the term. If that's the case then I'm happy because it's divisive and encouraging violence.
Click to expand...
there’s no point asking a group to take responsibility for something they are not responsible for.

you’re drawing attention to the fact people going to tonight’s match are foreign, you think you are being funny, but actually it’s spot the difference, oh look at them they’re different.
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
What's xenophobic about that? I'm keen to hear.

My criticism of 1894 was about their obsession with "tourists" which was implicitly xenophobic and contributed to getting an American City fan beaten up.

I know that was mentioned to them in last night's meeting between the club and the various fan groups, and they apparently agreed to stop using the term. If that's the case then I'm happy because it's divisive and encouraging violence.
Click to expand...
I don’t agree with that. I’ve seen plenty of ‘away fans in our home end started on and a few punched - the 1894 group had nothing to do with them.

You’d have to be pretty odd, to read a 1894 tweet and then because of reading that, attack a fan.

I’m going to bet lots of people didn’t have a clue that person was American either, they just thought it was an away fan - rightly or wrongly.
 
Last edited:
pottsy said:
there’s no point asking a group to take responsibility for something they are not responsible for.

you’re drawing attention to the fact people going to tonight’s match are foreign, you think you are being funny, but actually it’s spot the difference, oh look at them they’re different.
Click to expand...
I've been looking at your post history. You slag off everything and everyone. There's a thankfully small group of City fans who've become very aggressive and holier-than-thou, who shout down anyone who disagrees with them. Your post history is a prime example of that.

For a start it was a joke. I didn't hear anything as I had my noise-cancelling headphones on. And if 1894 didn't want to be associated with slagging off "tourists" then perhaps they shouldn't have put the question in their survey. Whether it was their intention or not, it lit a fuse.
 
Cheadle_hulmeBlue said:
I don’t agree with that. I’ve seen plenty of ‘away fans in our home end started on and a few punched - the 1894 group had nothing to do with them.

You’d have to be pretty odd to read a 1894 tweet and then because of reading that attack a fan.

I’m going to bet lots of people didn’t have a clue that person was American either, they just thought it was an away fans - rightly or wrongly.
Click to expand...
Spot on. Some of those flying over from other parts of the block - and as I understand it, coming over from other blocks - to have a pop at that guy probably have no interest in what 1894 tweet or even have any interest in the group itself. I know of one loon who apparently steamed over from 2 blocks away but I can say with certainty that his behaviour isn’t influenced by 1894 in any way. In fact, I doubt he’s even heard of 1894. I don’t know what happened to pottsy’s other post from last night but as he rightly pointed out it’s akin to blaming Kevin Parker for the racist abuse Kyle Walker received due to KP slagging him off on Twitter the week before. It’s utter bollocks.
 
Damocles said:
This sort of shit is why everybody thinks the OSC is one of those pathetic jobsworth Committees that exist at Labour Clubs and social clubs.
You've shit the bed here Tim, in the worst way
Click to expand...
lol. I bet you’ve got a few Jobworths’ Jobworth awards on your sideboard.
 
Last edited:
Northerndave said:
Hi Tim,

Post deleted, blame the Guinness and even worse, I have no idea why you were included in the quote as I was replying to Prestwich Blue and you got dragged into it. Hopefully you can accept my apology.
Click to expand...
Worse thing was that in writing my reply, I left the bacon on the pan and nearly burnt down my kitchen lol
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
What's xenophobic about that? I'm keen to hear.

My criticism of 1894 was about their obsession with "tourists" which was implicitly xenophobic and contributed to getting an American City fan beaten up.

I know that was mentioned to them in last night's meeting between the club and the various fan groups, and they apparently agreed to stop using the term. If that's the case then I'm happy because it's divisive and encouraging violence.
Click to expand...
Complete and utter nonsense.

I was standing two rows behind the incident you mentioned. To say 1894 contributed to it is laughable.

Ultimately, it's the club who are responsible for the scenes in the stands. They're responsible for stadium security. They are responsible for their own ticketing policy, which allows rival fans to buy tickets in the home end (which has stirred up a hornet's nest across the fanbase as a whole in recent weeks).

You're wrong, it wasn't discussed in last night's meeting. The club weren't in the meeting, either.

I did talk to one CM rep on WhatsApp last night, afterwards, who said they don't like the term tourist. I said that we had internally decided to start saying 'non-city-fans' going forward anyway because it's been weaponised and is used to undermine fans' very fair concerns about the risks opposition fans in the home end create.

Please don't try to insinuate that we're xenophobic. You're better than that.
 
Manchester33 said:
Complete and utter nonsense.

I was standing two rows behind the incident you mentioned. To say 1894 contributed to it is laughable.

Ultimately, it's the club who are responsible for the scenes in the stands. They're responsible for stadium security. They are responsible for their own ticketing policy, which allows rival fans to buy tickets in the home end (which has stirred up a hornet's nest across the fanbase as a whole in recent weeks).

You're wrong, it wasn't discussed in last night's meeting. The club weren't in the meeting, either.

I did talk to one CM rep on WhatsApp last night, afterwards, who said they don't like the term tourist. I said that we had internally decided to start saying 'non-city-fans' going forward anyway because it's been weaponised and is used to undermine fans' very fair concerns about the risks opposition fans in the home end create.

Please don't try to insinuate that we're xenophobic. You're better than that.
Click to expand...
You haven't understood the point I've made. I'm not suggesting that the 1894 Group actively encouraged people to attack someone who turned out to be a blue. I know you're better than that.

But this obsession with "tourists" has (a) helped to exacerbate an environment where anyone who is perceived as "not one of us" is fair game for abuse and physical violence. I'm hoping to meet up with an American City podcaster tomorrow evening. He's coming over from the USA for his first in-person game. Is he ok to be in the ground? Does he meet your criteria? Is he going to be beaten up if he films something and someone takes offence?

You've also been quite ironic in saying that the demonisation of "tourists" isn't anything whatsoever to do with 1894 going on about them constantly and tried to deflect responsibility for the attack in 115 onto the club and the stewards. It's nothing to do with the club, who happened to sell a ticket to someone who wanted one and didn't have a Manchester postcode. I used to be a "tourist" when I lived in SW London and went to watch Fulham occasionally. I was clearly lucky to escape a beating (although I had a London postcode)

t's the fans who attacked him who were wholly responsible but the febrile atmosphere that's been created about "tourists" gave them the fuel for that. It's like people shouting about "immigrants" and blaming them for all the country's problems.

As I said, I'm pleased you've recognised the issue and renounced the use of the word. Now perhaps we can focus on the issues around pricing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bez
Prestwich_Blue said:
You haven't understood the point I've made. I'm not suggesting that the 1894 Group actively encouraged people to attack someone who turned out to be a blue. I know you're better than that.

But this obsession with "tourists" has (a) helped to exacerbate an environment where anyone who is perceived as "not one of us" is fair game for abuse and physical violence. I'm hoping to meet up with an American City podcaster tomorrow evening. He's coming over from the USA for his first in-person game. Is he ok to be in the ground? Does he meet your criteria? Is he going to be beaten up if he films something and someone takes offence?

You've also been quite ironic in saying that the demonisation of "tourists" isn't anything whatsoever to do with 1894 going on about them constantly and tried to deflect responsibility for the attack in 115 onto the club and the stewards. It's nothing to do with the club, who happened to sell a ticket to someone who wanted one and didn't have a Manchester postcode. I used to be a "tourist" when I lived in SW London and went to watch Fulham occasionally. I was clearly lucky to escape a beating (although I had a London postcode)

t's the fans who attacked him who were wholly responsible but the febrile atmosphere that's been created about "tourists" gave them the fuel for that. It's like people shouting about "immigrants" and blaming them for all the country's problems.

As I said, I'm pleased you've recognised the issue and renounced the use of the word. Now perhaps we can focus on the issues around pricing.
Click to expand...
You’re off your head Colin.
 
Manchester33 said:
You’re off your head Colin.
Click to expand...
And you are living in an echo chamber where you clearly have no ability to understand or constructively deal with alternative views.

You don't even seem to recognise that the fact you've agreed to stop using the word means there was an issue.

The adult response would be to say "Yes, we realise it's not helpful to use a pejorative label for a group of people who may be watching us even though they aren't City fans who grew up in Collyhurst or Harpurhey".
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
What's xenophobic about that? I'm keen to hear.

My criticism of 1894 was about their obsession with "tourists" which was implicitly xenophobic and contributed to getting an American City fan beaten up.

I know that was mentioned to them in last night's meeting between the club and the various fan groups, and they apparently agreed to stop using the term. If that's the case then I'm happy because it's divisive and encouraging violence.
Click to expand...
Right!

No 1894 didn’t contribute to the American City fan getting beaten up.

At the time of the indcident, it was below where I stand on SSL1, nobody knew he was an American City fan. I would assume, I have to be careful as the incident is now with the Police, and it may go to court, that City fans involved thought he was a Liverpool fan? If they had known he was an American City fan, those City fans wouldn’t have done what they did,

Show me where 1894 have ever posted on X or on any other social media platform, if you see a tourist (in SSL1) beat them up.

In that case, Blue Moon forum members got him beat up, because tourists have been discussed on this forum relentlessly.

Next you’ll be posting the City fans who punched the American City fan were 1894 members.

I’ve got a lot of time for you PB, but every now and again you post a load of ill thought out bullshit! (shakes head)
 
Last edited:
I’ll say it out loud.

The Etihad on a match day has tourists who visit Manchester and take football matches in as part of their visit.(like I do when I go on a European city break)

The Etihad and Old Trafford have football tourist who come to watch the matches and fly home after the match or the next day. They specifically come to Manchester to watch the football matches.

Saying a person is a (football) tourist is not a derogatory word or a negative word,it is fact.

It’s yet another example of the PC minority in football trying to label the use of the word (football) tourist, that has been used for years, as something that is now bad.

www.visitmanchester.com

Sporting attractions in Manchester | Visit Manchester

Fuel your passion for sports in Manchester with our guide to sporting attractions. Immerse yourself in the adrenaline-pumping atmosphere of iconic stadiums, explore interactive exhibits, and embrace the city's vibrant sporting culture. From football fanatics to sports enthusiasts, our curated...
www.visitmanchester.com
 
I raised my concerns with fans reps about the obsession with “tourists” amongst our fanbase, over recent months. To their credit, the fans reps tried to be careful about their language and images (and I wasn’t objecting to the types of characters photographed wearing Arsenal shirts and Man U trackies). I wasn’t blaming any of them for people filming Asian Blues in the ground just for the colour of their skin. Nor the violence at Arsenal or vs the bin dippers. That’s more to do with the wider political climate.

I think there’s a bit of a lack of understanding about our roots, particularly amongst some Blues who weren’t there in the Maine Road days. They might not know they we had groups of fans from the Far East going to games when Oasis broke into the big time or when with he Sun jihai.

Some of it is really tedious. When City confirmed the January opening date for the new North Stand, the first 10 comments I saw on X was that it was going to be full of tourists. I’m looking forward to playing in a 60k plus stadium, even in League 1.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top