Argument re: United and their treatment of Munich survivors

Re: Arguement ref United and their treatment of Munich surviours

I'm no cynic said:
Oohvonkyvonky said:
"jonnytapia" - The biggest RAG left on here, ALWAYS crops up on any thread that mentions utd - His post history is littered with digs at City. Don't waste you're time with the fuckwit.
Joined 29/2/12 and with a sum total of just 38 similarly miserable posts. I guess you're right.

Ha! Ha! The level of invective is hilarious: De Niro thinks I'm an "embarrassment", to others I'm a "rag", others a "fuckwit". And why? Because I prefer to not get involved in juvenile point scoring of the very small-time variety. I'd love to know how many games some of the pisspoor respondents have been to - Ooh vonkyvonky, come on, let's see your City credentials. Here's mine: 82 English grounds watched City. Seven unbroken seasons (nearly 300 matches) home and away 1992-1999. 40th consecutive year of watching City. And a son whose middle name is Tueart. So, let's have yours. And I guarantee I'd fucking demolish you in any City Q&A session. I might not know my Scanlons: I do know my City. Manchester City.
 
Re: Arguement ref United and their treatment of Munich surviours

As a young lad in the early 60's Jackie Blanchflower lived near me in Peel Hall, (the posh houses not the council ones)!!

Inside football: Munich disaster: the myth and the misery
Independent, The (London), Feb 3, 2000 by David Conn


THE ANNIVERSARY of the Munich air disaster falls this coming Sunday, 6 February; a time, as ever, to remember the injured and the 23 people, including the eight "Busby Babes", who lost their lives. This year, though, the anniversary takes place in the context of angrier memories, an account of hard struggles and bitter realities, from bereaved relatives and survivors, many of whom are only now beginning to tell their stories. 

For 40 years, few publicly challenged the telling of Munich as a tragic football story; the loss of eight brilliant young players at Matt Busby's family club, which Busby, usually portrayed as a father figure, then painfully rebuilt and ultimately led to a heroic and cathartic European Cup victory 10 years later. However, former players, and relatives of those who died, now say there was a near- conspiracy of silence over what they saw as United's failure to look after them following the crash, a feeling in part that it would be disloyal to the players who died. 

This silence began to be breached only in the summer of 1997. The nine former United players who survived the crash were invited as guests of honour by Uefa, European football's governing body, to the 1998 European Cup final in Munich between Juventus and Borussia Dortmund - a mark, Uefa said, of the enormous contribution the men had made to European football. "I had tears in my eyes," says Ray Wood, the former United goalkeeper. "This was recognition, after 40 years, which we never had in all that time from United." 

At that Munich match two years ago the players talked more concertedly about United's treatment of them following the disaster. As surviving players fit enough to play, they were given no financial compensation by United. Those Busby wanted - Harry Gregg, Bill Foulkes, Bobby Charlton, Dennis Viollet - were put back to work. Others - Wood, Albert Scanlon and the 18-year-old wing prodigy Kenny Morgans - who never regained their form were sold soon afterwards without ceremony. 

United were insured against the expense of losing players; this amounted to pounds 112,000, which was shared by the club and the dependents of the players who died. A public appeal launched by Manchester's Lord Mayor raised pounds 52,000, distributed to dependents according to their financial needs. United's court case against the airline was settled in January 1963 for pounds 35,000, which led to further payments, including small amounts to the surviving players. 

Two players, Johnny Berry and Jackie Blanchflower, whose wife was pregnant at the time, survived but were too badly injured to play on. Insurance payments were shared between them and the club and they received some money from the two other funds. 

Contrary to some suggestions, the payments to the families of the dead players and to Berry and Blanchflower were, for the time, not insubstantial. The widespread anger and bitterness against United springs not only from a sense that more could have been done financially; there is a deeper feeling of betrayal. Many now say that United's reputation as a family club, Busby as its father figure, was a myth. After Busby's return in 1959, and with Louis Edwards on the board then chairman from 1962, United went back to business with players to sign and success to hunt. For many of the families of those who died, contact with United after the funerals and payouts was scant. 

Jackie Blanchflower, who like most of the players, lived in a house owned by the club, had to vacate it. "It was made pretty clear we had to leave," says Jean, his wife. "United were very cold, very harsh, after the crash." By January 1959, Blanchflower was on the dole. Louis Edwards offered him a job in his meat factory, loading pies on to lorries, but he declined, working in a succession of jobs until he later had some success as an after-dinner speaker. When the winger Berry found he could never play again, United sent him his employment cards in the post. Berry moved away to Farnham and cut off all contact with United. 

"It wasn't about money," says a relative of one of the families, who preferred, still, to remain anonymous. "It was about much more than that. For all the talk about the crash, the wave of sympathy which flooded into United, the club did no more than fulfil a cursory financial obligation towards the families. There was no more, no human compassion. It was a business, at a time when football clubs treated players like chattels, and the men who ran it, Busby as much as Edwards, were hard and ruthless." 

Andrew Blanchflower, Jackie's son, says: "My Dad still loved Manchester United, but he was bitter and very sad. I don't even accuse them of treating him badly, only that they didn't treat him well." 

The Munich benefit match, finally held after 40 years on 18 August 1998, was combined with Eric Cantona's farewell Old Trafford appearance, in a European XI. As if to underline its lateness, only two weeks after the match Jackie Blanchflower died, aged 65. Six months later Dennis Viollet died, also 65, tended by his devoted wife Helen, of a brain tumour that grew on the same, right-hand side of the head as the injuries he sustained in the crash.
 
Re: Arguement ref United and their treatment of Munich surviours

johnnytapia said:
I'm no cynic said:
Oohvonkyvonky said:
"jonnytapia" - The biggest RAG left on here, ALWAYS crops up on any thread that mentions utd - His post history is littered with digs at City. Don't waste you're time with the fuckwit.
Joined 29/2/12 and with a sum total of just 38 similarly miserable posts. I guess you're right.

Ha! Ha! The level of invective is hilarious: De Niro thinks I'm an "embarrassment", to others I'm a "rag", others a "fuckwit". And why? Because I prefer to not get involved in juvenile point scoring of the very small-time variety. I'd love to know how many games some of the pisspoor respondents have been to - Ooh vonkyvonky, come on, let's see your City credentials. Here's mine: 82 English grounds watched City. Seven unbroken seasons (nearly 300 matches) home and away 1992-1999. 40th consecutive year of watching City. And a son whose middle name is Tueart. So, let's have yours. And I guarantee I'd fucking demolish you in any City Q&A session. I might not know my Scanlons: I do know my City. Manchester City.
Is that your nomination for "biggest blue ever" award?
 
Re: Arguement ref United and their treatment of Munich surviours

johnnytapia said:
I'm no cynic said:
Oohvonkyvonky said:
"jonnytapia" - The biggest RAG left on here, ALWAYS crops up on any thread that mentions utd - His post history is littered with digs at City. Don't waste you're time with the fuckwit.
Joined 29/2/12 and with a sum total of just 38 similarly miserable posts. I guess you're right.

Ha! Ha! The level of invective is hilarious: De Niro thinks I'm an "embarrassment", to others I'm a "rag", others a "fuckwit". And why? Because I prefer to not get involved in juvenile point scoring of the very small-time variety. I'd love to know how many games some of the pisspoor respondents have been to - Ooh vonkyvonky, come on, let's see your City credentials. Here's mine: 82 English grounds watched City. Seven unbroken seasons (nearly 300 matches) home and away 1992-1999. 40th consecutive year of watching City. And a son whose middle name is Tueart. So, let's have yours. And I guarantee I'd fucking demolish you in any City Q&A session. I might not know my Scanlons: I do know my City. Manchester City.

You're completely missing the point. People think you're a fuckwit because you're trying to tell them how they should support City. Who the fuck appointed you the judge of all things blue ? You sneered at someone earlier in the thread and accused them of playing the "I'm a bigger blue" card, and then you go and do it yourself.
If you are such a big blue, then you'll understand about local rivalries and the banter between reds and blues in pubs/at work and on forums. The fact that you don't appear to understand this simple fundamental part of being a fan, leads me to suspect that you're either a fuckwit or a rag who is trying to be a smart arse twat.
Either way, you're a complete tool.
 
Re: Arguement ref United and their treatment of Munich surviours

BlueTG said:
johnnytapia said:
I'm no cynic said:
Joined 29/2/12 and with a sum total of just 38 similarly miserable posts. I guess you're right.

Ha! Ha! The level of invective is hilarious: De Niro thinks I'm an "embarrassment", to others I'm a "rag", others a "fuckwit". And why? Because I prefer to not get involved in juvenile point scoring of the very small-time variety. I'd love to know how many games some of the pisspoor respondents have been to - Ooh vonkyvonky, come on, let's see your City credentials. Here's mine: 82 English grounds watched City. Seven unbroken seasons (nearly 300 matches) home and away 1992-1999. 40th consecutive year of watching City. And a son whose middle name is Tueart. So, let's have yours. And I guarantee I'd fucking demolish you in any City Q&A session. I might not know my Scanlons: I do know my City. Manchester City.
Is that your nomination for "biggest blue ever" award?

No. I'm quite clearly never going to compete with people who can cite membership of this board prior to 2012 and who have many many hundreds of posts. To them I doff my cap. Now, if I could just get a handle on hitting the Caps Lock button I reckon I could make inroads towards being seen as an even bigger blue. As Vonky demonstrates, putting things in capitals ALWAYS makes your argument that touch more cogent.
 
Re: Arguement ref United and their treatment of Munich surviours

stony said:
johnnytapia said:
I'm no cynic said:
Joined 29/2/12 and with a sum total of just 38 similarly miserable posts. I guess you're right.

Ha! Ha! The level of invective is hilarious: De Niro thinks I'm an "embarrassment", to others I'm a "rag", others a "fuckwit". And why? Because I prefer to not get involved in juvenile point scoring of the very small-time variety. I'd love to know how many games some of the pisspoor respondents have been to - Ooh vonkyvonky, come on, let's see your City credentials. Here's mine: 82 English grounds watched City. Seven unbroken seasons (nearly 300 matches) home and away 1992-1999. 40th consecutive year of watching City. And a son whose middle name is Tueart. So, let's have yours. And I guarantee I'd fucking demolish you in any City Q&A session. I might not know my Scanlons: I do know my City. Manchester City.

You're completely missing the point. People think you're a fuckwit because you're trying to tell them how they should support City. Who the fuck appointed you the judge of all things blue ? You sneered at someone earlier in the thread and accused them of playing the "I'm a bigger blue" card, and then you go and do it yourself.
If you are such a big blue, then you'll understand about local rivalries and the banter between reds and blues in pubs/at work and on forums. The fact that you don't appear to understand this simple fundamental part of being a fan, leads me to suspect that you're either a fuckwit or a rag who is trying to be a smart arse twat.
Either way, you're a complete tool.

Wrong on nearly every count Stony. I've never once mentioned how anyone should support City. Having an opinion about someone's argument with a workmate doesn't equate to me making any point about how they should be supporting City. And no amount of verbal chicanery by you will make that true. I've never once said I'm judge/jury on anything. A forum is a place for debate. Some will agree/some disagree. It's the level of spleen-venting I find puzzling - as if it's somehow not being a "proper" blue by questionning someone's desire to win what I see as a pointless argument.

Banter - yep, good for the soul. Get stuck into opposing fans with how shite their team are/how good we are. But the original poster struck me as somewhat desperate to eek out a nugget of information that he could use to "win" in his verbal battle against someone who'd made similar claims about City.

Then followed a barrage of "only so many posts" a worse blue than blah blah blah. You think I'm a complete tool. Your opinion. Others think that too. Again, fine, their opinion.

Enjoy the game tomorrow.

Peace out.
 
Re: Arguement ref United and their treatment of Munich surviours

johnnytapia said:
Wrong on nearly every count Stony. I've never once mentioned how anyone should support City.

No, not much you haven't.

johnnytapia said:
"online reports and topics on Red Cafe": you clearly have too much time on your hands. Can I make a really novel suggestion? Quit the obsession with "them"; quit the infantile tit-for-tat point scoring and concentrate on what every City fan should: here's a clue...it begins with C and ends with Y. And it plays at The Etihad.

You've been telling everyone in all your posts in this thread that they should support City the way you say you do.
 
Re: Arguement ref United and their treatment of Munich surviours

johnnytapia said:
I'm no cynic said:
Oohvonkyvonky said:
"jonnytapia" - The biggest RAG left on here, ALWAYS crops up on any thread that mentions utd - His post history is littered with digs at City. Don't waste you're time with the fuckwit.
Joined 29/2/12 and with a sum total of just 38 similarly miserable posts. I guess you're right.

Ha! Ha! The level of invective is hilarious: De Niro thinks I'm an "embarrassment", to others I'm a "rag", others a "fuckwit". And why? Because I prefer to not get involved in juvenile point scoring of the very small-time variety. I'd love to know how many games some of the pisspoor respondents have been to - Ooh vonkyvonky, come on, let's see your City credentials. Here's mine: 82 English grounds watched City. Seven unbroken seasons (nearly 300 matches) home and away 1992-1999. 40th consecutive year of watching City. And a son whose middle name is Tueart. So, let's have yours. And I guarantee I'd fucking demolish you in any City Q&A session. I might not know my Scanlons: I do know my City. Manchester City.

I reckon I could run you close on games attended etc but I didn't say you were a rag I said that you were an embarrassment being a blue. i'm an old man and see things differently these days to when I was a youngster. I don't get so excited with shit. so I see it like this, if I say there is a bias, there is. if I say the rags are a bunch (some are ok) cunts they are.
if I say a city fan for whatever reason is an embarrassment then they fucking are.
I am 50 years a blue. not that that means a fucking thing.
 
Re: Arguement ref United and their treatment of Munich surviours

johnnytapia said:
stony said:
johnnytapia said:
Ha! Ha! The level of invective is hilarious: De Niro thinks I'm an "embarrassment", to others I'm a "rag", others a "fuckwit". And why? Because I prefer to not get involved in juvenile point scoring of the very small-time variety. I'd love to know how many games some of the pisspoor respondents have been to - Ooh vonkyvonky, come on, let's see your City credentials. Here's mine: 82 English grounds watched City. Seven unbroken seasons (nearly 300 matches) home and away 1992-1999. 40th consecutive year of watching City. And a son whose middle name is Tueart. So, let's have yours. And I guarantee I'd fucking demolish you in any City Q&A session. I might not know my Scanlons: I do know my City. Manchester City.

You're completely missing the point. People think you're a fuckwit because you're trying to tell them how they should support City. Who the fuck appointed you the judge of all things blue ? You sneered at someone earlier in the thread and accused them of playing the "I'm a bigger blue" card, and then you go and do it yourself.
If you are such a big blue, then you'll understand about local rivalries and the banter between reds and blues in pubs/at work and on forums. The fact that you don't appear to understand this simple fundamental part of being a fan, leads me to suspect that you're either a fuckwit or a rag who is trying to be a smart arse twat.
Either way, you're a complete tool.

Wrong on nearly every count Stony. I've never once mentioned how anyone should support City. Having an opinion about someone's argument with a workmate doesn't equate to me making any point about how they should be supporting City. And no amount of verbal chicanery by you will make that true. I've never once said I'm judge/jury on anything. A forum is a place for debate. Some will agree/some disagree. It's the level of spleen-venting I find puzzling - as if it's somehow not being a "proper" blue by questionning someone's desire to win what I see as a pointless argument.

Banter - yep, good for the soul. Get stuck into opposing fans with how shite their team are/how good we are. But the original poster struck me as somewhat desperate to eek out a nugget of information that he could use to "win" in his verbal battle against someone who'd made similar claims about City.

Then followed a barrage of "only so many posts" a worse blue than blah blah blah. You think I'm a complete tool. Your opinion. Others think that too. Again, fine, their opinion.

Enjoy the game tomorrow.


Peace out.
If you say you are a blue, then I'll just have to accept it as true unless you give good reason for doubt, but with count of 41 posts in close to 2 years, 8 of which are on this thread alone, just what is it here that you find offence with? The OP asked a genuine question and there have been some researched answers, but there is something here that you don't like and this is reflected in your replies which gives good reason for people to question your allegiance.
Out of interest, you say you have followed City at 82 league grounds. Which are the ten you haven't followed City at?
 
Re: Arguement ref United and their treatment of Munich surviours

johnnytapia said:
BlueTG said:
johnnytapia said:
Ha! Ha! The level of invective is hilarious: De Niro thinks I'm an "embarrassment", to others I'm a "rag", others a "fuckwit". And why? Because I prefer to not get involved in juvenile point scoring of the very small-time variety. I'd love to know how many games some of the pisspoor respondents have been to - Ooh vonkyvonky, come on, let's see your City credentials. Here's mine: 82 English grounds watched City. Seven unbroken seasons (nearly 300 matches) home and away 1992-1999. 40th consecutive year of watching City. And a son whose middle name is Tueart. So, let's have yours. And I guarantee I'd fucking demolish you in any City Q&A session. I might not know my Scanlons: I do know my City. Manchester City.
Is that your nomination for "biggest blue ever" award?

No. I'm quite clearly never going to compete with people who can cite membership of this board prior to 2012 and who have many many hundreds of posts. To them I doff my cap. Now, if I could just get a handle on hitting the Caps Lock button I reckon I could make inroads towards being seen as an even bigger blue. As Vonky demonstrates, putting things in capitals ALWAYS makes your argument that touch more cogent.

You don't have to hit the caps lock button. If you hold the shift button down at the same time it does the same job.

Oh and I used to have a fish called Keegan.
 

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.