Banned from Glory Glory

[Blueranger]

I have been banned from the Glory Glory site without having successfully having a post approved on the site!

After visiting and reading the bile that pours out from that board, i decided to respond with some facts and observations, on current and historical performance and comparisons.

I pointed out the following current facts

We have scored more goals than them
We have won more games than them
We have conceded less than them
We have more points than them
We have, this season, a better head to head.

On past performance, because they were screaming about money, i pointed out that since they were promoted in 77 we have been relegated 5 times once to the 3rd tier of english football and it's their fault if they could not use that bedrock foundation to establish them among the elite.

They keep comparing us to the Rags using success as the comparison. So i pointed out that they were in the shadow of a team with less than half the rags success and who had not won a trophy for 6 years.

I was not abusive, did not swear or offend against any recognised social criteria.

This was the reply i got when attempting to post.

Hello Blueranger,

You are receiving this notification because your post "Re: Congratulations
City" at "glory-glory.co.uk" was disapproved by a moderator or
administrator.

The following reason was given for the disapproval:

The reported message has the only purpose of irritating other posters. It
is likely to damage the quality of this board.

Unfortunately, we can only accept celebratory posts from your big brothers
- the real Manchester team.

Thanks anyway.

Now i am permanently banned!

 

[jollycity]

 

[burning blue soul]

i am going to absolutely love it when city take over the footballing world and crush everyone else!!

 

[vamps]

Oh dear, some people just are sore losers!

 

[Metal Biker]

And that's why everyone wants to be on Bluemoon. That sort of petulent attitude is rife on all club websites.

"Happy, nicey, luvvie comments only about the club otherwise BANNED"
People may disagree with some of the mods on here but you have to admit they're more level-headed, mature and tolerant in matters like this compared to mods of other forums.

 

[Skashion]

Mods on Spurs forums in particular have to be very precious about their little dears. Their egos are already battered and bruised by some northern monkey club robbing them of their rightful place amongst the elite. They couldn't handle some facts to prove that the northern monkey club deserves it as well.

 

[AntonDonJuan]

What is there obsession with replacing the word "fuck" with "love"

Makes their posts confusing as fuck to read

 

[nijinskybell]

Haha the truth has really got to them!

 

[vamps]

This was the Mod when he read your post and denied it!

 

[Craig_J]

Mods on Spurs forums in particular have to be very precious about their little dears. Their egos are already battered and bruised by some northern monkey club robbing them of their rightful place amongst the elite. They couldn't handle some facts to prove that the northern monkey club deserves it as well.

I'm a Spurs fan and I'm also on Glory Glory.

First of all I'll say are you being serious? The trouble isn't you lot coming on to say you deserve it, it's the fact your being absoloute wind up merchants. Your coming on and pretending to be Spurs fans whilst trying to cause trouble. Banter's fine, debate is fine, beign a WUM clearly isn't.

Secondly, blueranger I'm sorry they sent you an E-mail like that abck. I think putting that snide dig at the end is pretty pathetic. but are you sure that's all you posted?

If you want a discussion about this season then I'm prepared to have one.

The main problem us Spurs fans isn't the fact you got there ahead of us. Clearly you were better then us because the second half of the season we were utter dogshite for reasons such as a manager who isn't tactically all there and a lack of striker. But another problem is we're all going to be reacting to the fact you have money aren't we? It's not fair hence the reasons why UEFA are calling their new rules financial 'fair play'.

"On past performance, because they were screaming about money, i pointed out that since they were promoted in 77 we have been relegated 5 times once to the 3rd tier of english football and it's their fault if they could not use that bedrock foundation to establish them among the elite."

What do you mean exactly? The bedrock has only been around since the early 90's. Before that there wasn't much money around. And anyway, if we had won the title every eyar, been in the Champions League every eyar and won it then it wouldn't matter. You'd still eb able to outspend us.

The fact is the only reason you were brought is because you were a team in debt with not much history. Therefore you were cheap for a foreign owner to buy and he wouldn't have any comeption (or at least not much) when buying you. Is it fair that a team can get themselves in debt and then become the richest team in the world because of it? Do you really think that's fair?

Some of our comments may eb directed at City because of money. Even I've left those comments. But it's not City who's the problem it's the rulebook. I guess we all just need to ackowledge that a bit more.

"They keep comparing us to the Rags using success as the comparison. So i pointed out that they were in the shadow of a team with less than half the rags success and who had not won a trophy for 6 years."

Have we been comparing you to United? I have yet to see a comment. Maybe there are some but when you say "kept" you make it sound like it's a regular thing. If there's only one or two comments shouldn't you say " the extreme small minority compared us on one occasion to the rags"?