Fair Play comparison versus Rags

[M18CTID]

Schmeichel
Irwin
Bruce
Pallister
Parker
Ince
Robson
Kanchelskis
Giggs
Cantona
Hughes
Leighton
Anderson
Beardsmore
McClaire

This team was the most expensive team in the history of football and the club hadn't won the league for over a quarter if a century. So what's the fucking difference between them then and us now? Does he think it's fair that James W Gibson saved United from folding in the 30's after being a joke of a club with no fans and winning nowt for 37 years? Does he think it's fair that John Henry Davies saved Newton Heath from folding after they were a joke of a club with no fans who'd never won a trophy yet he changed their name, built them a new stadium, bought them a new team for an unprecidented amount of money and won them trophies?

As always, you and I are singing from exactly the same hymn sheet regarding this topic. Throw all the above at your average Rag and they will always struggle to give an answer.

I'll also add in that United were huge beneficiaries when City were severely punished for the illegal payments episode - most of our players were suspended from playing but astonishingly were also banned from ever playing for City again even when their suspensions were up, yet were free to play for other clubs (This was overturned many years later when Meredith returned to play for us in the twilight of his career, but by then the damage had long since been done). This lead to United signing 4 of City's best players, Meredith being one of course, all on the same day and this in turn formed the nucleus of their first great side. While we were rightfully punished for these indiscretions, the penalties were harsh in the extreme and could easily have lead to the club folding. Yet some 15 years later, Arsenal were widely thought to have bribed the very same FA into obtaining a place in the top flight. It's nothing short of a fucking disgrace.

Then of course there's City giving United yet another neighbourly hand when joining forces to get Manchester Central expelled from the league - at the time United were flagging, and it was City that carried more influence out of the 2 clubs because we were recognised as being a bigger club. Without our help, United could well have been unsuccessful in their bid to see off Manchester Central and that in turn could've lead to United being Manchester's third club.

 

[Deleted member 14625]

Schmeichel
Irwin
Bruce
Pallister
Parker
Ince
Robson
Kanchelskis
Giggs
Cantona
Hughes
Leighton
Anderson
Beardsmore
McClaire

This team was the most expensive team in the history of football and the club hadn't won the league for over a quarter if a century. So what's the fucking difference between them then and us now? Does he think it's fair that James W Gibson saved United from folding in the 30's after being a joke of a club with no fans and winning nowt for 37 years? Does he think it's fair that John Henry Davies saved Newton Heath from folding after they were a joke of a club with no fans who'd never won a trophy yet he changed their name, built them a new stadium, bought them a new team for an unprecidented amount of money and won them trophies?

As always, you and I are singing from exactly the same hymn sheet regarding this topic. Throw all the above at your average Rag and they will always struggle to give an answer.

I'll also add in that United were huge beneficiaries when City were severely punished for the illegal payments episode - most of our players were suspended from playing but astonishingly were also banned from ever playing for City again even when their suspensions were up, yet were free to play for other clubs (This was overturned many years later when Meredith returned to play for us in the twilight of his career, but by then the damage had long since been done). This lead to United signing 4 of City's best players, Meredith being one of course, all on the same day and this in turn formed the nucleus of their first great side. While we were rightfully punished for these indiscretions, the penalties were harsh in the extreme and could easily have lead to the club folding. Yet some 15 years later, Arsenal were widely thought to have bribed the very same FA into obtaining a place in the top flight. It's nothing short of a fucking disgrace.

Then of course there's City giving United yet another neighbourly hand when joining forces to get Manchester Central expelled from the league - at the time United were flagging, and it was City that carried the bigger influence because we were recognised as being a bigger club at the time. Without our help, United could well have been unsuccessful if they'd tried to see off Manchester Central themselves.

Indeed!

This is history. All part of ours and theirs. We were the bigger club for the first 75 years, we were on a par as clubs for the next 30 years and United have been the bigger club for the last 30 years. But for some reason probabaly 100 of them years are not knowledge to our Rag neighbours. History for them is selective. They literally think they've always been this huge club, yet then tell us we have no history. They're a laughable bunch of fools. Like you say they wouldn't be the club they are now without City.

 

[MancashCity]

Who gives a fuck!!! we got the cash why not buy the best at whatever cost! They are all just jealous and when people try to have ago at us cos of our spending power i just rub it in even more and tell em to look out cos we might go out and buy their gun players - whoever they support!!