FC United - Oral Hearing - judge rejects appeal (p 82)

[Tueartsoverhead kick]

Re: FC United - Judicial Review day 2 (pg 61)

Finally, if the issue is purely about a building being planned on a field in a residential area, and not about football, then why is this campaign being played out on a Manchester City fans' internet forum? What's it got to do with everyone on here? You're not deliberately playing on City fans' existing antipathy towards anything United-related are you, in this non-football issue?

The fact is luddite is that your club wants to directly affect the lives of some of the posters on here by building a stadium in their backyard. They are opposed to it, and as such, they have voiced their disquiet on this forum.

Thats correct The Flash we are allowed to voice our opinion on an open forum if no one reads or listens to us then so be it.

 

[Mad Eyed Screamer]

Re: FC United - Judicial Review day 2 (pg 61)

Mad Eyed Screamer, it's quite sad to see someone who for a long time stood up for the match-going fan using such weak arguments to try to undermine an independent supporter movement. Your 'middle class' vs 'working class' argument merely plays on a populist belief that only people working on the factory floor or down a mine can be considered working class, and that anyone else therefore can't represent working class interests. A weak and anti-intellectual argument that serves the neoliberal agenda of dividing working people - well done.

The ESPN point is a fair one to make, though does rest on a lack of understanding of what FC United was and was not set up to do. It is possible to be against Sky and its owners in particular, and against the sidelining of match-going fans interests in favour of the tv viewer, without necessarily being against having football on telly at all. The club and it's member-owners discuss and debate things like this, and decides - on an ongoing basis - what is right for the club's supporters and the other team involved. On that occasion it was decided that a game with Rochdale was very different than say a game with Portsmouth (FC told the FA it would refuse a rearranged for tv evening game had we gone through the subsequent round to play Portsmouth at home - in the interests of their traveling fans). So while a fair argument can be made that the wrong decision was made by FC in that case, it is in the end merely an example of football supporters organising themselves and trying to do what's best, and perhaps getting things wrong sometimes. What you are trying to do is claim that it was hypocritical, based purely on your own caricatured and deliberate misunderstanding of both the club and the issue of televised football.

Finally, if the issue is purely about a building being planned on a field in a residential area, and not about football, then why is this campaign being played out on a Manchester City fans' internet forum? What's it got to do with everyone on here? You're not deliberately playing on City fans' existing antipathy towards anything United-related are you, in this non-football issue?

Sorry, can you point me in the direction of a post where I said anything about working v middle class?
I'll answer the rest when I get back from work, just setting off now :)

You scoffed at the idea that FC might represent the interests of the working class fan because some people involved with the club don't have what you regard as working class jobs.

OK, I'll ask the same question again and be a bit more specific this time......
Can you please quote or cut 'n' paste the comment you are alleging I made ref the working class v middle class please?

 

[blueju]

Re: FC United - Judicial Review day 2 (pg 61)

Forget the intellectual toing and froing, I hate the fuckers because they are rags. Just because they hate the glazers they still love the red shite. I have two close mates who follow FC but still glory in any rag achievement and take any opportunity to belittle liddle old ciddy. Don't waste your time trying to appease this Luddite numpty because he's just trying to belittle you in his own manner and put you in your place.... It's what they've always done since I can remember, we have no say on any footballing matters due to us having no history. Just admit you don't want em anywhere near the etihad, admit you hate the cnuts cos they are just holier than thou rags and enjoy the rest of your day safe in the knowledge you support the best team in the land and all the world. Fuck em

 

[luddite]

Re: FC United - Judicial Review day 2 (pg 61)

OK, I'll ask the same question again and be a bit more specific this time......
Can you please quote or cut 'n' paste the comment you are alleging I made ref the working class v middle class please?

Sorry MES, you're right to question this - I mistakenly thought you had made the comment about working class jobs, when it was tuertsoverheadkick. Apologies for my lack of attention.

 

[luddite]

Re: FC United - Judicial Review day 2 (pg 61)

RE: the Rochdale 'sell out'...

Again, this is another sad example of those without principles using a deliberately misrepresented caricature of others' principles against them. The club is not against having the odd game on telly, as long as the fans remain in control of such decisions. Imagine that...

The problem with football fans in this country is they would rather attack other fans who are trying to stand up to the money men, than attack the money men. It's happened at City - some principled City fans have attempted to get their fellow blues to take a stand on certain issues - standing, the atmosphere, ticket prices etc. (even muting the idea of a breakaway club). I won't mention the names of those fans, but they get so much stick, along the lines of 'who do they think they are?' and 'stop embarrassing us, we're not rags' that they end up keeping their heads down and everyone just accepts that supporters should just be followers, blindly loyal.

Now that City have become so rich and successful, City fans have even started adopting the catch-all arrogant response to criticism United fans used in the 90s and beyond - anyone criticising us is just jealous. The 'tinpot', 'pub team' jibes at FC are symptomatic of that - saying a club is unimportant because they have less fans than you and play in a lower league.

 

[Anonymous]

Re: FC United - Judicial Review day 2 (pg 61)

RE: the Rochdale 'sell out'...

Again, this is another sad example of those without principles using a deliberately misrepresented caricature of others' principles against them. The club is not against having the odd game on telly, as long as the fans remain in control of such decisions. Imagine that...

The problem with football fans in this country is they would rather attack other fans who are trying to stand up to the money men, than attack the money men. It's happened at City - some principled City fans have attempted to get their fellow blues to take a stand on certain issues - standing, the atmosphere, ticket prices etc. (even muting the idea of a breakaway club). I won't mention the names of those fans, but they get so much stick, along the lines of 'who do they think they are?' and 'stop embarrassing us, we're not rags' that they end up keeping their heads down and everyone just accepts that supporters should just be followers, blindly loyal.

Now that City have become so rich and successful, City fans have even started adopting the catch-all arrogant response to criticism United fans used in the 90s and beyond - anyone criticising us is just jealous. The 'tinpot', 'pub team' jibes at FC are symptomatic of that - saying a club is unimportant because they have less fans than you and play in a lower league.

So anyone who dare criticse your mob is without principle?

I still feel sure that given what you are trying to achieve, if someone came along with a bundle of dosh with the promise of building you a mini-swamp next to the big swamp or some such, in exchange for stadium naming rights of said ground there may well be some serious debating amongst yourselves, but ultimately your so called principles would go out the window and a new ground you would have.

You need money and your members don't have bottomless pockets. At some point there needs to be a give. You will need, and no doubt attract, investment at some point. You have an online shop to further fleece your members with branded tat - just like your previous club, just like any other club.

Even "sanctimony" has a vaguely fiscal ring to it if you listen carefully enough.

 

[zutroy]

Re: FC United - Judicial Review day 2 (pg 61)

Come on, I think we all know the real reason City fans can't stand FCUM. For a while in 2005 many City fans lapped FC up, thinking it was a great way to get at United, but then two things stopped this in its tracks.

First, it became apparent that FC fans hadn't stopped being United fans - they still sang United songs, in that their protest songs were against Glazer and the corporate control of football, rather than against MUFC per se. This was a disappointment to many City fans.

Secondly, City were becoming more and more a part of that corporate world that FC fans were against, and more tellingly, that City had for a long time said they were against. Now, the existence of FC is not just an embarrassment to United, but also to City, whose fans are trying to get on with reveling in their club's recent success, and don't like the idea of a football club on their doorstep that is based on values that fly in the face of the current reality of Manchester City.

So it's that hypocrisy, between what City fans say they are all about, and what the reality reveals to the world, that is the problem. Highlighting the perceived hypocrisy of FCUM, gleaned from individual fans' choice of phrasing on social networking sites, might provide a handy argument to hide behind, but City fans simply can't hide from the fact that their club is not what they like to believe it is, and for most objective observers, there's only one football club that represents the interests of the working class fan in Manchester, and it's about to get a home just down the road from 'The Etihad'.

Bang on the money in EVERY sense of the word, well said. And it's highly amusing how angrily and bitterly all the blues are reacting to this post, having been told the truth about what FCUM are about and why they exist. Having said that, I've met many city fans who approve highly of what FCUM are doing, whilst not being supporters as such.

The problem with football fans in this country is they would rather attack other fans who are trying to stand up to the money men, than attack the money men.

Again, quite right Very much like those who attack strikers on picket lines without blaming the men at the top causing them to strike in the first place.

I think we all know that if it was fans of any other club who had formed a breakaway club in the same vein as FCUM, there would be much more admiration and much less vitriol.<br /><br />-- Tue Jan 22, 2013 3:57 pm --<br /><br />

Finally, if the issue is purely about a building being planned on a field in a residential area, and not about football, then why is this campaign being played out on a Manchester City fans' internet forum? What's it got to do with everyone on here? You're not deliberately playing on City fans' existing antipathy towards anything United-related are you, in this non-football issue?

The fact is luddite is that your club wants to directly affect the lives of some of the posters on here by building a stadium in their backyard. They are opposed to it, and as such, they have voiced their disquiet on this forum.

Thats correct The Flash we are allowed to voice our opinion on an open forum if no one reads or listens to us then so be it.

Not everyone in Moston opposes the proposed stadium development. In fact many are in favour. Please stop trying to convince yourselves that the opposition to the plans is universal across all Moston residents, as that assumption is far from correct and you know it

 

[M18CTID]

Re: FC United - Judicial Review day 2 (pg 61)

RE: the Rochdale 'sell out'...

Again, this is another sad example of those without principles using a deliberately misrepresented caricature of others' principles against them. The club is not against having the odd game on telly, as long as the fans remain in control of such decisions. Imagine that...

The problem with football fans in this country is they would rather attack other fans who are trying to stand up to the money men, than attack the money men. It's happened at City - some principled City fans have attempted to get their fellow blues to take a stand on certain issues - standing, the atmosphere, ticket prices etc. (even muting the idea of a breakaway club). I won't mention the names of those fans, but they get so much stick, along the lines of 'who do they think they are?' and 'stop embarrassing us, we're not rags' that they end up keeping their heads down and everyone just accepts that supporters should just be followers, blindly loyal.

Now that City have become so rich and successful, City fans have even started adopting the catch-all arrogant response to criticism United fans used in the 90s and beyond - anyone criticising us is just jealous. The 'tinpot', 'pub team' jibes at FC are symptomatic of that - saying a club is unimportant because they have less fans than you and play in a lower league.

You're entitled to your opinion just as much as the next man but sorry, pretty much every word of that is a crock of shit.

As it happens I have my principles but like the vast majority of football fans most of those principles aren't linked to spending much of my down time following my team. Any principles I do have relating to football are similar to the concerns of most other fans regarding the direction in which the modern game is going and we certainly don't need FCUM fans lecturing us about it because we're fully aware of those problems anyway.

As for City fans mocking FCUM because they're a much smaller club, I think you'll find that the size of the club has nothing to do with it. Fact is, there are many local non-league clubs that are much smaller than your lot who we don't mock in any way whatsoever and what a lot of us find so puzzling is why, when you decided you'd had enough of "Big, bad, commercialised United", those disaffected fans didn't adopt one of those long-standing non-league clubs and give them your support rather than form a brand new club with a ready made support base of several thousand - hence giving you an immediate advantage over all the other non-league clubs, many of whom have been in existence for 100 years or more - in what seems to be an exercise in attention-seeking more than anything else.

As for the Rochdale match, you'll never convince me that the decision to allow that game to be screened live on ESPN was anything other than a simple case of conveniently abandoning those precious principles in order to grab what money was on offer.

But hey-ho, it's a free country and you're entitled to do what you want. Just don't expect much understanding from your average City or United fan though.

 

[stony]

Re: FC United - Judicial Review day 2 (pg 61)

Come on, I think we all know the real reason City fans can't stand FCUM. For a while in 2005 many City fans lapped FC up, thinking it was a great way to get at United, but then two things stopped this in its tracks.

First, it became apparent that FC fans hadn't stopped being United fans - they still sang United songs, in that their protest songs were against Glazer and the corporate control of football, rather than against MUFC per se. This was a disappointment to many City fans.

Secondly, City were becoming more and more a part of that corporate world that FC fans were against, and more tellingly, that City had for a long time said they were against. Now, the existence of FC is not just an embarrassment to United, but also to City, whose fans are trying to get on with reveling in their club's recent success, and don't like the idea of a football club on their doorstep that is based on values that fly in the face of the current reality of Manchester City.

So it's that hypocrisy, between what City fans say they are all about, and what the reality reveals to the world, that is the problem. Highlighting the perceived hypocrisy of FCUM, gleaned from individual fans' choice of phrasing on social networking sites, might provide a handy argument to hide behind, but City fans simply can't hide from the fact that their club is not what they like to believe it is, and for most objective observers, there's only one football club that represents the interests of the working class fan in Manchester, and it's about to get a home just down the road from 'The Etihad'.

Bang on the money in EVERY sense of the word, well said. And it's highly amusing how angrily and bitterly all the blues are reacting to this post, having been told the truth about what FCUM are about and why they exist. Having said that, I've met many city fans who approve highly of what FCUM are doing, whilst not being supporters as such.

The problem with football fans in this country is they would rather attack other fans who are trying to stand up to the money men, than attack the money men.

Again, quite right Very much like those who attack strikers on picket lines without blaming the men at the top causing them to strike in the first place.

I think we all know that if it was fans of any other club who had formed a breakaway club in the same vein as FCUM, there would be much more admiration and much less vitriol.

-- Tue Jan 22, 2013 3:57 pm --

The fact is luddite is that your club wants to directly affect the lives of some of the posters on here by building a stadium in their backyard. They are opposed to it, and as such, they have voiced their disquiet on this forum.

Thats correct The Flash we are allowed to voice our opinion on an open forum if no one reads or listens to us then so be it.

Not everyone in Moston opposes the proposed stadium development. In fact many are in favour. Please stop trying to convince yourselves that the opposition to the plans is universal across all Moston residents, as that assumption is far from correct and you know it

Another turncoat spewing bile on here. Have you not got any fans of a small club to bully?

Like many have said, despite most blues holding your treacherous hypocritical little club in utter contempt. It is where you are building your stadium that is the problem.

 

[lloydie]

Re: FC United - Judicial Review day 2 (pg 61)

Come on, I think we all know the real reason City fans can't stand FCUM. For a while in 2005 many City fans lapped FC up, thinking it was a great way to get at United, but then two things stopped this in its tracks.

First, it became apparent that FC fans hadn't stopped being United fans - they still sang United songs, in that their protest songs were against Glazer and the corporate control of football, rather than against MUFC per se. This was a disappointment to many City fans.

Secondly, City were becoming more and more a part of that corporate world that FC fans were against, and more tellingly, that City had for a long time said they were against. Now, the existence of FC is not just an embarrassment to United, but also to City, whose fans are trying to get on with reveling in their club's recent success, and don't like the idea of a football club on their doorstep that is based on values that fly in the face of the current reality of Manchester City.

So it's that hypocrisy, between what City fans say they are all about, and what the reality reveals to the world, that is the problem. Highlighting the perceived hypocrisy of FCUM, gleaned from individual fans' choice of phrasing on social networking sites, might provide a handy argument to hide behind, but City fans simply can't hide from the fact that their club is not what they like to believe it is, and for most objective observers, there's only one football club that represents the interests of the working class fan in Manchester, and it's about to get a home just down the road from 'The Etihad'.

Bang on the money in EVERY sense of the word, well said. And it's highly amusing how angrily and bitterly all the blues are reacting to this post, having been told the truth about what FCUM are about and why they exist. Having said that, I've met many city fans who approve highly of what FCUM are doing, whilst not being supporters as such.

The problem with football fans in this country is they would rather attack other fans who are trying to stand up to the money men, than attack the money men.

Again, quite right Very much like those who attack strikers on picket lines without blaming the men at the top causing them to strike in the first place.

I think we all know that if it was fans of any other club who had formed a breakaway club in the same vein as FCUM, there would be much more admiration and much less vitriol.

-- Tue Jan 22, 2013 3:57 pm --

The fact is luddite is that your club wants to directly affect the lives of some of the posters on here by building a stadium in their backyard. They are opposed to it, and as such, they have voiced their disquiet on this forum.

Thats correct The Flash we are allowed to voice our opinion on an open forum if no one reads or listens to us then so be it.

Not everyone in Moston opposes the proposed stadium development. In fact many are in favour. Please stop trying to convince yourselves that the opposition to the plans is universal across all Moston residents, as that assumption is far from correct and you know it

..and there you have it, smug, arrogant and condescending, still peddling the old rag jibes.

Neither you nor your mate are telepathic and know what blues think. You are congenitally excluded from any form of understanding.

There is plenty wrong with football but building a new private club for you and your mates to play Billy Bigbollocks in, and in the process rob a community of a scarce amenity, is hardly going to rectify the situation. But as we all know the real reasons behind the club that's hardly a surprise.

see what i did there!