In the 70s at away games you either had to shut your gob & try & stay under the Radar or join up with other City fans . The home fans used to wait at Train Stations fo ryou or just hang about near the ground waiting to ask you the TimeDamocles said:
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Guvnors
- Thread starter KingRuben
- Start date
Lordy me, but some of the opinions on this thread are a real eye-opener!
According to Billy Mc, it's sanctimonious to of me to condemn hooligans and their effect on football. Fair enough; I'm happy to be sanctimonious all day long, then. Mind you, Billy, your definition of sanctimonious and mine probably differ...
To suggest that there wasn't a neo-fascist element attached to 1980's hooliganism (and that they intimidated/ attacked ethnic minorities) is to rewrite the 'history' that you speak so proudly of.
To invest the hooligans with a part in the working class struggle is, quite frankly, an insult to those of us who have done our bit for the same struggle.
And by the way, my exact words were "if you want to read a book about hooligans, great". How does this tell people what they can and cannot read?
Sorry to disappoint you but I'm working class too. That said, I don't happen to think that football is the sole preserve of any class. And no, I don't expect everybody at a football game to be "well-educated" etc - (what did I say to give you that idea?). I do expect people (in every situation in life) to treat others with manners, respect and dignity. Is this so bad?
You are right about one thing, though. Manchester does have a large working-class element. However - in my opinion - most of them would be blushing to be have their class defined by association with the hooligan element.
Whip blue, if I understand what you're saying correctly, it's okay to big up the hoolies on this message board but an act of cowardice to contradict those who do? If that's what you're saying, then you are denying people the right to free speech.
Not everybody affected by the actions of hooliganism are in a position to stand up to them. This is a basic tenet of the survival of the hooligan movement.
According to Billy Mc, it's sanctimonious to of me to condemn hooligans and their effect on football. Fair enough; I'm happy to be sanctimonious all day long, then. Mind you, Billy, your definition of sanctimonious and mine probably differ...
To suggest that there wasn't a neo-fascist element attached to 1980's hooliganism (and that they intimidated/ attacked ethnic minorities) is to rewrite the 'history' that you speak so proudly of.
To invest the hooligans with a part in the working class struggle is, quite frankly, an insult to those of us who have done our bit for the same struggle.
And by the way, my exact words were "if you want to read a book about hooligans, great". How does this tell people what they can and cannot read?
Sorry to disappoint you but I'm working class too. That said, I don't happen to think that football is the sole preserve of any class. And no, I don't expect everybody at a football game to be "well-educated" etc - (what did I say to give you that idea?). I do expect people (in every situation in life) to treat others with manners, respect and dignity. Is this so bad?
You are right about one thing, though. Manchester does have a large working-class element. However - in my opinion - most of them would be blushing to be have their class defined by association with the hooligan element.
Whip blue, if I understand what you're saying correctly, it's okay to big up the hoolies on this message board but an act of cowardice to contradict those who do? If that's what you're saying, then you are denying people the right to free speech.
Not everybody affected by the actions of hooliganism are in a position to stand up to them. This is a basic tenet of the survival of the hooligan movement.
whp.blue
Well-Known Member
1961RICH said:whp.blue said:thats life in a nutshell and exactly what the keyboard warriors have gotten away from real life.
no one should be allowed to insult anyone with total imunity we should all have to answer for our actions.
if people on here had to stand up for their opinions and do this without anonimity this board would be a much better forum and evertone would know who is a thug or biggot and who is a 12 year old calling everyone a wanker!
Violence (or threat of) has always suppressed free speech. When anonimity allows opinion (not abuse) to be expressed why is it bad ?
I agree but on this forum anonimity normally leads to insults I have never said that anybody should be stopped from giving their opinion but I have always said that the cowardly offensive keyboard warriors on here are wrong.
and also to defend free speech totally you have to defend the rights of people who offend to do so.
if this forum was solely here to defend free speech we would have no problems with the muncih comments/ songs or swearing at the ground or the support for the bnp etc or ps free speech only ok when we agree with the topic
whp.blue
Well-Known Member
mad4city said:Whip blue, if I understand what you're saying correctly, it's okay to big up the hoolies on this message board but an act of cowardice to contradict those who do? If that's what you're saying, then you are denying people the right to free speech.
Not everybody affected by the actions of hooliganism are in a position to stand up to them. This is a basic tenet of the survival of the hooligan movement.
no what I have always said is it is not ok for people to be cowards and hide behind their computer.
people will disagree that surely is the point of these forums. but what is not ok is for poeple to come on these forums saying things like mikey francis is a wanker or to start slagging off poeple who disagree with them. poeple can come on here and big up thugs that is their perogative just like people can come on here and big up hughes as the worlds greatest manager, i may not agree with them but I support their right to do so.
I have a problem with posters on here shooting their mouths off and even when they have the chance to say it in person they shut up. I was always brought up to either put up or shut up.
way too many people on this forum can talk the talk
mancityvstoke
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 15 Apr 2009
- Messages
- 21,505
- Location
- Vintage terraced Kippax
- Team supported
- The only football team to come from Manchester
mad4city said:Lordy me, but some of the opinions on this thread are a real eye-opener!
According to Billy Mc, it's sanctimonious to of me to condemn hooligans and their effect on football. Fair enough; I'm happy to be sanctimonious all day long, then. Mind you, Billy, your definition of sanctimonious and mine probably differ...
To suggest that there wasn't a neo-fascist element attached to 1980's hooliganism (and that they intimidated/ attacked ethnic minorities) is to rewrite the 'history' that you speak so proudly of.
.
Firstly you have a right chip on your shoulder
secondly At Man City in the 70's and 80's black lads and white lads were together and still are. No NEO fascists (student word)
cyberblue said:In the 70s at away games you either had to shut your gob & try & stay under the Radar or join up with other City fans . The home fans used to wait at Train Stations fo ryou or just hang about near the ground waiting to ask you the TimeDamocles said:Really interesting thread this, especially the ex-hooligans who are explaining how they first got in to it. Top marks all round for an interesting read lads.
'Have you got the time, mate'.
Oh shit.
Think about it.
gary111
Well-Known Member
its just a mass postcode war nowadays between the youth
FACTgary111 said:its just a mass postcode war nowadays between the youth
mad4city said:Lordy me, but some of the opinions on this thread are a real eye-opener!
According to Billy Mc, it's sanctimonious to of me to condemn hooligans and their effect on football. Fair enough; I'm happy to be sanctimonious all day long, then. Mind you, Billy, your definition of sanctimonious and mine probably differ...
To suggest that there wasn't a neo-fascist element attached to 1980's hooliganism (and that they intimidated/ attacked ethnic minorities) is to rewrite the 'history' that you speak so proudly of.
To invest the hooligans with a part in the working class struggle is, quite frankly, an insult to those of us who have done our bit for the same struggle.
And by the way, my exact words were "if you want to read a book about hooligans, great". How does this tell people what they can and cannot read?
Sorry to disappoint you but I'm working class too. That said, I don't happen to think that football is the sole preserve of any class. And no, I don't expect everybody at a football game to be "well-educated" etc - (what did I say to give you that idea?). I do expect people (in every situation in life) to treat others with manners, respect and dignity. Is this so bad?
You are right about one thing, though. Manchester does have a large working-class element. However - in my opinion - most of them would be blushing to be have their class defined by association with the hooligan element.
Whip blue, if I understand what you're saying correctly, it's okay to big up the hoolies on this message board but an act of cowardice to contradict those who do? If that's what you're saying, then you are denying people the right to free speech.
Not everybody affected by the actions of hooliganism are in a position to stand up to them. This is a basic tenet of the survival of the hooligan movement.
Ok I accept your point about what people read etc, but on the other hand youve totally mis interpreted what I was trying to say. Quite where I said I was proud of hooliganism is beyond me your just twisting everything to suit your leftwing diatribe (and now Im doing the same!). The point was about Micky Francis and his brother...his so called original mob were 90% black or mixed race.
In those days I used to go to the match with 15-20 other 13/14 year olds lads, like thousands of others. Kids went to the game without their dads in their thousands...you dont see that anymore. So in a way your argument is wrong about kids going to football and being driven away by hoolies....its pricing that drove kids away in my view not the occasional bout of mindless hooliganism.
CheethamHillBlue
Well-Known Member
whp.blue said:no one should be allowed to insult anyone with total imunity we should all have to answer for our actions.
if people on here had to stand up for their opinions and do this without anonimity this board would be a much better forum and evertone would know who is a thug or biggot and who is a 12 year old calling everyone a wanker!
Did MF, the Chelsea Headhunters, the ICF, the MIB etc help to increase or reduce people going to matches in the 80's? I worked with a Hammers fan in Ilford in the 80's who had 'stitched' a Villa fan the previous weekend with his craft knife but cried like a baby when a Brummie workmate put him up against the wall over his actions.
Safety in numbers, not anonymity.