How do you respond to this?

[Boney]

tbf he sounds clued up, you might want to check his figures though.

He's not that clued up.

He states that City won the league in 1946!

I think he is talking about 1947 when we came top of division two with average crowds of 39,000, that season utd averaged 44,000 when runners up in the league.

Basic fact, utd were more successful in the early 50s than city hence larger crowds. success will always bring larger crowds. Munich disaster came at a time when the media was just beginning to become global and the news of air crash reached more people than ever before. This created a ripple of sympathy that became a wave, this was then followed by success in the late sixties. But I never liked the fuckers and hate the way that from the mid 70s on they exploited Munich during their lean times.


I hate the fucking rags bastards so much. 90s and 2000s have been very painful.

 

[laserblue]

tbf he sounds clued up, you might want to check his figures though.

He's not that clued up.

He states that City won the league in 1946!

yeah - city were in the 2nd division yet had an average crowd only 4662 less than 1st division rags. tell him to fuck off.

 

[BatBlue]

Before the Munich air crash both sets of fans attended each others games when their own team was away and they could'nt afford to get to the away teams ground or were unable to get there due to travel not being as easy as it is today. This mostly stoped after Munich due to many City fans becoming irritated by the media at the time claiming United should be given trophys as they probably would have won them anyway (the media at this time is also the reason United became known across the world again because of Munich) but some City fans still went to United games until travel to games became easier and people started to earn more. So all the numbers he has actualy mean absolutely fuck all.

 

[Boney]

Oh and in 1955 utd finished 5th average crowd 36,000

we finished 7th average crowd 35,000

 

[M22_blu]

It's all about quality of fan not quantity, there might be more of them but there a bunch of **** faced inbred twats

 

[second to none]

It's all about quality of fan not quantity, there might be more of them but there a bunch of **** faced inbred twats

Right. The Nazis had a lot of fans too.

 

[laserblue]

we went through this not so long ago. rag crowds weren't all sell outs all the way into the premier league era. there were some wild fluctuations. in 1946-47 they managed all of 8456 against Stoke. not bad for the team that finished league runners up.

here are their highest, lowest and average league attendances from 1889-90 to 1998-99. some interesting fucking history there.

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.red11.org/mufc/stats/attendances.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.red11.org/mufc/stats/attendances.htm</a>

 

[bluemoonmcfc]

Nice one. Just hit him with all that. Gone quiet now.

 

[Dennis.has.done.it]

Why should we care ??
Thats history
Its OUR future........bring it on

 

[Owain]

What some Utd fan wrote on another website.

***************************
Just some interesting information for you.

Most blues like to say that the reason we have a larger fan base is because of munich. In the years between 1946-1957 we averaged a gate of 42,362 whereas our friendly bitter neighbours averaged 35, 913.

Even more interestingly, between 1946 and 1949 when united played at maine rd whilst reconstruction work was being done to OT after the bombings during the war, in the 1st season city won the league, but united had an average attendance of 4,662 more than city at thier own stadium. In the second season, United had an average attendance of more than 12,165 more than city at thier own stadium. In the third season, United had an average attendance of 10,109 more than city at thier own ground.

United have a higher average attendance than city for every decade since the 1940's. Between 1947 and the year before munich, there was an average of almost 7,000 more united fans attending games than city.

City were a more successful club during the 70's, yet there was a difference of over 13,000 in our average attendances, with united being the best supported club of the decade.

Manchester is blue?? give me a fucking break.

****************************************************

Was this from 'The Republik of Mancunia'? I had a pretty protracted debate with the rag tosspot that runs it about attendances. Gary James also helped me out with some attendance figures and some documentary evidence from those particular seasons - I'll dig out his email now.