If City and the rags were to merge...

The idea is simply abhorrent, however on the day we win the Champions League we will turn into them off the pitch and if that scenario plays out we may as well merge.
 
MCFC BOB said:
Yes.

Hart
Richards - Kompany - Vidic - Clichy
Valencia - Yaya - Carrick - Silva
Rooney - Aguero

De Gea; Smalling, Lescott, Barry, Nasri, Tevez, Van Persie.

you are taking the piss fvcking CARRICK

and I'm a better keeper than De Gea

also where the fvck is Zinadine Cleverly?????

Also mergers could work if you took the best bits from each club so my proposal would be:

take the Manchester from their name and City from ours
take the Blue from our kit and the white from theirs and make
the Etihad home as it is actually in Manchester and the jobs a good un
 
bluecityboy said:
I was reading the MUEN article about the proposed merger in the 60s and it got me thinking. If City and the rags were to merge against our wishes, would you continue supporting the club? Forgive my ignorance but is there modern example of anything similar ever happening?

What a ludicrous thread!

This will haunt me for a while now - thanks for ruining my sleep!
 
whp.blue said:
MCFC BOB said:
Yes.

Hart
Richards - Kompany - Vidic - Clichy
Valencia - Yaya - Carrick - Silva
Rooney - Aguero

De Gea; Smalling, Lescott, Barry, Nasri, Tevez, Van Persie.

you are taking the piss fvcking CARRICK

and I'm a better keeper than De Gea

also where the fvck is Zinadine Cleverly?????

Also mergers could work if you took the best bits from each club so my proposal would be:

take the Manchester from their name and City from ours
take the Blue from our kit and the white from theirs and make
the Etihad home as it is actually in Manchester and the jobs a good un
perish the thought eeeeeeeeeeeeewwwwwwwwwwwww.
 
Robbo. said:
Would "We" now really known any difference?

If it did happen in the 60's then we wouldnt of cared less. We would of probably been called Manchester, doesnt sound right but I would probably of supported them.

It would make a big difference to me because my grandad and dad would have walked away and I would never have become a city fan.
 
bluecityboy said:
I was reading the MUEN article about the proposed mer
ou5d8g.jpg
 
It was obviously never really considered.

Someone had a stupid idea and it was shot down in flames by both Boards.

There would have been a riot if it went any further and became public.
 
JGL07 said:
It was obviously never really considered.

Someone had a stupid idea and it was shot down in flames by both Boards.

There would have been a riot if it went any further and became public.

Too true my friend but it's something to muse about on this forum.
 
I would support Belgium as Spain and Italy and France and yaya yaya yaya yaya toure kolo kolo kolo kolo kolo toure, sorry couldn't help myself. Ivory Coast. Because imagine if our own Vincent kompany lifted a major trophy for Belgium. I would want to be Belgian just to feel how we felt 5 Fookin months ago AGAIN. so lets enjoy this everyday until we are hopefully champions again. CTID
 
Kenney_The_Blue said:
MCFC BOB said:
Yes.

Hart
Richards - Kompany - Vidic - Clichy
Valencia - Yaya - Carrick - Silva
Rooney - Aguero

De Gea; Smalling, Lescott, Barry, Nasri, Tevez, Van Persie.

Carrick? Fuck off
I was trying to be as impartial as possible by not putting too many City players in there. If I wanted the Manchester FC team to be anything, it would be this.

Hart; Richards - Kompany - Lescott - Clichy; Silva - Yaya - Barry - Nasri; Tevez - Aguero.

Just didn't want to seem unfair.
 
MCFC BOB said:
Kenney_The_Blue said:
MCFC BOB said:
Yes.

Hart
Richards - Kompany - Vidic - Clichy
Valencia - Yaya - Carrick - Silva
Rooney - Aguero

De Gea; Smalling, Lescott, Barry, Nasri, Tevez, Van Persie.

Carrick? Fuck off
I was trying to be as impartial as possible by not putting too many City players in there. If I wanted the Manchester FC team to be anything, it would be this.

Hart; Richards - Kompany - Lescott - Clichy; Silva - Yaya - Barry - Nasri; Tevez - Aguero.

Just didn't want to seem unfair.


Love that, it was mcr and not some mcr suberb wasnt it. Please name our substitutes I.e dzeko as well as you might not have listed that otherwise.
 
MCFC BOB said:
Kenney_The_Blue said:
MCFC BOB said:
Yes.

Hart
Richards - Kompany - Vidic - Clichy
Valencia - Yaya - Carrick - Silva
Rooney - Aguero

De Gea; Smalling, Lescott, Barry, Nasri, Tevez, Van Persie.

Carrick? Fuck off
I was trying to be as impartial as possible by not putting too many City players in there. If I wanted the Manchester FC team to be anything, it would be this.

Hart; Richards - Kompany - Lescott - Clichy; Silva - Yaya - Barry - Nasri; Tevez - Aguero.

Just didn't want to seem unfair.

Being unfair isn't putting in better players though, its then a paradox as you're being unfair to the superior player just to try and be impartial.

Hart
Zabaleta - Kompany - Vidic - Clichy
Yaya - Barry
Valencia - Kagawa - Silva
Van Persie

That's right now, barring Vidic who looked thin as fuck on his return, which is a shame as though he's United he is a fantastic defender. Van Persie right now is incredible and has dragged United through in a lot of games, Southampton an example and he was able to fuck his penalty up on top of that. I think as a collective our strike force is better, but Van Persie is magnificent at the moment and putting him on the bench isn't doing him justice. Kagawa was another fantastic player at Dortmund, just needs to be allowed to settle, he has shown what he can do in some games already anyway.
 
Many must remember ninjeskys testimonial when city and the rags played a scouse x11.
Didn't feel right at all and I was nay a wee nipper shaper.
 
JGL07 said:
It was obviously never really considered.

Someone had a stupid idea and it was shot down in flames by both Boards.

There would have been a riot if it went any further and became public.

Sadly, it did happen and it did become public. It hit the headlines in January 1965 with the discussions taking place at a couple of points in 1964.

Furious letters appeared in the papers about it and the idea was quashed.

I was surprised the MEN chose this angle for the piece on Friday - the piece was supposed to be a feature on my new book "Manchester The City Years". Of the half a million words and 608 pages on City's history to choose from it was a few paras on page 253 that the piece focused on.

If anyone wants to read the truth about the story then obviously it's in the book, but personally I'd like to stress that this is a very, very minor point in the Clubs entire history. The discussions did take place but there are so many other much more interesting stories to consider.
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top