Everything is priceless in Liverpool mate
Liverpool Thread - 2022/23
- Thread starter MAG
- Start date
- Status
Franny 1234
Well-Known Member
Under pearce it amazes me we had more than a 1000 fans watching that shite. CTIDHe said, ‘Liverpool’s highest attendance would not be in City’s top 20.’
We did have higher average attendances than Liverpool when Keegan was in charge:
2003-04 - City 46,235; Liverpool 41,777
2004-05 - City 45,192; Liverpool 42,568
And under Pearce we had two attendances higher than Liverpool’s highest in 2005-06, and six attendances higher than Liverpool’s highest in 2006-07.
Liverpool’s highest ever attendance is 61,905, there are 18 clubs with higher records than that and many with multiple attendances above that.
Here are City’s top attendances and they aren’t extensive of those above the Liverpool record:
MCFC Attendances - Manchester City, Man City History - Bluemoon-MCFC
Attendance records of games involving Manchester City Football Clubbluemoon-mcfc.co.uk
We were getting 54,000 before Pep arrived:
View attachment 59284
(Pep was announced in February 2016 and came in June 2016)
Have a read of this one:
‘For comparison purposes it’s worth looking at the attendances of the Division One champions in 1947 to see how the Blues compared. This attendance against Burnley was almost 17,000 higher than Division One champions Liverpool’s highest crowd that season (52,512 v Wolves in December) and the Merseyside Reds nearest home game to City’s Burnley match was watched by 48,800 and that was Liverpool v Manchester United (May 3). Liverpool did average 45,732 that season, whereas City averaged 39,283 but they were a Second Division club.
69,463 watch MCFC and Burnley in Division Two
On this day (May 10) in 1947 a solitary goal from Alec Herd against Burnley was enough to give Manchester City promotion. The attendance for this Second Division game was recorded by the media at the time as 67,672 but official records reviewed almost sixty years later showed that City actually...gjfootballarchive.com
The City-Burnley crowd was the Second Division’s record at the time and it was higher than every First Division crowd since the 1937-38 season.’
And you do know that 28,273 average attendance you mentioned was when we were in the third tier in 1998-99?
I do agree Liverpool fans are not fair weather supporters though. They have the second highest all-time average attendance, while never having got massive crowds they’ve been one of the most consistent and least fluctuating set of fans for attending.
At least the media are calling this one out, and rightly so. It’s a ridiculous decision.
Spot on and the rest of the country has had enough of the crying arrogant wankers.
Alan Harper's Tash
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 12 Dec 2010
- Messages
- 70,172
They should be kicked out of the Premier League if they aren’t English.
Let them set up their own league with the Isle of Man, the Scilly Isles, the Isle of Wight and the Channel Islands.
Let them set up their own league with the Isle of Man, the Scilly Isles, the Isle of Wight and the Channel Islands.
Last edited:
cheekybids
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 18 Sep 2009
- Messages
- 12,936
Give them independence & go to War………Do I sound like Putin (oops)
shack, my father in law is one of the soundest guys i've ever met in my life, proud as shit i married his daughter. hearing him kick off about liverpool is a pleasure. he fucking hates them. also love hearing him talk about the city team from the late 60s and how colin bell was his favourite ever non-evertonian. before my time so brilliant to listen to
Mad Eyed Screamer
Moderator
That's a low estimation.....
I'm With Stupid
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 6 May 2013
- Messages
- 23,213
Hmm, Guardiola gets sent of against Liverpool. 2 match touchline ban. Klopp gets sent off against City, nominal fine and welcomed back to the touchline next week. Seems about standard now.
Oh, and Pep's touchline ban was in the same match where he'd had to sit on a coach getting bottles thrown at it, and we'd had a legitimate goal disallowed (which admittedly he's used to at Anfield).
Oh, and Pep's touchline ban was in the same match where he'd had to sit on a coach getting bottles thrown at it, and we'd had a legitimate goal disallowed (which admittedly he's used to at Anfield).
blue b4 the moon
Well-Known Member
No agenda ever, nothing to see, no agenda ever.
The sad thing is I'm not in the slightest surprised by this or other shit across all forms of media these days.
No agenda ever, nothing to see, no agenda ever.
If I say it 24 hours a day I'll still never believe it.
Protein Junkie
Well-Known Member
Liverpool striker Darwin Nunez, 23, says 35-year-old Uruguay team-mate Luis Suarez, who also played for the Reds, got in touch with him to offer advice on how to deal with playing in the Premier League. (ESPN)
Reinforced dentures and physical abuse/assault of a black Raggie player coming up !!
Reinforced dentures and physical abuse/assault of a black Raggie player coming up !!
D
D
Deleted member 77198
Guest
Genealogically speaking, there’s no such thing as ‘English’. English is just a language and England is just some lines on a map on the island of Great Britain.
Nobody living in England today has majority Angle genes. The Angle, Saxon, Frisian, Jute etc. migration did not displace the indigenous population of what became England, and barely dented the genealogical map.
Most of us, including Scousers, have some Angle genes in there, but only a small percentage.
Also there was no mass Celtic migration to the British Isles. Celtic culture made its way over here in in the same way American culture is seeping in today, but there’s little Celtic genealogy in the British Isles. The Irish, Scottish, Welsh and Cornish aren’t genealogically Celtic. They’re the same as the English as they’re mainly just indigenously British/Brittonic than anything else.
Our ancestors weren't Celts, they were copycats
Culture Shock Fintan O'Toole The first of a weekly column looks at a great Irish cultural secret: we aren't really Celtic and…
The genes of people from the British Isles are all very similar to each other, with small percentages of genes from migrators over the centuries but mainly us all being indigenous to these islands.
So even if any of them claim to be fully Irish and Celtic and compare themselves to the English thinking that an Englishman is Anglo-Saxon, they’re dead wrong.
Last edited by a moderator:
In 1985 city v Charlton in division 2 attracted a bigger crowd than Liverpool v United in the same season.He said, ‘Liverpool’s highest attendance would not be in City’s top 20.’
We did have higher average attendances than Liverpool when Keegan was in charge:
2003-04 - City 46,235; Liverpool 41,777
2004-05 - City 45,192; Liverpool 42,568
And under Pearce we had two attendances higher than Liverpool’s highest in 2005-06, and six attendances higher than Liverpool’s highest in 2006-07.
Liverpool’s highest ever attendance is 61,905, there are 18 clubs with higher records than that and many with multiple attendances above that.
Here are City’s top attendances and they aren’t extensive of those above the Liverpool record:
MCFC Attendances - Manchester City, Man City History - Bluemoon-MCFC
Attendance records of games involving Manchester City Football Club
We were getting 54,000 before Pep arrived:
View attachment 59284
(Pep was announced in February 2016 and came in June 2016)
Have a read of this one:
‘For comparison purposes it’s worth looking at the attendances of the Division One champions in 1947 to see how the Blues compared. This attendance against Burnley was almost 17,000 higher than Division One champions Liverpool’s highest crowd that season (52,512 v Wolves in December) and the Merseyside Reds nearest home game to City’s Burnley match was watched by 48,800 and that was Liverpool v Manchester United (May 3). Liverpool did average 45,732 that season, whereas City averaged 39,283 but they were a Second Division club.69,463 watch MCFC and Burnley in Division Two
On this day (May 10) in 1947 a solitary goal from Alec Herd against Burnley was enough to give Manchester City promotion. The attendance for this Second Division game was recorded by the media at the time as 67,672 but official records reviewed almost sixty years later showed that City actually...
The City-Burnley crowd was the Second Division’s record at the time and it was higher than every First Division crowd since the 1937-38 season.’
And you do know that 28,273 average attendance you mentioned was when we were in the third tier in 1998-99?
I do agree Liverpool fans are not fair weather supporters though. They have the second highest all-time average attendance, while never having got massive crowds they’ve been one of the most consistent and least fluctuating set of fans for attending.
Johnny Mars Bar
Well-Known Member
Fine by me. Maybe they can do a pact with that mad woman in Scotland and form their own union.
Protein Junkie
Well-Known Member
Great post mate.Genealogically speaking, there’s no such thing as ‘English’. English is just a language and England is just some lines on a map on the island of Great Britain.
Nobody living in England today has majority Angle genes. The Angle, Saxon, Frisian, Jute etc. migration did not displace the indigenous population of what became England, and barely dented the genealogical map.
Most of us, including Scousers, have some Angle genes in there, but only a small percentage.
Also there was no mass Celtic migration to the British Isles. Celtic culture made its way over here in in the same way American culture is seeping in today, but there’s little Celtic genealogy in the British Isles. The Irish, Scottish, Welsh and Cornish aren’t genealogically Celtic. They’re the same as the English as they’re mainly just indigenously British/Brittonic than anything else.
(Obviously, this makes Glasgow Celtic FC’s name a total misnomer)Our ancestors weren't Celts, they were copycats
Culture Shock Fintan O'Toole The first of a weekly column looks at a great Irish cultural secret: we aren't really Celtic and…www.irishtimes.com
The genes of people from the British Isles are all very similar to each other, with small percentages of genes from migrators over the centuries but mainly us all being indigenous to these islands.
So even if any of them claim to be fully Irish and a Celt and compare themselves to the English thinking that an Englishman is Anglo-Saxon, they’re dead wrong.
I’ve studied Ancient British genealogy and you are indeed correct about “Celtic” being a culture not a race of people.
From memory I think the term was a Victorian construct for this purpose but it’s origins of the name go way back.
I Derailed the thread though :-)
Dave Ewing's Back 'eader
Well-Known Member
The only thing with that is that we wouldn't want the ground back - it'll be contaminated.
Burnage Burnsy
Well-Known Member
So I had my historical DNA analysed for fun.Genealogically speaking, there’s no such thing as ‘English’. English is just a language and England is just some lines on a map on the island of Great Britain.
Nobody living in England today has majority Angle genes. The Angle, Saxon, Frisian, Jute etc. migration did not displace the indigenous population of what became England, and barely dented the genealogical map.
Most of us, including Scousers, have some Angle genes in there, but only a small percentage.
Also there was no mass Celtic migration to the British Isles. Celtic culture made its way over here in in the same way American culture is seeping in today, but there’s little Celtic genealogy in the British Isles. The Irish, Scottish, Welsh and Cornish aren’t genealogically Celtic. They’re the same as the English as they’re mainly just indigenously British/Brittonic than anything else.
(Obviously, this makes Glasgow Celtic FC’s name a total misnomer)Our ancestors weren't Celts, they were copycats
Culture Shock Fintan O'Toole The first of a weekly column looks at a great Irish cultural secret: we aren't really Celtic and…
The genes of people from the British Isles are all very similar to each other, with small percentages of genes from migrators over the centuries but mainly us all being indigenous to these islands.
So even if any of them claim to be fully Irish and a Celt and compare themselves to the English thinking that an Englishman is Anglo-Saxon, they’re dead wrong.
51% English
35% Welsh but I do have one welsh grandparent
6% Scottish
8% Swedish/ Dane
Very interesting read
halfcenturyup
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 12 Oct 2009
- Messages
- 14,982
Genealogically speaking, there’s no such thing as ‘English’. English is just a language and England is just some lines on a map on the island of Great Britain.
Nobody living in England today has majority Angle genes. The Angle, Saxon, Frisian, Jute etc. migration did not displace the indigenous population of what became England, and barely dented the genealogical map.
Most of us, including Scousers, have some Angle genes in there, but only a small percentage.
Also there was no mass Celtic migration to the British Isles. Celtic culture made its way over here in in the same way American culture is seeping in today, but there’s little Celtic genealogy in the British Isles. The Irish, Scottish, Welsh and Cornish aren’t genealogically Celtic. They’re the same as the English as they’re mainly just indigenously British/Brittonic than anything else.
(Obviously, this makes Glasgow Celtic FC’s name a total misnomer)Our ancestors weren't Celts, they were copycats
Culture Shock Fintan O'Toole The first of a weekly column looks at a great Irish cultural secret: we aren't really Celtic and…
The genes of people from the British Isles are all very similar to each other, with small percentages of genes from migrators over the centuries but mainly us all being indigenous to these islands.
So even if any of them claim to be fully Irish and a Celt and compare themselves to the English thinking that an Englishman is Anglo-Saxon, they’re dead wrong.
You mean genetically?
citizen_maine
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 29 May 2011
- Messages
- 18,239
They'd still come second
- Status