Manchester Evening News

[ballinio]

So he's a red dipper eh? Let's come up with a simple game. Let's call it, which club, Liverpool or Manchester City, has had the lowest league attendance in the past ten years? The answer would be Liverpool with 34,663 in 2004 against Portsmouth. Now let's go for the runners-up. Come on, it's going to be City this time, it must be, it simply must be City this time. Oh no, it's Liverpool again, with 35,400 against Bolton on New Year's Day 2011. Surely Liverpool never contemplated moving to a new stadium? Well, thank fuck that idea was scrapped.

Liverpool also got 31,063 for their FA Cup replay against Reading 4 years ago.

there was a candle-lit vigil that day though

 

[manchester blue]

Fair play to Stuart, I wouldn't expect anything less, but the MEN can fuck off as far as I'm concerned. I will never buy or click on it's website again.

Exactly,just fuck it off en masse

I am of the same opinion regardless of this article.

For me it is not just the anti City stuff but the fact the article written displayed such a lack of research and knowledge of the subject.

You read newspapers and watch documentaries to learn something as generally they are fact based and properly researched. If this is the standard of sport journalism why bother reading?

This. Too little, too late this time. I was someone who defended them, free press and all that, but this isn't even scraping the bottom of the barrel. The editor should be sacked frankly along with the boy who wrote it.

 

[TCIB]

My email is going into MCFC....and I implore (a word David probably doesn't know) other City fans to do the same.

To busy making popcorn for the lurkers watching this thread mate, run off me feet here.

That fucking popcorn pidgeon will be here soon i reckon hehe.

 

[carlosthejackal]

I am more than happy to meet him face to face and give him my opinion. Its a pity this shit paper cant be arsed reporting in depth about certain ex managers sons beating up their wives or players shagging in laws etc etc !!!! Lets brush that under the carpet and concentrate on trying to undermine a club whose owners are creating jobs and investing millions into the area.

 

[bezer57]

Not read this rag since the 70s when city won the cup winners cup when we only got a side Collum on the back page : head line was utd lose again ! And the side Collum was as if ! Oh bye the way city won the cup winners cup last night !! It's just a rags ! Rag !

 

[bernabias home shirt]

I see Stuart & Keegan have not answered the question which has been asked many times
Who was responsible for that article going to print,was it the editor?

 

[RyanP3609]

It's truly shocking journalism, it's like something you'd get on a United fanzone website.

What makes it even worse are the picture, the first picture highlighting the "emtpy" seats, shows a group of three free seats just to the right of where the ball is. But if you look just to the left, there's two people coming down the steps! I mean ffs how can they claim the "empty" seats, were those people just randomly walking up and down the steps? I'm surprised this even made it into the paper!

If it's that fucking easy to be a journalist I might try my hand at it!

Anyone know how much they actually get paid to write this drivel?

 

[franksinatra]

Exactly,just fuck it off en masse

I am of the same opinion regardless of this article.

For me it is not just the anti City stuff but the fact the article written displayed such a lack of research and knowledge of the subject.

You read newspapers and watch documentaries to learn something as generally they are fact based and properly researched. If this is the standard of sport journalism why bother reading?

This. Too little, too late this time. I was someone who defended them, free press and all that, but this isn't even scraping the bottom of the barrel. The editor should be sacked frankly along with the boy who wrote it.

It is only a minor issue compared to this but at the start of the season they had an article about the Premiership leading goalscorers and suggested Jesus Navas could be amongst the top scorers. He scored one goal last season.

Now I rate Jesus Navas but as a fan I was fully aware he was more likely to create opportunities than outscore Aguero and Luis Suarez. Absolutely astounding that a journalist who is paid to write the article is too lazy to even to click on Wikipedia to realise Navas is unlikely to finish as the leagues top scorer.

Just highlights again the lazy journalism and research within that newspaper.

 

[erast fandorin]

So he's a red dipper eh? Let's come up with a simple game. Let's call it, which club, Liverpool or Manchester City, has had the lowest league attendance in the past ten years? The answer would be Liverpool with 34,663 in 2004 against Portsmouth. Now let's go for the runners-up. Come on, it's going to be City this time, it must be, it simply must be City this time. Oh no, it's Liverpool again, with 35,400 against Bolton on New Year's Day 2011. Surely Liverpool never contemplated moving to a new stadium? Well, thank fuck that idea was scrapped.

Liverpool also got 31,063 for their FA Cup replay against Reading 4 years ago.

there was a candle-lit vigil that day though

Also won a European trophy 3 yrs before they had any European success,not bad for a team with no history

-- Wed Feb 05, 2014 7:06 pm --

So he's a red dipper eh? Let's come up with a simple game. Let's call it, which club, Liverpool or Manchester City, has had the lowest league attendance in the past ten years? The answer would be Liverpool with 34,663 in 2004 against Portsmouth. Now let's go for the runners-up. Come on, it's going to be City this time, it must be, it simply must be City this time. Oh no, it's Liverpool again, with 35,400 against Bolton on New Year's Day 2011. Surely Liverpool never contemplated moving to a new stadium? Well, thank fuck that idea was scrapped.

Liverpool also got 31,063 for their FA Cup replay against Reading 4 years ago.

there was a candle-lit vigil that day though

Also won a European trophy 3 yrs before they had any European success,not bad for a team with no history<br /><br />-- Wed Feb 05, 2014 7:07 pm --<br /><br />

So he's a red dipper eh? Let's come up with a simple game. Let's call it, which club, Liverpool or Manchester City, has had the lowest league attendance in the past ten years? The answer would be Liverpool with 34,663 in 2004 against Portsmouth. Now let's go for the runners-up. Come on, it's going to be City this time, it must be, it simply must be City this time. Oh no, it's Liverpool again, with 35,400 against Bolton on New Year's Day 2011. Surely Liverpool never contemplated moving to a new stadium? Well, thank fuck that idea was scrapped.

Liverpool also got 31,063 for their FA Cup replay against Reading 4 years ago.

there was a candle-lit vigil that day though

Also won a European trophy 3 yrs before they had any European success,not bad for a team with no history

 

[Shirley]

Not read this rag since the 70s when city won the cup winners cup when we only got a side Collum on the back page : head line was utd lose again ! And the side Collum was as if ! Oh bye the way city won the cup winners cup last night !! It's just a rags ! Rag !

Just for accuracy, the night we won the European Cup Winners Cup in Vienna (I was there) was the same night as the FA Cup replay at the swamp, Chelsea vs Leeds which was televised live and I believe the reason City didn't get much write up or even live tv.