Manchester Evening News

[manchester blue]

Overreaction of the year this.

Shite article. Move on.

Yet another one that doesn't get it.

The article IS shite but the real issue here is why was it allowed to go to print?

Nobody from the muen has come out and answered that question.

What was their motive?

Because the MEN has deemed it ok to print. That tells me that the MEN's editor has dropped a ball/made an error/been shit as well.

Stuart Brennan has immediately released a counter-article, which was deemed ok to print, which tells me that the MEN editor has recognised that he's dropped a ball/made an error/been shit as well.

It doesn't tell me, at all, that the MEN is biased, intends to piss off City fans and actively dislikes City as a club and its fans. That's an overreaction.

Every gobshite has an opinion on football these days. Every gobshite has a blog/Twitter account. Some of them are God awful and their arguments lack any evidence and strength. People are now actively looking for attention with what they write and almost tweet/write diplomatically as if their opinion is an overriding confirmation of truth and the final word. It's cack. Absolutely cack.

This Lynch bloke has tried to think critically here and made a balls up. He'll maintain his stance for a while but ultimately he'll look back on this article in about 6 months time and think, "Fuckinell. That was shite." - Look at the other stuff he writes. It's all 'no substance' other than the odd 'opinion column' and it's almost Adrian Durham-like but a bit more sophisticated.

It's all about looking at the evidence, coming up with an 'original' point/opinion on it, then proving it. He's not proven anything. Red circles on 10 empty seats at a sold out match does not prove anything. His argument lacks substance and evidence. It's basically something you'd get a teacher shaking their head at.

It's not anti-City. It's just shite.

Do you really believe it's not anti City? One story alone would not tell you the paper has an anti City slant but ask yourself why Stuart Brennan has an login on here.

I'll give you the Talksport analogy though. Shame really that the quality has sunk to those depths. Have we all fallen for it?

 

[mrtwiceaseason]

there is always a thread on here about atmosphere and infatables surley this is thetime to go to asda or the pound shop and buy a red inflatable swimming ring for the chelsea match ?(not sunderland)

 

[sir baconface]

I think this will make 100 pages.

86 at least.

 

[bluetonium]

In his last post on the thread, Mr Brennan suggested that all will be revealed. Has anything been revealed? Was it just a cheap ploy to keep us watching?

As mentioned a few times, I don't think I have ever seen a local newspaper actually have digs at one of their own, at least not so regularly. I was in York recently (yeah I know, couple of decades too late but does it still count?) and their local papers were all drumming up support for their team for a vital bottom of the table clash, you would have thought York City were the best thing since sliced bread, paper obviously recognized their influence and ability to be useful for the club by keeping interest high, even the Stockport Times has not given up the ghost with County and they are regularly back page and optimistic, despite their on and off field pantomime of recent years. Ok, both examples are not on the scale of mcfc, but surely that is no bad thing?

Meh, they got what they wanted, a reaction. But I don't listen to talksport for that very same reason - MEN is welcome to go down that path, truly am not interested in reading that kind of stuff. We have bigger fish to try.

 

[Sheik Yermoney]

I wonder if the so called "journalist" watched the Barcelona v Real Sociedad semi final 1st leg this week at the Nou Camp? A crowd of only 38,505 turned up.

<a class="postlink" href="http://espnfc.com/stats/attendance/_/league/esp.1/spanish-primera-division?cc=5739" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://espnfc.com/stats/attendance/_/le ... on?cc=5739</a>

Given that the capacity is 98,787 by my reckoning that's 60,282 empty seats. Now that's what I call swathes of empty seats reminiscent of the swamp on 6-1 day. Good job he wasn't highlighting the empty seats with red dots at that game as he'd still be doing it now.

Interestingly Barcelona's average attendance this season is 74,775 so perhaps they need to consider downscaling rather extending the Nou Camp.

<a class="postlink" href="http://espnfc.com/stats/attendance/_/league/esp.1/spanish-primera-division?cc=5739" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://espnfc.com/stats/attendance/_/le ... on?cc=5739</a>

 

[1961_vintage]

Like most print media, the MEN is just a total anachronism.

I do wonder where the decent journalists are plying their trade these days.

 

[mrbelfry]

Having re-read the article on page 2 of this thread it's probably not as inflamatory as I first thought. However I do interpret it as a pathetic attempt at a bit of bantz with confused internal logic. He's not making 'emptihad' jokes but the article is clearly all about that. He also mentions that the only 3 teams that have better league attendances than us are all ones with bigger stadiums. In isolation not a reason to increase capacity but surely an indicator.

In summary it is as SB has described it. I'll conceived and badly timed. But still 99.9% than my output on here

 

[Bill]

It's a rag paper. Always has been always will.

Like all other media they can see their cash cow under threat. They will say and print anything to keep it safe.

Integrity matters not when the muen is involved.

Sooner it closes the better.

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

The article in the trade press and the comments from professionals in their own industry tells you everything you need to know about this MEN story. Despite the bluster from the Editor, the failure to react properly, ie to pull such a toxic story, has caused damage to the paper. A lot of City fans have commercial relationships, buy advertising etc, with the paper. I know plenty in the business community in Manchester who will vote with their wallets.

 

[BringBackSwales]

It's a rag paper. Always has been always will.

Like all other media they can see their cash cow under threat. They will say and print anything to keep it safe.

Integrity matters not when the muen is involved.

Sooner it closes the better.

Agreed

 

[mcfcphil]

Like most print media, the MEN is just a total anachronism.

I do wonder where the decent journalists are plying their trade these days.

There is currently a mass exodus of talent from the industry. What's left is people like lynch who are making calls they don't have the talent or experience to make.
If he didn't come across as such a prick I would have some sympathy for him.

 

[BringBackSwales]

Unfortunately I reckon that the muen will have calculated that the increase in web hits will have far outweighed a few people no longer visiting the site, and that most will have strayed back within a couple of weeks anyway, so its a win win for them, and they actually make money out of taking the piss out of us. So the question becomes fellow Blues have enough of us got the desire to fuck on the muen and NEVER buy it or click on it again, or more likely will they leave it a while and carry on taking the piss out of us on an ongoing basis, the snidey rag scumbags?

 

[Shirley]

Unfortunately I reckon that the muen will have calculated that the increase in web hits will have far outweighed a few people no longer visiting the site, and that most will have strayed back within a couple of weeks anyway, so its a win win for them, and they actually make money out of taking the piss out of us. So the question becomes fellow Blues have enough of us got the desire to fuck on the muen and NEVER buy it or click on it again, or more likely will they leave it a while and carry on taking the piss out of us on an ongoing basis, the snidey rag scumbags?

I have already made the decision not to revisit, never again do I want a red ring.
I'm sure in the event there is anything worth reading someone will probably copy it on these pages.

 

[manchester blue]

Unfortunately I reckon that the muen will have calculated that the increase in web hits will have far outweighed a few people no longer visiting the site, and that most will have strayed back within a couple of weeks anyway, so its a win win for them, and they actually make money out of taking the piss out of us. So the question becomes fellow Blues have enough of us got the desire to fuck on the muen and NEVER buy it or click on it again, or more likely will they leave it a while and carry on taking the piss out of us on an ongoing basis, the snidey rag scumbags?

The last few derogotory articles, whilst annoying, did not stop me buying or visiting their website. The damage is done this time. There are plenty of other good sites to get news from, I bet most don't even know Bluemoon has a news section.

I wonder if the so called "journalist" watched the Barcelona v Real Sociedad semi final 1st leg this week at the Nou Camp? A crowd of only 38,505 turned up.

<a class="postlink" href="http://espnfc.com/stats/attendance/_/league/esp.1/spanish-primera-division?cc=5739" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://espnfc.com/stats/attendance/_/le ... on?cc=5739</a>

Given that the capacity is 98,787 by my reckoning that's 60,282 empty seats. Now that's what I call swathes of empty seats reminiscent of the swamp on 6-1 day. Good job he wasn't highlighting the empty seats with red dots at that game as he'd still be doing it now.

Interestingly Barcelona's average attendance this season is 74,775 so perhaps they need to consider downscaling rather extending the Nou Camp.

<a class="postlink" href="http://espnfc.com/stats/attendance/_/league/esp.1/spanish-primera-division?cc=5739" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://espnfc.com/stats/attendance/_/le ... on?cc=5739</a>

I don't think the 6-1 would have been a good match to highlight them as this sold out. Oops, maybe he should have based on his ill judged idea of a sold out game being the catalyst for a reason not to expand a stadium. He would have been better using this cup game as an example as why United should not have such a high capacity but that would have been equally dense of him. Lets face it, its yet another snidey dig from an outlet that should be more supportive and they have burned their bridges forever with me. If the club had any sense they would stop linking it on the Media section of the site.

[bigimg]http://i44.tinypic.com/2cngkqq.jpg[/bigimg]

 

[Gary James]

I sure a few Blues have seen this but I've also written a piece for the MEN (free of charge!) to get across the facts of City's support. <a class="postlink" href="http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/city-fill-new-stadium-says-6684618" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/ ... ys-6684618</a>

Hopefully it adds some fact and truth to the discussion and follows up the great comments from Bluemooners and Ric's article.

 

[manchester blue]

I sure a few Blues have seen this but I've also written a piece for the MEN (free of charge!) to get across the facts of City's support. <a class="postlink" href="http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/city-fill-new-stadium-says-6684618" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/ ... ys-6684618</a>

Hopefully it adds some fact and truth to the discussion and follows up the great comments from Bluemooners and Ric's article.

Almost got me there Gary! :)

I'll wait till is copied here but I'm sure it will more far researched that the orginial piece. Does it have red circles?

 

[alanblue]

The MEN have never replaced Peter Gardener a true reporter who said it like it was a real City journalist

 

[laserblue]

I sure a few Blues have seen this but I've also written a piece for the MEN (free of charge!) to get across the facts of City's support. <a class="postlink" href="http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/city-fill-new-stadium-says-6684618" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/ ... ys-6684618</a>

Hopefully it adds some fact and truth to the discussion and follows up the great comments from Bluemooners and Ric's article.

Copied and pasted below to save everyone clicking on the link. Great response Gary and a very good point about Newcastle's attendances.


Guest comment: City will fill their new stadium
7 Feb 2014 21:31

The expansion of Manchester City's Etihad Stadium and the Blues fans' ability to fill it has been a hot topic this week - here City expert and writer Gary James gives an historical perspective on the club's attendances.

How the Etihad Stadium expansion could look from inside

After reading David Lynch’s piece on City’s alleged missing fans in the club’s highest crowd of the season I thought it was appropriate to provide a factual consideration of the Blues’ current attendance figures. Firstly, let’s make one point abundantly clear that at every Premier League club there are fans who simply cannot make it to every game for whatever reason. Some may be working, others may not be able to attend because it’s a school night and so at every ground there are, on occasion, visibly empty seats. Whether we like it or not that’s the way it is.

Now in terms of City’s support… I find it hard to accept that anyone can make a story out of ‘absent’ City fans when clearly the club is selling out its Premier League games. Rather than criticise the content of Lynch's article (though there are inaccuracies even in his attendance figures) here are a few facts that may help to paint the true picture of City’s support.

City’s average attendance is currently only a few hundred below official capacity – that’s comparable with all leading clubs. When attendances vary it is often as a result of away support not selling out or increased segregation needs. One of the more extreme examples worth noting from this season came when Newcastle brought around 1200 fans less than the away capacity allowed and the attendance was 46,842 (about 500 empty away seats below true segregated capacity). City’s ticketing and security staff had freed up some of the away allocation in a bid to satisfy the ever-growing demand from City fans, but couldn’t give every empty away seat over to Blues.

Frankly, there’s no point pursuing the argument about City’s sell-out Premier League games because the evidence is clear. Instead it’s worth considering the other hot potato – will the 60,000 plus capacity of the renovated Etihad Stadium be too much? If history is anything to go by I’d say frankly it won’t be enough, not in the long term. When City were first planning to move to the current stadium the plan was for it to be a 60,000 capacity venue. Many fans were disappointed when those plans were scaled down to below 50,000. Had City leaped from their woefully inadequate final Maine Road capacity of around 35,000 (which included over 4,000 temporary seats!) to 60,000 then it’s possible the club would now be talking of increasing from that figure to 70,000 or more. Certainly many League games over the last few seasons could have attracted sell-out crowds. Look at the way Newcastle and Arsenal’s crowds rocketed when they increased to their current levels – incidentally Newcastle’s average was only 16,834 in 1991 and so it shows what growth can be achieved.

From a historical perspective City has a proud record for support and the Blues have been one of the most consistent sides for attendance throughout history. Since 1966, apart from six seasons, Manchester United has been the best supported League side of course, however prior to that date the situation was somewhat different. In fact, of today’s top six best supported sides (United, Arsenal, Newcastle, City, Liverpool and Chelsea) only City, Chelsea and Newcastle have consistently received good support in every era of football’s existence. There have been occasional dips of course - I guess those three sides have also been the least successful three overall - but they still managed to retain a more consistent level of support overall throughout history.

Unlike United, Arsenal and Chelsea, the Blues have never attracted the lowest crowd in their division, nor have they attracted the division’s lowest average crowd – a fate that United have endured. Okay, all of this is irrelevant you could say, but what it shows is that City have always had one of the most loyal fan bases in football. What they’ve occasionally lacked is an appropriate capacity.

There is no doubt that inadequate capacity, such as at Hyde Road, Maine Road from 1992 to 2003 and again at the Etihad today, has limited average support. As early as 1905 Hyde Road’s 40,000 capacity was deemed too small. For me these sentiments, from a contemporary journalist, remain true in terms of capacity today: “Naturally, with such a large population to draw upon, Manchester City get exceptionally big gates, and they would get larger did they possess a better constructed and more commodious ground. That is their chief want.”

I would say go to 60,000 plus now and then increase to 70,000 plus within the following decade. As Newcastle have proved with, arguably, no success and what United have demonstrated with major success, a club with a strong fan base can see its attendances rocket. The momentum at City is gaining pace every day. I say ‘build it they will come!’

 

[manchester blue]

I
After reading David Lynch’s piece on City’s alleged missing fans in the club’s highest crowd of the season I thought it was appropriate to provide a factual consideration of the Blues’ current attendance figures.
[/i]

See Mr Lynch, that's how to get a subtle dig in.

Another great counter piece which further shows up Mr Lynch's poor work.

 

[Kirkstall Blue]

I"ll wait untill someone copies it Gary, don't want to click on the MEN anymore.