MUEN

[gaudinho's stolen car]

649?

Close

642?

37?

 

[LongsightM13]

So there won't be anything about the rags v spuds on the back page next Tuesday, then.
It will be something about a City squad member.
Let's wait and see if you're right before you start calling people paranoid.

Every team's fans think the media is biased against them. Ours are no different. Do you not think all our rivals will think the media loves us, after all the columnists have been raving over Aguero the past few days? The rags think the media hate them, and probably think they love us because were "challengers to their throne".
How about we try and be different? How about we become the set of fans who DON'T think the media hates us? Sounds absurd, I know. But let's try it for a short while, hey?

I doubt the sports editors of other regional papers covering two main clubs oversaw a cull of journalists in which one of those clubs was left with no representation on the sports desk.
Fletcher did so.

 

[Challenger1978]

I'm not sure I believe what I've been told....

What was the back page feature in the MUEN last night?

The format has now changed. Ref sports back page, used for early previous days news ie "Fletch is back" and the 10 pages centre pullout is now devoted to late previous days news with 4 pages on Citys win and other related news.Other 6 pages ref Rags and other local teams,cricket etc.
Don`t be mislead by some of the anti MEN tossers on this forum,who never read it but take "advice" from ill advised non readers !!

The MUEN has been taking the piss out of city since at least the early 90's. Back when I used to deliver the fucking thing on a paper round.

 

[stuart brennan]

Just to make a point or two here.
The reason City were not on the back page, as Oakiecokie has pointed out, is that the later sports news now goes on the pull-out, so City were on the cover of the pull-out and three pages inside.
The very same happened to United on Monday - they won their opening game and the back page story was Micah Richards talking about City.
With tight deadlines for evening games, these kind of things have to be done.
To answer the last point, the only person "culled" in the last round of redundancies was a Red.
Chris Bailey left voluntarily to work for City.
At a quick tot-up, that means there are now five Reds and five Blues on a 13-man sports desk covering the MEN and the weekly papers.
Just for the record, the main moderator on our website is also a Blue.
Just try taking a step back and put things in context sometimes.
There is no anti-City agenda at the MEN - we would have to be commercially suicidal to do so.
United fans call us the Manchester Evening Blues, as they only see the stuff they regard as being anti-United and ignore all the positive stuff.

 

[mancunial]

I'm paranoid because I enjoy being paranoid, it keeps me on edge I'm like a coiled spring from morning till night ready to pounce on anyone who calls my beloved club, but their is one thing that bewilders me, I never hear city the club call anyone or complain?

 

[Dzeko's Right Boot]

Just to make a point or two here.
The reason City were not on the back page, as Oakiecokie has pointed out, is that the later sports news now goes on the pull-out, so City were on the cover of the pull-out and three pages inside.
The very same happened to United on Monday - they won their opening game and the back page story was Micah Richards talking about City.
With tight deadlines for evening games, these kind of things have to be done.
To answer the last point, the only person "culled" in the last round of redundancies was a Red.
Chris Bailey left voluntarily to work for City.
At a quick tot-up, that means there are now five Reds and five Blues on a 13-man sports desk covering the MEN and the weekly papers.
Just for the record, the main moderator on our website is also a Blue.
Just try taking a step back and put things in context sometimes.
There is no anti-City agenda at the MEN - we would have to be commercially suicidal to do so.
United fans call us the Manchester Evening Blues, as they only see the stuff they regard as being anti-United and ignore all the positive stuff.

Wham bam, thankyou man. Can we give it a rest now please?

 

[oakiecokie]

Just to make a point or two here.
The reason City were not on the back page, as Oakiecokie has pointed out, is that the later sports news now goes on the pull-out, so City were on the cover of the pull-out and three pages inside.
The very same happened to United on Monday - they won their opening game and the back page story was Micah Richards talking about City.
With tight deadlines for evening games, these kind of things have to be done.
To answer the last point, the only person "culled" in the last round of redundancies was a Red.
Chris Bailey left voluntarily to work for City.
At a quick tot-up, that means there are now five Reds and five Blues on a 13-man sports desk covering the MEN and the weekly papers.
Just for the record, the main moderator on our website is also a Blue.
Just try taking a step back and put things in context sometimes.
There is no anti-City agenda at the MEN - we would have to be commercially suicidal to do so.
United fans call us the Manchester Evening Blues, as they only see the stuff they regard as being anti-United and ignore all the positive stuff.

Well seeing that I live in Cheshire and have to pay 47p per night x 6 nights,I have been your most loyal fan and supporter,can I now expect a FREE subscription for a YEAR from your very generous (cough) company.
I await with baited breath. lol
By the way,how difficult is it for you to write positve stuff (most of the time) about the Blues when you are a Red.Must hurt surely. ;)<br /><br />-- Wed Aug 17, 2011 5:00 pm --<br /><br />

Just to make a point or two here.
The reason City were not on the back page, as Oakiecokie has pointed out, is that the later sports news now goes on the pull-out, so City were on the cover of the pull-out and three pages inside.
The very same happened to United on Monday - they won their opening game and the back page story was Micah Richards talking about City.
With tight deadlines for evening games, these kind of things have to be done.
To answer the last point, the only person "culled" in the last round of redundancies was a Red.
Chris Bailey left voluntarily to work for City.
At a quick tot-up, that means there are now five Reds and five Blues on a 13-man sports desk covering the MEN and the weekly papers.
Just for the record, the main moderator on our website is also a Blue.
Just try taking a step back and put things in context sometimes.
There is no anti-City agenda at the MEN - we would have to be commercially suicidal to do so.
United fans call us the Manchester Evening Blues, as they only see the stuff they regard as being anti-United and ignore all the positive stuff.

Wham bam, thankyou man. Can we give it a rest now please?

Well DRB,think Mr.Brennan owes us a couple of pints mate !!

 

[Challenger1978]

Just to make a point or two here.
The reason City were not on the back page, as Oakiecokie has pointed out, is that the later sports news now goes on the pull-out, so City were on the cover of the pull-out and three pages inside.
The very same happened to United on Monday - they won their opening game and the back page story was Micah Richards talking about City.
With tight deadlines for evening games, these kind of things have to be done.
To answer the last point, the only person "culled" in the last round of redundancies was a Red.
Chris Bailey left voluntarily to work for City.
At a quick tot-up, that means there are now five Reds and five Blues on a 13-man sports desk covering the MEN and the weekly papers.
Just for the record, the main moderator on our website is also a Blue.
Just try taking a step back and put things in context sometimes.
There is no anti-City agenda at the MEN - we would have to be commercially suicidal to do so.
United fans call us the Manchester Evening Blues, as they only see the stuff they regard as being anti-United and ignore all the positive stuff.

How about when city was in the first and second division and your newspaper gave us sod all coverage. When I say sod all coverage I mean literally half the time you didn't even bother putting in any kind of match report. Then when you did half the time its was a column an inch across by at most 3 or 4 inches long.

Now don't try and deny it I was a skint teen back then when that happened. There was no bloody internet either so the main ways I had to follow what was going on back then was either read the MUEN or if I was lucky listen to the match on magic 1152 (I'll always love magic 1152 because of that).

As for the highlighted that would be why you have to give away your paper now because you've been shitting on city fans for the last 20 years. So no one wants to read your crap any more.

 

[oakiecokie]

Just to make a point or two here.
The reason City were not on the back page, as Oakiecokie has pointed out, is that the later sports news now goes on the pull-out, so City were on the cover of the pull-out and three pages inside.
The very same happened to United on Monday - they won their opening game and the back page story was Micah Richards talking about City.
With tight deadlines for evening games, these kind of things have to be done.
To answer the last point, the only person "culled" in the last round of redundancies was a Red.
Chris Bailey left voluntarily to work for City.
At a quick tot-up, that means there are now five Reds and five Blues on a 13-man sports desk covering the MEN and the weekly papers.
Just for the record, the main moderator on our website is also a Blue.
Just try taking a step back and put things in context sometimes.
There is no anti-City agenda at the MEN - we would have to be commercially suicidal to do so.
United fans call us the Manchester Evening Blues, as they only see the stuff they regard as being anti-United and ignore all the positive stuff.

How about when city was in the first and second division and your newspaper gave us sod all coverage. When I say sod all coverage I mean literally half the time you didn't even bother putting in any kind of match report. Then when you did half the time its was a column an inch across by at most 3 or 4 inches long.

Now don't try and deny it I was a skint teen back then when that happened. There was no bloody internet either so the main ways I had to follow what was going on back then was either read the MUEN or if I was lucky listen to the match on magic 1152 (I'll always love magic 1152 because of that).

As for the highlighted that would be why you have to give away your paper now because you've been shitting on city fans for the last 20 years. So no one wants to read your crap any more.

Because in those days we were only on par with Stockport,Bury,Macclesfield.
Need I say more ?

 

[ancoats]

Just to make a point or two here.
The reason City were not on the back page, as Oakiecokie has pointed out, is that the later sports news now goes on the pull-out, so City were on the cover of the pull-out and three pages inside.
The very same happened to United on Monday - they won their opening game and the back page story was Micah Richards talking about City.
With tight deadlines for evening games, these kind of things have to be done.
To answer the last point, the only person "culled" in the last round of redundancies was a Red.
Chris Bailey left voluntarily to work for City.
At a quick tot-up, that means there are now five Reds and five Blues on a 13-man sports desk covering the MEN and the weekly papers.
Just for the record, the main moderator on our website is also a Blue.
Just try taking a step back and put things in context sometimes.
There is no anti-City agenda at the MEN - we would have to be commercially suicidal to do so.
United fans call us the Manchester Evening Blues, as they only see the stuff they regard as being anti-United and ignore all the positive stuff.

How about when city was in the first and second division and your newspaper gave us sod all coverage. When I say sod all coverage I mean literally half the time you didn't even bother putting in any kind of match report. Then when you did half the time its was a column an inch across by at most 3 or 4 inches long.

Now don't try and deny it I was a skint teen back then when that happened. There was no bloody internet either so the main ways I had to follow what was going on back then was either read the MUEN or if I was lucky listen to the match on magic 1152 (I'll always love magic 1152 because of that).

As for the highlighted that would be why you have to give away your paper now because you've been shitting on city fans for the last 20 years. So no one wants to read your crap any more.

spot on matey

even the great joe royle said when the season started in 98 that city have fell that far down the paper even the small print above us

MEUN has been a joke paper for years
they laugh so hard about manchester city on the way down they never in a million years think that 1 day we would over take utd

well fu*k off muen we dont need a local crap mamchester paper to find out how well/bad we are doing coz most manchestre city fans turn up week in week out and in any league and not just glory hunters like utd fans<br /><br />-- Wed Aug 17, 2011 6:45 pm --<br /><br />

Just to make a point or two here.
The reason City were not on the back page, as Oakiecokie has pointed out, is that the later sports news now goes on the pull-out, so City were on the cover of the pull-out and three pages inside.
The very same happened to United on Monday - they won their opening game and the back page story was Micah Richards talking about City.
With tight deadlines for evening games, these kind of things have to be done.
To answer the last point, the only person "culled" in the last round of redundancies was a Red.
Chris Bailey left voluntarily to work for City.
At a quick tot-up, that means there are now five Reds and five Blues on a 13-man sports desk covering the MEN and the weekly papers.
Just for the record, the main moderator on our website is also a Blue.
Just try taking a step back and put things in context sometimes.
There is no anti-City agenda at the MEN - we would have to be commercially suicidal to do so.
United fans call us the Manchester Evening Blues, as they only see the stuff they regard as being anti-United and ignore all the positive stuff.

How about when city was in the first and second division and your newspaper gave us sod all coverage. When I say sod all coverage I mean literally half the time you didn't even bother putting in any kind of match report. Then when you did half the time its was a column an inch across by at most 3 or 4 inches long.

Now don't try and deny it I was a skint teen back then when that happened. There was no bloody internet either so the main ways I had to follow what was going on back then was either read the MUEN or if I was lucky listen to the match on magic 1152 (I'll always love magic 1152 because of that).

As for the highlighted that would be why you have to give away your paper now because you've been shitting on city fans for the last 20 years. So no one wants to read your crap any more.

Because in those days we were only on par with Stockport,Bury,Macclesfield.
Need I say more ?

but we are the only manchester team and the local paper focus on utd
to sell papers glory hunters 30p was everything to them

 

[nmc]

Because in those days we were only on par with Stockport,Bury,Macclesfield.
Need I say more ?


Well Oakicokie must work for the MEN coming out with first degree shite like that. We had better gates than those three teams put together - even at our lowest ebb. You simply couldn't lump us in with Bury and Stockport, we were the freak show of the (old) third division everywhere we went it was a sell out. Our home gates were on another planet and we stuck together in our hour of need very very well - I was so proud to be a City fan that season. So comments like that really wind me up and they belong to the south coast snippers on the MEN comments section.

As for the MEN I appreciate mr Brennan's points and probably accept we all have a little paranoia in our midst ( me included). I now accept that the MEN's poor coverage and general lack of insight and knowledge probably extends to the Rags as well. Its only my opinion - i read the MEN most days because i take the train into town but i have to say that not just the sport but its utter crap these days - and is certainly in its death throws. It's clear when you hear Spencer on the radio that whilst he talks first and foremost as a United fan he either hasn't got a clue what's going on or he is speaking more in hope than anything else. How many times has he told Talksport this summer that Sneijder is coming to the Rags - I doubt he knows anything he just wants it to happen.

 

[Dzeko's Right Boot]

Just to make a point or two here.
The reason City were not on the back page, as Oakiecokie has pointed out, is that the later sports news now goes on the pull-out, so City were on the cover of the pull-out and three pages inside.
The very same happened to United on Monday - they won their opening game and the back page story was Micah Richards talking about City.
With tight deadlines for evening games, these kind of things have to be done.
To answer the last point, the only person "culled" in the last round of redundancies was a Red.
Chris Bailey left voluntarily to work for City.
At a quick tot-up, that means there are now five Reds and five Blues on a 13-man sports desk covering the MEN and the weekly papers.
Just for the record, the main moderator on our website is also a Blue.
Just try taking a step back and put things in context sometimes.
There is no anti-City agenda at the MEN - we would have to be commercially suicidal to do so.
United fans call us the Manchester Evening Blues, as they only see the stuff they regard as being anti-United and ignore all the positive stuff.

How about when city was in the first and second division and your newspaper gave us sod all coverage. When I say sod all coverage I mean literally half the time you didn't even bother putting in any kind of match report. Then when you did half the time its was a column an inch across by at most 3 or 4 inches long.

Now don't try and deny it I was a skint teen back then when that happened. There was no bloody internet either so the main ways I had to follow what was going on back then was either read the MUEN or if I was lucky listen to the match on magic 1152 (I'll always love magic 1152 because of that).

As for the highlighted that would be why you have to give away your paper now because you've been shitting on city fans for the last 20 years. So no one wants to read your crap any more.

spot on matey

even the great joe royle said when the season started in 98 that city have fell that far down the paper even the small print above us

MEUN has been a joke paper for years
they laugh so hard about manchester city on the way down they never in a million years think that 1 day we would over take utd

well fu*k off muen we dont need a local crap mamchester paper to find out how well/bad we are doing coz most manchestre city fans turn up week in week out and in any league and not just glory hunters like utd fans

-- Wed Aug 17, 2011 6:45 pm --

How about when city was in the first and second division and your newspaper gave us sod all coverage. When I say sod all coverage I mean literally half the time you didn't even bother putting in any kind of match report. Then when you did half the time its was a column an inch across by at most 3 or 4 inches long.

Now don't try and deny it I was a skint teen back then when that happened. There was no bloody internet either so the main ways I had to follow what was going on back then was either read the MUEN or if I was lucky listen to the match on magic 1152 (I'll always love magic 1152 because of that).

As for the highlighted that would be why you have to give away your paper now because you've been shitting on city fans for the last 20 years. So no one wants to read your crap any more.

Because in those days we were only on par with Stockport,Bury,Macclesfield.
Need I say more ?

but we are the only manchester team and the local paper focus on utd
to sell papers glory hunters 30p was everything to them

In that case, are you going to start a campaign to get all of those smaller teams out of the newspaper, just because they aren't in Manchester?

 

[blue dallas]

Just to make a point or two here.
The reason City were not on the back page, as Oakiecokie has pointed out, is that the later sports news now goes on the pull-out, so City were on the cover of the pull-out and three pages inside.
The very same happened to United on Monday - they won their opening game and the back page story was Micah Richards talking about City.
With tight deadlines for evening games, these kind of things have to be done.
To answer the last point, the only person "culled" in the last round of redundancies was a Red.
Chris Bailey left voluntarily to work for City.
At a quick tot-up, that means there are now five Reds and five Blues on a 13-man sports desk covering the MEN and the weekly papers.
Just for the record, the main moderator on our website is also a Blue.
Just try taking a step back and put things in context sometimes.
There is no anti-City agenda at the MEN - we would have to be commercially suicidal to do so.
United fans call us the Manchester Evening Blues, as they only see the stuff they regard as being anti-United and ignore all the positive stuff.

says the guy who reporting on the 4 nil vs swansea,
serves up around 3 paragraphs on Balotelli drivel !

 

[oakiecokie]

Because in those days we were only on par with Stockport,Bury,Macclesfield.
Need I say more ?


Well Oakicokie must work for the MEN coming out with first degree shite like that. We had better gates than those three teams put together - even at our lowest ebb. You simply couldn't lump us in with Bury and Stockport, we were the freak show of the (old) third division everywhere we went it was a sell out. Our home gates were on another planet and we stuck together in our hour of need very very well - I was so proud to be a City fan that season. So comments like that really wind me up and they belong to the south coast snippers on the MEN comments section.

As for the MEN I appreciate mr Brennan's points and probably accept we all have a little paranoia in our midst ( me included). I now accept that the MEN's poor coverage and general lack of insight and knowledge probably extends to the Rags as well. Its only my opinion - i read the MEN most days because i take the train into town but i have to say that not just the sport but its utter crap these days - and is certainly in its death throws. It's clear when you hear Spencer on the radio that whilst he talks first and foremost as a United fan he either hasn't got a clue what's going on or he is speaking more in hope than anything else. How many times has he told Talksport this summer that Sneijder is coming to the Rags - I doubt he knows anything he just wants it to happen.

The only difference was the gates.
Considering they were our local derbies how could be NOT on par with them,along with the other 23 clubs in that same division.

 

[BucksBlue]

649?

Close

642?

higher or lower than 649?

 

[stuart brennan]

Again, can I just kill the stuff about when City were in the second division.
I was at the MEN at the time, working as a sub-editor, and the sports editor kept a record of column inches devoted to United and City, and made sure that they balanced by the end of the week.
Any City or United fan who complained that the other team got preferential coverage - was shown the figures.
That was despite the fact that City were, as someone said, a division below Stockport and Bury, and United were winning the Treble.
The poster who said otherwise has a faulty memory, or is just remembering what he wants to remember.

 

[blue dallas]

Again, can I just kill the stuff about when City were in the second division.
I was at the MEN at the time, working as a sub-editor, and the sports editor kept a record of column inches devoted to United and City, and made sure that they balanced by the end of the week.
Any City or United fan who complained that the other team got preferential coverage - was shown the figures.
That was despite the fact that City were, as someone said, a division below Stockport and Bury, and United were winning the Treble.
The poster who said otherwise has a faulty memory, or is just remembering what he wants to remember.

what about the drivel you printed about Mario in your swansea match report ?
the column inches between us and utd may well be equal, its what your write in those columns is what most blues are pissed off about.
heres a thought, Zabaleta is at Hyde tonight with his family watching the reserves, what a guy.
why don't you print about that tomorrow, i'm sure you'd find some red column inches for it, if it was Darren Fletcher.

 

[nmc]

Again, can I just kill the stuff about when City were in the second division.
I was at the MEN at the time, working as a sub-editor, and the sports editor kept a record of column inches devoted to United and City, and made sure that they balanced by the end of the week.
Any City or United fan who complained that the other team got preferential coverage - was shown the figures.
That was despite the fact that City were, as someone said, a division below Stockport and Bury, and United were winning the Treble.
The poster who said otherwise has a faulty memory, or is just remembering what he wants to remember.

Don't disagree column inches were balanced but what about the disgusting leader comment - remember the 'we only print the results' nonsense -totally unforgivable - the begining of the end. the MEN nailed its colours to the mast that day.

 

[stuart brennan]

what about the drivel you printed about Mario in your swansea match report ?
the column inches between us and utd may well be equal, its what your write in those columns is what most blues are pissed off about.

You have to write the match reports for evening kick offs as the game progresses, otherwise we would not hit the deadline.
I was told to mention the "I Love Mcr" T-shirts, and Mario did what he did, which was daft, when the subject was a serious one.
I have constantly defended Mario, in the MEN and on Talksport, but you can't escape the fact that he does daft things, a lot.
I didn't go over the top, just mentioned it - I'm not here to whitewash, or Bluewash, but to say what I think, and I think Mario was daft.
If it had been a Saturday game, when you have time to consider and edit your own stuff, it probably wouldn't have gone in, but evening match reports are a mad scramble and these things happen.
Just try it - next timje you watch a match, set yourself to write a 1,000 words match report which has to be completed within ten minutes of the final whistle. Trust me, it is not easy!

 

[Shooter 83]

Again, can I just kill the stuff about when City were in the second division.
I was at the MEN at the time, working as a sub-editor, and the sports editor kept a record of column inches devoted to United and City, and made sure that they balanced by the end of the week.
Any City or United fan who complained that the other team got preferential coverage - was shown the figures.
That was despite the fact that City were, as someone said, a division below Stockport and Bury, and United were winning the Treble.
The poster who said otherwise has a faulty memory, or is just remembering what he wants to remember.

While you're here.... Can you explain why you go on about Yaya Toure's wage's being 220k per week and Carlos Tevez being on 250k per week(you try and squeeze that one in every column about City) when the Club has comfirmed the fiqures quoted are well over the top.