The game wasn't tarnished by Munich chants, and neither was the game at Ewood.
For more than ten years it has become universally recognised among City fans that (rightly or wrongly) 'Munichs' has become a term to refer to United fans as a collective.
Is it in bad taste?
Yes.
Is it a direct reference to the deaths of dozens of human beings more than 50 years ago?
No.
Great post.
Pointedly, the genuine Munich chants which explicitly refer to the disaster are extremely rare. In the rare case that one or two (usually pissed) degenerates attempt to start one of the said chants, they're discouraged and 9 times out of 10 it ends there.
Genuine Munich chants are frowned upon, and the majority of our match day going fans wouldn't stand for them within earshot.
Referring to United fans as 'Munichs' is offensive, it's meant to be. It's in bad taste, but the application and the context is key. IMO at least, this has just become another stick to beat our club with, the press are clutching at straws now and it tells.
W
-- Mon May 02, 2011 2:18 pm --
e're a threat to the monopoly, and they're using anything they can to undermine us.
You might say we shouldn't give them the opportunity, but why should we concede to their demands? If it isn't some fans referring to a club and its fans who've lived off and marketed a tragic accident for more than 50 years (while doing nothing to help the actual victims of the accident) as 'Munichs', then it'll just be something else.
And besides, how do you interpret what can be construed as offensive and then apply it to the point people are being banned from attending games as a result?
Treading a very thin line once we get to that stage in football.
We paid our respects to those who died in Munich 3 years ago. Any genuine disrespect would have surfaced then if it so existed. But it didn't, because our fans, as a majority, aren't the scum we're regularly depicted as in the press.
Worth remembering that when you label other blues X Y Z.
