Perception of City as a 'big' club

[squirtyflower]

Incidentally, if anyone wants a wander down memory lane with the goals from the Spurs game May 1977 that I mentioned above, then here's the video posted on YouTube by the estimable mcfcvideos, who posts on here. The move for the superb goal by Peter Barnes starts around 1 minute 9 seconds:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jEPRA-GzQU4[/youtube]

tony book's team was great, we should never have brought back big mal

 

[petrusha]

tony book's team was great, we should never have brought back big mal

We could do a separate thread on that, but I absolutely agree. I loved Book's side - it was the first that I watched, and it helped when I was a kid that they won nearly every home game. I think I'm correct that in the three seasons when I started - 1975/6, 1976/7 and 1977/8 - we only lost a total of six home matches.

When Mal came back, the team was ageing, and the big buys Book made from 1977 onwards never really worked out (Channon, Futcher, Viljoen and the like, even Deyna, whose undoubted brilliance flickered intermittently rather than shone regularly in his time with us). But when a judicious remodelling was needed, Mal ripped the team apart, selling not only over-the-hill players but younger stars like Barnes and Owen. And almost all Mal's purchases were worse than the men they were to replace.

And not only did we make the team worse by bringing in inferior quality, but we almost bankrupted ourselves in the process, which was what really f**ked us over for years. Swales negotiated and sanctioned fees that were simply insane. In all the time I've been watching English football, I struggle to recall many if any episodes of such utter insanity at other big clubs.

That's all I'll say for now. I could write reams about it, though! :)

 

[Rudgey]

Really interesting read.

Does is make new fans from the 70's glory hunters?

Are we not 8th in the all time total of top flight points won? U****d are 3rd from memory.

I think those of us who started going in the seventies have been through enough crap to avoid being called glory hunters! Although I suppose as a kid, the fact that we were a top team made it easier to withstand stick from the obnoxious rags at school - not sure how I'd have coped 20 years later, to be honest. :)

I joke about the glory hunters of course! It took thick skin at school in the 90's, but patience is a virtue as they say!

 

[Gary James]

Managed to find a table here of all top flight points until 7 January 2013: http://www.myfootballfacts.com/All-TimeTopFlightPointsTable1888-89to2010-11.html. It's Liverpool, Arsenal, Everton, United, Villa, Chelsea, Spurs and then us. Newcastle (36 behind us - presumably their relegation a couple of years back helped us to overtake them) and Sunderland complete the top ten.

When you consider how long Everton and Arsenal have been in the top flight then I guess it's inevitable they'll be high up the list. It also shows that for all Utd's dominance over the last 20 years their pre-WW2 form really was poor otherwise they'd be much higher. Chelsea's successes in recent years have lifted them and, if all goes to plan, City will challenge the others (though it would take major struggles for the others to lose their way - Villa are trying their best to help us out I guess!).

Also, if you consider City's so-called rollercoaster existence, it suggests that we've actually been more consistent than NUFC and SFC to be ahead of them.

Petrusha - as you know from my book(s) I keep urging people to recognise the full history of City as something to celebrate. We may not have had the same level of success as some of the clubs but we have had success for every generation (we came close to missing one in the last 30 years, but got there in the end). Not all clubs can say that.

So my conclusion... despite our image our history has been one that has been cyclical with major success or at least significant League challenge coming in fairly regular spells (04-34/37-56-68/70-76-11/now with title challenges/FAC appearances in 05, 20, 26, 33, 55, 77, 81). Our longest spell without a major challenge/final appearance was 1981-2011 - the period of decline/down-sizing that is out of character with our history. But even in that period we had two 5th place finishes (early 90s).

 

[Gary James]

Incidentally, for all City's struggles over the years, up until the 1990s relegation City had played more top flight games than Utd since City's first promotion in 1899.

 

[squirtyflower]

tony book's team was great, we should never have brought back big mal

We could do a separate thread on that, but I absolutely agree. I loved Book's side - it was the first that I watched, and it helped when I was a kid that they won nearly every home game. I think I'm correct that in the three seasons when I started - 1975/6, 1976/7 and 1977/8 - we only lost a total of six home matches.

When Mal came back, the team was ageing, and the big buys Book made from 1977 onwards never really worked out (Channon, Futcher, Viljoen and the like, even Deyna, whose undoubted brilliance flickered intermittently rather than shone regularly in his time with us). But when a judicious remodelling was needed, Mal ripped the team apart, selling not only over-the-hill players but younger stars like Barnes and Owen. And almost all Mal's purchases were worse than the men they were to replace.

And not only did we make the team worse by bringing in inferior quality, but we almost bankrupted ourselves in the process, which was what really f**ked us over for years. Swales negotiated and sanctioned fees that were simply insane. In all the time I've been watching English football, I struggle to recall many if any episodes of such utter insanity at other big clubs.

That's all I'll say for now. I could write reams about it, though! :)

it was a truly good period and i hardly remember the losses, sat in the Platt Lane, Row 5 right behind the goal
the aging stars would have been replaced by bookie, his mistakes were when he tried to buy big
we had some good youngsters coming through and TB was the right person to have brought them through but Swales let his vanity get the best of him
Mal ripped it apart and gave us the glorious Booby Shinton and Halifax away (and that is no spelling mistake), seeing Gary Owen and Barnes leave was heartbreaking

 

[Gary James]

we had some good youngsters coming through and TB was the right person to have brought them through but Swales let his vanity get the best of him
Mal ripped it apart and gave us the glorious Booby Shinton and Halifax away (and that is no spelling mistake), seeing Gary Owen and Barnes leave was heartbreaking

In recent months I've been researching the archive at the NWFA and watching some very interesting BBC news items on this period. With hindsight it's pretty clear Swales didn't know what he was doing bringing back Allison and then moving Book to the side.

There's a telling clip (actually there's a few!) that shows how this was never really going to work. At the time we had no idea, but watching it now it is abundantly clear that Swales messed it all up.

The films will be shown as part of the event I'm staging with the NWFA at Cornerhouse at the end of April - more details soon. Any fan interested in City during this period will want to see this stuff - it's not been seen since it was first broadcast (not on youtube or elsewhere).

 

[Bianchi]

The films will be shown as part of the event I'm staging with the NWFA at Cornerhouse at the end of April - more details soon. Any fan interested in City during this period will want to see this stuff - it's not been seen since it was first broadcast (not on youtube or elsewhere).

This sounds fascinating. When/where will details be released?

 

[mancityvstoke]

We are a big club and always have been. Ask any Utd fan. They are always banging on about City being a MASSIVE club.

Must be true then.

 

[acton28.blog]

I think the 98/99 season, minimum home gate in the league of 30057 (Fulham) shows loyalty and for me there is no bigger gauge of support or being a big club than loyalty.