Steviesleftpeg
Well-Known Member
Re: North-West tonight
*tries desperately to put lid back on can of worms*
*tries desperately to put lid back on can of worms*
Pigeonho said:Ok fair enough. Tell me though, with one FA Cup to our name in 34 years, what do they have to be obsessed about? Genuine question that, not being funny.
Their younger fans are the worst, the older ones not so bad (generally).
The younger ones have grown up knowing nothing but success so have no real character, they don't understand disappointment and can't fathom why we're so joyous and enjoying ourselves. They find it puzzling why we celebrate a "mere" FA Cup win.
Regular success has desensitized them so much that it means very little to them now and they get their jollies from (attempting) taunting us, Liverpool fans, and whoever else.
Pigeonho said:Ok fair enough. Tell me though, with one FA Cup to our name in 34 years, what do they have to be obsessed about? Genuine question that, not being funny.
Pigeonho said:A fan of a club winning league titles, CL titles an what not, has no reason to be obsessed with us. From what i've gauged on here it's like people want them to be obsessed with us, simply so they can say back to them what they have said to us for years. Same with the bitter tag. I've never been obsessed or bitter towards them though, so maybe i'm wrong.RP2 said:Pigeonho said:Didn't mean it like that mate, god no! I'm not the thread police.
What I meant was you said they are obsessed with us. Go and count the amount of United-esque threads in General Forum. My opinion? They have nothing to be obsessed about, whereas it appears we do.
Mate, I agree that we are just as bad when it comes to 'obsessing' - but we have always had a reason to be bitter !!! They have NO reason to be bitter/obsessive, yet A LOT clearly are, from my experience.
Pigeonho said:Go to the general forum.Steviesleftpeg said:On the BBC tonight. They were interviewing some United fans from Middleton about the final.
One of the little kids was holding a sign which said '43 years, 20,000 empty seats'.
They are so obsessed with us its becoming very embarrassing. Biggest game of their season and that is all they can think about. Actually I'd go beyond embarrassing, it's just sad.
Guess how many of those 'Mancunian' United fans were going? One. And he was from Australia and got his ticket through the Melbourne supporters club (no offence Aussie Blues)
Pigeonho said:Ok fair enough. Tell me though, with one FA Cup to our name in 34 years, what do they have to be obsessed about? Genuine question that, not being funny.LoveCity said:Pigeonho said:The most ironic post ever.
Nah, if I was obsessed with them I'd spend an hour and post endless links of stuff to show you even more that in fact, many United fans are obsessed with us. Reading your post, I went to the only United forum I've heard of and saw those threads on the opening pages. Not much effort and certainly no obsession.
What is strangely obsessive behaviour though is picking out any posts that suggest the media hates us or fans of other clubs hate us and demeaning City fans for doing that. I wonder who does that?
Pigeonho said:A fan of a club winning league titles, CL titles an what not, has no reason to be obsessed with us. From what i've gauged on here it's like people want them to be obsessed with us, simply so they can say back to them what they have said to us for years. Same with the bitter tag. I've never been obsessed or bitter towards them though, so maybe i'm wrong.RP2 said:Pigeonho said:Didn't mean it like that mate, god no! I'm not the thread police.
What I meant was you said they are obsessed with us. Go and count the amount of United-esque threads in General Forum. My opinion? They have nothing to be obsessed about, whereas it appears we do.
Mate, I agree that we are just as bad when it comes to 'obsessing' - but we have always had a reason to be bitter !!! They have NO reason to be bitter/obsessive, yet A LOT clearly are, from my experience.
LoveCity said:Pigeonho said:A fan of a club winning league titles, CL titles an what not, has no reason to be obsessed with us.
These took me about a minute to find:
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.redcafe.net/f7/bluemoon-goes-into-meltdown-287034/index50.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.redcafe.net/f7/bluemoon-goes ... dex50.html</a>
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.redcafe.net/f7/now-dust-has-settled-citys-parade-330615/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.redcafe.net/f7/now-dust-has- ... de-330615/</a>
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.redcafe.net/f7/oh-irony-329797/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.redcafe.net/f7/oh-irony-329797/</a>
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.redcafe.net/f7/time-leave-city-centre-330498/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.redcafe.net/f7/time-leave-ci ... re-330498/</a>
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.redcafe.net/f7/city-winning-fa-cup-like-329505/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.redcafe.net/f7/city-winning- ... ke-329505/</a>
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.redcafe.net/f7/city-fans-stupid-tattoos-329411/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.redcafe.net/f7/city-fans-stu ... os-329411/</a>
They relaunched as Ardwick FC, in Ardwick. not moved to Ardwick.mancunian_red_84 said:Mëtal Bikër said:You're not arguing because you know you're incorrect and nothing you have said changes these facts.mancunian_red_84 said:I am not arguing united was formed in manchester, city wasn't formed in manchester either if you want to be technical.
What I am saying is the name manchester united is perfectly legitimate, since when it was decided what to call the club was located in manchester and the support united had at that time mostly came from the city of manchester.
The truth here is you have two schools of thought , one that football clubs should reflect their area which is why one of your board resigned when you moved to south manchester and set up manchester central arguing that east/central manchester had a right to a football club.
Or you had the other school of thought in that football clubs can be grown by tapping into other areas, particularly untapped ones.
Now if you guys want to argue about the modern day manchester united, particularly since they dropped football club from the badge and decided to tap into every foreign market they can....ill hold my hands up and rip my own club to shreads for some of the shameless stuff thats gone on and also point out the stuff your club is beginning to do that resembles the early stages of what we did 15-20 years ago.
But no way whatsoever are city the only mancunian club, we are too big in manchester for that one and by big im not talking about armchairs and 3d tv's in pubs, im talking about your average week in week out manc lads.
United has and will continue to draw huge numbers of these lads from the city regardless of success.
I think if city are to become the new power around these parts you need to move away from this mentality you have, your owners certainly plan to rightly or wrongly.
Newton Heath weren't formed in Manchester, St Marks weren't formed in Manchester, but Ardwick FC were. Man Utd ARE Newton Heath, St Mark's were the semi pro club which split in half, one stayed amateur the other formed as Ardwick. St Marks don't exist anymore.
No, Manchester no longer has one club which is highly popular in the area, but Manchester has only EVER had ONE Manchester Club (well briefly two when Manchester Central existed.) You're arguing points about how united have since made steps to associate themselves with the city of Manchester, but that's not the topic of discussion here.
It was when one United fan, who quickly became wound up and started getting angry, stated that Manchester and greater manchester are the same thing, that Gtr M/cr is a city and therefore Trafford is still a part of Manchester and when Utd were formed so were Newton heath. Instead of trying to establish an association to Manchester via methods, he was establishing that United are Mancunian through formation and heritage, which it isn't.
No-one's saying utd don't have a huge fanbase in Manchester, but then that's not what this topic of discussion has been about anyway.
The crux is.....United were not formed in Manchester. Manchester City, were.
Well that lad should have paid more attention in geography.
Didn't st marks merge with gorton athletic, naming themselves gorton a.f.c, and losing st marks name at this point. Then gorton a.f.c split into gorton a.f.c and west gorton athletic. this was 1887. then gorton a.f.c moved into aardwick, turned professional and called themselves ardwick a.f.c.
This all took place outside the city of manchester, you moved in and adpoted the name of ur area, but i am not sure why this and turning professional gives you extra credibility than.
Newton heath moving into the city (newton heath itself being incorporated during our time at bank street) and then adopting a name in 1902 that accurately reflected where it was located.
Granted it was only until 1910........to me the only argument you could say here is that we should have changed our name once we moved out of the city but before that both clubs were formed outside the city, both moved into the city and both changed their names.
or have i got the whole split wrong, that gorton a.f.c as an entirety turned professional and moved into the city of manchester naming themselves ardwick?