Ruining Football Since 2008 Flag Trouble?

[jrb]

Talking about overreacting, the people who think the club overreacted, are equally overreacting about the club losing its soul and identity over this.

I think your overreacting.

Saying that, there is an underlining current of PCness and a very rigid structure of decision making at City now.

It's a process you see. Everything has to be evaluated before a decision can be made. Knee-jerk reactions are no longer allowed, and they are a thing of the past.

 

[peacefrog]

Talking about overreacting, the people who think the club overreacted, are equally overreacting about the club losing its soul and identity over this.

I think your overreacting.

Saying that, there is an underlining current of PCness and a very rigid structure of decision making at City now.

It's a process you see. Everything has to be evaluated, before a decision can be made. Knee-jerk reactions are no longer allowed, and they are a thing of the past.

I don't think I've overreacted at all. The only definite statements I've made is that I liked the flag. The rest are maybes because I don't know what anybody else thinks. But in the event that certain people at city didn't find it proper, then I think it's fair that it's taken down. I still wouldn't have had anyone thrown out for it though.

 

[Kirkstall Blue]

I think it's a ludicrous overreaction from the club. It's obviously ironic, and two fingers up the media from the fans. Seems like far too much analysis is going into the semantics of the word "killing" and nonsense like that.

To remove the banner, and kick the lad in question out of the game, is well over the top and I hope the club see sense. For all the rhetoric about retaining our soul and identity, this suggests the opposite. It's a piss taking banner, nothing more.

Your right Ric, definitely over the top and not just the lad thrown out, but his mate and the children.

 

[JohnMaddocksAxe]

FFS, can't you see that the message suggests that the people who wrote it feel persecuted by the press.

Now, whether you think that they are justified in feeling that way or not, it is indicative of a persecution complex - even if it is tongue in cheek - and the club will want fuck all to do with that.

The club cannot benefit at all from being seen to be part of that or condoning that.

If a flag/banner suggesting that is in the stadium then the club are seen to be endorsing that feeling by allowing it.

And it will only bring negativity to MCFC, with the press, and anyone else who wants to, seeing it as a sign of pettiness, a lack of professionalism and a childish persecution complex.

Why would the club want to be linked with those characteristic? It would be a PR nightmare for them.

Yes, people can moan all they want about it being a joke and tongue in cheek, but the club isn't in a position to chance itself being associated with such pettiness and it being taken as the view of, or endorsed by, the club itself.

People need to get a grip and recognise that the pettiness of football fans should not be mirrored by a professional club, especially one in City's unique position.

 

[glen quagmire]

FFS, can't you see that the message suggests that the people who wrote it feel persecuted by the press.

Now, whether you think that they are justified in feeling that way or not, it is indicative of a persecution complex - even if it is tongue in cheek - and the club will want fuck all to do with that.

The club cannot benefit at all from being seen to be part of that or condoning that.

If a flag/banner suggesting that is in the stadium then the club are seen to be endorsing that feeling by allowing it.

And it will only bring negativity to MCFC, with the press and anyone else who wants to, seeing it as a sign of pettiness, a lack of professionalism and a childish persecution complex.

Why would the club want to be linked with those characteristic? It would be a PR nightmare for them.

Yes, people can moan all they want about it being a joke and tongue in cheek, but the club isn't in a position to chance themselves being associated with such pettiness and it being taken as the view of, or endorsed by, the club itself.

People need to get a grip and recognise that the pettiness of football fans should not be mirrored by a professional club, especially one in City's unique position.

John, do you ever post one line replies?

 

[JohnMaddocksAxe]

FFS, can't you see that the message suggests that the people who wrote it feel persecuted by the press.

Now, whether you think that they are justified in feeling that way or not, it is indicative of a persecution complex - even if it is tongue in cheek - and the club will want fuck all to do with that.

The club cannot benefit at all from being seen to be part of that or condoning that.

If a flag/banner suggesting that is in the stadium then the club are seen to be endorsing that feeling by allowing it.

And it will only bring negativity to MCFC, with the press and anyone else who wants to, seeing it as a sign of pettiness, a lack of professionalism and a childish persecution complex.

Why would the club want to be linked with those characteristic? It would be a PR nightmare for them.

Yes, people can moan all they want about it being a joke and tongue in cheek, but the club isn't in a position to chance themselves being associated with such pettiness and it being taken as the view of, or endorsed by, the club itself.

People need to get a grip and recognise that the pettiness of football fans should not be mirrored by a professional club, especially one in City's unique position.

John, do you ever post one line replies?

No

 

[warpig]

FFS, can't you see that the message suggests that the people who wrote it feel persecuted by the press.

Now, whether you think that they are justified in feeling that way or not, it is indicative of a persecution complex - even if it is tongue in cheek - and the club will want fuck all to do with that.

The club cannot benefit at all from being seen to be part of that or condoning that.

If a flag/banner suggesting that is in the stadium then the club are seen to be endorsing that feeling by allowing it.

And it will only bring negativity to MCFC, with the press, and anyone else who wants to, seeing it as a sign of pettiness, a lack of professionalism and a childish persecution complex.

Why would the club want to be linked with those characteristic? It would be a PR nightmare for them.

Yes, people can moan all they want about it being a joke and tongue in cheek, but the club isn't in a position to chance itself being associated with such pettiness and it being taken as the view of, or endorsed by, the club itself.

People need to get a grip and recognise that the pettiness of football fans should not be mirrored by a professional club, especially one in City's unique position.

and what about fans chanting then JMA? are all fans who sing songs that are not officially approved by mcfc to be thrown out as well? get real.

 

[m27]

Peacefrog, if you like the flag then that should be the end of it. I like the flag and if our owner, Chairman or Garry Cook don't like it then I totally disagree with them and think they are totally missing the point.

Do you think it should stay or not? You, not anyone else.

 

[jrb]

FFS, can't you see that the message suggests that the people who wrote it feel persecuted by the press.

Now, whether you think that they are justified in feeling that way or not, it is indicative of a persecution complex - even if it is tongue in cheek - and the club will want fuck all to do with that.

The club cannot benefit at all from being seen to be part of that or condoning that.

If a flag/banner suggesting that is in the stadium then the club are seen to be endorsing that feeling by allowing it.

And it will only bring negativity to MCFC, with the press and anyone else who wants to, seeing it as a sign of pettiness, a lack of professionalism and a childish persecution complex.

Why would the club want to be linked with those characteristic? It would be a PR nightmare for them.

Yes, people can moan all they want about it being a joke and tongue in cheek, but the club isn't in a position to chance themselves being associated with such pettiness and it being taken as the view of, or endorsed by, the club itself.

People need to get a grip and recognise that the pettiness of football fans should not be mirrored by a professional club, especially one in City's unique position.

The funny thing is.

I've not seen any journalists having their laptops removed and being marched out of the stadium be 3 security guards, even though they've been writing s*** about the club for months, if not years, since our new owners bought the club.

Perhaps it's just me, but I find that even more offensive. Obviously the people running the club know exactly what they're doing, and they deemed that banner to be much worse?

 

[JohnMaddocksAxe]

FFS, can't you see that the message suggests that the people who wrote it feel persecuted by the press.

Now, whether you think that they are justified in feeling that way or not, it is indicative of a persecution complex - even if it is tongue in cheek - and the club will want fuck all to do with that.

The club cannot benefit at all from being seen to be part of that or condoning that.

If a flag/banner suggesting that is in the stadium then the club are seen to be endorsing that feeling by allowing it.

And it will only bring negativity to MCFC, with the press, and anyone else who wants to, seeing it as a sign of pettiness, a lack of professionalism and a childish persecution complex.

Why would the club want to be linked with those characteristic? It would be a PR nightmare for them.

Yes, people can moan all they want about it being a joke and tongue in cheek, but the club isn't in a position to chance itself being associated with such pettiness and it being taken as the view of, or endorsed by, the club itself.

People need to get a grip and recognise that the pettiness of football fans should not be mirrored by a professional club, especially one in City's unique position.

and what about fans chanting then JMA? are all fans who sing song that arent officially approved by mcfc to be thrown out. get real.

Are you suggesting that any club in the world is able to police chanting in the same way that they police banners?

Because more or less every club in the world controls banners in their stadium and removes any they deem inappropriate. Yet not many can control chanting in anything like approaching the same manner.

(Although, they obviously do attempt to remove people who chant things that are not wanted)

Also, consider that any chants that are embarrassing to the club tend to be, at most, talked about as hearsay and/or background noise on television. Whereas a banner, if part deemed part of a news story by a section of the press, will be flashed all over the world in pictures for as long as people want it to be.

I can't see it as a fair comparison