Somebody Give Me A Comeback

[zeusbheld]

...

I agree, but by serious business, I am alluding to the United fans inability to laugh at their own club whilst also loving it, in the way that City fans can do.

damn shame too, they're really missing out. united have been comedy gold this summer.

 

[Hooch]

How can Dunne be labelled a "Money-grabber" ?

 

[mad4city]

What puzzles me in all of the rag ranting, in general, I mean, is if Tevez (their £25m bid notwithstanding) was "only a squad player" at the swamp, how come it's a problem that City have "TEN!!!!" (TM- mr a ferguson) forwards? Surely, he's as well off as a squad player at little old City as he would be at the exhalted ones??
Do you think that they know that their "lovable old rogue of a manager" (TM - a lotta random c**ts) didn't get the best out of one of the world's best players?

 

[blue1969]

Decent response but I always thought the same when I was going to OT as a kid in 1988. Stood with your mates, nearly everyone from a 10 mile radius of the ground.
Times change, clubs change and this dream that the core of the club will remain is nonsense, if the sheiks want to make money (which they will eventually) they are not going to get it from dave in wythenshawe and johnny in gorton.

Its not just city or united its football as a whole, its overpriced and overhyped.

Sky gave a lot to football but also took the soul away

In '88 they had already sold thier sole. One of the first things that went was the connection with Manchester on their badge, Old trafford was already full of out of towners, as you were a kid you mustn't of realised.

 

[blue dallas]

tell him to go wank spiders !

 

[blue cigar]

ferguson wanted tevez - fact. the fans wanted him - fact. carlos told them to get fucked,dress it up any way they want.
man you are a selling club due to their debt. we are not.

 

[Deleted member 14625]

United fans are easy.

Spend two minutes on Google and get a few photos of their geeky fans, and just send them back. Like this one:

A lot of Blues don't seem to undertand that they loathe the fact that their club is supported by brainless gloryhunters. That's the easy way to get up their noses and a picture paints a thousand word.

Her on the left had drawn up that poster a few months ago in the anticipation of one Carlos Tevez coming over to see them, but he ditched United for the blues so she stuck "OWEN" over "TEVEZ" instead!

 

[Deleted member 14625]

Decent response but I always thought the same when I was going to OT as a kid in 1988. Stood with your mates, nearly everyone from a 10 mile radius of the ground.
Times change, clubs change and this dream that the core of the club will remain is nonsense, if the sheiks want to make money (which they will eventually) they are not going to get it from dave in wythenshawe and johnny in gorton.

Its not just city or united its football as a whole, its overpriced and overhyped.

Sky gave a lot to football but also took the soul away

In '88 they had already sold thier sole. One of the first things that went was the connection with Manchester on their badge, Old trafford was already full of out of towners, as you were a kid you mustn't of realised.

From 1958 onwards they werent the club of Manchester! thousands of "Cockney Reds" and fans from anywhere and everywhere supported Man United for one reason only!

 

[Gary James]

Martin Edwards was the Sheik before the Sheik. United were known as mega-spenders all the way back in the early 20th century (if Gary James is reading, perhaps he can confirm or deny this). United's fanbase was always smaller than City's in the Manchester area, back when that sort of thing was important.

It's a difficult one to focus on because you can look at this from different angles. Apart from the 1980s-2000s City were always able to buy expensive players. We've broken the transfer record on several occasions (not just twice as the City website claims) and so our present situation is one that can be viewed as being on a par with our entire history (obviously the amounts are greater).

With United, they have also been a buying club at times. They certainly have inflated purchase prices. To me the early years of Ferguson's reign are more about expensive purchases (think about Utd's team for the 5-1 in 1989) than home grown talent and it is true that the money spent on players like Pallister in the 80s set the template for what followed in the Premier League era.

United should not get on their high horse about inflated transfer fees as analysis would prove that they are as guilty (if not more so) than City, Chelsea, Real Madrid or whoever.

To me City's recent ability to challenge for the best players is more typical of our entire history than the limited scope we've had in the last twenty or so years, so it'd be wrong for anyone in football to claim City have no history/heritage/right to make these bids.

At the time of Robinho's arrival I wrote a piece for the programme which pointed out that:

• We have beaten or equalled the British Transfer record in five separate decades
• City were the first British side to have bought two separate million pound players
• In 1981 the Blues purchased their third million pound man (Trevor Francis) – equalling Nottingham Forest, but this feat was not matched by any other club until United bought our present manager Mark Hughes from Barcelona in 1988
• Our own transfer record has been smashed twice within a few months on four occasions
• As early as 1904 the Blues were regarded as matching the British record and in that same year we also broke the record for winger.

Our history and heritage suggests we should be challenging for the best.

 

[lloydie]

absolutely love your contributions, Gary, (and the book btw) you always give us the authorative answer and without the blue tinted bias.
Lost count of the amount of times I've used your work to dumbfound know nothing U****d "fans", once again a big "Thankyou"