United thread 2017/18

[Colin Bells Boots]

I believe it's called selective memory.

It is only selective if they knew it in the first place surely ? And as GDM rightly says , most of the pathetic fuckers don't know the first thing about the club they " support " .

 

[PannickAtTheDisco]

Is there a set of supporters that know less about the bulk of their club's history than united fans? I'm not basing this merely on postings on the internet, but real life encounters. Most have never heard of John Henry Davies, James Gibson and many have not even heard of Louis Edwards, in spite of being intimately aware of his son. That absence of knowledge is not something that would ordinarily be worthy of criticism, but conflated with a tedious tendency to pontificate about history, it creates a target that is far too difficult to ignore.

might as well call them the NRA, National Rags Association.

• Fed a diet of heavily targeted and censored propaganda and bile from selected news sources.
• Believe they have a right to their position regardless of the changing times.
• When someone else buys a star player for a lot of money and beats them, the solution is not a fairer system for all to ensure competition but to state there's nothing wrong with spending money as long as it's only them and people like them who spend it, and that the problem is that people like them need more money whereas the pesky foreigners coming in and lower class upstarts who've got money have got too much of it and they need to be penalised to ensure that they stay in control.
• Promote their biggest supporters and advocates into positions of power across the governance of football to ensure they are protected, can influence policy and punish their rivals.
• Have the rest of the authorities turn a blind eye to their misdemeanours and generally undesirable behaviour both on-and-off the pitch and when incidents occur, make sure it's brushed over and a suitable narrative is formed. When one of their own does a dastardly deed, these authorities are pressured and cajoled into making sure that they are defended with a suitable narrative such as "it wasn't as bad as it looked, he didn't really mean it, it's just part of his game, he was provoked" whereas if a far less severe "incident" occurs involving one of their rivals it's immediately blown out of all proportion and serious sanctions imposed, because they're "oil rich, foreign, aggressive thugs who cry wolf but are set to destroy our game and the way things should be, what did you expect? they won the lottery and were always lower class and that's how they behave, just listen to the way they talk".

fits them like a glove.

 

[Deleted member 81382]

Or being unable to think for yourself and scratch below the surface.

most of the pathetic fuckers don't know the first thing about the club they " support " .

No excuse either, you can literally ascertain knowledge with the tap of a few buttons these days.

 

[old blue]

Ashley Young says that the Scum never talk about City in an interview where he talks about City. :-)

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

might as well call them the NRA, National Rags Association.

• Fed a diet of heavily targeted and censored propaganda and bile from selected news sources.
• Believe they have a right to their position regardless of the changing times.
• When someone else buys a star player for a lot of money and beats them, the solution is not a fairer system for all to ensure competition but to state there's nothing wrong with spending money as long as it's only them and people like them who spend it, and that the problem is that people like them need more money whereas the pesky foreigners coming in and lower class upstarts who've got money have got too much of it and they need to be penalised to ensure that they stay in control.
• Promote their biggest supporters and advocates into positions of power across the governance of football to ensure they are protected, can influence policy and punish their rivals.
• Have the rest of the authorities turn a blind eye to their misdemeanours and generally undesirable behaviour both on-and-off the pitch and when incidents occur, make sure it's brushed over and a suitable narrative is formed. When one of their own does a dastardly deed, these authorities are pressured and cajoled into making sure that they are defended with a suitable narrative such as "it wasn't as bad as it looked, he didn't really mean it, it's just part of his game, he was provoked" whereas if a far less severe "incident" occurs involving one of their rivals it's immediately blown out of all proportion and serious sanctions imposed, because they're "oil rich, foreign, aggressive thugs who cry wolf but are set to destroy our game and the way things should be, what did you expect? they won the lottery and were always lower class and that's how they behave, just listen to the way they talk".

fits them like a glove.

Or alternatively, most of them could just be a bit thick.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Ashley Young says that the Scum never talk about City in an interview where he talks about City. :-)

In recent years their our players (probably under instruction tbf) almost never talk about united, part from around Derbies.

 

[SilverFox2]

Many of their fans seem to be happy basking in the illusion that our runaway season was created by unfair means.
They are resigned to fighting for a best of the rest trophy effectively elevating us to belong with the RM and Barca status of yesteryear.

I am happy to accept their version of congratulation and understand their disappointment that their expensively assembled team of individuals has been unable to even challenge for the PL title.
May I wish them well in their quest to keep hold of runners up to City but the media will ensure that concentration on that secondary race will have maximum exposure so they can keep up the illusion of success that their history richly deserves.

 

[deano ou812]

Ashley Young says that the Scum never talk about City in an interview where he talks about City. :-)

Haha of course they don’t..

 

[Ancient Citizen]

Is there a set of supporters that know less about the bulk of their club's history than united fans? I'm not basing this merely on postings on the internet, but real life encounters. Most have never heard of John Henry Davies, James Gibson and many have not even heard of Louis Edwards, in spite of being intimately aware of his son. That absence of knowledge is not something that would ordinarily be worthy of criticism, but conflated with a tedious tendency to pontificate about history, it creates a target that is far too difficult to ignore.

There certainly isn't, I schooled a Rag tosser in the pub yesterday about Davies and Gibson, and he'd never heard of them.
You get this tedious 'No History' claptrap incessantly, point out 1936/7 league champions were City, and the crackpot says,
'That was donkey's years ago!' So it seems it's alright to bang on about history, as long as someone doesn't mention the past.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

There certainly isn't, I schooled a Rag tosser in the pub yesterday about Davies and Gibson, and he'd never heard of them.
You get this tedious 'No History' claptrap incessantly, point out 1936/7 league champions were City, and the crackpot says,
'That was donkey's years ago!' So it seems it's alright to bang on about history, as long as someone doesn't mention the past.

It's the same as united fans who talk about their game with Liverpool having 'always' been their biggest game. It could only make any meaningful claim to such a title since the mid-1970's, which means it covers less than a third of each club's....errr....history.