United Thread | 2025/26

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ric
  • Start date Start date
Bluekiwi said:
My wife is embarrassed to confess that she lived in Failsworth at the same time he did.
Click to expand...
He and I are of a similar age and I was brought up in Failsworth. In those days it was a very small place and if there had been a decent plumber called Ratcliffe I would have remembered the name, particularly if he had a scruffy son. Which leads me to the conclusion that his lineage may be just a charade. He may well be the scruffy son of a stockbroker from Prestbury.
 
The "t-shirt" line previously used for judging offsides has suddenly disappeared.

Qkg7lE6.png
 
Last edited:
"Won't be winning trophies anymore" they sang about Garnacho who left United after 5 years with a league and fa cup winners medal to his name to join a side who won 2 trophies last season alone. Its especially funny when they still think it's the 90's
 
JOGAMIGMOG said:
Offside
View attachment 170064
So VAR has a look and rather than produce the side-on image such as this
View attachment 170065
Instead all we see is this..
View attachment 170066
I’m not buying it. Moreover, look at how far forward the Rat is leaning in the match still compared to the VAR image. It’s a fucking fix.
Click to expand...
This is why they'll never get relegated but, I was told again last night that over the season it all evens out!!!!!

I turned off after the above 'goal' but, although the early red was a red... however, at the other end it could very easily have been a yellow as 'an early red would spoil the game '.
 
rickmcfc said:
How is Uniteds first goal from yesterday not offside? Has the ruling changed as I thought if any part of the body was in an offside position then it’s offside?
Click to expand...
Only if it's a part you can score with however, even IF he was inside the other rag next to him wasn't and being so close was interfering with play.
 
KentBlue said:
I've always wondered why he got involved in the first place.
Click to expand...
He will be 73 next month, most of his life he's been anonymous until he started investing in sport entities, like you I wondered why. He's still active in INEOS as Chairman and CEO so he must be a busy man, obviously been very successful in business but, as I said aside from his knighthood no one really knew who he was. The conclusion Ive come to is he wanted a legacy, to be remembered. Chose the wrong club though and hopefully remains so. Its certainly cost him a lot of his fortune the current price of shares are less than half what he paid
 
That game turned on the early sending off and the injury to Cole Palmer. When the game evened up on numbers, Chelsea didn't have the players available to equalise but they were the better side at 2-1. Utd beat Chelsea because they got all the possible breaks.

Utd are imo a mid-table side, and I don't think Utd fans are going to accept that.
 
Gordyola said:
Its certainly cost him a lot of his fortune the current price of shares are less than half what he paid
Click to expand...
Essentially, knighted despite his stupidity? What a wonderful country we have become: rewarded for imbecilic behaviour that causes you to lose your money. On that basis we should have Bodger and Badger running our treasury department.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top