toffee balls
Well-Known Member
Not how I remember them emerging but I don't doubt your story pal.m7mcfc said:
I seem to recall being attracted to violence and bullying as the 2 main factors soon after Denis Law did his thing.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Who is bigger in Manchester? City or Utd?
- Thread starter Marvin
- Start date
I seem to recall being attracted to violence and bullying as the 2 main factors soon after Denis Law did his thing.
its a Barm
Well-Known Member
I don't think we will ever know the exact split and to be honest I don't really care , but as someone said semi final day saw a couple of cars , the M6 was full of blue cars and coaches no rags in sight until M1, I think that tells us that there are many rags in Manchester but not many match fans.
Bill
Moderator
m7mcfc said:de niro said:Marvin said:Outside of Manchester, down South, Ireland, London, I know we don't even come close. They are a national and international club with millions of supporters, but in Manchester it's very different.
I'll never forget FA Cup semi-final day at Wembley when City fans poured out of Manchester. For miles and miles around Manchester the motorways and service stations were a sea of City and you only saw Utd fans in any numbers South of Birmingham.
I was incarcerated in London some years ago and one Saturday afternoon the Cockneys started booting their cell doors. I asked what's that about? News had filtered through United had just scored.
"Support a local club you Cockney cnuts" I shouted. "Fack Off you Manc cant" was the reply.
I asked one of these Cockney reds one day, why United? When you have so many clubs in London. He told me the Cockney reds grew from when Salford docks closed and dockers went down south in search of work at London docks and they were not going to start supporting a London team were they.
He said his Fathers side of the family were from Davyhulme, Urmston.
possibly true but believe me the reason the majority are rags is glory. simple as that. plastic through and through. there are no docks in bath, essex, singapore and so on.
Kippax.
Well-Known Member
This debate tickles me, why are we bothered who's bigger or to put it into a better content, who's got the best following in Manchester? We all know they have the best following as they have been the most successful in the last two decades. The majority of the kids when going through school follow the best teams to keep popular, only the selected few can see through the bull shit of being Mr popular and like to walk in different paths. In Manchester in the 80's I would say the split was 50/50 but in the 90'00 and to 2010 its proberebly been 80/20 in their favour with the success. But the tide is turning I would say from 2008 with the take over and our first trophy it was 60/40 to them and since our first title is now prob around 60/40 to us and this will steadily grow. But its going to take a decade or two rule Manchester but tick tock it will happen.
We need to stop with the SE Asia jibes - I've been in Hong Kong for a 6 years (just as we stopped being shit) and was a season ticket holder since 77 (didn't go to York away though). We are getting bigger out here even though Sun has gone but we have a good reputation as decent fans
Kippax.
Well-Known Member
stonejo said:We need to stop with the SE Asia jibes - I've been in Hong Kong for a 6 years (just as we stopped being shit) and was a season ticket holder since 77 (didn't go to York away though). We are getting bigger out here even though Sun has gone but we have a good reputation as decent fans
you do disappoint me, rag! :)
Prestwich_Blue
Well-Known Member
The fact that it's even close or debatable is remarkable in itself given that (as Robbo and others have said) they've had such huge success over such a long period. The only time they weren't undisputed top dogs in Manchester was in the mid-to-late 1970's. Kids go with the flow and support the successful local team but if you were a City fan, then it was genuine.
That's why their stupid 'xx years' banner used to make me laugh. They never realised that it showed them up as glory-hunters and us to be proper fans, who supported their team even though they'd won nothing. If they'd won nothing for 35 years, there would be no sign of at least 90% of their so-called fans whereas we kept at least 90% of ours.
That's why I say we shouldn't care about numbers or percentages. It's about loyalty, sticking with your team through thick and thin. We've won that battle hands down.
That's why their stupid 'xx years' banner used to make me laugh. They never realised that it showed them up as glory-hunters and us to be proper fans, who supported their team even though they'd won nothing. If they'd won nothing for 35 years, there would be no sign of at least 90% of their so-called fans whereas we kept at least 90% of ours.
That's why I say we shouldn't care about numbers or percentages. It's about loyalty, sticking with your team through thick and thin. We've won that battle hands down.
Prestwich_Blue said:The fact that it's even close or debatable is remarkable in itself given that (as Robbo and others have said) they've had such huge success over such a long period. The only time they weren't undisputed top dogs in Manchester was in the mid-to-late 1970's. Kids go with the flow and support the successful local team but if you were a City fan, then it was genuine.
That's why their stupid 'xx years' banner used to make me laugh. They never realised that it showed them up as glory-hunters and us to be proper fans, who supported their team even though they'd won nothing. If they'd won nothing for 35 years, there would be no sign of at least 90% of their so-called fans whereas we kept at least 90% of ours.
That's why I say we shouldn't care about numbers or percentages. It's about loyalty, sticking with your team through thick and thin. We've won that battle hands down.
Well said, that man... everything else is just tomorrow's chip wrappers
It could have been 10
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 9 Dec 2012
- Messages
- 358
dom said:Prestwich_Blue said:The fact that it's even close or debatable is remarkable in itself given that (as Robbo and others have said) they've had such huge success over such a long period. The only time they weren't undisputed top dogs in Manchester was in the mid-to-late 1970's. Kids go with the flow and support the successful local team but if you were a City fan, then it was genuine.
That's why their stupid 'xx years' banner used to make me laugh. They never realised that it showed them up as glory-hunters and us to be proper fans, who supported their team even though they'd won nothing. If they'd won nothing for 35 years, there would be no sign of at least 90% of their so-called fans whereas we kept at least 90% of ours.
That's why I say we shouldn't care about numbers or percentages. It's about loyalty, sticking with your team through thick and thin. We've won that battle hands down.
Well said, that man... everything else is just tomorrow's chip wrappers
It's been my experience that every city fan I meet or associate with is a well - rounded individual with a good sense of humour ,great company to be with & around. And even tho we all love City we do tend to have an interest in other things & have other topics to talk about.
Whereas your average rag has no sense of humour, take themselves too seriously, only ever talk about nitid & nothing else, tend to be loud mouth boors & generally have the intelligence & intellect of a 10 year old. I remember many years ago I was flicking channels on the remote & had the misfortune to come across a live rag match. Just at that moment the camera went on a banner in the crowd which said "Nitid first, kids second, wife third". I thought to myself that just about sums you shower of wankers up.