I was going to pick out this gem as well. What is laughable is that it is the complete opposite that is true here. Everybody wants to beat United, this is what has made some of our titles all the more impressive. Fergie even called it when Keegan lost it. No one cares about City at all. When United are in town we help fill stadiums and that's because people want to see us beaten, fair enough. City do not have that mantle at all. City get an easy ride most of the time.
Bluemoon goes into Meltdown
- Thread starter Logan!
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
Flower Among Them All, or A Flower Among Rags.
I like how he has to justify having an account on an online forum to prevent his fellow bitters from attacking himThat Mani guy is back, but on Bluemoon this time
Apparently, I got him banned
"Loves Bluemoon....and they love him"
Job well done @VanGaalEra 
Well he's right, we're just that much bigger than them and the fact that no one honestly cares about them winning the title.
West Ham game:
Someone tell this guy we've already had a game week since the international break:
Someone responded:
Someone tell this guy we've already had a game week since the international break:
Someone responded:
The 2007 side that battered us in the san siro?
How bad is this one from their media bias/agenda thread:
ManiManc again
Yeah, how dare the Munich disaster in 1958 thwart our attempt to win it sooner.
I thought the match day forum was horrible last match on here but it was different kind of bad to this. You have to assume that most of those posters are pretty young given City's recent influx of cash so they're perhaps only acting their age.West Ham game:
Someone tell this guy we've already had a game week since the international break:
Someone responded:
They can't be *that* young, sure Chelsea was taken over in 2003.
Sure they can. Many people only start following football seriously around puberty. If you were born in '93 and were 10 when Chelsea became rich and started winning things you'd be 22 now so the baby-Chelsea boomers are adults.
There's something not quite right about him.ManiManc again
It has to be 'petal x' surely?
That's because there are just not enough of them. All those empty PC chairs.
Bluemoon Rag of the year A.K.A. "Petal"
That level of ignorance/stupidity is too strong
Not even sure it's ignorance, he must know.
Anyway, the media aren't saying they have to win the CL, they're saying they should be doing better then the group stages and round of 16.
I used to go to RAWK for a laugh. I might need to start heading over here from time to time for a chuckle.
Yep, we'e never had teams raise their games against us. We've not been top dog for 2 years now and STILL we're the focus of everyone's attentions wee in, week out.
City losing to West Ham, at home, has gone by with barely a whimper. Yet you can imagine the scrutiny we'd have received had we lost away to Southampton.
Wow. So, this lad has managed to assume that we might have used Shaw's injury as an excuse for losing to Southampton. Of course, he can't actually evidence any of this seeing as we didn't lose and the only reference to Shaw I've seen from the club is a few players dedicating the win to him.
To clarify, it's wrong for us to use Shaw as an excuse for losing (which we haven't done) but it's okay for him to complain that Shaw has "only broken his leg" and suggest we'd use it as an excuse in the first place? Some levels of cuntery transcends football rivalry.
Saw this from a West Ham fan (personally I disagree but anyway)
Man City might as well not exist in my view, wouldn't make a difference. I feel nothing when they win, nothing when they lose and even less when they win the league.
For all of Chelsea's faults - of which there are ****loads - they at least managed to build some sense of relevance by having long-serving players like Drogba, Terry, Lampard, Cole, Cech etc. in their team. You point to those as all-time Chelsea greats.
Man City just feels like a mercenary band. Like a greatest hits collection of the players not good enough to play for Real Madrid and Barcelona. They still don't feel like a real top side to me yet, even though they've won the league etc. They have no identity; they're a perpetual all-star team.
Beating them yesterday didn't feel as good as beating Arsenal or Liverpool. I think that says a lot, considering they're probably the strongest side in the league at the moment.
Actually agree with large parts of that, however City will be looking at the likes of Hart, Kompany, Zabaletta, Toure, Silva and Aguero as their Cech/Terry/Lampard/Drogba style 'club men', assuming they aren't shipped out in the next few years for shinier toys.
Fair enough IMO
Same guy who said Fergie retired because of an argument with Woodward, posted this regarding why/how we gave Rooney his pay rise.
that doesn't sound bitter or small time at all!Our best friend ManiManc quoting a United fan over there:
Well, they are the experts in empty seats. We really have no experience in that area whatsoever.
We had 26 years in the wilderness and still managed the highest attendances: even in the old second division, I remember us getting 60,000. So much for that argument.
I'm a prophet
and a pusher. Partly truth, partly fiction.
Ha. They really are pissed that we view Liverpool as a bigger rival than City.
I'd go simply for Rag Tag
Something with rag in it, of course. "Like a red rag to a blue".