A very good article,must be that your fellow supporters are still at church !

It needs updating but this is a brilliant book about Manchester football.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Manchester-Football-History-Gary-James/dp/0955812704

Anyone who thinks United got to where they are today by 'hard work' and 'sticking to the rules' will be sorely disappointed.

City don't come out of it smelling of roses either.

Tribal support for a football club is a natural haven for hypocrisy. We're not immune to it and I think it's healthy to point that out from time to time.

I don't think our owners (particularly Louis Edwards) have been saints. That said, I don't believe our club at any point in its history has ever been elevated way beyond its 'natural' ceiling by massive external investment far beyond the capacities of what it could organically generate based on its footballing endeavours and the size of the community that supported it.

Are those sentiments those of genuine united fans or trolls?

I remember when I joined the old bbc 606 and I even used my real name

I genuinely hoped the site would be a place where would exchange genuine opinions about sport and have fun.

My first few articles were met with abuse and ridicule, I told my friend about it and he laughed and explained to me what the internet was.

From that day I never looked back.

You basically need to filter trolls and engage with genuine people or find a way to engage with trolls.

I chose to become a troll as well. Its the only way to survive.

On to the subject mater, it pains me to say it but City are the best run club in the country and probably have the best manager to. Makes sense why they will win trophies.

The source of the money is all we have left to hang onto.

I don't really get it either.

All the money just ends up in the pockets of footballers earning 400k a week, or billionaire owners.

Who cares whether the bulk of that money is coming from merchandise sales in Asia. Or from a rich guy is the middle east.

Can't be too many clubs in the World getting trolled to this extent when they're top of their domestic league, have an upcoming final next weekend and are in the Semi Finals of the Champions League.

comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 1 minute ago
Tribal support for a football club is a natural haven for hypocrisy. We're not immune to it and I think it's healthy to point that out from time to time.

I don't think our owners (particularly Louis Edwards) have been saints. That said, I don't believe our club at any point in its history has ever been elevated way beyond its 'natural' ceiling by massive external investment far beyond the capacities of what it could organically generate based on its footballing endeavours and the size of the community that supported it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But why are United so well supported worldwide? Up until the start of the 90s they couldn't hold a candle to the likes of Liverpool in terms of honours, yet all my life (born 79) they've always been a pretty big deal. Was it something to do with the air disaster, or players like Charlton, Law and Best in the 60s? I've never really been able to fathom why a club that didn't really make a dent in the worldwide footballing landscape compared to many others had so many supporters in places like China and Thailand.

comment by Champers - Pow! Right in the kisser (U6859)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 1 minute ago
Tribal support for a football club is a natural haven for hypocrisy. We're not immune to it and I think it's healthy to point that out from time to time.

I don't think our owners (particularly Louis Edwards) have been saints. That said, I don't believe our club at any point in its history has ever been elevated way beyond its 'natural' ceiling by massive external investment far beyond the capacities of what it could organically generate based on its footballing endeavours and the size of the community that supported it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But why are United so well supported worldwide? Up until the start of the 90s they couldn't hold a candle to the likes of Liverpool in terms of honours, yet all my life (born 79) they've always been a pretty big deal. Was it something to do with the air disaster, or players like Charlton, Law and Best in the 60s? I've never really been able to fathom why a club that didn't really make a dent in the worldwide footballing landscape compared to many others had so many supporters in places like China and Thailand.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
United's marketing is top notch tbh.

I wouldn't say it's ethical to convince people in developing countries that buying United merch is preferable to having safe drinking water but marketing has never been ethical.

On to the subject mater, it pains me to say it but City are the best run club in the country and probably have the best manager to. Makes sense why they will win trophies
————————-
I’m not bothered at all where City get their money from and good luck to them with their success. But the only reason they’ve been able to be such a well run club is because of the unlimited resources they’ve had access to. Without that they wouldn’t be able to be so well run.

comment by Terminator1 (U1863)
posted 8 seconds ago
On to the subject mater, it pains me to say it but City are the best run club in the country and probably have the best manager to. Makes sense why they will win trophies
————————-
I’m not bothered at all where City get their money from and good luck to them with their success. But the only reason they’ve been able to be such a well run club is because of the unlimited resources they’ve had access to. Without that they wouldn’t be able to be so well run.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Uniteds and Citys net spends have been almost identical over the last 10 years.

We have spent poorly, and made poor footballing decisions. It isn't due to a lack of spending.

comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Champers - Pow! Right in the kisser (U6859)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 1 minute ago
Tribal support for a football club is a natural haven for hypocrisy. We're not immune to it and I think it's healthy to point that out from time to time.

I don't think our owners (particularly Louis Edwards) have been saints. That said, I don't believe our club at any point in its history has ever been elevated way beyond its 'natural' ceiling by massive external investment far beyond the capacities of what it could organically generate based on its footballing endeavours and the size of the community that supported it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But why are United so well supported worldwide? Up until the start of the 90s they couldn't hold a candle to the likes of Liverpool in terms of honours, yet all my life (born 79) they've always been a pretty big deal. Was it something to do with the air disaster, or players like Charlton, Law and Best in the 60s? I've never really been able to fathom why a club that didn't really make a dent in the worldwide footballing landscape compared to many others had so many supporters in places like China and Thailand.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
United's marketing is top notch tbh.

I wouldn't say it's ethical to convince people in developing countries that buying United merch is preferable to having safe drinking water but marketing has never been ethical.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Biggest crowds in the country while in the second division in the 70s was definitely down to the marketing prowess of the PLC in the 1990s.

United once had 1000's of small shareholders.

Louis Edwards appointed agents to buy up those shares for next to nothing by convincing those shareholders that United were on the brink of collapse and they'd lose all their money.

He actually claimed it was "His duty to try and help the little people".

https://www.granadaland.org/paul-greengrass-on-the-investigation-into-louis-edwards-that-became-a-world-in-action/

comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Champers - Pow! Right in the kisser (U6859)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 1 minute ago
Tribal support for a football club is a natural haven for hypocrisy. We're not immune to it and I think it's healthy to point that out from time to time.

I don't think our owners (particularly Louis Edwards) have been saints. That said, I don't believe our club at any point in its history has ever been elevated way beyond its 'natural' ceiling by massive external investment far beyond the capacities of what it could organically generate based on its footballing endeavours and the size of the community that supported it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But why are United so well supported worldwide? Up until the start of the 90s they couldn't hold a candle to the likes of Liverpool in terms of honours, yet all my life (born 79) they've always been a pretty big deal. Was it something to do with the air disaster, or players like Charlton, Law and Best in the 60s? I've never really been able to fathom why a club that didn't really make a dent in the worldwide footballing landscape compared to many others had so many supporters in places like China and Thailand.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
United's marketing is top notch tbh.

I wouldn't say it's ethical to convince people in developing countries that buying United merch is preferable to having safe drinking water but marketing has never been ethical.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It is, granted, but the world has changed an awful lot since the 60s and 70s, and marketing worldwide surely wasn't anywhere near as easy as it is these days with the invention of the world wide web. Yet back in 1980s West Yorkshire if you went into a sports shop like JJB you would always be able to get a big range of merchandise for Liverpool, Everton and Manchester United. Similarly, at primary school, kids all tended to support one of those three. Two of those clubs were bossing things at the time, the other hadn't won the league in years, yet they always had loads of fans. Its something I've genuinely never understood.

comment by Terminator1 (U1863)
posted 4 minutes ago
On to the subject mater, it pains me to say it but City are the best run club in the country and probably have the best manager to. Makes sense why they will win trophies
————————-
I’m not bothered at all where City get their money from and good luck to them with their success. But the only reason they’ve been able to be such a well run club is because of the unlimited resources they’ve had access to. Without that they wouldn’t be able to be so well run.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The only reason

Really, is it that simple?

comment by Terminator1 (U1863)
posted 7 minutes ago
On to the subject mater, it pains me to say it but City are the best run club in the country and probably have the best manager to. Makes sense why they will win trophies
————————-
I’m not bothered at all where City get their money from and good luck to them with their success. But the only reason they’ve been able to be such a well run club is because of the unlimited resources they’ve had access to. Without that they wouldn’t be able to be so well run.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I seem to remember Liverpool clearly outspending Arsenal during the Wenger years and winning fackall

comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 12 seconds ago
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Champers - Pow! Right in the kisser (U6859)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 1 minute ago
Tribal support for a football club is a natural haven for hypocrisy. We're not immune to it and I think it's healthy to point that out from time to time.

I don't think our owners (particularly Louis Edwards) have been saints. That said, I don't believe our club at any point in its history has ever been elevated way beyond its 'natural' ceiling by massive external investment far beyond the capacities of what it could organically generate based on its footballing endeavours and the size of the community that supported it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But why are United so well supported worldwide? Up until the start of the 90s they couldn't hold a candle to the likes of Liverpool in terms of honours, yet all my life (born 79) they've always been a pretty big deal. Was it something to do with the air disaster, or players like Charlton, Law and Best in the 60s? I've never really been able to fathom why a club that didn't really make a dent in the worldwide footballing landscape compared to many others had so many supporters in places like China and Thailand.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
United's marketing is top notch tbh.

I wouldn't say it's ethical to convince people in developing countries that buying United merch is preferable to having safe drinking water but marketing has never been ethical.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Biggest crowds in the country while in the second division in the 70s was definitely down to the marketing prowess of the PLC in the 1990s.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Odd comment, City alawys had the biggest crowds on their forays into the lower divisions.

United boast about getting 60,000 against Sunderland in Div.2 hardly a mention of the 21,000 there against Charlton in the same season.

What type of marketing was around in 1974 that had utd the best supported team in England after they were relegated to the old 2nd division.

Tribalism is a funny one, seeing all the posts about the end of the quadruple just looked like a bunch of fans who are scared of something. Did I miss something becasue I hadn't really been aware of City fans going on about winning the quadruple, just stuff in the media which we all know should never be taken seriously. City were very fortuate to get their new owners in terms of the wealth it's brought in and I'm sure they won't be the last, people just need to let it go and deal with it.

comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 12 seconds ago
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Champers - Pow! Right in the kisser (U6859)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 1 minute ago
Tribal support for a football club is a natural haven for hypocrisy. We're not immune to it and I think it's healthy to point that out from time to time.

I don't think our owners (particularly Louis Edwards) have been saints. That said, I don't believe our club at any point in its history has ever been elevated way beyond its 'natural' ceiling by massive external investment far beyond the capacities of what it could organically generate based on its footballing endeavours and the size of the community that supported it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But why are United so well supported worldwide? Up until the start of the 90s they couldn't hold a candle to the likes of Liverpool in terms of honours, yet all my life (born 79) they've always been a pretty big deal. Was it something to do with the air disaster, or players like Charlton, Law and Best in the 60s? I've never really been able to fathom why a club that didn't really make a dent in the worldwide footballing landscape compared to many others had so many supporters in places like China and Thailand.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
United's marketing is top notch tbh.

I wouldn't say it's ethical to convince people in developing countries that buying United merch is preferable to having safe drinking water but marketing has never been ethical.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Biggest crowds in the country while in the second division in the 70s was definitely down to the marketing prowess of the PLC in the 1990s.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Odd comment, City alawys had the biggest crowds on their forays into the lower divisions.

United boast about getting 60,000 against Sunderland in Div.2 hardly a mention of the 21,000 there against Charlton in the same season.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Here are the average attendances for the 1973-4 season.

https://www.worldfootball.net/attendance/eng-premier-league-1973-1974/1/

You can prove anything with facts.

comment by Sky-blue (U22529)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Terminator1 (U1863)
posted 4 minutes ago
On to the subject mater, it pains me to say it but City are the best run club in the country and probably have the best manager to. Makes sense why they will win trophies
————————-
I’m not bothered at all where City get their money from and good luck to them with their success. But the only reason they’ve been able to be such a well run club is because of the unlimited resources they’ve had access to. Without that they wouldn’t be able to be so well run.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The only reason

Really, is it that simple?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Of course it’s that simple. I’m not even having a dig, just stating a fact. It’s far easier to build something with unlimited funds, and to ensure the smooth running of an organisation. City have made plenty of poor buys just like every other club but they’re not as affected by it as much as others because they’ve just been able to throw more money to rectify it.

United aren’t really a very good example to use when stating how well run they are. Somehow United have managed to really screw up everything from top to bottom despite still being extremely successful off the pitch.

I think you need to look at individuals more so than teams. Individuals like to identify with other individuals.
Why did everybody root for Ali rather than Foreman?
How important were Best and Keegan in the grand scheme of things?
I think that type of appeal and following relates to modern day Messi et al.

We don't want our owners nor need them. City couldn't win a raffle without theirs.

This is basically it. They are a sham of a football club. The Sheikh could have bought Derby County and achieved same results as let's be fair other than playing in the council house and in blue shirts what's left over from the old club? Not much.

I dislike Liverpool more than I do City also. By a fair margin too I'd admit. I have way more respect for them and their achievements though despite hating them to my very inner core.

PSG n City are the worst thing to happen to football in the last 20 years although VAR ain't too far behind.

Just when you thought a debate was underway - the nob appears.

comment by Glazers_Out (SE85) (U21241)
posted 7 minutes ago
I dislike Liverpool more than I do City also. By a fair margin too I'd admit. I have way more respect for them and their achievements though despite hating them to my very inner core.

PSG n City are the worst thing to happen to football in the last 20 years although VAR ain't too far behind.
----------------------------------------------------------------------


You would think us not wining the Champions league would make you feel better. Soon we will start signing your players then you will really hate us