Man Utd Fans

[Section_31]

Souness would have far more right to rant about greed in football than Neville does. Sounsss's generation are all part owners of carpet shops and shit because they hardly made a penny despite winning everything in site and getting brain damage from heading balls.

 

Neville owns hotels and a football club, was getting paid about 30k a week at the age of 18. I mean fucking hell.

[Scott_M]

I wonder what they’ll be doing on the 12th when they play Leicester.

 

Could do with the pricks winning that.

[Josef Svejk]

1 hour ago, JohnnyH said:

Hang on, Souness was talking utter nonsense. He effectively said that the Glazers had funded the buy out and what was the problem. He’d clearly never heard of a leveraged buy out. It was actually embarrassing how bad and clueless Souness was. 

That's not all he said, though, is it?

[Chris]

22 minutes ago, Josef Svejk said:

That's not all he said, though, is it?

Yeah you see this a lot now. Might be the soundbite era we live in, but something someone got wrong (or slightly missed the mark on) can be used to say "yeah he was talking absolute bollocks" when 95% of what they said had merit. It's unfortunate. 

[Harry Squatter]

Wonder if they will be enjoying the noisy neighbours getting to the CL final. 

[Tony Moanero]

5 hours ago, waddy78 said:

Who the fuck has a muzzy now a days? 

 His name's probably Keith and he lives in his mum's basement in Sutton coalfield.

Muzzies are boss. His one is shit though. Looks like he painted it on with his nan’s eyebrow pencil.

[Harry Squatter]

Glazers out. Gazprom in. It's all about saving football 

[dockers_strike]

 

16 minutes ago, Doctor Troy said:

Glazers out. Gazprom in. It's all about saving football 

Gazprom have \ had an office in Manchester. But to they not know that's Abramovich's company so would be a conflict of interest?

[Halcyon Days]

24 minutes ago, Doctor Troy said:

Glazers out. Gazprom in. It's all about saving football 

Some 4D chess shit going on here? Saviours.

[Crazy Dave]

14 hours ago, Stickman said:

Love the way Souness just smiles at them knowing he could take them even at his age 

 

 

The state of that obnoxious cunt doing the vid. Gasping for air inbetween spewing abuse towards Souness and Carragher. 
 

Sounds like he’s about to keel over any second from a heart attack. 

[Stickman]

6 hours ago, Doctor Troy said:

Wonder if they will be enjoying the noisy neighbours getting to the CL final. 

They should be as they cheered them onto the title in 2019 

[DalyanPete]

Would hate to see how this peaceful protest would have ended if we had followed ratface's advice and joined the mancs in marching to the ground.

[Total Longo]

12 hours ago, waddy78 said:

The Carragher / Souness thing started before all this, started when Souness said Pickford knew he was going in to hurt VVD, then Carragher butted in saying something like you can't talk some of your tackles were boardering on assault  since then there's been a few digs for what seems like no reason.

Oh, the irony.

[Elite]

3 hours ago, Crazy Dave said:

The state of that obnoxious cunt doing the vid. Gasping for air inbetween spewing abuse towards Souness and Carragher. 
 

Sounds like he’s about to keel over any second from a heart attack. 

Carragher defended them live on TV after that, is he for fucking real?

[Stickman]

Interesting thread from a City fan

 

 

 

[RedKnight]

From a City fan so I'll take no moralising from him.

[Section_31]

3 minutes ago, RedKnight said:

From a City fan so I'll take no moralising from him.

Being called a bin dipper by a club from Moss Side was a new high on the irony-meter. 

 

I think Occam's Razor is pointing towards the fact mancs are cunts, regardless of hue. 

[Ezekiel 25:17]

With city, it's the fans, it's all about their wretched horrible skin headed fringed fans, I know they'r FC oil and they've cheated for years, but I'd still accept that on the basis there's no choice, but their fans make me sick, the most self entitled cunts in the league, way worse than United fans, and they hate us more than the mancs do, I'm sure of it.

[JohnnyH]

11 hours ago, Josef Svejk said:

That's not all he said, though, is it?

 

11 hours ago, Chris said:

Yeah you see this a lot now. Might be the soundbite era we live in, but something someone got wrong (or slightly missed the mark on) can be used to say "yeah he was talking absolute bollocks" when 95% of what they said had merit. It's unfortunate. 

The discussion is on ownership, and the comment was that Souness was the only one talking sense. 

 

Souness effectively said the Glazers were good owners, and literally said they had put in their own money.  Factually and fundamentally wrong, and worse than that, he painted over the massive issue of leveraged buyouts, one which resulted in our club being hours away from bankruptcy, and basically said there was nothing to see here on how the Glazers owned or funded the club.  That's not only wrong, but dangerous as it divides the fanbases.

 

If there's other comments you want to pat him on the back for, then fine.  But on the key issue he got it massively and  dangerously wrong.  

 

And before this turns into the usual childish wank of people supporting an opinion because of who said it, as opposed to the opinion itself - Souness is my favourite ever Liverpool player and our best ever midfielder, imo.

[Scott_M]

1 hour ago, Stickman said:

Interesting thread from a City fan

 

 

 

I was with him up until post 11 or so. 
 

Then he came across like a cunt. 

[Josef Svejk]

9 minutes ago, JohnnyH said:

 

The discussion is on ownership, and the comment was that Souness was the only one talking sense. 

 

Souness effectively said the Glazers were good owners, and literally said they had put in their own money.  Factually and fundamentally wrong, and worse than that, he painted over the massive issue of leveraged buyouts, one which resulted in our club being hours away from bankruptcy, and basically said there was nothing to see here on how the Glazers owned or funded the club.  That's not only wrong, but dangerous as it divides the fanbases.

 

If there's other comments you want to pat him on the back for, then fine.  But on the key issue he got it massively and  dangerously wrong.  

 

And before this turns into the usual childish wank of people supporting an opinion because of who said it, as opposed to the opinion itself - Souness is my favourite ever Liverpool player and our best ever midfielder, imo.

The key issue was the protests taking place right in front of him. He questioned whether they were to do with the nature of ownership (as opposed to lack of success) and when they were taking place (before a relatively insignificant league match as opposed to a European semi-final a few days beforehand).

 

I imagine if a bunch of pissed up losers are directing abuse at you, you have a good sense of whether it's a serious political protest about the nature of ownership or not. You can choose to believe it was (and that Souness is wrong about the owners in question). But all of the video evidence I've seen makes it look like a bunch of piss heads enjoying a riot in the Bank Holiday sunshine. 

[JohnnyH]

31 minutes ago, Josef Svejk said:

The key issue was the protests taking place right in front of him. He questioned whether they were to do with the nature of ownership (as opposed to lack of success) and when they were taking place (before a relatively insignificant league match as opposed to a European semi-final a few days beforehand).

 

I imagine if a bunch of pissed up losers are directing abuse at you, you have a good sense of whether it's a serious political protest about the nature of ownership or not. You can choose to believe it was (and that Souness is wrong about the owners in question). But all of the video evidence I've seen makes it look like a bunch of piss heads enjoying a riot in the Bank Holiday sunshine. 

The issue was why they were protesting.  Souness effectively said the Glazers were good owners and had put in their own money. All he did was talk down an issue that will see clubs go bankrupt and because critical thinking is not taught or promoted in people, the vast majority will take his point and make it their own without looking into it.  You just have to look at this thread where the amount Man Utd have spent on signings has been posted as some kind of "what are they moaning about" point?  Utterly missing the point. 

 

We all know this wouldn't have happened had Utd been where Man City are right now, but that is the case for every club and fan in the world. If we were winning the league under Hicks and Gillett we'd have seen virtually no protests either.  It's a pointless debate because we all know that's the nature of football.  Almost everyone here slaughtering Gary Neville would have absolutely loved him if he was the Liverpool right back for 16 years.  The vast majority of Liverpool fans saying he's a hypocrite and wrong, would have been backing the exact same comments to the hilt had he been "one of ours".  That's football.  As a discussion point it's meaningless.

 

The real and important point was how the Glazers had funded the buyout.  Old Trafford is falling apart due to a lack of investment, and they have paid over £1billion servicing the loans for the buyout.  THAT'S the real issue.  And Souness dismissed it.  So when someone says he was the only one talking sense, I'm quite happy that I am right to challenge that view.

[Jarvinja Ilnow]

3 hours ago, Elite said:

Carragher defended them live on TV after that, is he for fucking real?

I nominate Carragher to go to number 2 on Stig's "straightener" hit list, just after Catcherintherye.

[VladimirIlyich]

14 minutes ago, JohnnyH said:

The issue was why they were protesting.  Souness effectively said the Glazers were good owners and had put in their own money. All he did was talk down an issue that will see clubs go bankrupt and because critical thinking is not taught or promoted in people, the vast majority will take his point and make it their own without looking into it.  You just have to look at this thread where the amount Man Utd have spent on signings has been posted as some kind of "what are they moaning about" point?  Utterly missing the point. 

 

We all know this wouldn't have happened had Utd been where Man City are right now, but that is the case for every club and fan in the world. If we were winning the league under Hicks and Gillett we'd have seen virtually no protests either.  It's a pointless debate because we all know that's the nature of football.  Almost everyone here slaughtering Gary Neville would have absolutely loved him if he was the Liverpool right back for 16 years.  The vast majority of Liverpool fans saying he's a hypocrite and wrong, would have been backing the exact same comments to the hilt had he been "one of ours".  That's football.  As a discussion point it's meaningless.

 

The real and important point was how the Glazers had funded the buyout.  Old Trafford is falling apart due to a lack of investment, and they have paid over £1billion servicing the loans for the buyout.  THAT'S the real issue.  And Souness dismissed it.  So when someone says he was the only one talking sense, I'm quite happy that I am right to challenge that view.

Could it not be that both arguments have merit? But the way of dealing with them is not spewing anti scouse sentiment assaulting police officers and trying to do the same to ex Liverpool footballers?

[dockers_strike]

I think until a verified word for word transcript of what Souey said is produced, it's putting one's own slant on his comments saying he effectively said this or that.

 

I'll be honest and say I dont recollect him using those words about 'good owners' or putting their 'own money' in. Generalising, he said the owners have not prevented the club spending nearly a million quid. His point was the fans have used the Euro League debacle as a vehicle to resurrect the glazer out movement because they havent won a title for getting on 8 years.

 

I totally agree with him on that.