That could be because Shankly, Paisley, Fagan and Dalglish managed to win all those trophies without making everyone think they were complete c*ntsQuote:
Originally Posted by IainR
Printable View
That could be because Shankly, Paisley, Fagan and Dalglish managed to win all those trophies without making everyone think they were complete c*ntsQuote:
Originally Posted by IainR
Quote:
Originally Posted by IainR
You've completely misunderstood my original post.
As City fans we're just as happy taking the piss out of ourselves as we are out of you lot and certainly didn't become Blues to lord it over others. Most of us had no or little choice in the matter and we've made the best of what has been a bad job for the most part.
From what I've seen many of you lot became rags for the sole reason that the team were successful. You've known nothing but winning trophies but even that's not been enough for you. Your mantra has not been simply to glory in your own vicarious success but to mock and deride others. You've done that without realising the utter and complete irony of "fans" like you mocking true fans who have a genuine connection to the club they support and care little about how many trophies they've won.
The truth is that many of you simply won't be able to take the boot being on the other foot.
It's only 3 weeks since West Brom announced they were looking to offer him a new contractQuote:
Originally Posted by IanDarkpeak
Quote:
Originally Posted by IainR
So what you are saying is he's available ;)
Just finished reading 'Beastly Fury' about the origins of British football in the 1800's. Dodgy owners, controversial referee decisions, the top teams poaching the best players, crowd trouble and players going on the piss, some things never change
[QUOTE=Danbert Nocurry;567902]
From what I've seen many of you lot became rags for the sole reason that the team were successful. You've known nothing but winning trophies but even that's not been enough for you. QUOTE]
Wow..
This is superb!
1968 > 1993.. no title... little success.. and a relegation.. yet you still think it was simply about us being successful...
Well done.
No they didn't.. rose tinted glasses.. Look at the recent article about teams people love to hate... Man U and Liverpool were included...Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Head
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/foo...s-Arsenal.html
"Personally I have always said that before Pep Guardiola’s Barcelona was born, this Liverpool side was the best I’d ever seen. But they were hated"
Can you make it harder to piss on your arguments.. I'm getting bored..
[QUOTE=IainR;567922]Quote:
Originally Posted by Danbert Nocurry
http://youtu.be/HKTIe6piDOI
Tick Tock
Iain lad, you needn't have gone to the trouble of digging up a poorly researched, half baked article that has one paragraph saying Liverpool were hated, you should have just asked someone who watched football in that era. Despite 20 years of dominance Liverpool were never hated like United are today.Quote:
Originally Posted by IainR
A couple of other points from the article, I've talked to a lot of people about football over the years and I've never heard anyone say 'I hate those MK Dons'. As for Souness's Rangers being hated, it was Souness that was hated, not Rangers. He achieved the feat of being hated by both Rangers and Celtic fans because he signed Maurice Johnston for Rangers who was a Catholic
It's just envy...Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Head
Souness isn't hated by Rangers fans.. thats incredible.. he left for Liverpool but he's still liked up there..
Mourinhos chelsea..
Any team at the top eventually gets turned on. With City it is easy because they are a souless team who sack their most successful manager in decades for merely finishing second, 12 months after winning a title..