Manchester City

[JacknDanny]

paddy crerand on radio five making an absolute show of himself about city - united. this was on the breakfast show and he's clearly pissed out of his head.

http://www.bbc.co.uk...rammes/p012ctfh

Haha i think he has had a few to many scotches celebrating

Met Crerand many times. Never seen him sober

Edited December 10, 2012 by JacknDanny

[JacknDanny]

I've just looked again and Tevez holds his arms up in total amazement that it''s been given. To me it looks like Rafael has clipped his own bladdy heels. Cheating, diving git !!

Tevez holds his arms up in total amazement? ......................but keeps his mouth shut

If Tevez hadn't committed a foul he couldn't keep his mouth shut if his life depended on it........especially against Man U. It wasn't amazement on his face it was the realization that he'd committed a foul in a dangerous area and dropped a <deleted>!!!

Those blue tinted glasses you're looking through are obviously much too dark to see anything clearly.

Hey Genius, he kept his mouth shut because he had been booked 2 minutes earlier for dissent

No point jack. Trying to have a sensible debate is futile today with this giddy bunch.

I see MrRed hasn't emerged from his pit yet. Wonder if you'll get an apology !!

I dont think he will even remember what he wrote

No hard feelings, he is obviously one of those 'aggressive drunks'

[nev]

And another thing. About the only thing that baffoon Atkinson gave us was when Toure got hacked all over the place. Except, Toure had stood tall and was off on the attack, so what did Atkinson do to give us the "advantage"? Yeah, he blew the whistle and pulled us back. Divhead.

He also gave you the advantage when he ruled out a perfectly good goal from Young.

He also gave you the advantage when he failed to give a stonewall penalty after Evra was barged over in the penalty area.

We'll happily allow Toure the advantage to play on if you give us the 'goal' and 'penalty'.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2245608/Graham-Poll-Alex-Ferguson-felt-playing-12-men-Martin-Atkinson-performance.html

Summed up perfectly, maybe the blues should take of the blue tinted glasses.

[mrbojangles]

And another thing. About the only thing that baffoon Atkinson gave us was when Toure got hacked all over the place. Except, Toure had stood tall and was off on the attack, so what did Atkinson do to give us the "advantage"? Yeah, he blew the whistle and pulled us back. Divhead.

He also gave you the advantage when he ruled out a perfectly good goal from Young.

He also gave you the advantage when he failed to give a stonewall penalty after Evra was barged over in the penalty area.

We'll happily allow Toure the advantage to play on if you give us the 'goal' and 'penalty'.

http://www.dailymail...erformance.html

Summed up perfectly, maybe the blues should take of the blue tinted glasses.

The Daily Mail AND Graham Poll Are you for real nev.

[nev]

And another thing. About the only thing that baffoon Atkinson gave us was when Toure got hacked all over the place. Except, Toure had stood tall and was off on the attack, so what did Atkinson do to give us the "advantage"? Yeah, he blew the whistle and pulled us back. Divhead.

He also gave you the advantage when he ruled out a perfectly good goal from Young.

He also gave you the advantage when he failed to give a stonewall penalty after Evra was barged over in the penalty area.

We'll happily allow Toure the advantage to play on if you give us the 'goal' and 'penalty'.

http://www.dailymail...erformance.html

Summed up perfectly, maybe the blues should take of the blue tinted glasses.

The Daily Mail AND Graham Poll Are you for real nev.

He is more qualified to assess a ref than us mate, Atkinson never gives united anything, if it was webb you have a case but to say atkinson is biased for united you're having a mare mate.

[JacknDanny]

He also gave you the advantage when he ruled out a perfectly good goal from Young.

He also gave you the advantage when he failed to give a stonewall penalty after Evra was barged over in the penalty area.

We'll happily allow Toure the advantage to play on if you give us the 'goal' and 'penalty'.

http://www.dailymail...erformance.html

Summed up perfectly, maybe the blues should take of the blue tinted glasses.

The Daily Mail AND Graham Poll Are you for real nev.

He is more qualified to assess a ref than us mate, Atkinson never gives united anything, if it was webb you have a case but to say atkinson is biased for united you're having a mare mate.

The referee had a bad game nev. I dont care what anyone says. I saw it with my own eyes.

There were decisions made against both teams that were wrong. Without being biased, in my opinion, most of the decisions were against City.

I hasten to add I am not blaming the ref for us losing, I am not saying we lost because the ref was cr@p. The one decision that truly irked me was not allowing the advantage to Yaya. That was just panic reffing, and amateurish. The handball by Smalling on the edge of the area and several fouls given against City that simply should have been given the other way. I dont think he was biased towards United, I just think he had a sh!t game and made several ludicrous decisions

[salty]

Tevez did City no favours in the closing minutes. Having been 2 down 2-2 would have been a good point for them. He had a major whinge when he was rightly penalised for backing in and shoving a Utd player off the ball. He followed up by giving away the cruical free kick at the end. With RVP and Rooney around in particular its madness to give away a stupid free kick in a dangerous area. He should have been sent off just before the end for a petulant kick on a Utd defender.

You must have better eyes than me, salty!!

I didnt see a foul. I saw no contact. Even when it was replayed, never saw contact. Not saying it wasnt there, just that I didnt see it, despite having seen it 3 or 4 times.

The incident before where he got booked for dissent, it was a clear foul on him, 100%

I accept he was lucky to stay on the pitch kicking out at Jones.

No, only as good JacknDanny. I have to admit I only saw the incident once as I was not at home to watch it in my usual uninterrupted manner. I taped MOTD last night and will be very interested to see their coverage of it. The incident previous to that where he got booked was replayed at the time and I would have to disagree with you.

[JacknDanny]

Tevez did City no favours in the closing minutes. Having been 2 down 2-2 would have been a good point for them. He had a major whinge when he was rightly penalised for backing in and shoving a Utd player off the ball. He followed up by giving away the cruical free kick at the end. With RVP and Rooney around in particular its madness to give away a stupid free kick in a dangerous area. He should have been sent off just before the end for a petulant kick on a Utd defender.

You must have better eyes than me, salty!!

I didnt see a foul. I saw no contact. Even when it was replayed, never saw contact. Not saying it wasnt there, just that I didnt see it, despite having seen it 3 or 4 times.

The incident before where he got booked for dissent, it was a clear foul on him, 100%

I accept he was lucky to stay on the pitch kicking out at Jones.

No, only as good JacknDanny. I have to admit I only saw the incident once as I was not at home to watch it in my usual uninterrupted manner. I taped MOTD last night and will be very interested to see their coverage of it. The incident previous to that where he got booked was replayed at the time and I would have to disagree with you.

No. Thats why Tevez was going ballistic. He was fouled first and then he grabbed onto the other player.

[mrbojangles]

Just thought I would share these stats before the "holier than thou, innocent, never do anything wrong" Man United fans mouth off too much.

The total number of Football Banning Orders (as at 9th November 2012) for Man United is 98 and just over double that of Man City at 47.

Source :- http://www.homeoffic...121?view=Binary (not the Daily Mail) !!

[Travel2003]

Something for both teams.

Quote from link:

Directed from an article in Norwegian VG discussing the performance of Nasri, the Manchester City-player who hid behind a team-mate during a Van Persie free-kick. Hockeyplayers are obviously of a tougher breed, as a United-supporter I remember in shame how our Giggs did the same TWICE against Gerrard of Liverpool! So here's to all the hard-working hockeyplayers out there; keep up the good work!

[sumrit]

Just thought I would share these stats before the "holier than thou, innocent, never do anything wrong" Man United fans mouth off too much.

The total number of Football Banning Orders (as at 9th November 2012) for Man United is 98 and just over double that of Man City at 47.

Source :- http://www.homeoffic...121?view=Binary (not the Daily Mail) !!

Selective quotes. Without looking, for this current season, it could be down to the teams (and rivalry) we've faced so far this season as opposed to the teams Man C have faced so far.

If you look at last season (a complete season) the figures were:

Man U arrests = 148........74 at home Man C arrests = 94........51 at home.

The number of away fans for each club at away games is not easily available, but for home games, once you take attendances into account things change a little bit.

Man U total attendance = 1,432,358

Arrests made = 74

An average of one arrest for every 19,356 supporters attending the home matches.

Man C total attendance = 893,851

Arrests made =51

An average of one arrest for every 17,526 supporters attending the home matches.

Pretty similar figures (in fact slightly in our favour) I think you'll agree, and totally different from your 'Headline' figures

I would suggest that, as we have a far bigger support both throughout the country and globally, we probably have a far greater number of supporters attending our away matches which would account for the 74 against 43 'away arrest' figures .

Edited December 10, 2012 by sumrit

[JacknDanny]

Just thought I would share these stats before the "holier than thou, innocent, never do anything wrong" Man United fans mouth off too much.

The total number of Football Banning Orders (as at 9th November 2012) for Man United is 98 and just over double that of Man City at 47.

Source :- http://www.homeoffic...121?view=Binary (not the Daily Mail) !!

Selective quotes. Without looking, for this current season, it could be down to the teams (and rivalry) we've faced so far this season as opposed to the teams Man C have faced so far.

If you look at last season (a complete season) the figures were:

Man U arrests = 148........74 at home Man C arrests = 94........51 at home.

The number of away fans for each club at away games is not easily available, but for home games, once you take attendances into account things change a little bit.

Man U total attendance = 1,432,358

Arrests made = 74

An average of one arrest for every 19,356 supporters attending the home matches.

Man C total attendance = 893,851

Arrests made =51

An average of one arrest for every 17,526 supporters attending the home matches.

Pretty similar figures (in fact slightly in our favour) I think you'll agree, and totally different from your 'Headline' figures

I would suggest that, as we have a far bigger support both throughout the country and globally, we probably have a far greater number of supporters attending our away matches which would account for the 74 against 43 'away arrest' figures .

City and United are given equal number of away tickets, and invariably use their allocation.

So how does the assumption that you have a bigger global support, mean that you have a 'far greater' number of supporters attending away matches? Its simply not true.

[nev]

Just thought I would share these stats before the "holier than thou, innocent, never do anything wrong" Man United fans mouth off too much.

The total number of Football Banning Orders (as at 9th November 2012) for Man United is 98 and just over double that of Man City at 47.

Source :- http://www.homeoffic...121?view=Binary (not the Daily Mail) !!

Selective quotes. Without looking, for this current season, it could be down to the teams (and rivalry) we've faced so far this season as opposed to the teams Man C have faced so far.

If you look at last season (a complete season) the figures were:

Man U arrests = 148........74 at home Man C arrests = 94........51 at home.

The number of away fans for each club at away games is not easily available, but for home games, once you take attendances into account things change a little bit.

Man U total attendance = 1,432,358

Arrests made = 74

An average of one arrest for every 19,356 supporters attending the home matches.

Man C total attendance = 893,851

Arrests made =51

An average of one arrest for every 17,526 supporters attending the home matches.

Pretty similar figures (in fact slightly in our favour) I think you'll agree, and totally different from your 'Headline' figures

I would suggest that, as we have a far bigger support both throughout the country and globally, we probably have a far greater number of supporters attending our away matches which would account for the 74 against 43 'away arrest' figures .

City and United are given equal number of away tickets, and invariably use their allocation.

So how does the assumption that you have a bigger global support, mean that you have a 'far greater' number of supporters attending away matches? Its simply not true.

Come off it mate city hardly sell out for away games

[nev]

Its MARIO TIME!!!!

As I predicted, Balotelli starts with Aguero.

Come on Mario, show them Rags and make them eat their words

3 shots 3 goals

Must bring this stat back up, we also had one hit the post and rebound put in from a incorrect offside decision.

Just shows we have the most lethal strike force in europe 3 shots on goal 3 goals 100% accuracy

How many you have against qpr last season 26? and only got 3 and the last 2 when the other team gave up also yesteday was it 11 shots only 2 goals and none by a striker , i say your strikers are over rated no wonder you was so keen on buying RVP and Rooney

[uptheos]

Well, one things for sure City cannot afford to ever have little Sami Nasri in a defensive wall again. Apart from hiding behind Dzeko and turning sideways, what the hell was he doing sticking his leg out? I think Hart would might have saved it, had it not been for that hobbit. Regarding Atkinson, the worst decision he made was pulling back Ya Ya Toure, when he was away in acres of space and we all know how dangerous he could be from that kind of position.

[MrRed]

going to sleeep now witth a fat smle

Well I am assuming, having read your comments which have now been deleted, that you must have drunk about 3 gallons of beer last night, so you will probably be resurfacing around Wednesday!

We lost the battle but not the war Red.

Hope you have the worst hangover ever!!

Jack Daniels mate Cheers!!

[mrbojangles]

Just thought I would share these stats before the "holier than thou, innocent, never do anything wrong" Man United fans mouth off too much.

The total number of Football Banning Orders (as at 9th November 2012) for Man United is 98 and just over double that of Man City at 47.

Source :- http://www.homeoffic...121?view=Binary (not the Daily Mail) !!

Selective quotes. Without looking, for this current season, it could be down to the teams (and rivalry) we've faced so far this season as opposed to the teams Man C have faced so far.

If you look at last season (a complete season) the figures were:

Man U arrests = 148........74 at home Man C arrests = 94........51 at home.

The number of away fans for each club at away games is not easily available, but for home games, once you take attendances into account things change a little bit.

Man U total attendance = 1,432,358

Arrests made = 74

An average of one arrest for every 19,356 supporters attending the home matches.

Man C total attendance = 893,851

Arrests made =51

An average of one arrest for every 17,526 supporters attending the home matches.

Pretty similar figures (in fact slightly in our favour) I think you'll agree, and totally different from your 'Headline' figures

I would suggest that, as we have a far bigger support both throughout the country and globally, we probably have a far greater number of supporters attending our away matches which would account for the 74 against 43 'away arrest' figures .

A slight flaw in your long winded attempt to get away from the facts. Who mentioned arrests? This is about banning orders (and not including this year) not all arrests lead to banning orders, only the more serious ones. Nice try but facts are facts and those are from the Home Office.

[MrRed]

Just thought I would share these stats before the "holier than thou, innocent, never do anything wrong" Man United fans mouth off too much.

The total number of Football Banning Orders (as at 9th November 2012) for Man United is 98 and just over double that of Man City at 47.

Source :- http://www.homeoffic...121?view=Binary (not the Daily Mail) !!

Selective quotes. Without looking, for this current season, it could be down to the teams (and rivalry) we've faced so far this season as opposed to the teams Man C have faced so far.

If you look at last season (a complete season) the figures were:

Man U arrests = 148........74 at home Man C arrests = 94........51 at home.

The number of away fans for each club at away games is not easily available, but for home games, once you take attendances into account things change a little bit.

Man U total attendance = 1,432,358

Arrests made = 74

An average of one arrest for every 19,356 supporters attending the home matches.

Man C total attendance = 893,851

Arrests made =51

An average of one arrest for every 17,526 supporters attending the home matches.

Pretty similar figures (in fact slightly in our favour) I think you'll agree, and totally different from your 'Headline' figures

I would suggest that, as we have a far bigger support both throughout the country and globally, we probably have a far greater number of supporters attending our away matches which would account for the 74 against 43 'away arrest' figures .

A slight flaw in your long winded attempt to get away from the facts. Who mentioned arrests? This is about banning orders (and not including this year) not all arrests lead to banning orders, only the more serious ones. Nice try but facts are facts and those are from the Home Office.

You will be showing my banned statistics here next <deleted>!

Never met a bunch of bitter losers in my life

[mrbojangles]

Never met a bunch of bitter losers in my life

Thank you very much.

[sumrit]

A slight flaw in your long winded attempt to get away from the facts. Who mentioned arrests? This is about banning orders (and not including this year)n not all arrests lead to banning orders, only the more sereious ones. Nice try but facts are facts and those are from the Home Office.

It's a pity you don't read the title of the link you provided.

It's called 'Statistics on Football-Related Arrests and Banning orders Season 2011-12'.

The total number of Football Banning Orders (as at 9th November 2012) for Man United is 98 and just over double that of Man City at 47.

The quote you made was for the TOTAL number of banning orders for each club but doesn't say over what period of time those figures relate to. As I said, 'Selective Quotes'. They probably relate to a period of several years because:

If you scroll down to table two you'll see that the number of banning orders for the 2011-12 season (the season the report is about) is Man U 24..........Man C 15. If you compare those figures against the attendance figures you'll see once again they are very similar, although, because they've only supplied total figures and not home/away figures, this is less accurate.

I chose to use the arrest figures given in Table 9 because it's the only table that gives both home and away figures. The 'home' figures are directly under the control of our respective clubs so can be assessed more accurately, while the 'away' figures are down to the control and organisation of other clubs and generally out of our clubs direct control.

You supplied the figures, I just scrolled down past the distorted headline you supplied.

[sumrit]

Well, one things for sure City cannot afford to ever have little Sami Nasri in a defensive wall again. Apart from hiding behind Dzeko and turning sideways, what the hell was he doing sticking his leg out? I think Hart would might have saved it, had it not been for that hobbit. Regarding Atkinson, the worst decision he made was pulling back Ya Ya Toure, when he was away in acres of space and we all know how dangerous he could be from that kind of position.

You think that was worse than ruling out a perfectly good goal scored by Young?????????????

[MrRed]

.........or a certain penalty and and and not sending Tevez off for a full on lashing kick at Jones????

[mrbojangles]

Part 1 (due to the number of quotes)

A slight flaw in your long winded attempt to get away from the facts. Who mentioned arrests? This is about banning orders (and not including this year)n not all arrests lead to banning orders, only the more sereious ones. Nice try but facts are facts and those are from the Home Office.

It's a pity you don't read the title of the link you provided.

It's called 'Statistics on Football-Related Arrests and Banning orders Season 2011-12'.

I provided a link to the document but my comments were about the Banning orders. That was the subject I was talking about. You then change it to try and suit your needs and water the facts down to per number of supporters . In your reasoning, if someone provides a link on a footballing subject in the Daily Mail, you can include absolutely anything the paper has written on any subject. If you want to talk about arrests, make a new post on the subject and don't try to confuse the issue that is being discussed.

The quote you made was for the TOTAL number of banning orders for each club but doesn't say over what period of time those figures relate to. As I said, 'Selective Quotes'. They probably relate to a period of several years because:

Read the report properly will you. They are current "live" banning orders. Banning Orders are time limited and expire whilst also new ones can be issued.

It's a rolling figure and your guys currently have 98 "live" banning orders and we have 47. There ain't no manipulation going on here, they are what they are.

I chose to use the arrest figures given in Table 9 because it's the only table that gives both home and away figures. The 'home' figures are directly under the control of our respective clubs so can be assessed more accurately, while the 'away' figures are down to the control and organisation of other clubs and generally out of our clubs direct control.

A crime is a crime, is a crime, is a crime. It doesn't matter one jot where you commit it.

Man U fan at court in Norwich:- Your honour, I'm sorry but it wasn't my fault I kicked the heck out of this Norwich fan. It was the Police fault cos there weren't enough of them to stop me.

Judge:- erm.........have you been looking at Sumrits excuses on football arrest stats?

[mrbojangles]

Part 2 (due to the number of quotes)

You supplied the figures, I just scrolled down past the distorted headline you supplied.

No I didn't. The Home Office did.

[uptheos]

.........or a certain penalty and and and not sending Tevez off for a full on lashing kick at Jones????

I was in the bathroom on all three occasions.

[MrRed]

I think most of the City lot where being sick in there also because they never mention the facts!

[JacknDanny]

Well, one things for sure City cannot afford to ever have little Sami Nasri in a defensive wall again. Apart from hiding behind Dzeko and turning sideways, what the hell was he doing sticking his leg out? I think Hart would might have saved it, had it not been for that hobbit. Regarding Atkinson, the worst decision he made was pulling back Ya Ya Toure, when he was away in acres of space and we all know how dangerous he could be from that kind of position.

You think that was worse than ruling out a perfectly good goal scored by Young?????????????

Yes it was worse. For starters, the linesman rules whether it is offside, NOT the referee. And the decision was borderline to say the least. Was it offside? Probably not, but it was not a clear cut decision, its not like he was onside by a mile, more like a knee

[uptheos]

Well, one things for sure City cannot afford to ever have little Sami Nasri in a defensive wall again. Apart from hiding behind Dzeko and turning sideways, what the hell was he doing sticking his leg out? I think Hart would might have saved it, had it not been for that hobbit. Regarding Atkinson, the worst decision he made was pulling back Ya Ya Toure, when he was away in acres of space and we all know how dangerous he could be from that kind of position.

You think that was worse than ruling out a perfectly good goal scored by Young?????????????

Yes it was worse. For starters, the linesman rules whether it is offside, NOT the referee. And the decision was borderline to say the least. Was it offside? Probably not, but it was not a clear cut decision, its not like he was onside by a mile, more like a knee

Referee can overrule the linesman on all aspects.

[mrbojangles]

Well, one things for sure City cannot afford to ever have little Sami Nasri in a defensive wall again. Apart from hiding behind Dzeko and turning sideways, what the hell was he doing sticking his leg out? I think Hart would might have saved it, had it not been for that hobbit. Regarding Atkinson, the worst decision he made was pulling back Ya Ya Toure, when he was away in acres of space and we all know how dangerous he could be from that kind of position.

You think that was worse than ruling out a perfectly good goal scored by Young?????????????

Yes it was worse. For starters, the linesman rules whether it is offside, NOT the referee. And the decision was borderline to say the least. Was it offside? Probably not, but it was not a clear cut decision, its not like he was onside by a mile, more like a knee

Referee can overrule the linesman on all aspects.

Yes, but they usually don't for offsides. Afterall, that is one of the main jobs of the linesman and he usually has the best position and line of sight.

[uptheos]

Yes, but they usually don't for offsides. Afterall, that is one of the main jobs of the linesman and he usually has the best position and line of sight.

You're quite right they usually don't......but...