The 'Manchester Is Blue' Thread

Samid said:
New year, same fantastic turnout.
Click to expand...
If you can’t beat them on the pitch.. :lol:

One thing I do find odd about the scattering of empty seats is that they don’t seem to have increased between the jump from a 48,000 to a 55,000 seater stadium. So we had empty seats yet we’ve somehow managed to bridge a 7,000 gap of extra people. Does give credit to the fact the demand is there but some people are selective for games.

I now live down south but continue to keep my ticket. Getting to midweek evening games is an absolute non starter for me, for example.
 
This thread really didn't need bumping. We call them the bitters, yet here we are, talking about their bright blue empty seats to help us feel better about the fact that their first team is currently better than ours.
 
Trizy said:
This.

All the Arab money in the world can't change the fact they're still a small club.
Click to expand...

That's not true though, the method of how they got there will always be questionable but the end results will be that they grow, they already have, if they continue at even this level of success for another 10 years, they will be a big club, if they aren't already.

Will they ever eclipse United in the footballing culture? ehh probably not for a generation or two, there would need to be a dramatic decline in us also.

Chelsea did the same thing via a similar method, all be it not the same degree, but to refuse to call them a big club is just bitterness in some weird way. I don't see the need to belittle reality just cause you don't like it, I don't either but you have to rise to challenges.
 
SillyUsername said:
This thread really didn't need bumping. We call them the bitters, yet here we are, talking about their bright blue empty seats to help us feel better about the fact that their first team is currently better than ours.
Click to expand...

You don't understand football rivalry it seems. Get over yourself.
 
SillyUsername said:
This thread really didn't need bumping. We call them the bitters, yet here we are, talking about their bright blue empty seats to help us feel better about the fact that their first team is currently better than ours.
Click to expand...
Do you always take football so seriously? Half the fun of it is the 'banter' between opposition.
 
The funniest thing is that the empty seats aren't even at games like this evening when I guess there is a reason for it. They can play Spurs or Arsenal at home and you'll still see empty seats scattered about. Seems the only game they get a full house for is their cup final...
 
The thing is most big sides will rarely have a spare seat during this period due to match tickets being used as stocking fillers or Christmas ex pats taking in a game before they leave again etc.
Its genuinely shocking to see that tonight.
 
I sense a little superiority complex here. We all know this is the strongest Manchester City side in years. They are simply unstoppable and strong in all areas of the pitch. Empty seats are mainly due to the fact Manchester is predominately a united supporting city - similar to how Newcastle monopolize..well Newcastle. Having traveled the world extensively and recently relocated to Shanghai, I can say that City's brand appeal has increased dramatically. This of course correlates to winning matches and inevitably a few trophies.
 
tinfish said:
I sense a little superiority complex here. We all know this is the strongest Manchester City side in years. They are simply unstoppable and strong in all areas of the pitch. Empty seats are mainly due to the fact Manchester is predominately a united supporting city - similar to how Newcastle monopolize..well Newcastle. Having traveled the world extensively and recently relocated to Shanghai, I can say that City's brand appeal has increased dramatically. This of course correlates to winning matches and inevitably a few trophies.
Click to expand...

This thread was created 4+ years ago - it's not some bitter, kneejerk reaction to City running away with the league this season. Indeed, the myth of Manchester 'being blue' goes back years, as does United fan's mockery of such claims. Ironically, the 'Manchester is Blue' claims were far more steadfast when United were racking up titles for fun and it was their bitter reaction to our imperious success. The Berties don't claim it as much anymore, weirdly enough.
 
Buchan said:
This thread was created 4+ years ago - it's not some bitter, kneejerk reaction to City running away with the league this season. Indeed, the myth of Manchester 'being blue' goes back years, as does United fan's mockery of such claims. Ironically, the 'Manchester is Blue' claims were far more steadfast when United were racking up titles for fun and it was their bitter reaction to our imperious success. The Berties don't claim it as much anymore, weirdly enough.
Click to expand...

Well, my point was really against the empty seat mockery that is used. Of course their stadium isn't packed out like Old Trafford or Newcastle. But outside of England, their appeal has grown exponentially, especially in Asia.
 
Lastwolf said:
That's not true though, the method of how they got there will always be questionable but the end results will be that they grow, they already have, if they continue at even this level of success for another 10 years, they will be a big club, if they aren't already.

Will they ever eclipse United in the footballing culture? ehh probably not for a generation or two, there would need to be a dramatic decline in us also.

Chelsea did the same thing via a similar method, all be it not the same degree, but to refuse to call them a big club is just bitterness in some weird way. I don't see the need to belittle reality just cause you don't like it, I don't either but you have to rise to challenges.
Click to expand...

City were in League 1 the old division 2 in 1999, they were in the Championship the old division 1 in 2002.

Meanwhile Chelsea won the FA Cup in 97, league cup in 98, finished 3rd in 99 and won the FA Cup again in 2000.

Chelsea were a big club before they got taken over, while City were a yoyo club for years.
 
The holy trinity 68 said:
City were in League 1 the old division 2 in 1999, they were in the Championship the old division 1 in 2002.

Meanwhile Chelsea won the FA Cup in 97, league cup in 98, finished 3rd in 99 and won the FA Cup again in 2000.

Chelsea were a big club before they got taken over, while City were a yoyo club for years.
Click to expand...


Ciddy: Sunderland with a lottery win
 
The holy trinity 68 said:
City were in League 1 the old division 2 in 1999, they were in the Championship the old division 1 in 2002.

Meanwhile Chelsea won the FA Cup in 97, league cup in 98, finished 3rd in 99 and won the FA Cup again in 2000.

Chelsea were a big club before they got taken over, while City were a yoyo club for years.
Click to expand...

Big club is a bit strong mate haha even if I appreciate the defending of Chelsea. We were a good top 6 side, but not close enough to win the title unfortunately. Honestly, if it weren't us being bought by Abramovich, it probably would have been Spurs if what you read is true.
 
Sunspear17 said:
Big club is a bit strong mate haha even if I appreciate the defending of Chelsea. We were a good top 6 side, but not close enough to win the title unfortunately. Honestly, if it weren't us being bought by Abramovich, it probably would have been Spurs if what you read is true.
Click to expand...

‘Bigger than City’, Chelsea won a few trophies and were a good cup side albeit maybe not in the league.

They had some great players around 99/00 ish. Desailly, Le Saux, Leboeuf, Casiraghi, Deschamps, Vialli, Zola, Di Matteo, Weah, Flo, Wise.
 
tinfish said:
Having traveled the world extensively and recently relocated to Shanghai, I can say that City's brand appeal has increased dramatically. This of course correlates to winning matches and inevitably a few trophies.
Click to expand...
Having travelled the world extensively and recently back from India and Singapore, I can say no one cares about City, I saw maybe three City shirts in two weeks, compared to 100+ United and at least 30 Liverpool.
 
tinfish said:
Well, my point was really against the empty seat mockery that is used. Of course their stadium isn't packed out like Old Trafford or Newcastle. But outside of England, their appeal has grown exponentially, especially in Asia.
Click to expand...

They're still a million miles off us though. Every village in every country in Asia has a kid in a United shirt. When you see a City shirt you actually notice it because it's so rare.
 
The holy trinity 68 said:
City were in League 1 the old division 2 in 1999, they were in the Championship the old division 1 in 2002.

Meanwhile Chelsea won the FA Cup in 97, league cup in 98, finished 3rd in 99 and won the FA Cup again in 2000.

Chelsea were a big club before they got taken over, while City were a yoyo club for years.
Click to expand...
And..... minutes away from losing the playoff final against the mighty Gillingham?

History could have been so different? (I fecking hate you Gillingham!)
 
tinfish said:
Well, my point was really against the empty seat mockery that is used. Of course their stadium isn't packed out like Old Trafford or Newcastle. But outside of England, their appeal has grown exponentially, especially in Asia.
Click to expand...
I have yet to see a City shirt here in Thailand. Almost all shirts seen are United.
 
The holy trinity 68 said:
‘Bigger than City’, Chelsea won a few trophies and were a good cup side albeit maybe not in the league.

They had some great players around 99/00 ish. Desailly, Le Saux, Leboeuf, Casiraghi, Deschamps, Vialli, Zola, Di Matteo, Weah, Flo, Wise.
Click to expand...


Aye, they were so desperate to compete at the top they spent way beyond their means and nearly went out of existence. Hence, Bates selling up for a quid. Yep, for those of you not around, Chelsea FC, the original doped club were sold for £1. Then came the lottery win.
 
The holy trinity 68 said:
They are indeed. What happened to them could have happened to any other club in the PL. They just got lucky that they were based in Manchester and their rivals were/are the biggest club in England.
Click to expand...

Either they came to buy United and the Glazers wouldn't sell, so they brought City to spite us. Much the same way that Ford went all out to win Le Mans in the 60s because Enzo Ferrari refused to sell Ferrari to Ford.

Or maybe they thought they were actually buying United.
 
Sassy Colin said:
Either they came to buy United and the Glazers wouldn't sell, so they brought City to spite us. Much the same way that Ford went all out to win Le Mans in the 60s because Enzo Ferrari refused to sell Ferrari to Ford.

Or maybe they thought they were actually buying United.
Click to expand...


Buying City must have had something to do with United. They knew they would get spotlight just from being rivals with the biggest and greatest team in English football.

Why would anyone buy that crap when there were plenty of better teams in the division.
 
What was the issue yesterday then? More roadwork, accidents, or actual holiday blues?
 
tinfish said:
Having traveled the world extensively and recently relocated to Shanghai, I can say that City's brand appeal has increased dramatically. This of course correlates to winning matches and inevitably a few trophies.
Click to expand...
Having travelled the world extensively as well as having lived in Shanghai and more recently Central and South América, I can say that City's brand appeal hasn't increased dramatically. Could count the number of City shirts I've seen on one hand. Seen a surprisingly large number of Dortmund shirts though, particularly in Brazil.
 
Trizy said:
This.

All the Arab money in the world can't change the fact they're still a small club.
Click to expand...


That can change in 10 years time, if they keep dominating that they do now. A lot of fickle xbox fans in here who already thinking about jumping ship to the other side.
 
Denis' cuff said:
Aye, they were so desperate to compete at the top they spent way beyond their means and nearly went out of existence. Hence, Bates selling up for a quid. Yep, for those of you not around, Chelsea FC, the original doped club were sold for £1. Then came the lottery win.
Click to expand...

Did you mean Bates bought us for a quid? Bates bought the club for £1 in 1982.
 
It's amazing that they still can't fill their ground in light of recent success, which I guess says it all.

That said, big club or not, I'm amazed that that success hasn't had a similar effect as it did to Leicester's.When they were on their way to the title, season tickets were snapped up in no time to completely sold out, you couldn't get a shirt for love or money (have family there).
 
cyberman said:
The thing is most big sides will rarely have a spare seat during this period due to match tickets being used as stocking fillers or Christmas ex pats taking in a game before they leave again etc.
Its genuinely shocking to see that tonight.
Click to expand...

It's hugely embarrassing for us in terms of the PL. It also makes us look stupid on a global scale. How can anyone take us seriously when we post huge worldwide revenues yet fail to sell out the majority of our home games. This all on the back of us having our greatest season in living memory. I'm not naive enough to believe that we are as big as the club are reporting we are. We can't expect anyone to believe the lie if we don't get the groundwork right though.
 
Drawfull said:
It's amazing that they still can't fill their ground in light of recent success, which I guess says it all.

That said, big club or not, I'm amazed that that success hasn't had a similar effect as it did to Leicester's.When they were on their way to the title, season tickets were snapped up in no time to completely sold out, you couldn't get a shirt for love or money (have family there).
Click to expand...

Leicester's ground holds nearly 23,000 less than ours - it's easier to sell out a 32,000-seater stadium than it is to sell out a 55,000-seater stadium. What's amazing is that, despite expanding the stadium a couple of years back, anyone thinks City still can't ever fill the ground based on a game played on a Tuesday night after New Year's Day which was always going to have it's fair share of season ticket no shows (have a look at the 3 other games played last night and see how many empties there were at those as well, especially West Ham yet they still announced a capacity crowd), particularly in the family stand which is always the biggest problem when this topic comes up. Obviously City aren't arsed about that because they persist in having the family stand covering the whole of one end. There was only one block in the whole stadium showing online yesterday where you could buy 2 seats together. All the other blocks were showing single seats dotted about. Obviously, there were loads more than that in reality but there's nothing the club can do if a ST holder gives the game a miss and then doesn't pass their ticket onto someone else or stick it back up for re-sale via the club's online ticket exchange. Believe me, I've got my own opinions on those who pick and choose their games and who could make more of an effort but it's probably easy for me to criticise when I live within walking distance of the stadium.

It might not seem it to some people but City's match-going fanbase has increased considerably since the takeover and continues to do so. Our League Cup game against Wolves a couple of months back was our second highest home crowd in the competition's history and as for "can't fill the ground", well Saturday's FA Cup 3rd round tie against Burnley has sold out so there will be over 54,000 there. 7 or 8 years ago we wouldn't have got more than 35,000-40,000 for that game even with favourable ticket prices.

Incidentally, I re-located my season ticket to the front row of our block at the start of the season when one came available because it's £225 cheaper than the £665 I would've paid if I'd stayed in my usual seat further up the block. You'll be pleased to know that as I prefer to stand with my mates, that seat on the front row has been empty for every game this season:lol:
 
Steven_Seagull said:
It's hugely embarrassing for us in terms of the PL. It also makes us look stupid on a global scale. How can anyone take us seriously when we post huge worldwide revenues yet fail to sell out the majority of our home games. This all on the back of us having our greatest season in living memory. I'm not naive enough to believe that we are as big as the club are reporting we are. We can't expect anyone to believe the lie if we don't get the groundwork right though.
Click to expand...
Finally a City fan with common sense. Bite
 
You must log in or register to reply here.