Jump to content

Man U Fans

charlotte_se22

By charlotte_se22
in The Lounge

 Share

Recommended Posts

Alan Medic

Alan Medic

Posted
Posted

huncamunca Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> heres a made up fact that may well prove to be

> true - most mancunians support City, whereas those

> from outside Manchester who know nothing about

> football supprot United.


That's an Urban Myth. Old BR here is from Cheshire and last time I looked Manchester was in Lancashire.

Corazon22

Corazon22

Posted
Posted

Laddy Muck Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Bluerevolution Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Oi, from Wythenshawe, South Manchester,

> > Lancashire- Ecky thump, I'd box your ears

>

>

> tee hee...;-)

>

>

> GLORY, GLORY...

kerryb

kerryb

Posted
Posted
As a Manchester United supporter since 1975, when you go to a home match you see all the thousands of locals walking to the ground. There is also a lot of out of the area support but when you can seat 77,000 + this is not a problem. Most of the comments regarding this are pure jealousy!
DJKillaQueen

DJKillaQueen

Posted
Posted

It's not jealousy, just a belief that you support the team you grew up around. Because at the end of the day it's easy to pick a successful team to support but not so easy to support the local team struggling to get promotion.


Many of us that support the teams of our home town do so because we had other family members, parents that supported those teams. It's like an identity thing...a kind of pride for your roots. To those types of supporter, it has far more meaning than the following of a team because they top the charts or because they have this footballing star or that one.


I'm an Everton supporter because I grew up in Liverpool. But I also support Millwall because I've lived in this area for 20 plus years and they are my nearest league team (along with Dulwich Hamlets) and I do go to home games of both of those clubs as often as possible.

Laddy Muck

Laddy Muck

Posted
Posted

Hold on, just a minute! I'd like to point out that I didn't "pick" United because they were "a successful team". In fact, I didn't choose to support any team. I fell into liking the game as a child. My introduction to the game was viewing, on TV, a highly gifted player (George Best) - who happened to play for Manchester United. I'd never really watched anyone play football until then, and therefore had, prior to that, little interest in the game - let alone in supporting a team. But a firm fan I became. I remained a United fan after Bestie left, when they plummetted down what was then the First Division, and - yes - when they were eventually relegated to the Second Division. I have now been supporting them for 40 years and will continue doing so until I am carted off to my grave - irrespective of in which League they are, or where they are placed! If that doesn't make me a proper supporter, or - somehow - precludes me from being a United supporter, in your eyes, then so be it.


My second team is Dulwich Hamlets (my local team since moving to this area). As you are aware, they are far from being near the top of the Premier League, and I support them too.


Your post appears to be suggesting that the likes of me (Londoners) shouldn't be supporting non-London clubs. Frankly, I don't see that a supporter necessarily has to support the team s/he "grew up around". Moreover, you speak of "roots". What if an individual, like myself, is the product of parents from different countries? What if someone never stays in one area for any length of time? If you choose to support Everton because it's what you wish to do (for whatever reason) then that is no-one else's business but yours - and good on you. Ditto who Londoners choose to support.

DJKillaQueen

DJKillaQueen

Posted
Posted

So you started supporting a team because you liked a player! Proves my point don't you think (player being more important than club) but I didn't say there was anything wrong with that...just merely explained why some fans criticise that kind of support in response to another poster inferring that any criticism was just jealousy lol.


Whether you like it or not, Man Utd does have a pile of fans that have no real connection or dedication to the club for the reasons I cited. You are not typical of those kinds of fans and your dedication is proven but it doesn't mean that the majority of people buying Man Utd shirts have any real dedication to the club. It's a running joke with City fans that Man Utd imports it's fanbase for example, not helped of course by the fact that many ordinary local supporters have become priced out of being able to afford to see games at the clubs they grew up around.


Football teams historically started as groups of factory workers or villagers or friends. There's a very deep and long running social tradition around football support that is tribal and local. And that is still true for 99% of football teams. Only those in the top flight of the premiership have this phenomena of en mass non local fanbases - and that's for one reason only - because most of those non local fans only have time for big money winning teams and big stars...and for me that is not the remit of a true supporter.

kerryb

kerryb

Posted
Posted
Here here. When i started watching them in 1975/76 season they had just come up from the then 2nd division and were not as successful in the league as they are now. I started off watching my local team Stoke but felt completely different when went to Old Trafford for the first time - like falling in love for the first time!! Always hope Stoke do well but Utd is in my heart, been to most grounds in England and even lost a job because i would not miss a game in my younger days. As i have got older it is not the end of the world if they dont win but i know there will always be a place in my heart for them.
DJKillaQueen

DJKillaQueen

Posted
Posted
Beckham has brought more fans and revenue in than George Best I'm afraid if we sre going to be brutally honest (a by product of sky money and global media). Having said that GB was a massive talent and there's no doubting his importance in the history of Man United and impact on British football, but like Gasgoine he was an alcoholic mess, and blew it. Bobby Moore is far more worthy of celebration than GB imo in all respects - a true ambassador for the sport.
Mick Mac

Mick Mac

Posted
Posted

DJKillaQueen Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Beckham has brought more fans and revenue in than

> George Best I'm afraid if we sre going to be

> brutally honest (a by product of sky money and

> global media). Having said that GB was a massive

> talent and there's no doubting his importance in

> the history of Man United and impact on British

> football, but like Gasgoine he was an alcoholic

> mess, and blew it. Bobby Moore is far more worthy

> of celebration than GB imo in all respects - a

> true ambassador for the sport.


From Wikipedia;

"The core strength of Manchester United's global brand is often attributed to Matt Busby's rebuilding of the team and subsequent success following the Munich air disaster, which drew worldwide acclaim. [83] The "iconic" team included Bobby Charlton and Nobby Stiles (members of England's World Cup winning team), Denis Law and George Best. The attacking style of play adopted by this team (in contrast to the defensive-minded "catenaccio" approach favoured by the leading Italian teams of the era) "captured the imagination of the English footballing public". [90] Busby's team also became associated with the liberalisation of Western society during the 1960s; George Best, known as the "fifth Beatle" for his iconic haircut, was the first footballer to significantly develop an off-the-field media profile."


As for your comparison between Gascoigne and Best. Just look at what they achieved. Best won a European Cup, 2 League titles and European player of the year. Gazza won none of these and went to Scotland for an easy time.

DJKillaQueen

DJKillaQueen

Posted
Posted

George Best was perhaps the first true 'celebrity' footballer but for all the wrong reasons, primarily women and booze and helped partly by the era. I think the wiki article is going a bit far by suggesting that Man U 'associated with the liberalisation of Western society during the 1960s' (the problem with Wiki articles being written by fans, enthusiasts and amatuer journalists).


Many new United fans (since the creation of the premiership in 1992/ the televising of games globally by sky and the export of Beckham) have never seen George Best play. Do you think all those people who bought Beckham shirts in the far east knew anything of Best, Styles or Busby? I know loads of kids that support Man U but have never been to Manchester. They support that team for the star players they like - Rooney and Ronaldo before that. They know nothing of Man U's history and when their star players move...they move too.

Bluerevolution

Bluerevolution

Posted
Posted

There "fan" base did build after the Munich disaster as it was received world wide, this new fangled thing called television.

Best, Law et al helped build it stronger in the 60's and, as you say, the creation of Premiership and Sky tv they grew even bigger, the fact that they have dominated premiership and cups helps. I remember in 70's when Liverpool were "the" team to be following, so many european cup wins.

But a true fan stays loyal to his/her childhood team through thick and thin.


35 years and we're still here. MCFC

Mick Mac

Mick Mac

Posted
Posted
No my original post was about how George Best helped make them the biggest club in the world by support, not the richest club. We were talking about people deciding to support the club, remember? Your points about money are not really relevant. It was Busbys team that first made them a global attraction generating worldwide fan interest. The Ferguson team built on that foundation.
Bluerevolution

Bluerevolution

Posted
Posted

Mick Mac Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> No my original post was about how George Best

> helped make them the biggest club in the world by

> support, not the richest club. We were talking

> about people deciding to support the club,

> remember? Your points about money are not really

> relevant. It was Busbys team that first made them

> a global attraction generating worldwide fan

> interest. The Ferguson team built on that

> foundation.



Not in his first 5 seasons he didn't, most wanted fergie out by season 3 as they had done absolutely nothing league or cup wise. Fergie was grooming (in a good way) his youth team and they came into the first team and made ManUre succesful again.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

East Dulwich Forum

Established in 2006, we are an online community discussion forum for people who live, work in and visit SE22.

Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...