The mancityfans.net football forum

FACT.

DoomMerchant wrote:FACT.

Judging by the response you got on this thread Doomie, there are obviously plenty on here that do.

Can't say I've ever tried it...but don't reckon I'd fancy it though. What about you?

john68 wrote:

DoomMerchant wrote:FACT.

Judging by the response you got on this thread Doomie, there are obviously plenty on here that do.

Can't say I've ever tried it...but don't reckon I'd fancy it though. What about you?

Good question! I have a friend who doesn't know whether he likes marmite or not as he has never tried it! How is that possible? Threatened to force feed him twiglets but he claims he has a possible wheat allergy and has also been through enough recently as he supports Glasgow Rangers...

Speak for yourself,
but as to the statement don't think it's true.
I think our players are not scared of mixing it with anyone.Theres no way people like Zabba,NDJ,Vincent,Yaya,even little David are afraid of getting stuck in when they have to.

Rag_hater wrote:Speak for yourself,
but as to the statement don't think it's true.
I think our players are not scared of mixing it with anyone.Theres no way people like Zabba,NDJ,Vincent,Yaya,even little David are afraid of getting stuck in when they have to.

we certainly didn't look arsed yesterday when we were getting forearm smashed to the face.

Someone should have put a boot in someone's fucking nuts to change the tone. If the ref wasn't doing it, we should have.

what would have happened in that match in 1975? Would someone have fucking called bullshit on it and fought back or would we have tippy tapped our way around it and bitched about the ref, forcing our manager to not have a post match presser because he was so hurt by poor officiating that he was afraid of speaking out.

i just wish, in watching the match again, that someone had the bollocks to throw down. 10 City players with passion could have beaten those cunts. true story.

cheers

DoomMerchant wrote:

Rag_hater wrote:Speak for yourself,
but as to the statement don't think it's true.
I think our players are not scared of mixing it with anyone.Theres no way people like Zabba,NDJ,Vincent,Yaya,even little David are afraid of getting stuck in when they have to.

we certainly didn't look arsed yesterday when we were getting forearm smashed to the face.

Someone should have put a boot in someone's fucking nuts to change the tone. If the ref wasn't doing it, we should have.

what would have happened in that match in 1975? Would someone have fucking called bullshit on it and fought back or would we have tippy tapped our way around it and bitched about the ref, forcing our manager to not have a post match presser because he was so hurt by poor officiating that he was afraid of speaking out.

i just wish, in watching the match again, that someone had the bollocks to throw down. 10 City players with passion could have beaten those cunts. true story.

cheers

Balotelli was the only one to stand up for himself, albeit a bit too strongly for Webb the Red's taste. He was being raped and retaliated (relatively) in-kind. Of course he was called for the foul (surprisingly not booked) and Stoke were allowed to play at their own game alone.

...and Doomie never answered the question Jon.

john68 wrote:...and Doomie never answered the question Jon.

probably confused him talking about marmite...

Had this discussion with a lady friend yesterday. Said I drew the line at anything but a small well oiled vibe in the right circumstances, just to show i could take it as well as give it. But I agree with you. Us oldies know what Buzzer, Frannie and Doyly would do.Dean Whitehead would not have been making love for several days I can assure you.

If we did the same, we would get carded every single time.

That is how it has worked all season. Look at the typical possession stats for most City games, then look at the number of free kicks. We can have 70% possession & yet still concede more or within two free kicks of the oppo. How the fuck is that possible unless we are an absolute bunch of thugs & all our players are cheats who dive rather than actually being fouled ?

Eg: according to the Guardian, we had 67% possession, 16 goal attempts (6 on target) yet conceded only one less foul (14) than Stoke (15)

The rags at Stoke had 58% possession 14 goal attempts (4 on target) yet conceded only 5 fouls to Stoke's 11.

At Everton we had 68% possession 21 goal attempts (3 on target ) conceded 9 free kicks to Everton's 12.

The rags had 48% possession & got the same number of free kick a us, (9) yet only 7 goal attempts (4 on target) to Everton's 19 goal attempts (8 on target) yet Everton were pulled up for 13 fee kicks to rags' 9 in a game they were under the cosh .

We had 69% of possession at Sunderland but the same no of fouls as them (7).
We had 73% at WBA but conceded 3 more fouls (11) than them (8)

Basically, we are a bunch of dirty cunts & if we do ANYTHING we will be punished.

At Villa however, we had 64% & they conceded 15 fouls to our 6, a statistic you would think a lot closer to what you would expect for a side on top in the game.

Who was the ref ? Wny no other than new ref Michael Oliver (mentioned in the Webb thread as being decent).

Not yet received his instructions from the cartel.

Ted Hughes wrote:If we did the same, we would get carded every single time.

That is how it has worked all season. Look at the typical possession stats for most City games, then look at the number of free kicks. We can have 70% possession & yet still concede more or within two free kicks of the oppo. How the fuck is that possible unless we are an absolute bunch of thugs & all our players are cheats who dive rather than actually being fouled ?

Eg: according to the Guardian, we had 67% possession, 16 goal attempts (6 on target) yet conceded only one less foul (14) than Stoke (15)

The rags at Stoke had 58% possession 14 goal attempts (4 on target) yet conceded only 5 fouls to Stoke's 11.

At Everton we had 68% possession 21 goal attempts (3 on target ) conceded 9 free kicks to Everton's 12.

The rags had 48% possession & got the same number of free kick a us, (9) yet only 7 goal attempts (4 on target) to Everton's 19 goal attempts (8 on target) yet Everton were pulled up for 13 fee kicks to rags' 9 in a game they were under the cosh .

We had 69% of possession at Sunderland but the same no of fouls as them (7).
We had 73% at WBA but conceded 3 more fouls (11) than them (8)

Basically, we are a bunch of dirty cunts & if we do ANYTHING we will be punished.

At Villa however, we had 64% & they conceded 15 fouls to our 6, a statistic you would think a lot closer to what you would expect for a side on top in the game.

Who was the ref ? Wny no other than new ref Michael Oliver (mentioned in the Webb thread as being decent).

Not yet received his instructions from the cartel.

either your conspiracy is bang on OR we fuclin pass the ball to the opposition an awful lot after tippy tapping it around for a couple minutes. Thinking about it...i doubt those are mutually exclusive.

cheers

Socrates wrote:

john68 wrote:...and Doomie never answered the question Jon.

probably confused him talking about marmite...

i have in fact tried Marmite, and it is, in fact, fucking horrific.

The same i would guess might be said about the other, although i don't have anything experiential to offer. If you can't beat em, join em? i dunno....

cheers

DoomMerchant wrote:

Ted Hughes wrote:If we did the same, we would get carded every single time.

That is how it has worked all season. Look at the typical possession stats for most City games, then look at the number of free kicks. We can have 70% possession & yet still concede more or within two free kicks of the oppo. How the fuck is that possible unless we are an absolute bunch of thugs & all our players are cheats who dive rather than actually being fouled ?

Eg: according to the Guardian, we had 67% possession, 16 goal attempts (6 on target) yet conceded only one less foul (14) than Stoke (15)

The rags at Stoke had 58% possession 14 goal attempts (4 on target) yet conceded only 5 fouls to Stoke's 11.

At Everton we had 68% possession 21 goal attempts (3 on target ) conceded 9 free kicks to Everton's 12.

The rags had 48% possession & got the same number of free kick a us, (9) yet only 7 goal attempts (4 on target) to Everton's 19 goal attempts (8 on target) yet Everton were pulled up for 13 fee kicks to rags' 9 in a game they were under the cosh .

We had 69% of possession at Sunderland but the same no of fouls as them (7).
We had 73% at WBA but conceded 3 more fouls (11) than them (8)

Basically, we are a bunch of dirty cunts & if we do ANYTHING we will be punished.

At Villa however, we had 64% & they conceded 15 fouls to our 6, a statistic you would think a lot closer to what you would expect for a side on top in the game.

Who was the ref ? Wny no other than new ref Michael Oliver (mentioned in the Webb thread as being decent).

Not yet received his instructions from the cartel.

either your conspiracy is bang on OR we fuclin pass the ball to the opposition an awful lot after tippy tapping it around for a couple minutes. Thinking about it...i doubt those are mutually exclusive.

cheers

Man City v Woves. Posssession 51%/49%, goal attempts 19/13, goals 3/1 fouls against 18/6.

Ted Hughes wrote:

DoomMerchant wrote:

Ted Hughes wrote:If we did the same, we would get carded every single time.

That is how it has worked all season. Look at the typical possession stats for most City games, then look at the number of free kicks. We can have 70% possession & yet still concede more or within two free kicks of the oppo. How the fuck is that possible unless we are an absolute bunch of thugs & all our players are cheats who dive rather than actually being fouled ?

Eg: according to the Guardian, we had 67% possession, 16 goal attempts (6 on target) yet conceded only one less foul (14) than Stoke (15)

The rags at Stoke had 58% possession 14 goal attempts (4 on target) yet conceded only 5 fouls to Stoke's 11.

At Everton we had 68% possession 21 goal attempts (3 on target ) conceded 9 free kicks to Everton's 12.

The rags had 48% possession & got the same number of free kick a us, (9) yet only 7 goal attempts (4 on target) to Everton's 19 goal attempts (8 on target) yet Everton were pulled up for 13 fee kicks to rags' 9 in a game they were under the cosh .

We had 69% of possession at Sunderland but the same no of fouls as them (7).
We had 73% at WBA but conceded 3 more fouls (11) than them (8)

Basically, we are a bunch of dirty cunts & if we do ANYTHING we will be punished.

At Villa however, we had 64% & they conceded 15 fouls to our 6, a statistic you would think a lot closer to what you would expect for a side on top in the game.

Who was the ref ? Wny no other than new ref Michael Oliver (mentioned in the Webb thread as being decent).

Not yet received his instructions from the cartel.

either your conspiracy is bang on OR we fuclin pass the ball to the opposition an awful lot after tippy tapping it around for a couple minutes. Thinking about it...i doubt those are mutually exclusive.

cheers

Man City v Woves. Posssession 51%/49%, goal attempts 19/13, goals 3/1 fouls against 18/6.

you can't tease me like that without telling me who officiated Mr Huge.

cheers

We don't like it up us...

But John Fashanu did.

paulmclaren wrote:
But John Fashanu did.

Justin.

^^^^that's the one.

Ted Hughes wrote:If we did the same, we would get carded every single time.

That is how it has worked all season. Look at the typical possession stats for most City games, then look at the number of free kicks. We can have 70% possession & yet still concede more or within two free kicks of the oppo. How the fuck is that possible unless we are an absolute bunch of thugs & all our players are cheats who dive rather than actually being fouled ?

Eg: according to the Guardian, we had 67% possession, 16 goal attempts (6 on target) yet conceded only one less foul (14) than Stoke (15)

The rags at Stoke had 58% possession 14 goal attempts (4 on target) yet conceded only 5 fouls to Stoke's 11.

At Everton we had 68% possession 21 goal attempts (3 on target ) conceded 9 free kicks to Everton's 12.

The rags had 48% possession & got the same number of free kick a us, (9) yet only 7 goal attempts (4 on target) to Everton's 19 goal attempts (8 on target) yet Everton were pulled up for 13 fee kicks to rags' 9 in a game they were under the cosh .

We had 69% of possession at Sunderland but the same no of fouls as them (7).
We had 73% at WBA but conceded 3 more fouls (11) than them (8)

Basically, we are a bunch of dirty cunts & if we do ANYTHING we will be punished.

At Villa however, we had 64% & they conceded 15 fouls to our 6, a statistic you would think a lot closer to what you would expect for a side on top in the game.

Who was the ref ? Wny no other than new ref Michael Oliver (mentioned in the Webb thread as being decent).

Not yet received his instructions from the cartel.

great point and well researched, as usual.
that's exactly what annoyed me most and turned me from the usual fighting/confrontational chap to an almost paranoid fan.
It started with the away league game @ Anfield, when Atkinson booked Kompany, Barry, Milner, Balotelli (sent off) despite they truly made a Stoke to counter our passing game, but only had Carroll booked at 90'.

Barry got booked for tickling someone's shoulder yesterday, possibly as a result of looking a bit cross at the time as someone had just slapped him in the face.

Marmite is wonderful. Heaven in a jar...

Socrates wrote:Barry got booked for tickling someone's shoulder yesterday, possibly as a result of looking a bit cross at the time as someone had just slapped him in the face.

Marmite is wonderful. Heaven in a jar...

lemme summarize:

We couldn't fight back because Webb had us hogtied
You like it up you.

cheers