Paranoia and Conspiracy Theories

[Rag_hater]

That just seems the rantings of a rag hater to me.The fact that the fuckers got a 2.5 (2.5)% advantage at home seems a small amount to me and people go on about how many pens the fuckers get like it's some extraordinary number that makes everyone elses number seem trivial.The fuckers got 11 last year we got 8.The year before we got more, 9 to 5 I think.Same with yellow cards and other stuff,the only thing I can find the fuckers getting an advantage is red cards but there may be an explanation for that.

Ironic really, considering your pseudonym.

You don't believe that the Rags don't get an advantage, no problems there. You believe we have the same cut of the green as them, no problem there either. In fact, I have no problem with any of your thoughts, there yours and you are entitled to them; Rag Hater.

I think the village idiot should put his hand up before he gives an opinion......shouldnt be allowed to otherwise.

Says the arsehole in the middle of nowhere.
Thing is I take the facts as they are presented and not try and spin them into some bullshit of a paranoid,delusionl poor so and so.

[carl_feedthegoat]

That just seems the rantings of a rag hater to me.The fact that the fuckers got a 2.5 (2.5)% advantage at home seems a small amount to me and people go on about how many pens the fuckers get like it's some extraordinary number that makes everyone elses number seem trivial.The fuckers got 11 last year we got 8.The year before we got more, 9 to 5 I think.Same with yellow cards and other stuff,the only thing I can find the fuckers getting an advantage is red cards but there may be an explanation for that.

Ironic really, considering your pseudonym.

You don't believe that the Rags don't get an advantage, no problems there. You believe we have the same cut of the green as them, no problem there either. In fact, I have no problem with any of your thoughts, there yours and you are entitled to them; Rag Hater.

I think the village idiot should put his hand up before he gives an opinion......shouldnt be allowed to otherwise.

Says the arsehole in the middle of nowhere.
Thing is I take the facts as they are presented and not try and spin them into some bullshit of a paranoid,delusionl poor so and so.

PUT YOUR FUCKING HAND UP AND WAIT FOR THE SIGNAL !!

[Rag_hater]

That just seems the rantings of a rag hater to me.The fact that the fuckers got a 2.5 (2.5)% advantage at home seems a small amount to me and people go on about how many pens the fuckers get like it's some extraordinary number that makes everyone elses number seem trivial.The fuckers got 11 last year we got 8.The year before we got more, 9 to 5 I think.Same with yellow cards and other stuff,the only thing I can find the fuckers getting an advantage is red cards but there may be an explanation for that.

Ironic really, considering your pseudonym.

You don't believe that the Rags don't get an advantage, no problems there. You believe we have the same cut of the green as them, no problem there either. In fact, I have no problem with any of your thoughts, there yours and you are entitled to them; Rag Hater.

I think the village idiot should put his hand up before he gives an opinion......shouldnt be allowed to otherwise.

Says the arsehole in the middle of nowhere.
Thing is I take the facts as they are presented and not try and spin them into some bullshit of a paranoid,delusionl poor so and so.

PUT YOUR FUCKING HAND UP AND WAIT FOR THE SIGNAL !!

Capitols.Got you shouting.Good job youre nowhere no one can hear the fool

[Beefymcfc]

It's good that these things are actually highlighted, even if they are seen as 'Paranoia and Conspiracist's'. I noticed that the ref gave no crucial decisions on Saturday and the Rags lost to a half decent side .......... at HOME!

[scroll]...... City Win, Rag Bastards Lose, Oh City, You've Got Me Singing the Blues ......[/scroll]

[Im_Spartacus]

RH, how would you respond to the facts that last season, united committed the lowest fouls/tackles ratio in the league bar Swansea, around 45%. City's ratio was lower only than Everton and Stoke.

united made 3 more tackles per game, but city committed 3 more fouls per game.

It works out that city are 50% dirtier than united - given the style of football we played last year, and the extreme amount of posession we had in many games, how is this possible. How is it possible that we make significantly less tackles but commit significantly more fouls.

How many people would have classed city as such a dirty side?

How many people would find these numbers very much at odds with what they see on the tv week in week out, city as dirty as stoke and everton, do me a fucking favour - city are penalised disproportionately for niggling fouls generally playing for 50 50 balls when the opposition have been pressured into a misplaced pass. Evidence for this is that despite committing far more "fouls", we have the same number of bookings as united for fouls.

[john68]

@ Sparty,
....and therein lies a major problem that City seem to encounter more than the rags. Those little niggly nothing free kicks, not worth a yellow card but effective at stopping City gaining momentum and building pressure. The nothing decisions given that allow our opponents the chance to relieve pressure and regroup. The insignificant decisions that happen throughout a game but get forgotten.

Considering that only goal difference split City and the rags last season and the fact that, as Ted pointed out, the rags have already gained a 6pt advantage from disgusting reffing decisions, those big decisions are crucial too.

I really don't like referees....never have.

[Rag_hater]

RH, how would you respond to the facts that last season, united committed the lowest fouls/tackles ratio in the league bar Swansea, around 45%. City's ratio was lower only than Everton and Stoke.

united made 3 more tackles per game, but city committed 3 more fouls per game.

It works out that city are 50% dirtier than united - given the style of football we played last year, and the extreme amount of posession we had in many games, how is this possible. How is it possible that we make significantly less tackles but commit significantly more fouls.

How many people would have classed city as such a dirty side?

How many people would find these numbers very much at odds with what they see on the tv week in week out, city as dirty as stoke and everton, do me a fucking favour - city are penalised disproportionately for niggling fouls generally playing for 50 50 balls when the opposition have been pressured into a misplaced pass. Evidence for this is that despite committing far more "fouls", we have the same number of bookings as united for fouls.

Don?t see us as a dirty side but we are a physical team.
I have seen from my armchair plenty of times when one of our olayers has been a little late to a challenge,plenty of times I have seen one of our players be aggresive be a bit careless be a bit wreckless.
But if you experts are telling me that having the bulk of the ball during a game exempts us from all those situations I can see why it's apparent the refs have it for us.

[ashton287]

He is a rag simple as that. It's not even good wum-ing.

[ashton287]

Anyone seen the sky advert for the game on sat?

Fucking 2 Sunderland fans talking about the game last year. Emotional music on in the background and an effect on the video to make it look like some epic western or some shit like that. Then they describe the goal and say it was "typical Sunderland".

Sky know how to stage a wind up. Rag hater should take notes from those cunts.

[dazby]

I think we commit a lot of fouls because when we don't have the ball we are very aggressive trying to get it back. It's all part of our pressing game. We often commit many players forward so when we do turn the ball over a foul is a great way of giving ourselves the opportunity to get back.

[Rag_hater]

He is a rag simple as that. It's not even good wum-ing.

Your'e a dickhead worse than me at wuming.

[ashton287]

Your'e a dickhead worse than me at wuming.

You seem to be a little vexed.

I'm just better than you bro.

[Rag_hater]

Your'e a dickhead worse than me at wuming.

You seem to be a little vexed.

I'm just better than you bro.

Keep on dreaming
At least you believe you.

[Pretty Boy Lee]

Keep on dreaming
At least you believe you.

Can I ask your actual feelings on united? Serious question.

[Ted Hughes]

I think we commit a lot of fouls because when we don't have the ball we are very aggressive trying to get it back. It's all part of our pressing game. We often commit many players forward so when we do turn the ball over a foul is a great way of giving ourselves the opportunity to get back.

That's a good theory but when you see the attacks Arsenal had for instance, most could have been stopped with a foul, but few were; we chose to try & defend it fairly instead. Same with the breakaways by Southampton, QPR & Villa.

We know a team not far away from here who would have a certain range of assorted gingas kicking people's legs from underneath them in the same circumstances though don't we ?

Their game v Spurs they had marginally less of everything attacking wise than we did at Fulham & slightly less possession. They conceded 5 fouls, we conceded 12. Do you genuinely think we will have been more than twice as 'aggressive' as Utd in our game?

[Foreverinbluedreams]

RH, how would you respond to the facts that last season, united committed the lowest fouls/tackles ratio in the league bar Swansea, around 45%. City's ratio was lower only than Everton and Stoke.

united made 3 more tackles per game, but city committed 3 more fouls per game.

It works out that city are 50% dirtier than united - given the style of football we played last year, and the extreme amount of posession we had in many games, how is this possible. How is it possible that we make significantly less tackles but commit significantly more fouls.

How many people would have classed city as such a dirty side?

How many people would find these numbers very much at odds with what they see on the tv week in week out, city as dirty as stoke and everton, do me a fucking favour - city are penalised disproportionately for niggling fouls generally playing for 50 50 balls when the opposition have been pressured into a misplaced pass. Evidence for this is that despite committing far more "fouls", we have the same number of bookings as united for fouls.

Don?t see us as a dirty side but we are a physical team.
I have seen from my armchair plenty of times when one of our olayers has been a little late to a challenge,plenty of times I have seen one of our players be aggresive be a bit careless be a bit wreckless.
But if you experts are telling me that having the bulk of the ball during a game exempts us from all those situations I can see why it's apparent the refs have it for us.

Yet again you dodge the main question. In your opinion are we 50% dirtier than U*d?

I don't think he's a Rag, I just believe in an effort to be objective he's gone too far the other way and lost all sense of reality.

[Ted Hughes]

At Southampton, Utd only gave away 4 free kicks. Remarkable self discipline in such a high emotion game.

[Peter Doherty (AGAIG)]

@ Sparty,
....and therein lies a major problem that City seem to encounter more than the rags. Those little niggly nothing free kicks, not worth a yellow card but effective at stopping City gaining momentum and building pressure. The nothing decisions given that allow our opponents the chance to relieve pressure and regroup. The insignificant decisions that happen throughout a game but get forgotten.

Considering that only goal difference split City and the rags last season and the fact that, as Ted pointed out, the rags have already gained a 6pt advantage from disgusting reffing decisions, those big decisions are crucial too.

I really don't like referees....never have.

I remember the home game against liverpool in the cup at our place last January. I think the ref was lee mason. Every time we attacked them through the midfield they fouled us. The ref gave the free-kicks (mostly) but didn't book anyone. The scousers could therefore constantly stop the flow of our game with impunity. No big deal but the ref basically helped them cheat us out of that game (not to mention the penalty and what should have been the sending-off of Johnson).

[Ted Hughes]

@ Sparty,
....and therein lies a major problem that City seem to encounter more than the rags. Those little niggly nothing free kicks, not worth a yellow card but effective at stopping City gaining momentum and building pressure. The nothing decisions given that allow our opponents the chance to relieve pressure and regroup. The insignificant decisions that happen throughout a game but get forgotten.

Considering that only goal difference split City and the rags last season and the fact that, as Ted pointed out, the rags have already gained a 6pt advantage from disgusting reffing decisions, those big decisions are crucial too.

I really don't like referees....never have.

I remember the home game against liverpool in the cup at our place last January. I think the ref was lee mason. Every time we attacked them through the midfield they fouled us. The ref gave the free-kicks (mostly) but didn't book anyone. The scousers could therefore constantly stop the flow of our game with impunity. No big deal but the ref basically helped them cheat us out of that game (not to mention the penalty and what should have been the sending-off of Johnson).

We only have to look to the recent game v Stoke to see an example of the same thing, where Clattenburg let about 70% of their fouls go unpunished. We ended up conceding as many free kicks as they did in that game.

[Peter Doherty (AGAIG)]

@ Sparty,
....and therein lies a major problem that City seem to encounter more than the rags. Those little niggly nothing free kicks, not worth a yellow card but effective at stopping City gaining momentum and building pressure. The nothing decisions given that allow our opponents the chance to relieve pressure and regroup. The insignificant decisions that happen throughout a game but get forgotten.

Considering that only goal difference split City and the rags last season and the fact that, as Ted pointed out, the rags have already gained a 6pt advantage from disgusting reffing decisions, those big decisions are crucial too.

I really don't like referees....never have.

I remember the home game against liverpool in the cup at our place last January. I think the ref was lee mason. Every time we attacked them through the midfield they fouled us. The ref gave the free-kicks (mostly) but didn't book anyone. The scousers could therefore constantly stop the flow of our game with impunity. No big deal but the ref basically helped them cheat us out of that game (not to mention the penalty and what should have been the sending-off of Johnson).

We only have to look to the recent game v Stoke to see an example of the same thing, where Clattenburg let about 70% of their fouls go unpunished. We ended up conceding as many free kicks as they did in that game.

Agreed. There also seems to be an unwritten rule that they can elbow one of our players in the head per home game.