Alan brazil an roni irooney referred to united as man u twice last week on the sports breakfast.
He used to play for united and irani is a proper biased united fan, they didn't seem to have a problem with it?
He used to play for united and irani is a proper biased united fan, they didn't seem to have a problem with it?
***
a pair of ignorant tubes?
It's just a really sensitive time at the moment so best to be cautious & release a statement.
===============================================
So, you're saying that if it had been sung after Liverpool and United had already played their games, they wouldn't have issued a statement?
=========================================
IOP you came looking to start an arguement & cause more unrest between the 2 sets of fans.... after 280+ comments I'm sure you got what you wanted.
=========================================
This thread was a bit fractious at the beginning, but it's getting entertaining, now. I'm enjoying these contortions of logic, such as the suggestion that United thought the chant was OK, but just wanted to defuse things before next week, so apologised anyway
But surely an ex player wouldn't have used that shortened name for united if it meant what you claim it does?
Never heard anybody refer to City as Man C
==========================================
No, it's a diferent abbreviation: 'Man City'
One syllable more than 'Man U', but one less than 'Man United'.
If you add the 3 letters 'i-c-h' to 'Man U' in dyslexic Countdown, and take away the 'A', you can arrive at 'Munich', but you can arrive at anything you want if you add and take away any letters you feel like.....that's the beauty of dyslexic Countdown.
Anagrams become so much easier, with those rules
No one is saying that it means that, what I(at least) am saying is that it is easy to construe things differently. So you go and say "I cannot stand Man U fans" and someone who thinks the way I highlighted would have a go at you for mocking Munich because in their heads that is what "Man U" stands for. Does it mean though that your intention, when you made that statement was to mock the dead? No!
Kemlyn Road
What is so laughable about that school of thought, I (again, at least) felt it was a feasible option, especially after your PR and other members handled the Suarez affair. There are times you'll say something, others will take offense due to them misinterpreting your intentions, more often then not people apologize and move on, to stop the situation from escalating further. Could you imagine Man United saying "These chants weren't aimed at the disasters so there is no need to apologize?" every dog and his flea would have a say and no doubt it would descend to Man United condones tragedy chants.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Towton
There are some who interpret this in such manner though, the point I am trying to bring across is that because I may think that way when you say "Man U" doesn't mean that you intended it to be an insult.
What is so laughable about that school of thought, I (again, at least) felt it was a feasible option
==============================================
So you're saying that United's apologies are not sincere, they're just PR exercises? How do you know this?
Is there any way of knowing which ones are sincere?
Do they scratch their noses for the insincere ones, or something like that?
========================================
it is easy to construe things differently
========================================
Yes, it is, if you're paranoid to the point of derangement.
'Man U' sounds nothing like 'Munich', it just happens to have 3 letters in common with it.
If you take the words 'Manchester United' and perform all kinds of random associations with it, I'm sure you can come up with a prediction that the world will end next Wednesday. and many people have done something similar with the Bible.
Doesn't mean they're not nuts, thouigh....
The origin of Man U is in a song about DE first sung by West Brom fans.....
man, you (Man U) are man_ure - rotting in you grave.
know you know.
Kemlyn Road (U10652)
Can you not read?
I am saying it is a school of thought, i.e a possibility, that due to Man United not wanting unsavory media reports they decided to end it with an apology. I don't work at the club so I cannot definitely speak about the logic behind the statement, what I can however do, is to give opinions on why the club released a statement.
For the umpteeth time, there are people who believe such in regards to Man U, because you say it doesn't mean you are mocking Munich as there are other innocent meanings to the term. In the same manner the "victims" chant can be likened.
Nobody is catching on. It's really very simple, United started chanting this after Hillsborough. Common sense tells you this without even delving back as the words always and never are used implying at least two incidents. Without these incidents the chant would work for Suarez so again it refers to Hillsborough no matter which way you paint it and you should be condemning these idiots after recent findings not trying to come up with silly excuses using screwed logic.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
So what you are saying is the reaction of the media and public to the chants from the weekend is over the top and misunderstood?
You could almost say you are like victims in this and it's not your fault !!!!!!!
There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
It doesn't necessarily have to be about tragedies. As I alluded to in my example, Man U doesn't always have to be about mocking a tragedy...there are other situations that I listed some time ago in this thread which could possibly explain the 'always' and 'never'.
Oh come on, youre clearly clutching at straws now.
Half a Big Bite (U7237)
I am saying it is a possibility, as before this weekend, it was apparently sung prior, we didn't hear any complaints, but as soon as this weekend comes along, the chant is suddenly demonized as a tragedy chant. All I am saying is that that MAY NOT be the case.
There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
No i'm not, I do believe I am raising a valid point. It seems some want it to mean one thing, what I am showing you is that it can mean quite a few other things.
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
--------------------
I always thought it was because LFC tried blaming Heysel on Chelsea fans. Pre-dates Hillsborough by a few years.
It has always been a tragedy chant!
You mean in the same way Suarez MAY NOT have been racially abusing Evra?
No Thunder as I've already stated the words always and never are used implying at least two incidents.
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 21 seconds ago
No Thunder as I've already stated the words always and never are used implying at least two incidents.
-----------------
That's a big reach. They're hardly quantifiable words.
There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
That is your interpretation, doesn't mean it is correct.
Half a Big Bite (U7237)
As I said it is down to interpretation, yes there is a possibilty that Suarez didn't mean to act in a racial way, but the quotes attributed to him at the time in his radio interview in Uruguay kind of hung him, even though the FA or whoever told both parties to keep their mouth shut.
Sign in if you want to comment
Suarez/ Evra.... The handshake
Page 13 of 15
11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15
posted on 17/9/12
Alan brazil an roni irooney referred to united as man u twice last week on the sports breakfast.
He used to play for united and irani is a proper biased united fan, they didn't seem to have a problem with it?
posted on 17/9/12
He used to play for united and irani is a proper biased united fan, they didn't seem to have a problem with it?
***
a pair of ignorant tubes?
posted on 17/9/12
It's just a really sensitive time at the moment so best to be cautious & release a statement.
===============================================
So, you're saying that if it had been sung after Liverpool and United had already played their games, they wouldn't have issued a statement?
=========================================
IOP you came looking to start an arguement & cause more unrest between the 2 sets of fans.... after 280+ comments I'm sure you got what you wanted.
=========================================
This thread was a bit fractious at the beginning, but it's getting entertaining, now. I'm enjoying these contortions of logic, such as the suggestion that United thought the chant was OK, but just wanted to defuse things before next week, so apologised anyway
posted on 17/9/12
But surely an ex player wouldn't have used that shortened name for united if it meant what you claim it does?
posted on 17/9/12
Never heard anybody refer to City as Man C
==========================================
No, it's a diferent abbreviation: 'Man City'
One syllable more than 'Man U', but one less than 'Man United'.
If you add the 3 letters 'i-c-h' to 'Man U' in dyslexic Countdown, and take away the 'A', you can arrive at 'Munich', but you can arrive at anything you want if you add and take away any letters you feel like.....that's the beauty of dyslexic Countdown.
Anagrams become so much easier, with those rules
posted on 17/9/12
posted on 17/9/12
No one is saying that it means that, what I(at least) am saying is that it is easy to construe things differently. So you go and say "I cannot stand Man U fans" and someone who thinks the way I highlighted would have a go at you for mocking Munich because in their heads that is what "Man U" stands for. Does it mean though that your intention, when you made that statement was to mock the dead? No!
Kemlyn Road
What is so laughable about that school of thought, I (again, at least) felt it was a feasible option, especially after your PR and other members handled the Suarez affair. There are times you'll say something, others will take offense due to them misinterpreting your intentions, more often then not people apologize and move on, to stop the situation from escalating further. Could you imagine Man United saying "These chants weren't aimed at the disasters so there is no need to apologize?" every dog and his flea would have a say and no doubt it would descend to Man United condones tragedy chants.
posted on 17/9/12
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 17/9/12
Towton
There are some who interpret this in such manner though, the point I am trying to bring across is that because I may think that way when you say "Man U" doesn't mean that you intended it to be an insult.
posted on 17/9/12
What is so laughable about that school of thought, I (again, at least) felt it was a feasible option
==============================================
So you're saying that United's apologies are not sincere, they're just PR exercises? How do you know this?
Is there any way of knowing which ones are sincere?
Do they scratch their noses for the insincere ones, or something like that?
========================================
it is easy to construe things differently
========================================
Yes, it is, if you're paranoid to the point of derangement.
'Man U' sounds nothing like 'Munich', it just happens to have 3 letters in common with it.
If you take the words 'Manchester United' and perform all kinds of random associations with it, I'm sure you can come up with a prediction that the world will end next Wednesday. and many people have done something similar with the Bible.
Doesn't mean they're not nuts, thouigh....
posted on 17/9/12
The origin of Man U is in a song about DE first sung by West Brom fans.....
man, you (Man U) are man_ure - rotting in you grave.
know you know.
posted on 17/9/12
Kemlyn Road (U10652)
Can you not read?
I am saying it is a school of thought, i.e a possibility, that due to Man United not wanting unsavory media reports they decided to end it with an apology. I don't work at the club so I cannot definitely speak about the logic behind the statement, what I can however do, is to give opinions on why the club released a statement.
For the umpteeth time, there are people who believe such in regards to Man U, because you say it doesn't mean you are mocking Munich as there are other innocent meanings to the term. In the same manner the "victims" chant can be likened.
posted on 17/9/12
Nobody is catching on. It's really very simple, United started chanting this after Hillsborough. Common sense tells you this without even delving back as the words always and never are used implying at least two incidents. Without these incidents the chant would work for Suarez so again it refers to Hillsborough no matter which way you paint it and you should be condemning these idiots after recent findings not trying to come up with silly excuses using screwed logic.
posted on 17/9/12
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 17/9/12
So what you are saying is the reaction of the media and public to the chants from the weekend is over the top and misunderstood?
You could almost say you are like victims in this and it's not your fault !!!!!!!
posted on 17/9/12
There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
It doesn't necessarily have to be about tragedies. As I alluded to in my example, Man U doesn't always have to be about mocking a tragedy...there are other situations that I listed some time ago in this thread which could possibly explain the 'always' and 'never'.
posted on 17/9/12
Oh come on, youre clearly clutching at straws now.
posted on 17/9/12
Half a Big Bite (U7237)
I am saying it is a possibility, as before this weekend, it was apparently sung prior, we didn't hear any complaints, but as soon as this weekend comes along, the chant is suddenly demonized as a tragedy chant. All I am saying is that that MAY NOT be the case.
posted on 17/9/12
There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
No i'm not, I do believe I am raising a valid point. It seems some want it to mean one thing, what I am showing you is that it can mean quite a few other things.
posted on 17/9/12
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
--------------------
I always thought it was because LFC tried blaming Heysel on Chelsea fans. Pre-dates Hillsborough by a few years.
posted on 17/9/12
It has always been a tragedy chant!
posted on 17/9/12
You mean in the same way Suarez MAY NOT have been racially abusing Evra?
posted on 17/9/12
No Thunder as I've already stated the words always and never are used implying at least two incidents.
posted on 17/9/12
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 21 seconds ago
No Thunder as I've already stated the words always and never are used implying at least two incidents.
-----------------
That's a big reach. They're hardly quantifiable words.
posted on 17/9/12
There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
That is your interpretation, doesn't mean it is correct.
Half a Big Bite (U7237)
As I said it is down to interpretation, yes there is a possibilty that Suarez didn't mean to act in a racial way, but the quotes attributed to him at the time in his radio interview in Uruguay kind of hung him, even though the FA or whoever told both parties to keep their mouth shut.
Page 13 of 15
11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15