Re: Football Chat Thread PART II : Wed Dec 05, 2012 8:44 pm  

Northampton_Saint wrote:

*sigh* Of course we will magically find another 30,000 fans from out of the woodwork when we hit the premiership, exactly the same as any other club you boring little man. The point is purely that MK's support is no different to anyone else's - we have the same dedicated never-say-die passionate home-and-away fans and the same glory hunting part-time scumbags as anyone else does and in the same proportions. DO try and keep up...

My point is that these are the fans/types of clubs you are claiming to.be against, yet will be happy should this scenario happen at stadium MK. DO try and keep up...

Re: Football Chat Thread PART II : Wed Dec 05, 2012 9:01 pm  

Talent Spotter wrote:

Real fans who wouldn't go to one of the local non league clubs, but went to the club with the shiny new stadium instead....

...and which club do you actively support as a matter of interest? Prescot Cables? Altrincham FC? No? Exactly. Shut the **** up then, hypocrite.

Talent Spotter wrote:

My point is that these are the fans/types of clubs you are claiming to.be against, yet will be happy should this scenario happen at stadium MK. DO try and keep up...

Yes, well... whatever... I'm bored of arguing the bleeding obvious with you - if you want to argue what you'd rather I was saying instead of what I'm actually saying then you go ahead - I won't detain you any longer.

And I'd get the "." key on your laptop looked at as it seems to be sticking rather a lot. Either that or you suck at typing anyway. Or are illiterate...

Re: Football Chat Thread PART II : Wed Dec 05, 2012 9:04 pm  

Rooney couldn't care less tonight...

Re: Football Chat Thread PART II : Wed Dec 05, 2012 9:09 pm  

Oh dear, I seem to have touched a nerve! x

Re: Football Chat Thread PART II : Wed Dec 05, 2012 9:23 pm  

Northampton_Saint wrote: Absolutely. What is fundamentally the difference? Two clubs changing their image in an attempt to maximise revenues and draw in more punters - everyone else in the football leagues does it and it's just an uncomfortable fact of life that we all have to live with in modern football. And don't think the irony of having this discussion with a Latics fan in the first place is lost on me either. Your "lifelong" supporter base hasn't half grown mighty quick in the last 10-15 years hasn't it? Some cynics might even argue that there's probably quite a few of your "fans" who used to wear the colours of other local clubs and who've changed allegiances to come along for the premiership ride... Physician heal thyself http://www.historicalkits.co.uk/Wigan_A ... hletic.htm Looks like a green hoop to me... OK only one, but a hoop nevertheless. Consider my post edited to "hoop" singular if it makes you any happier. Wasn't a hoop. The back of the shirt was plain blue. Blue being our home colour.

Northampton_Saint wrote: Absolutely. What is fundamentally the difference? Two clubs changing their image in an attempt to maximise revenues and draw in more punters - everyone else in the football leagues does it and it's just an uncomfortable fact of life that we all have to live with in modern football. And don't think the irony of having this discussion with a Latics fan in the first place is lost on me either. Your "lifelong" supporter base hasn't half grown mighty quick in the last 10-15 years hasn't it? Some cynics might even argue that there's probably quite a few of your "fans" who used to wear the colours of other local clubs and who've changed allegiances to come along for the premiership ride... Physician heal thyself http://www.historicalkits.co.uk/Wigan_A ... hletic.htm Looks like a green hoop to me... OK only one, but a hoop nevertheless. Consider my post edited to "hoop" singular if it makes you any happier. Wasn't a hoop. The back of the shirt was plain blue. Blue being our home colour.

Re: Football Chat Thread PART II : Wed Dec 05, 2012 11:03 pm  

Conroy wrote:

Wasn't a hoop. The back of the shirt was plain blue. Blue being our home colour.

...except when it's white... or black... or green... or red...

Re: Football Chat Thread PART II : Thu Dec 06, 2012 10:09 am  

Northampton_Saint wrote:

Conroy wrote:

Wasn't a hoop. The back of the shirt was plain blue. Blue being our home colour.

...except when it's white... or black... or green... or red...

Oh dear.

Re: Football Chat Thread PART II : Thu Dec 06, 2012 11:20 am  

Conroy wrote:

Oh dear.

I know, I know... The truth can be a right inconvenient b***h can't it?

Re: Football Chat Thread PART II : Thu Dec 06, 2012 11:25 am  

Northampton_Saint wrote:

I know, I know... The truth can be a right inconvenient b***h can't it?

So Man Utd and Arsenal have changed their club colours this year have they?

Re: Football Chat Thread PART II : Thu Dec 06, 2012 1:37 pm  

Conroy wrote:

So Man Utd and Arsenal have changed their club colours this year have they?

Errrrrr.... no..... I don't think I've ever claimed otherwise? MK haven't changed a single aspect of our club colours at all since our inception either and what's that got to do with the point?

Arsenal and Man. Utd. have both however abandoned the original communities they were formed as a part of and changed their club's name, colours and logo in the past for no reason other than because of hard-nosed, heartless business decisions to increase their marketability and profitability at the expense of their original core fans. This is seemingly the criteria that you wish to use to judge the "validity" and "franchise-ness" of a football club on. On that basis, if MK are a "franchise" then so are Arsenal and Man. Utd, and so are most other clubs in the football league.

Q.E.D. and check-mate.