Jump to content
IGNORED

Guardian: Is Bristol the least successful English footballing city?


MetzRed

Recommended Posts

Stoke have had 61 seasons of top flight football, but they have yet to finish as high as our highest position in our 9 top class seasons (we finished 2nd in all England in 1907. Stoke's highest finish in the pyramid is 4th). And I don't think they, or Port Vale, will be bettering that any time soon.

Meanwhile, Port Vale matched Rovers highest ever position in the pyramid - 28th (:rofl2br:) - as recently as 1997 (:rofl2br:) and have beaten it. Twice (:rofl2br:), 27th and 23rd. Port ****ing Vale. And I'm not aware of PV being relegated out of the league into the part-time league by a team borrowing their kit, either.

 

So, to sum up: since 1920, when Rovers first joined the ranks of the full-time professionals (instead of hiding away amongst the rank amateurs) our best is better than Stoke's. And Rovers' lowest is lower than Port Vale's. What a crock of utter shit Rovers truly are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, ZiderEyed said:

Good point actually. Still stunning the sheer amount of clubs in London, compared to other large European cities.

Istanbul can't be far behind London in terms of number of clubs- taking into account a far smaller league system. And, domestically at least, far more successful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, ZiderEyed said:

I'll have him know we've won the Anglo-Scottish Cup, the Gloucester Cup, and won the Second and Third divisions.

We've won pish all and I love that, in a way.

Thank you! Cheeky beggar at the Guardian ignoring half our trophy cabinet.

He’ll change his tune when we’re dominating Europe in 3 years :fear:

:city:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, ZiderEyed said:

They have Paris FC in the National, but it is astonishing really. In Milan, there are 4, including non-league sides.

They are in Ligue 2 this season. Just got promoted when Bastia folded. But I agree, surprisingly few.

Same can be said of Barcelona too, unless you count Espanyol, who I suppose are in the wider metro area of Barcelona.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Leveller said:

And Berlin is even weaker. No successful club, one top tier side and one other. Though the division and reunification via the Wall was a big issue.

Dynamo Berlin won 10 straight titles in the East German league but I think that might have had something to do with the fact that they were the favourite team of the head of the secret police...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Tom said:

They are in Ligue 2 this season. Just got promoted when Bastia folded. But I agree, surprisingly few.

Same can be said of Barcelona too, unless you count Espanyol, who I suppose are in the wider metro area of Barcelona.

The Gasheads of Barcelona, same colours an all

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Dastardly and Muttley said:

Arguably, the biggest underachieving city is London...

Never had a team to really create a dynasty in the way that Liverpool or Manchester have. Only won the European Cup/ Champions League once.

wow, I didn't realize London has only nabbed the EC / CL just once. Brilliant little factoid! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having lived in both cities, it's like chalk and cheese. Architecture wise, City wins as Stoke-on-Trent can only offer the D Road.

However, culinary wise Stoke wins as they have Oatcakes (think savoury pancakes about 8 inches in diameter). Filled with bacon and melted Cheshire cheese is up there with the best the UK can offer as a snack!

The River Avon Vs River Trent? We win!

Local breweries? Score draw.

Stoke don't have Rovers as a team so they win that one!

Can't think of any other positives for Stoke although the locals are really good eggs, which considering they call people 'Duck', makes sense! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, ZiderEyed said:

I'll have him know we've won the Anglo-Scottish Cup, the Gloucester Cup, and won the Second and Third divisions.

And this prestigious award too. Clearly the Guardian just didn't do any serious research into our history.

5a607b0e4798d_ScreenShot2018-01-18at10_45_47.thumb.png.8731d41d465663e4ed74d64ad0fe55ea.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Dastardly and Muttley said:

When? For years they were famous for never having been in the top or bottom tier, unless my memory’s playing tricks on me.

(come to think of it, was that the Gas? Although they’ve subsequently plumbed even deeper depths)

Despite finishing bottom of Division 3 (South) in 1939 and provoking WWII to avoid having to seek re-election?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Jack Dawe said:

Stoke have had 61 seasons of top flight football, but they have yet to finish as high as our highest position in our 9 top class seasons (we finished 2nd in all England in 1907. Stoke's highest finish in the pyramid is 4th). And I don't think they, or Port Vale, will be bettering that any time soon.

Meanwhile, Port Vale matched Rovers highest ever position in the pyramid - 28th (:rofl2br:) - as recently as 1997 (:rofl2br:) and have beaten it. Twice (:rofl2br:), 27th and 23rd. Port ****ing Vale. And I'm not aware of PV being relegated out of the league into the part-time league by a team borrowing their kit, either.

 

So, to sum up: since 1920, when Rovers first joined the ranks of the full-time professionals (instead of hiding away amongst the rank amateurs) our best is better than Stoke's. And Rovers' lowest is lower than Port Vale's. What a crock of utter shit Rovers truly are.

Funny thing is, when I started supporting City, Rovers was the more successful club. Hard to believe now :o 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, cidercity1987 said:

Of course it's Bristol.

Biggest City to never have won the top division.

Biggest City to never have won the FA Cup.

Biggest City to never have won the League Cup.

Biggest City by a significant margin never to have played in the Premier League.

Oh and about twice the size of Stoke's six villages so no comparison.

And the only major city without a tram system in place or even proposed :( 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 18/01/2018 at 08:32, Norn Iron said:

Having lived in both cities, it's like chalk and cheese. Architecture wise, City wins as Stoke-on-Trent can only offer the D Road.

However, culinary wise Stoke wins as they have Oatcakes (think savoury pancakes about 8 inches in diameter). Filled with bacon and melted Cheshire cheese is up there with the best the UK can offer as a snack!

The River Avon Vs River Trent? We win!

Local breweries? Score draw.

Stoke don't have Rovers as a team so they win that one!

Can't think of any other positives for Stoke although the locals are really good eggs, which considering they call people 'Duck', makes sense! 

It's NOT Wolverhampton?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 18/01/2018 at 08:32, Norn Iron said:

Having lived in both cities, it's like chalk and cheese. Architecture wise, City wins as Stoke-on-Trent can only offer the D Road.

However, culinary wise Stoke wins as they have Oatcakes (think savoury pancakes about 8 inches in diameter). Filled with bacon and melted Cheshire cheese is up there with the best the UK can offer as a snack!

The River Avon Vs River Trent? We win!

Local breweries? Score draw.

Stoke don't have Rovers as a team so they win that one!

Can't think of any other positives for Stoke although the locals are really good eggs, which considering they call people 'Duck', makes sense! 

Cheers duck. Oatcakes with bacon and chayse, canner beat it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...