Wind up song fail.

[Southport Red]

Thought it was funny on Tuesday night when the Citeh fans tried to wind us up. 

At the Ethihad, we had a lot of success irritating them with

”Your City is Red,

Your City is Red

Just like Bristol

Your City is Red”

they tried to reciprocate with Your City is Blue on Tuesday but it didn’t work for two main reasons

 

1) Just like Manchester, doesn’t scan, too many syllables, and

2) IT’S ENTIRE PROPOSITION IS RIDICULOUS!

 

When they sang just like Manchester, your City is Blue, me and the bloke next to me just burst out laughing. Must be the worst wind up chant fail ever. 

[Coxy27]

It's basically the same as what we sang, yes Manchester is a bit long for the tune, but it's just some light hearted retaliation, I'd expect nothing less; Football fans aren't known to be particularly melodical.

By no means 'the worst wind up chant fail ever' - If that's even a thing.

[Bar BS3]

And I’ve always thought that the moon is more white, than blue. 

[Hampshire Red]

thought their wind up was "where were you on Friday nigh?", reference to the 7500 fans at Etihad who couldnt their way to Derby?

 

[Southport Red]

2 minutes ago, Coxy27 said:

It's basically the same as what we sang, yes Manchester is a bit long for the tune, but it's just some light hearted retaliation, I'd expect nothing less; Football fans aren't known to be particularly melodical.

By no means 'the worst wind up chant fail ever' - If that's even a thing.

But is an epic fail. My post says we sang it in Manchester. Although Citeh are currently better than United singing your City is Red at them has some resonance, their retailiation that Bristol is Blue is ridiculous because no one supports Rovers. 

They should have gone with “Small town in South Wales” or something. 

[Southport Red]

7 minutes ago, Hampshire Red said:

thought their wind up was "where were you on Friday nigh?", reference to the 7500 fans at Etihad who couldnt their way to Derby?

 

I thought their best moment was after we sang where were you when you were s**t? They replied with “beating you when we were s**t” :-)

[Littlesh*t]

3 minutes ago, Southport Red said:

I thought their best moment was after we sang where were you when you were s**t? They replied with “beating you when we were s**t” :-)

I have to admit that was a great response and I did find it funny

[RedYoshi]

Their most accurate chant was “you’re only here to watch the City”.

[Bar BS3]

9 minutes ago, Southport Red said:

I thought their best moment was after we sang where were you when you were s**t? They replied with “beating you when we were s**t” :-)

 

6 minutes ago, Littlesh*t said:

I have to admit that was a great response and I did find it funny

They might want to check out the head to head stats against us...! 

[Jin]

Sang the "your city is red" chant away at the Etihad because we were in town, were people singing it because of Man Utd? Refused to sing it at home, I hate Man Utd.

[Tom]

Clearly wound you up enough to post this topic!

[Welcome To The Jungle]

5 minutes ago, CityLew said:

Sang the "your city is red" chant away at the Etihad because we were in town, were people singing it because of Man Utd? Refused to sing it at home, I hate Man Utd.

Despite my dislike for United, at least their success through the 90's and 00's was based on them sticking my SAF when they were struggling, and being the biggest (or one of the biggest) club in the UK in terms of fanbase.

Their big signings have been funded by having a fan base in the hundreds of millions, which may be a sad example of modern football, but at least they earned it. Citeh's success is based on having huge private investment, like Chelsea's success. That is ruining the game more imo. 

[exAtyeoMax]

I thought the JPT song was the best…

[ZiderEyed]

Hahaha, the fact that you remembered it and felt the need to mention it means it must've got to you a bit, no?

[Super]

55 minutes ago, Hampshire Red said:

thought their wind up was "where were you on Friday nigh?", reference to the 7500 fans at Etihad who couldnt their way to Derby?

 

that was good have to admit.

[MCFC]

1 hour ago, Welcome To The Jungle said:

Despite my dislike for United, at least their success through the 90's and 00's was based on them sticking my SAF when they were struggling, and being the biggest (or one of the biggest) club in the UK in terms of fanbase.

Their big signings have been funded by having a fan base in the hundreds of millions, which may be a sad example of modern football, but at least they earned it. Citeh's success is based on having huge private investment, like Chelsea's success. That is ruining the game more imo. 

You'd do well to research a bit about united being saved by no less than three 'sugar daddies' throughout their history before typing the same old drivel used up and down the country by ill-informed fans, no offence mate

[Welcome To The Jungle]

5 minutes ago, MCFC said:

You'd do well to research a bit about united being saved by no less than three 'sugar daddies' throughout their history before typing the same old drivel used up and down the country by ill-informed fans, no offence mate

I should start by saying that we can't control who owns our club so this isn't against Man City fans, who are much more likeable than the United variety. That said the current City ownership, along with the PSG, have put so much money into the football market that the whole thing is getting less stable. Just a few years ago, signing players in the Championship for 7 figures was a big deal. Now today we're discussing how we feel 6 million for Flint is an insult. 

The whole thing is getting ridiculous and the knock on will always find its way to fans through ticket prices. We're far from perfect ourselves but it is a worrying trend when other clubs find in excess of £120 million for full backs. Like I said, my beef isn't with you, or indeed with United fans (as annoying as they are), but with the amount of money being ploughed into the game. Sadly, your club is probably, after PSG, the worst example of this. 

[Southport Red]

2 hours ago, CityLew said:

Sang the "your city is red" chant away at the Etihad because we were in town, were people singing it because of Man Utd? Refused to sing it at home, I hate Man Utd.

Maybe that’s where I’m getting confused then. I thought it was a mix of we are in town plus Man Utd, which is why I thought it was daft them singing your City is Blue, they weren’t loads of them and there are zero Rovers. 

Having had a rethink, I now think their biggest fail wind up was “you’re just a sh*t Bristol Rovers”, sorry but cannot get wound up by that one. 

[RedRock]

Hopefully, the Yeovil fans will catch on with..

Your City is blue

Unlike Bristol

Your City is blue

[cider-manc]

3 hours ago, Welcome To The Jungle said:

Despite my dislike for United, at least their success through the 90's and 00's was based on them sticking my SAF when they were struggling, and being the biggest (or one of the biggest) club in the UK in terms of fanbase.

Their big signings have been funded by having a fan base in the hundreds of millions, which may be a sad example of modern football, but at least they earned it. Citeh's success is based on having huge private investment, like Chelsea's success. That is ruining the game more imo. 

Their big signings started in the 80s. Gary pallister was the second highest fee paid between two british clubs.... Gary pallister!!!! Add to that the likes of ince, robson etc. They even spent 1.5m on neil webb! A stupid amount of money at the time.

Yes manchester united were always a bigger fan base than manchester City or chelsea but it's an absolute myth that they werent another example of private investment taking them forward. Their fan base was bigger...  But not to the extent they were spending at the time and they certainly didnt have the global fan base they have today.

2 hours ago, Welcome To The Jungle said:

I should start by saying that we can't control who owns our club so this isn't against Man City fans, who are much more likeable than the United variety. That said the current City ownership, along with the PSG, have put so much money into the football market that the whole thing is getting less stable. Just a few years ago, signing players in the Championship for 7 figures was a big deal. Now today we're discussing how we feel 6 million for Flint is an insult. 

The whole thing is getting ridiculous and the knock on will always find its way to fans through ticket prices. We're far from perfect ourselves but it is a worrying trend when other clubs find in excess of £120 million for full backs. Like I said, my beef isn't with you, or indeed with United fans (as annoying as they are), but with the amount of money being ploughed into the game. Sadly, your club is probably, after PSG, the worst example of this. 

Whilst i agree with you to a point. Manchester Citys record signing is about to be broken taking it to £57m (before that it was kdb who looked 5 times the player pogba is against us). Manchester uniteds is nearly double that, barcas is over double that and psg.... Well we all know how much they spent on neymar. Everytime the record is broken the cost overall goes up. Manchester City can be critised for buying an entire team but they rarely break transfer records... at least unitl last summer.

[INCRED]

7 hours ago, Hampshire Red said:

thought their wind up was "where were you on Friday nigh?", reference to the 7500 fans at Etihad who couldnt their way to Derby?

 

Could have retorted the same with 15k empty seats in first leg - where were you at the Etihad?

[TBW]

I couldn't hear a single chant from them honestly...

[MCFC]

On 1/25/2018 at 14:00, Welcome To The Jungle said:

I should start by saying that we can't control who owns our club so this isn't against Man City fans, who are much more likeable than the United variety. That said the current City ownership, along with the PSG, have put so much money into the football market that the whole thing is getting less stable. Just a few years ago, signing players in the Championship for 7 figures was a big deal. Now today we're discussing how we feel 6 million for Flint is an insult. 

The whole thing is getting ridiculous and the knock on will always find its way to fans through ticket prices. We're far from perfect ourselves but it is a worrying trend when other clubs find in excess of £120 million for full backs. Like I said, my beef isn't with you, or indeed with United fans (as annoying as they are), but with the amount of money being ploughed into the game. Sadly, your club is probably, after PSG, the worst example of this. 

So despite the fact our record signing is £21m less than Liverpools, £51m less than uniteds (in fact they have at least FOUR above ours), £18m less than Chelsea's, the same as Arsenal's, £145m less than PSG, £90m less than Barcelona, £35m less than Real Madrid's, it's City's fault? Righto, thanks for that.

As for the full back situation, we paid £6.5m for Zabaleta in 2008, £16m for Kolarov in 2010 and £7m for Clichy in 2011. Those were the last fullbacks we signed before the season just gone, a total of £29.5m in NINE years, that's for a top Premier League club. Because of that, all of our fullbacks were too old, all were over 31, and three were over 32. Even if you add the new players on, it makes it £153m in 10 years. The only reason we paid so much last season, is down to PSG, Real Madrid and Barcelona inflating the market to properly obscene levels. There's a reason we pulled out of the Sanchez, Mbappe and Pogba deals, it's called relative value.

 

[MCFC]

22 hours ago, cider-manc said:

Their big signings started in the 80s. Gary pallister was the second highest fee paid between two british clubs.... Gary pallister!!!! Add to that the likes of ince, robson etc. They even spent 1.5m on neil webb! A stupid amount of money at the time.

Yes manchester united were always a bigger fan base than manchester City or chelsea but it's an absolute myth that they werent another example of private investment taking them forward. Their fan base was bigger...  But not to the extent they were spending at the time and they certainly didnt have the global fan base they have today.

Whilst i agree with you to a point. Manchester Citys record signing is about to be broken taking it to £57m (before that it was kdb who looked 5 times the player pogba is against us). Manchester uniteds is nearly double that, barcas is over double that and psg.... Well we all know how much they spent on neymar. Everytime the record is broken the cost overall goes up. Manchester City can be critised for buying an entire team but they rarely break transfer records... at least unitl last summer.

Gave my response before I saw this. Great reply, pretty much spot on, well done.

[Welcome To The Jungle]

23 minutes ago, MCFC said:

So despite the fact our record signing is £21m less than Liverpools, £51m less than uniteds (in fact they have at least FOUR above ours), £18m less than Chelsea's, the same as Arsenal's, £145m less than PSG, £90m less than Barcelona, £35m less than Real Madrid's, it's City's fault? Righto, thanks for that.

As for the full back situation, we paid £6.5m for Zabaleta in 2008, £16m for Kolarov in 2010 and £7m for Clichy in 2011. Those were the last fullbacks we signed before the season just gone, a total of £29.5m in NINE years, that's for a top Premier League club. Because of that, all of our fullbacks were too old, all were over 31, and three were over 32. Even if you add the new players on, it makes it £153m in 10 years. The only reason we paid so much last season, is down to PSG, Real Madrid and Barcelona inflating the market to properly obscene levels. There's a reason we pulled out of the Sanchez, Mbappe and Pogba deals, it's called relative value.

 

A fair post and I'm not above accepting that you've probably changed my opinion on Man City, at least in relation to other clubs (Barca, PSG, United and others). I still believe that you have spent too much on full backs, and haven't helped the situation, but I will happily say I no longer believe you to be 'second worst' after PSG, and with some thought, probably not as bad as United. I'd still have you on a par with Liverpool though. 

What we can all agree on though I'm sure is that there is way to much money knocking around football. And the whole thing would be made better if every club spent less.

[MCFC]

5 hours ago, Welcome To The Jungle said:

A fair post and I'm not above accepting that you've probably changed my opinion on Man City, at least in relation to other clubs (Barca, PSG, United and others). I still believe that you have spent too much on full backs, and haven't helped the situation, but I will happily say I no longer believe you to be 'second worst' after PSG, and with some thought, probably not as bad as United. I'd still have you on a par with Liverpool though. 

What we can all agree on though I'm sure is that there is way to much money knocking around football. And the whole thing would be made better if every club spent less.

Not going to disagree with you there mate.

It wasn't a go at you personally, I'm just bored of hearing the same old tired cliche's about City ruining football, so when I get chance, with decent-minded people, I take my time to try and explain why it's not really the case.

[Portland Bill]

On 25/01/2018 at 13:41, MCFC said:

You'd do well to research a bit about united being saved by no less than three 'sugar daddies' throughout their history before typing the same old drivel used up and down the country by ill-informed fans, no offence mate

Was going to say much the same, plus, the amount of money they have spent over the last 20 years is obscene. Also, are they not   the most dept ridden club in England?

[BRISTOL86]

What a nice change it makes to get an opposition fan on here who talks sense in an articulate manner. 

[Arsene's Wanger]

On 25/01/2018 at 11:48, Southport Red said:

But is an epic fail. My post says we sang it in Manchester. Although Citeh are currently better than United singing your City is Red at them has some resonance, their retailiation that Bristol is Blue is ridiculous because no one supports Rovers. 

They should have gone with “Small town in South Wales” or something. 

You're sh*t, and you're almost Welsh...

[Cider red]

2 hours ago, MCFC said:

Not going to disagree with you there mate.

It wasn't a go at you personally, I'm just bored of hearing the same old tired cliche's about City ruining football, so when I get chance, with decent-minded people, I take my time to try and explain why it's not really the case.

I certainly don' think man city have ruined football. The money is ridiculous now; your keeping up with the times. At least you have used it to buy players for a system and play superb attacking footy, unlike Chelsea and United- who bore their opponents into submission. I'e seen some of your fans moaning after the other Night, you honestly are so good it's almost superhuman. Enjoy it while you can!