The mancityfans.net football forum

bigblue wrote:Still trying to figure out why shearer said he's biased towards the rags. They were his rivals his whole playing career, so must just be a case of drinking the swampy kool-aid

bigblue wrote:Still trying to figure out why shearer said he's biased towards the rags. They were his rivals his whole playing career, so must just be a case of drinking the swampy kool-aid

Peter Doherty (AGAIG) wrote:

bigblue wrote:Still trying to figure out why shearer said he's biased towards the rags. They were his rivals his whole playing career, so must just be a case of drinking the swampy kool-aid

Think Trevor Sinclair.

City64 wrote:

Peter Doherty (AGAIG) wrote:

bigblue wrote:Still trying to figure out why shearer said he's biased towards the rags. They were his rivals his whole playing career, so must just be a case of drinking the swampy kool-aid

Think Trevor Sinclair.

Im wondering if Trev has been axed by MOTD after his recent twitter "outing" of rag bias ? Seriously hope not but he has been quiet on twitter lately .

Foreverinbluedreams wrote:

City64 wrote:

Peter Doherty (AGAIG) wrote:

bigblue wrote:Still trying to figure out why shearer said he's biased towards the rags. They were his rivals his whole playing career, so must just be a case of drinking the swampy kool-aid

Think Trevor Sinclair.

Im wondering if Trev has been axed by MOTD after his recent twitter "outing" of rag bias ? Seriously hope not but he has been quiet on twitter lately .

He was on Football Focus yesterday mate.

nottsblue wrote:

Beefymcfc wrote:

Original Dub wrote:Garth Crooks says the rags purchases are
"Nothing less than phenomenal "

Again, another cunt who needs to scrape a living by pandering to the Rag cunts for the BBC. How that fucking toad still gets an airing is beyond me. Must be a quota thing.

Garth Crooks is the very worst pundit and I use that term as loosely as possible. If possible, he makes Phil Neville look human instead of the Neanderthal he is

bigblue wrote:Still trying to figure out why shearer said he's biased towards the rags. They were his rivals his whole playing career, so must just be a case of drinking the swampy kool-aid

Mase wrote:

bigblue wrote:Still trying to figure out why shearer said he's biased towards the rags. They were his rivals his whole playing career, so must just be a case of drinking the swampy kool-aid

He was taking the piss. Because someone on Twitter questions his bias against City last season.

He's a fuckin egg in a bun.

Nickyboy wrote:

Mase wrote:

bigblue wrote:Still trying to figure out why shearer said he's biased towards the rags. They were his rivals his whole playing career, so must just be a case of drinking the swampy kool-aid

He was taking the piss. Because someone on Twitter questions his bias against City last season.

He's a fuckin egg in a bun.

I'd forgotten about that. If he was saying that and it was tongue in cheek maybe we don't need to be so prescious about it!

nottsblue wrote:

nottsblue wrote:

Beefymcfc wrote:

Original Dub wrote:Garth Crooks says the rags purchases are
"Nothing less than phenomenal "

Again, another cunt who needs to scrape a living by pandering to the Rag cunts for the BBC. How that fucking toad still gets an airing is beyond me. Must be a quota thing.

Garth Crooks is the very worst pundit and I use that term as loosely as possible. If possible, he makes Phil Neville look human instead of the Neanderthal he is

If anyone was in any doubt about how dumb Garth Crooks is, then check out his team of the week on the BBC football page.

Shrek is in there! In midfield!

PeterParker wrote:

bigblue wrote:Still trying to figure out why shearer said he's biased towards the rags. They were his rivals his whole playing career, so must just be a case of drinking the swampy kool-aid

How do you think you get jobs as a football expert if you do not give a decent colon cleaning to the rags?

Shearer, Henry, Carragher, Souness, Redknapp, etc.

Mase wrote:

bigblue wrote:Still trying to figure out why shearer said he's biased towards the rags. They were his rivals his whole playing career, so must just be a case of drinking the swampy kool-aid

He was taking the piss. Because someone on Twitter questions his bias against City last season.

He's a fuckin egg in a bun.

Nick wrote:Just seen "former city player" getting done for sexual assault while a woman sleeps..

But Darius vassell is an ex Aston villa player ?

london blue 2 wrote:

patrickblue wrote:

littlebig wrote:

london blue 2 wrote:Can we paste the text rather than feed thier agenda by posting links. Hate going on those pages to read this shit. Curiosity often gets the better.

Anyway, another dig, in the images "city spent 50 mil on Walker" whilst scum simply "signed lukaku from everton"

Twats

Second this. I never click links for Sky / Mail etc. but would like to see what's being said.

I remember a few years back one/some of the media outlets emailed/wrote to whoever was running this site at the time, stating that by cutting and pasting their articles/stories/bullshit, we were infringing their copyright or some such and if it continued, they might sue the site.
That's when the links as opposed to cut and paste started.
I'm sure WW, will be able to cast some more light on it.

So can we not paste the story and provide the link like most of the useless cunts on Twitter? Then we can know the content without adding to thier agenda.

Dameerto wrote:

london blue 2 wrote:

patrickblue wrote:

littlebig wrote:

london blue 2 wrote:Can we paste the text rather than feed thier agenda by posting links. Hate going on those pages to read this shit. Curiosity often gets the better.

Anyway, another dig, in the images "city spent 50 mil on Walker" whilst scum simply "signed lukaku from everton"

Twats

Second this. I never click links for Sky / Mail etc. but would like to see what's being said.

I remember a few years back one/some of the media outlets emailed/wrote to whoever was running this site at the time, stating that by cutting and pasting their articles/stories/bullshit, we were infringing their copyright or some such and if it continued, they might sue the site.
That's when the links as opposed to cut and paste started.
I'm sure WW, will be able to cast some more light on it.

So can we not paste the story and provide the link like most of the useless cunts on Twitter? Then we can know the content without adding to thier agenda.

As long as you give credit (by providing a link to the orginal article) you are fine to copy/paste. They can get annoyed with stolen content if you don't don't, though.
The only exception is paid content - I wouldn't recommend pasting from anything behind a paywall.

london blue 2 wrote:

Dameerto wrote:

london blue 2 wrote:

patrickblue wrote:
I remember a few years back one/some of the media outlets emailed/wrote to whoever was running this site at the time, stating that by cutting and pasting their articles/stories/bullshit, we were infringing their copyright or some such and if it continued, they might sue the site.
That's when the links as opposed to cut and paste started.
I'm sure WW, will be able to cast some more light on it.

So can we not paste the story and provide the link like most of the useless cunts on Twitter? Then we can know the content without adding to thier agenda.

As long as you give credit (by providing a link to the orginal article) you are fine to copy/paste. They can get annoyed with stolen content if you don't don't, though.
The only exception is paid content - I wouldn't recommend pasting from anything behind a paywall.

Sweet. Let's make it a rule as they don't need anymore clicks from us...