PDA

View Full Version : Fergie lays into FC United


Shaggy
05-09-06, 11:28 PM
SIR Alex Ferguson is today at the centre of a storm after criticising Reds fans who formed rebel club FC United.

In a new book, the Old Trafford boss, already under fire from some supporters for the fact that United have been the Premiership's lowest spenders during the transfer window, has labelled the thousands of fans who broke away to form the Rebels in protest against last year's takeover by the American tycoon Malcolm Glazer as self-publicists.

And he also appears to dismiss the notion of supporters having a say in the running of a football club, as well as re-iterating his statement from last season that life at Old Trafford has improved under the new regime.

On the formation of FC United, Ferguson in `The Official Manchester United Diary of the Season,' said: "I'm sorry about that. It is a bit sad that part, but I wonder just how big a United supporter they are.

"They seem to me to be promoting or projecting themselves a wee bit rather than saying `at the end of the day the club have made a decision, we'll stick by them.' It's more about them than us."

An FC United spokesperson replied: "It's sad that Ferguson has chosen to make these comments because a war of words does no-one any good.

"When David Gill made similar comments it was easier to dismiss, but it hard to swallow when it comes from Sir Alex, who as a previous champion of supporters' rights should have a better understanding of the situation.

"The situation is that whether fans stopped going to Old Trafford on a point of principle or because they could no longer afford the prices, they did so with a heavy heart and remain Manchester United supporters. Those supporters deserve better than this."

Sir Alex also reveals in the book, written by Tom Tyrrell, that anti-Glazer supporters had phoned him at home to urge him to resign when the takeover was going through.

Ferguson says that the prospect of leaving his staff in the lurch was the principal reason he did not quit, saying of the angry fans: "They seemed to forget that I have brought at least ... well, I've brought everybody here!

"The likes of Les Kershaw has been with me 18 years, Dave Bushell, Jim Ryan, Tony Whelan, Paul McGuinness, Mike Phelan, Brian McClair, they have been here with me virtually from the beginning, or at least over 10 or 12 years and I said `What happens to my staff if I go?' I feel that I have a responsibility to them.

"Need them to stay in a job, not me. So, therefore, there was a lot of hot air and a lot of unfair criticism because nobody actually knew the people.

"I can understand people thinking they have to protect the club, and I am fully aware of that, but all these protests should have been done when they went plc.

"That was the time to protest because thereafter Manchester United was never going to be the same."

Many of the supporters at the core of the anti-Glazer struggle were those who had opposed the failed takeover by Rupert Murdoch's BSkyB in 1998.

Ferguson says that he was opposed to the Murdoch bid, but questions the fans' role in that successful fight, saying: "They (the fans) felt they were responsible for stopping the BSkyB deal, which is not true. Absolutely not.

"They may have made their voice heard but they were not responsible. It was the Monopolies and Mergers Commission (MMC) that stopped that.

"They carried on to the degree where they actually thought they should have a say in the running of the football club."

But those involved in the anti-Sky campaign point out that the MMC themselves referred to the role supporters played, helping to persuade the commission that the deal would have been against the public interest.

And Mark Longden of the Independent Manchester United Supporters Association hit back at the manager, saying:

"Fergie is turning into the Marie Antoinette of Old Trafford, because the stuff he is coming out with is tantamount to saying `Let them eat cake.'

"Everyone associated with United has taken money out of the football club. The only people who have constantly given to it are the fans, and that gives them the right to have a say as to how the club is run."

:haha:

G_Man
05-09-06, 11:55 PM
In a new book,

Not another fuckin book. Can't he give it a rest FFS? :rant:

Anyway, nice to see him abusing his own fans :haha: a colleague of mine goes to FC United games, he loves it.

CharlieMansonsSquint
06-09-06, 12:01 AM
[QUOTE=G_Man]Not another fuckin book. Can't he give it a rest FFS? :rant:
[QUOTE]

Probably forgot with the drink that he released the first one.

Laz
06-09-06, 12:37 AM
Ferguson says that the prospect of leaving his staff in the Crouch was the principal reason he did not quit, saying of the angry fans: "They seemed to forget that I have brought at least ... well, I've brought everybody here!

Another victim! :haha:

JRG
06-09-06, 11:17 AM
Some of my colleagues are FC united supporters and were ST olders at OT for years. They seem to enjoy it and they believe they have made a principled stand that will ultimately be good for football.

Ferguson on the other hand has basically writen off the true united fans as he is aware that the real supporters can e repleced by the prwan sandwich brigade from the Home Counties.

The man is an abolute disgrace.

red g
06-09-06, 11:27 AM
i admire there stand but once scum always scum

JRG
06-09-06, 11:36 AM
i admire there stand but once scum always scum

Absolutely true, but tere are some who are less scummy than others. It is, of course, marginal.

Mumsafan
06-09-06, 05:20 PM
I think they are to be admired the way they got the whole thing off the ground so quickly and made it a success.

Slim
06-09-06, 09:51 PM
I think they are to be admired the way they got the whole thing off the ground so quickly and made it a success.

I agree.........I'm almost scared to say nice things about United fans but fair play to them.
As for Slur Alex :whatever:

Cantankerous
07-09-06, 01:32 PM
Reading that article, either I'm going mad, or there's something on this site that changes the word "lurch" into Crouch. It was in this bit -

"Ferguson says that the prospect of leaving his staff in the Crouch was the principal reason"

When i went to quote the article, it showed the word "lurch", but when I refreshed this page to check it once more said "Crouch".

Is my sanity going even faster than I thought, am I dyslexic, or is this website really altering words??

Cantankerous
07-09-06, 01:33 PM
Hmm, posting about the website changing things and using the word that is being changed was a bit daft...

Try luurch...

scully
07-09-06, 07:04 PM
:haha: The Est1892 madness claims another victim!

AF and Paul created a word-filter that didn't let certain words get posted, and "l u r c h" is one of these. The reason for that is the way that people like Brendan and Dunk used it excessively when referring to Crouch, showing total disrespect for one of our players and depressing the fuck out of less negative Reds. I think it's definitely proved counter-productive here though as people may actually start using this new phrase "to leave in the Crouch", thereby making the name "Crouch" itself a very negative thing.

Another banned word is "c u n t" - all swear words were temporarily banned until fucking potty-mouths like myfuckingself protested, upon which a compromise was reached and all naughty words except that one were returned.

Another mental word-banning was the word "sun", which, just because it is also the name of a certain rag, was blanket-banned to the extent that you had to go through loads of bizarre para-locution when you wanted to say, for example, that you'd been sunbathing.

Shaggy
07-09-06, 07:06 PM
Reading that article, either I'm going mad, or there's something on this site that changes the word "lurch" into Crouch. It was in this bit -

"Ferguson says that the prospect of leaving his staff in the Crouch was the principal reason"

When i went to quote the article, it showed the word "lurch", but when I refreshed this page to check it once more said "Crouch".

Is my sanity going even faster than I thought, am I dyslexic, or is this website really altering words??

:haha: :haha: :haha: :haha: :haha:

I fell victim to this last week and it's very amusing to see it happen to somebody else. :haha:

G_Man
07-09-06, 07:55 PM
Reading that article, either I'm going mad, or there's something on this site that changes the word "lurch" into Crouch. It was in this bit -

"Ferguson says that the prospect of leaving his staff in the Crouch was the principal reason"

When i went to quote the article, it showed the word "lurch", but when I refreshed this page to check it once more said "Crouch".

Is my sanity going even faster than I thought, am I dyslexic, or is this website really altering words??

This is one of the funniest posts I've read :haha: