Manchester United 17/18: Reigning Europa League Champions, EFL Cup and Community Shield Holders!!!

[Joe Reilly]

Anyone here know the words to this...?

Manchester United urged to stop their fans singing song about Romelu Lukaku

It's something to do with 'genius' rhyming with a certain part of his anatomy. 'Kick it Out!' (where we they in the 80's incidentally) complain that this stereotypes black men. But if the inspiration for the ditty is actually because he wears 13.5 size boots, who is doing the stereotyping then?

 

[juice_terry]

[emoji2]

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

 

[Wilf]

Wonder what people think about the situation of United and Hampshire police supposedly working together to identify people who sung this? Yep, it's racist relating cock size to ethnicity - and it's racist even if the thing being sung is a 'compliment'. But this also smacks of PR and process - 'we've been forced to do something and will go with 'liaising' with plod'. And if it was racist and presumably a criminal offence a couple of games ago, why didn't they do something then?

edit... just seen 61....>

 

[Wilf]

It's something to do with 'genius' rhyming with a certain part of his anatomy. 'Kick it Out!' (where we they in the 80's incidentally) complain that this stereotypes black men. But if the inspiration for the ditty is actually because he wears 13.5 size boots, who is doing the stereotyping then?

Here comes my first inquiry about a footballer's penis size in about 15 years on urban:

So, is that it then? Fans extrapolate from shoe size, United hierarchy and Kick it Out extrapolate from his ethnicity??

 

[Joe Reilly]

So, is that it then? Fans extrapolate from shoe size, United hierarchy and Kick it Out extrapolate from his ethnicity??

Who knows what it was originally really about, apart from the response being an example of the the politics of the campus being applied to the terraces.

And while the offending ditty is on the crass side, the response to the middle class finger-wagging is genuinely witty. Accordingly, if it is considered to be guilty as charged for singing the first song, then surely an equally guilty verdict must apply for the 'assumption' contained in the second one?

And then what?

Politically approved song sheets handed out prior to games?

With an obligation on every single fan in the ground to provide proof to the authorities that they sung at least one of the them with the necessary gusto?

 

[Wilf]

Who knows what it was originally really about, apart from the response being an example of the the politics of the campus being applied to the terraces.

And while the offending ditty is on the crass side, the response to the middle class finger-wagging is genuinely witty. Accordingly, if it is considered to be guilty as charged for singing the first song, then surely an equally guilty verdict must apply for the 'assumption' contained in the second one?

And then what?

Politically approved song sheets handed out prior to games?

With an obligation on every single fan in the ground to provide proof to the authorities that they sung at least one of the them with the necessary gusto?

Aye, for decades football's top brass didn't give a fuck about racism. Now there's a top-down, prescriptive, diversity policy approach that shades into actual criminal justice in this case (though I doubt there are actually going to be arrests).

 

[happie chappie]

Ffs – seriously. Involve the police? What a waste of their time and resources.

Hardly a “zigger zigger zigger chant.

By all means ask fans not to chant it (and I wouldn’t sing it personally just I don’t sing about Tits, Fanny and United) but threaten to punish people. Jesus.

Just brings anti-racism into disrepute.

 

[Wilf]

Ffs – seriously. Involve the police? What a waste of their time and resources.

Hardly a “zigger zigger zigger chant.

By all means ask fans not to chant it (and I wouldn’t sing it personally just I don’t sing about Tits, Fanny and United) but threaten to punish people. Jesus.

Just brings anti-racism into disrepute.

That's it though, the motivations of those seemingly involving the police are not actually anti-racist, or anything most people would understand as antiracist.

 

[Joe Reilly]

That's it though, the motivations of those seemingly involving the police are not actually anti-racist, or anything most people would understand as antiracist.

It does appear that the bar is being raised in a surreptitious way purely to ensure 'most people' will be unable to clear it. What the insiders seem happy to ignore is that if 'race' is all you ever feed in, eventually 'race' is all you will ever get out.

 

[Joe Reilly]

WhoScored.com

Marcus Rashford Characteristics:

'Player has no significant strengths.'

 

[Ole]

The Martial/Rashford rotation is working like a charm so far isn't it?

 

[donkyboy]

still not convinced by our scoring prowess. City seem to demolish teams more often than us.

 

[happie chappie]

still not convinced by our scoring prowess. City seem to demolish teams more often than us.

City have a better and more exciting starting 11 but United probably a better and deeper squad.

Could be neck and neck. 1968 anyone?

 

[Joe Reilly]

still not convinced by our scoring prowess. City seem to demolish teams more often than us.

There is also the potential for teams to demolish City more often.

 

[Wilf]

City have a better and more exciting starting 11 but United probably a better and deeper squad.

Could be neck and neck. 1968 anyone?

Certainly Saturday's squad + pogba in a few week + Ibra in 3 months looks pretty strong.

 

[donkyboy]

still not convinced by our scoring prowess. City seem to demolish teams more often than us.

Just as I said. Citeh demolish stoke who we could only draw with.

 

[TruXta]

This Utd team is turning into Mou-era Chelsea isn't it? An abundance of talent marshalled to contain rather than dominate against equals. If it gets trophies then fair play, but, and I never thought I'd say this, I really miss the old Utd. At least you were entertaining.

 

[Shechemite]

Been a long long time since utd played as the old utd.

 

[Shechemite]

Inevitable losing of game we should never lose.

 

[Shechemite]

Oh no. We might get a point against these titans

 

[The39thStep]

Hush hush
Whispers who dares
Christopher Robin
Has fallen downstairs

 

[Wilf]

I once had egg and chips in a pub in Huddersfield and somebody sneezed on it. Not been back since.

 

[Joe Reilly]

The Martial/Rashford rotation is working like a charm so far isn't it?

Indeed. There is also another recurring factor. Come the 80th minute...11 goals this season for United in the final ten minutes.

 

[Joe Reilly]

Just what is the criteria for Match of the Day? Yesterday what had previously been presented as 'a must win game' between 2nd and 3rd in the Premiership is subsequently relegated to fifth in the running order. The assembled expensively paid experts offered no analysis other than to say it was maybe 'a bit boring'. Meanwhile City were lauded for taking things to 'another level' except for the fact that they were left hanging on in the end against a team of genuine mediocrities like West Brom...might this weakness prove to be decisive in the longer run?

Not something the MOD pundits were interested in discussing either.

Its the same as the previous accusations against Jose for betraying the 'Utd tradition' and even being 'anti-football'. But most games at Anfield were like that, tight affairs possibly separated by the odd goal near the end, when Utd came away with all 3 points.

In the same way that when Utd were in their famed attacking pomp games at OT were often decided 1-0 against title contenders. Single goals against Arsenal, Blackburn and most memorably 0-1 against Newcastle away all spring to mind, where Utd were absolutely battered for the first 20 minutes, only to nick it with 10 minutes left (Cantona again). Newcastle were 12 points ahead at the time. Apparently they had taken it to a 'new level' then too. Except they couldn't defend either.

 

[TruXta]

Just what is the criteria for Match of the Day? Yesterday what had previously been presented as 'a must win game' between 2nd and 3rd in the Premiership is subsequently relegated to fifth in the running order. The assembled expensively paid experts offered no analysis other than to say it was maybe 'a bit boring'. Meanwhile City were lauded for taking things to 'another level' except for the fact that they were left hanging on in the end against a team of genuine mediocrities like West Brom...might this weakness prove to be decisive in the longer run?

Not something the MOD pundits were interested in discussing either.

Its the same as the previous accusations against Jose for betraying the 'Utd tradition' and even being 'anti-football'. But most games at Anfield were like that, tight affairs possibly separated by the odd goal near the end, when Utd came away with all 3 points.

In the same way that when Utd were in their famed attacking pomp games at OT were often decided 1-0 against title contenders. Single goals against Arsenal, Blackburn and most memorably 0-1 against Newcastle away all spring to mind, where Utd were absolutely battered for the first 20 minutes, only to nick it with 10 minutes left (Cantona again). Newcastle were 12 points ahead at the time. Apparently they had taken it to a 'new level' then too. Except they couldn't defend either.

I get what you're saying about sometimes needing to grind out wins, but do you entirely disagree that Mourinho-style Utd is a lot less entertaining, and dominating, than vintage Fergie Utd? For all the talk about being in transition (and how that must hurt you lot), you've not won the league for some time now and frankly look off the pace.

 

[Lord Camomile]

Just what is the criteria for Match of the Day? Yesterday what had previously been presented as 'a must win game' between 2nd and 3rd in the Premiership is subsequently relegated to fifth in the running order. The assembled expensively paid experts offered no analysis other than to say it was maybe 'a bit boring'. Meanwhile City were lauded for taking things to 'another level' except for the fact that they were left hanging on in the end against a team of genuine mediocrities like West Brom...might this weakness prove to be decisive in the longer run?

I think they've switched from slavishly showing the supposed 'big matches' (usually involving the same teams again and again) in favour of showing the matches that were actually the most interesting and/or had the biggest talking points. See Man Utd v Liverpool from a couple of weeks ago - previously would have been the first or second match shown, because of reputation, but this time it was on last because it was a boring match.

I think it's in response to viewer feedback, and personally I think it's a positive development.

 

[Joe Reilly]

I get what you're saying about sometimes needing to grind out wins, but do you entirely disagree that Mourinho-style Utd is a lot less entertaining, and dominating, than vintage Fergie Utd? For all the talk about being in transition (and how that must hurt you lot), you've not won the league for some time now and frankly look off the pace.

First I don't think Utd are actually the finished article. A natural left back is one stand out vacancy. Another may be the traditional number 10 role. Kagawa, couldn't fill it. Mata either and Miki is struggling. Obviously having Pogba will make a vast difference. He is the lynch-pin between defence and attack, between Matic and Lukaku. As he absence has shown he is at least as important to Utd as Kane to Spurs, and De Bruyne to City.
I don't get the idea of being 'off the pace', when sitting in second place, with three quarters of the season still to go?

 

[Joe Reilly]

I think they've switched from slavishly showing the supposed 'big matches' (usually involving the same teams again and again) in favour of showing the matches that were actually the most interesting and/or had the biggest talking points. See Man Utd v Liverpool from a couple of weeks ago - previously would have been the first or second match shown, because of reputation, but this time it was on last because it was a boring match.

I think it's in response to viewer feedback, and personally I think it's a positive development.

The Premier League is a competition first and foremost. So who might win it is meant to be of primary importance. Why they might win it invariably carries the 'most interest' and generally represents the 'big talking points'. There was plenty to analyse in the Utd v Spurs match, two contenders for said title, when set against that criteria but Lineker and co opted out.
Moreover going into the match according to many pundits Spurs were the only legitimate challengers to City and the result at OT would surely prove it. Instead it provided a heavy hint in the opposite direction. But no discussion afterwards.

And what precisely were the big talking points surrounding Liverpool and Huddersfield? Or for that matter Arsenal and Swansea? Home matches which ended in predictable wins against relegation fodder.

Now, the two extremely sloppy goals City conceded to West Brom (who had scored a magnificent 7 goals in the previous 9 games) ought to have been a talking point as a portent to the titles possible destination, but again hardly merited a mention.
So rather than being picked on merit as you suggest the running order seems to be based entirely on the number of goals accrued in each fixture irrespective of any wider significance. Goals alone equal entertainment? If so, just show the goals then.

But given what it cost the BBC to retain the rights to Motd, not to mention the ridiculous salaries of the in house experts, the football watching public, are currently, I would suggest, being seriously short-changed.

 

[TruXta]

The Premier League is a competition first and foremost. So who might win it is meant to be of primary importance. Why they might win it invariably carries the 'most interest' and generally represents the 'big talking points'. There was plenty to analyse in the Utd v Spurs match, two contenders for said title, when set against that criteria but Lineker and co opted out.
Moreover going into the match according to many pundits Spurs were the only legitimate challengers to City and the result at OT would surely prove it. Instead it provided a heavy hint in the opposite direction. But no discussion afterwards.

And what precisely were the big talking points surrounding Liverpool and Huddersfield? Or for that matter Arsenal and Swansea? Home matches which ended in predictable wins against relegation fodder.

Now, the two extremely sloppy goals City conceded to West Brom (who had scored a magnificent 7 goals in the previous 9 games) ought to have been a talking point as a portent to the titles possible destination, but again hardly merited a mention.
So rather than being picked on merit as you suggest the running order seems to be based entirely on the number of goals accrued in each fixture irrespective of any wider significance. Goals alone equal entertainment? If so, just show the goals then.

But given what it cost the BBC to retain the rights to Motd, not to mention the ridiculous salaries of the in house experts, the football watching public, are currently, I would suggest, being seriously short-changed.

I can't say I've ever watched MotD for serious analysis. It's basically just highlights and fluffy grasping at depth.

 

[tommers]

Well, this is surreal.

I remember once turning on 5live to listen to us play Spurs or somebody and they spent the half hour before the match discussing whether Man Utd's kit is really nice or just a bit nice and wondering what Mourinho does to get his hair just the right side of shiny and luxuriant.

I feel for you though. 5th on MOTD. Nightmare.