Bluemoon goes into Meltdown

Manchester City rejected rivals Manchester United's latest break-out star Marcus Rashford because they thought he was too small.
“His brother Dwayne was with him when he came to us,” the club’s secretary, Ron Jamieson, toldThe Times. “He was touting him to Manchester City at the time but the recruitment officer there did not fancy him because he was a bit on the small side and didn’t pick him up.”

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/...d-youngster-for-being-too-small-a6897671.html

No wonder why they are so bitter about him.
 
Can't blame them for being happy to no longer have a nazi eagle as their crest.
 
Jose Ferginho said:
"First post here guys, I must say I think United are back in business, gonna be a great season."


"May I be among the first to tell you to go fcuk yourself?"
sir baconface, Today at 7:01 PM

Just another day on Bluemoon! :lol:
 
Incidentally here's what a City fan on Arsenal Mania had to say about Bluemoon:

To be fair, I don't think there are too many flattering posts about Mourinho on this thread mate ;) There are plenty of great posters on Bluemoon if you delve into more than just a few of the more obvious threads (I'm one of them by the way lol) but if you can't hate on your rivals on your own forum and let off some steam every now and then, it's a pretty sad state of affairs. Like I said, Mourinho and United are not getting a particularly great press on here either (perfectly understandable given the history between him and Wenger by the way), and imagine if he had gone to Spurs - I'm sure the hostility on here would be even greater and be similar to that on Bluemoon. Incidentally, an Arsenal fan on Red Cafe defended the City fans on BM and asked the United fans what do they actually expect not just because of the rivalry between the clubs but also because Mourinho is pretty much disliked by every set of fans in the country bar Chelsea fans and now United fans.

I think what goes on in that place is a little more than "hating on rivals" and "letting off steam".
 

At8byJI.png
 

I don't like the New York City badge. It looks like such a rubbish Inter Milan rip-off.

The new City one isn't too bad. It will look much better when it's more than just an Adobe Illustrator design and they stick it on the shirt.
 
The NYC one is made to just rip off the Yankees fans in New York.

Well Yankees have a stake in the club so shouldn't be a surprise.

Genuine questions for the City lot on here: Why is Bluemoon such a cesspit of insignificance and intolerance? Where are the fecking mods and do they ever moderate? Why are YOU here?

Bluemoon has no Newbie system which contributes a lot of it. City also still derive a larger section of our fanbase from Manchester and the immediate areas around the club so it's only natural there is greater animosity towards United. I've seen a few posters on here who are blinded by bias and do not seem to offer anything worthwhile with their posts, but the Newbie system means only a few like that filter through. Different experiences of the clubs over the past decades explain the attitude towards United held by many as well.

As for why I am here, I joined for two reasons mainly. Firstly, I often saw a lot of stuff said about City that I obviously disagreed with and wanted to debate. Secondly, I grew sick of Bluemoon for clear reasons and when looking on here I discovered the quality of discussion was better and people were far more objective and more receptive of opposition fans. Don't get me wrong, Bluemoon has some fantastic posters, but it needs a system to stop anyone with half a brain cell from posting.
 
Well Yankees have a stake in the club so shouldn't be a surprise.



Bluemoon has no Newbie system which contributes a lot of it. City also still derive a larger section of our fanbase from Manchester and the immediate areas around the club so it's only natural there is greater animosity towards United. I've seen a few posters on here who are blinded by bias and do not seem to offer anything worthwhile with their posts, but the Newbie system means only a few like that filter through. Different experiences of the clubs over the past decades explain the attitude towards United held by many as well.

As for why I am here, I joined for two reasons mainly. Firstly, I often saw a lot of stuff said about City that I obviously disagreed with and wanted to debate. Secondly, I grew sick of Bluemoon for clear reasons and when looking on here I discovered the quality of discussion was better and people were far more objective and more receptive of opposition fans. Don't get me wrong, Bluemoon has some fantastic posters, but it needs a system to stop anyone with half a brain cell from posting.
Good post, I think it's great that there are other clubs fans on here. It certainly gives a different edge to discussions for sure. Some are a bit mental as well....which is also good :D
 
That is mad. Clearly we are doing something right.
Well Yankees have a stake in the club so shouldn't be a surprise.



Bluemoon has no Newbie system which contributes a lot of it. City also still derive a larger section of our fanbase from Manchester and the immediate areas around the club so it's only natural there is greater animosity towards United. I've seen a few posters on here who are blinded by bias and do not seem to offer anything worthwhile with their posts, but the Newbie system means only a few like that filter through. Different experiences of the clubs over the past decades explain the attitude towards United held by many as well.

As for why I am here, I joined for two reasons mainly. Firstly, I often saw a lot of stuff said about City that I obviously disagreed with and wanted to debate. Secondly, I grew sick of Bluemoon for clear reasons and when looking on here I discovered the quality of discussion was better and people were far more objective and more receptive of opposition fans. Don't get me wrong, Bluemoon has some fantastic posters, but it needs a system to stop anyone with half a brain cell from posting.
I've been a Bluemoon member since 2010 and post on there a fair bit.
There are some fantastic posters on there and some time total feckwits which I suppose reflects society as a whole.
Reds who pitch up there are treated with respect if they want to discuss rather than troll the forum. There will be the odd insult thrown out but often it is in jest.
Like Bobbymanc I also attempt to correct factual inaccuracies and misconceptions about City and try to not bite when some halfwit cannot get past the empty seats and sugar daddy jibes.
 
I've been a Bluemoon member since 2010 and post on there a fair bit.
There are some fantastic posters on there and some time total feckwits which I suppose reflects society as a whole.
Reds who pitch up there are treated with respect if they want to discuss rather than troll the forum. There will be the odd insult thrown out but often it is in jest.
Like Bobbymanc I also attempt to correct factual inaccuracies and misconceptions about City and try to not bite when some halfwit cannot get past the empty seats and sugar daddy jibes.

Not been following football long, have you?
Respect! :)
 
Well Yankees have a stake in the club so shouldn't be a surprise.



Bluemoon has no Newbie system which contributes a lot of it. City also still derive a larger section of our fanbase from Manchester and the immediate areas around the club so it's only natural there is greater animosity towards United. I've seen a few posters on here who are blinded by bias and do not seem to offer anything worthwhile with their posts, but the Newbie system means only a few like that filter through. Different experiences of the clubs over the past decades explain the attitude towards United held by many as well.

As for why I am here, I joined for two reasons mainly. Firstly, I often saw a lot of stuff said about City that I obviously disagreed with and wanted to debate. Secondly, I grew sick of Bluemoon for clear reasons and when looking on here I discovered the quality of discussion was better and people were far more objective and more receptive of opposition fans. Don't get me wrong, Bluemoon has some fantastic posters, but it needs a system to stop anyone with half a brain cell from posting.
Rag
 
I've been a Bluemoon member since 2010 and post on there a fair bit.
There are some fantastic posters on there and some time total feckwits which I suppose reflects society as a whole.
Reds who pitch up there are treated with respect if they want to discuss rather than troll the forum. There will be the odd insult thrown out but often it is in jest.
Like Bobbymanc I also attempt to correct factual inaccuracies and misconceptions about City and try to not bite when some halfwit cannot get past the empty seats and sugar daddy jibes.

I am sure there are some good posters on there but it is not easy finding them.

That United thread is not a thread for United discussion, it is a thread to see how many times you can use the word cnut to describe United. And if you say one good word about United, not trolling, then that is it. You are officially a rag cnut.
 
I am sure there are some good posters on there but it is not easy finding them.

That United thread is not a thread for United discussion, it is a thread to see how many times you can use the word cnut to describe United. And if you say one good word about United, not trolling, then that is it. You are officially a rag cnut.
The United thread is a law unto itself. Many are on there just to let off steam and any logic goes out of the window.
 
I don't like the New York City badge. It looks like such a rubbish Inter Milan rip-off.

The new City one isn't too bad. It will look much better when it's more than just an Adobe Illustrator design and they stick it on the shirt.
And also looks better when they take the 3 stars of it. I mean what does each star mean? Looks to me that it can only be one star for each of the ten years they failed to win anything? I know they have won it since then but my question is still WTF is with the stars?
 
And also looks better when they take the 3 stars of it. I mean what does each star mean? Looks to me that it can only be one star for each of the ten years they failed to win anything? I know they have won it since then but my question is still WTF is with the stars?

I think they said that it was purely decorative. You know, like adding sprinkles to a dog turd.
 
Incidentally here's what a City fan on Arsenal Mania had to say about Bluemoon:



I think what goes on in that place is a little more than "hating on rivals" and "letting off steam".

I do find it rather poignant that my post from Arsenal Mania found it's way on to here on the very same day I was promoted ;)
 
And also looks better when they take the 3 stars of it. I mean what does each star mean? Looks to me that it can only be one star for each of the ten years they failed to win anything? I know they have won it since then but my question is still WTF is with the stars?

And they were so close to adding a fourth which would have made their badge look even spiffier. Oh well.

I still find it hilarious that in a sport where stars above team crests traditionally represent trophies previously won City decided to add 3 to theirs for 'decorative reasons'.

A bit like some tosser buying a Ferrari badge on Ebay and sticking it on his red Renault Clio because it looks 'cool'.
 
And also looks better when they take the 3 stars of it. I mean what does each star mean? Looks to me that it can only be one star for each of the ten years they failed to win anything? I know they have won it since then but my question is still WTF is with the stars?

It's like those patronising stars that primary school teachers stick on a six-year-old's homework: "and there's a big gold one for sacking Stuart Pearce..."
 
Dortmund's FB post about Gundogan leaving:

Gündogan moves to Manchester City

Bundesliga side Borussia Dortmund and Ilkay Gündogan will go their separate ways in future. The midfielder, who is currently suffering from a knee injury, will leave the eight-time German champions in the summer to join Manchester City, who finished fourth in the English Premier League last season, on 1 July 2016.
 
From their BBC bias against City thread, same guy:

They have gone a step further today - the BBC Gossip page is now split into 4 sections

Man United gossip (6 stories)
More gossip (18 stories - 2 mentions of United, despite them having their own section above)
Best of social media (3 stories - 2 mention United)
And Finally

In Total United are mentioned 12 times and Mourinho 10 times.

I have raised an official complaint to BBC as follows

Recieved a reply from the Beeb - as exactly as suggested it was a complete and utter fob off.

It basically stated that they felt the coverage of 17 our of 35 stories on one topic was justified. In fact, they didn't even acknowledge the idividual aspects of my complaint on page 83

Thanks for getting in touch with us about the reports we feature on the BBC Sport website.

Our front page reflects the major headlines in what is going on in the world of sport and sometimes, this means that a particular team or athlete is featured more than once.

As you may have seen, Manchester United have dominated the headlines across the media over the last few months with the speculation relating to Louis Van Gaal’s future at the club and José Mourinho’s appointment just days after their FA Cup win. We’re sorry if you were unhappy about this but we felt that these stories were of interest to our website users.

Thanks again for contacting us.

Kind Regards

BBC Complaints Team
Glory glory Mannn.....

Whilst I realise it is a fruitless task to continue complaining to them...


Dear BBC,

Many thanks for your prompt reply, however I fear you haven't understood the specifics of my complaint.

My overall complaint is this - the BBC sport website is biased towards stories featuring Manchester United, not just in the last week or month but overall.

The examples I gave were simply recent examples of your biased over-exposure of United and under-exposure of other clubs in the Premier League.

Perhaps you could explain why there was a "Mourinho Man United squad selection" tool, when he hadn't even been appointed as United manager, but there was no Conte, Wenger, Guardiola, Klopp, Hughes, Ranieri, Pardew, or Allardyce squad selectors?

I would also be interested to hear why you focus on the amount of money that some clubs have spent (Chelsea/City) but rarely quote the cost of the United squad as compared to Leicester. As I said, towards the end of the season you compared the cost of Leicesters squad to that of Manchester City, on the day that Leicester were actually playing Manchester United to possibly win the league title at Old Trafford - Man United having a similar squad cost to Manchester City, yet you did not make onee comment about the United squad cost.

You also have a tendancy to quote the transfer cost of players for other clubs whilst not doing so for United. Examples of this are "£44 million signing Raheem Sterling" but when you comment on United player it will be "21 year old Martial" with no mention of the transfer fee. It's as if you have a point to make about some clubs spending money whilst perpetuating the myth that Manchester United don't buy players for huge fees.

I felt your initial reply was a generic fob off and did not actually answer the queries I raised, so sadly I feel the need to reraise these points and look forward to your direct comments regarding the differences in reporting standards for United and the other clubs in the EPL

Many thanks and kind regards
 
Last edited: