Another bitter Sunderland fan (1 Viewer)

SonofErnie · Apr 22, 2012

http://salutsunderland.com/2012/04/mixed-feelings-au-revoir-portsmouth-good-riddance-coventry/?

The utter hypocrisy in this article is astounding. He holds sentimental views about a club that has gone into admin twice in 2 years, cheating every other club they've played against, yet still holds a grudge against us when his club couldn't accumulate enough points in 42 games to make our result against Bristol City academic.

SkyBlue · Apr 22, 2012

To be fair there is some sensible fans in the comment who raise a valid point, for example

Personally I feel sorry for an set of fans being relegated. They have nothing to do with the running of their respective clubs. I’ve been a season ticket holder at Sunderland for 31 years and still feel agreived by what happened that night. But it was 7 or 8 minutes gamesmanship blown out of all proportion over the years. It doesn’t warrant the embarrassment 35 years later of goading supporters who the majority probably weren’t even around. All this talk of karma is nonsense 35 years is not karma especially when the people involved left 30 years ago. Aim the vitriol at Jimmy Hill.

The game would have probably finished 2-2 anyway. Portsmouth have been cheating for many many years by living so far beyond their means the board and people involved at that club should be ashamed.

Glaziers green top · Apr 22, 2012

Here, here a sensible Mackem, now that's not something you encounter every day!

Sumo the Micky Quinn · Apr 22, 2012

What gets me is all these Sunderland kids they only go on about 1977. Just goes to show how much they know there history. Until I read Jim Browns books I wasn't even aware of 1977 being only 5 years old at the time.

I only just realised this 2 days ago reading this article, the same thing happened in 1997.

Tottenham 1-2 Coventry, 11/05/1997
The original top-flight last-day escapologists – they'd already survived final-game scrapes nine times in 30 years – Coventry went to White Hart Lane knowing they had to win and hope Sunderland and Middlesbrough dropped points in order to survive. An early twist, brought about by traffic on the M25 and M1, meant that the game kicked off 15 minutes late, with the rest of the matches starting at the prescribed time.
Dion Dublin headed Gordon Strachan’s side into the lead after 12 minutes, before Paul Williams volleyed in another on 38 minutes, with Gary McAllister assisting both goals. However Spurs got a goal back before half time – Paul McVeigh following up a Teddy Sheringham free-kick that cannoned off the post – to ensure a nervy second half.
Given the delay, Coventry knew with 14 minutes still left to play that a win would keep them up, and promptly retreated deep into their own half, inviting Spurs to attack them incessantly. Thanks to veteran keeper Steve Ogrizovic, Gerry Francis' side were kept at bay, and Coventry went on to celebrate yet another last-gasp escape act.

Otis · Apr 22, 2012

Sumo the Micky Quinn said:
What gets me is all these Sunderland kids they only go on about 1977. Just goes to show how much they know there history. Until I read Jim Browns books I wasn't even aware of 1977 being only 5 years old at the time.

I only just realised this 2 days ago reading this article, the same thing happened in 1997.

Think you will find that is incorrect and as in 1977 we had this God-like power to stop all the traffic and cause a backlog that delayed the kick off.

We hold that much infinite power.

Kilblane · Apr 22, 2012

Otis said:
Think you will find that is incorrect and as in 1977 we had this God-like power to stop all the traffic and cause a backlog that delayed the kick off.

We hold that much infinite power.

Its called cheating, blatent breaking all the rules, cheating

GRIM REAPER · Apr 22, 2012

Otis said:
Think you will find that is incorrect and as in 1977 we had this God-like power to stop all the traffic and cause a backlog that delayed the kick off.

We hold that much infinite power.

not wishing a banning order but do you think its only coventry fans who have difficulty getting to games on time?

do you think that all 10,000 plus sunderland fans were inside goodison for start of the midweek game? or in 1997 were the 15,000 sunderland fans inside for kick-off in south west london. they had to travel the same route as coventry fans plus 4 hours on the start and an extra bit getting through london.

the kick-off time is clearly stated and should be observed unless a medical or genuine emergency. to use these provisions to gain a tactical advantage is very unsporting.
what about the fans who get there on time but have trains to catch later?

using off-field antics to gain an advantage on-field would be considered cheating by many. if every team involved took the same attitude no game would ever start.

Sumo the Micky Quinn · Apr 22, 2012

Page 54, Coventry City - The Elite Era by Jim Brown

Sunderland were understandably aggrieved, and - according to Jimmy Hill - Alan Hardaker of the Football League reprimanded Coventry for their part in the unfortunate events of the evening. At a subsequent hearing the club were exonerated of all wrong-doing and the matter was buried.

scroobiustom · Apr 22, 2012

I like the Tom P comment

DazzleTommyDazzle · Apr 22, 2012

GRIM REAPER said:
not wishing a banning order but do you think its only coventry fans who have difficulty getting to games on time?

do you think that all 10,000 plus sunderland fans were inside goodison for start of the midweek game? or in 1997 were the 15,000 sunderland fans inside for kick-off in south west london. they had to travel the same route as coventry fans plus 4 hours on the start and an extra bit getting through london.

the kick-off time is clearly stated and should be observed unless a medical or genuine emergency. to use these provisions to gain a tactical advantage is very unsporting.
what about the fans who get there on time but have trains to catch later?

using off-field antics to gain an advantage on-field would be considered cheating by many. if every team involved took the same attitude no game would ever start.

Only problem with your comment is that it wasn't the club that decided to delay the kick off.

The decision was made by the Police, because of the number of fans still outside the ground.

I presume that the rationale was to avoid some sort of crush caused by people panicing to get in.

Otis · Apr 22, 2012

DazzleTommyDazzle said:
Only problem with your comment is that it wasn't the club that decided to delay the kick off.

The decision was made by the Police, because of the number of fans still outside the ground.

I presume that the rationale was to avoid some sort of crush caused by people panicing to get in.

Exactly. Absolutely nothing to do with the club delaying the kick off.

Unless of course you are stupid enough to also think we are Mystic Meg and knew that Sunderland would go down 2-0 in advance of the game? This would be a conspiracy bigger than the Watergate scandal.

You think we delayed the kick off on the off chance that Sunderland might lose their game and then we could have a chat to Bristol about us playing out for a draw? Fantasy stuff and you'd have to be as thick as pig shit to believe that.

If it was fixed before the game why the fook did we go 2-0 up and were all over Bristol and could have had more?

It is absolutely clear that any decision was made after hearing that Sunderland had lost and there was no pre-match fixing involved, including the game being delayed. The police actually said they delayed the game.

Maybe we fixed it with West Midlands Police too.

Don't you know we have the entire government in our pockets.

I should shut my mouth if I was you otherwise we we wield our God like power and strike you down with thunderbolts and all fireballs from the heavens.

GRIM REAPER · Apr 22, 2012

Sumo the Micky Quinn said:
Page 54, Coventry City - The Elite Era by Jim Brown

again, not wishing a banning order but this isn't true.
coventry were found guilty. Jimmy Hill was on the panel that decided the "punishment" which was "not to do it again"!!
i can understand people who weren't even born wondering what the fuss is but the sunderland fans' main focus is Jimmy Hill who they see as a corrupt hypocrite.
he should have had nothing to do with the "independent" enquiry.
to be honest he shouldn't have been allowed ANY involvement with the FA while holding a position with a club, be it coventry, sunderland, liverpool or whoever.

no doubts every club has a few skeletons in the cupboard (sunderland included) but the whole incident is a stain on coventry's history. it drags all of the honest coventry players and fans under the same umbrella, and you could say that is unfair. sunderland didn't do it, Jimmy Hill did.

GRIM REAPER · Apr 22, 2012

DazzleTommyDazzle said:
Only problem with your comment is that it wasn't the club that decided to delay the kick off.

The decision was made by the Police, because of the number of fans still outside the ground.

I presume that the rationale was to avoid some sort of crush caused by people panicing to get in.

what about the sunderland fans panicing to get in at goodison and selhurst park, didn't they panic enough?
if there was an "emergency situation" which i'm sorry but i doubt to use it to gain an advantage is unsporting at the very least.

Otis · Apr 22, 2012

GRIM REAPER said:
what about the sunderland fans panicing to get in at goodison and selhurst park, didn't they panic enough?
if there was an "emergency situation" which i'm sorry but i doubt to use it to gain an advantage is unsporting at the very least.

Yes, we apologise for Merseyside Police not being West Midlands Police. That is entirely our fault.:facepalm:

torchomatic · Apr 22, 2012

Surely, that's down to the individual police forces, not the club?

GRIM REAPER said:
what about the sunderland fans panicing to get in at goodison and selhurst park, didn't they panic enough?
if there was an "emergency situation" which i'm sorry but i doubt to use it to gain an advantage is unsporting at the very least.

GRIM REAPER · Apr 22, 2012

Otis said:
Exactly. Absolutely nothing to do with the club delaying the kick off.

Unless of course you are stupid enough to also think we are Mystic Meg and knew that Sunderland would go down 2-0 in advance of the game? This would be a conspiracy bigger than the Watergate scandal.

You think we delayed the kick off on the off chance that Sunderland might lose their game and then we could have a chat to Bristol about us playing out for a draw? Fantasy stuff and you'd have to be as thick as pig shit to believe that.

If it was fixed before the game why the fook did we go 2-0 up and were all over Bristol and could have had more?

It is absolutely clear that any decision was made after hearing that Sunderland had lost and there was no pre-match fixing involved, including the game being delayed. The police actually said they delayed the game.

Jimmy Hill was very aware that knowing the sunderland score in advance would be an advantage. hundreds of thousands of football fans knew the same.

Jimmy Hill was the forerunner to ensure that NO MORE corrupt end of the season antics take place. ALL games that have bearings on key positions MUST kick-off at the same time, if one is delayed they all are.

Otis · Apr 22, 2012

GRIM REAPER said:
Jimmy Hill was very aware that knowing the sunderland score in advance would be an advantage. hundreds of thousands of football fans knew the same.

Jimmy Hill was the forerunner to ensure that NO MORE corrupt end of the season antics take place. ALL games that have bearings on key positions MUST kick-off at the same time, if one is delayed they all are.

Knowing the Sunderland score in advance would only be an advantage if Sunderland lost you fool!! :facepalm: Where the fook does the would be an advantage come from. All you had to do was draw or win.

Fook me.
:facepalm:

GRIM REAPER · Apr 22, 2012

torchomatic said:
Surely, that's down to the individual police forces, not the club?

maybe so, but the FA enquiry didn't think so. they found coventry guilty of gamesmanship. luckily for them Jimmy Hill was able to decide his own punishment.
i doubt cheating like that will be allowed to happen again as strict rules have been put in place to prevent the likes of Hill.

i don't put 1997 in the same bracket as 77 because Jimmy hill didn't sit judge at his own trial. not that i would have much confidence at what happened behind closed doors of the FA. Any speculation that he could still have influence over his cronies in 1997 would be speculation and shouldn't be used to muddy the waters.
In 1997 i believe the police force involved was the same for both clubs.

GRIM REAPER · Apr 22, 2012

Otis said:
Knowing the Sunderland score in advance would only be an advantage if Sunderland lost you fool!! :facepalm: Where the fook does the would be an advantage come from. All you had to do was draw or win.

Fook me.
:facepalm:

i haven't called you a fool.
it would be an advantage to both coventry AND bristol to know the sunderland score in advance. they would know whether they both had to play to win or fix the result to be a draw by not trying.

if you can't see why it is an advantage to know other scores in advance i really can't help you. even things like goal difference become an issue on last day. a team may need to win by six goals and starts with five centre forwards, they wouldn't normally do it. an extreme version i know but thats why strict rules were put in place.

Otis · Apr 22, 2012

It could have been an advantage not would have been an advantage.

How could it have been an advantage if you had have won? Could have, not would have!

Sumo the Micky Quinn · Apr 22, 2012

So that's where we went wrong yesterday.

We should have invited Jimmy Hill to the stadium yesterday as he was a commentator on the 87 Cup Final, he should have delayed the kick off 15 minutes, therefore making Bristol City lose, then, doing a fergie complaining about 90 mins not being played, we continue the game until we out score Doncaster, giving us another chance next week.:facepalm:

Macca · Apr 22, 2012

This gets funnier and funnier. It's a stain on our history, hilarious. We asked 100 football fans outside of the North East what they knew about this incident. Our survey said...uh errr!

Otis · Apr 22, 2012

I said before, in 1977 I was working with at least 6 Sunderland fans and continued to work with them until our company was closed down some 15 years later.

Not once did any of them ever even mention that match let alone complain about it and we used to talk about football every single day.

Why is that you think?

Skyblue4u · Apr 22, 2012

Why are we even bothering debating with these idiots? Forget 1977, what about 1904 and 1957? the dirty cheating hypocritical arse wipes

Otis · Apr 22, 2012

TheBigCowWandered said:
dont think they will be all that bitter anymore like. far better gates 2 divisions higher than us an owner who cares dearly for his football club. If anything we should want to be more like them

But why are you posting on here rather than sitting back basking in your 3-0 victory yesterday? MOTD were purring about your performance and you might well make that Champions League place.

Otis · Apr 22, 2012

Doubt it.

When did you start going up?

Macca · Apr 22, 2012

TheBigCowWandered said:
i'm a cov fan mate been going for years probably long before you were born

Maybe stop putting "like" or should I say "leek" in your posts

Mentum · Apr 22, 2012

TheBigCowWandered said:
i'm a cov fan mate been going for years probably long before you were born

He's just done the same with me mate, not very welcoming on here are they?

GRIM REAPER · Apr 22, 2012

Otis said:
It could have been an advantage not would have been an advantage.

How could it have been an advantage if you had have won? Could have, not would have!

if we had won then the other two teams involved would have had to fight it out fairly in a proper football match for 90 minutes. i believe coventry had the better goal difference so that would have infuenced the bristol "tactics" and how they played the game.
i'm surprised you think that knowing exactly what result you need to get in terms of how to play the game isn't an advantage.

out of interest, how do you feel about a football club chairman sitting on a panel that is judging his own team on a cheating charge? do you think that is a conflict of interests? i struggle to think of anyone apart from Jimmy Hill who thinks that is honourable behaviour.

anyway, no doubts the moderators will have finished they're sunday morning baquettes soon and my ban will be in the post.

for me whether you want to hear this or not i believe that Jimmy Hill is a cheating hypocrite of the highest order. his actions put a stain over your club forever.
it really is a shame for the honest coventry people who aren't proud about what happened getting tarred with the same brush. their voices are seldom heard.

Otis · Apr 22, 2012

Macca said:
Maybe stop putting "like" or should I say "leek" in your posts

Yep, it was the 'like' thing that stood out for me too, also the talking about their owner clearly caring about their club.

Otis · Apr 22, 2012

GRIM REAPER said:
if we had won then the other two teams involved would have had to fight it out fairly in a proper football match for 90 minutes. i believe coventry had the better goal difference so that would have infuenced the bristol "tactics" and how they played the game.
i'm surprised you think that knowing exactly what result you need to get in terms of how to play the game isn't an advantage.

out of interest, how do you feel about a football club chairman sitting on a panel that is judging his own team on a cheating charge? do you think that is a conflict of interests? i struggle to think of anyone apart from Jimmy Hill who thinks that is honourable behaviour.

anyway, no doubts the moderators will have finished they're sunday morning baquettes soon and my ban will be in the post.

for me whether you want to hear this or not i believe that Jimmy Hill is a cheating hypocrite of the highest order. his actions put a stain over your club forever.
it really is a shame for the honest coventry people who aren't proud about what happened getting tarred with the same brush. their voices are seldom heard.

Of course Hill shouldn't have been on the panel. How is that Sky Blues' fans fault?

And the reason i called you a fool is because it is very foolish to hold any sort of grudge like this for 35 years!! If you were wallowing in League 3 and still down amongst the deadmen because of it i could understand it more, but still, we didn't murder the Queen or bring down 4 Jumbo Jets over the capital. We didn't rape anyone or download kiddy porn..

Do you still hate all Germans for World War II?

It was 35 years ago and that is why you are a fool.

Macca · Apr 22, 2012

Otis said:
Yep, it was the 'like' thing that stood out for me too, also the talking about their owner clearly caring about their club.

I have a mate from up that way who sticks " like " in his emails all the time. Too easy....next

Otis · Apr 22, 2012

TheBigCowWandered said:
not really you would think they would want new members.... I just wanted to come along talk about my beloved coventry city didnt want all these false accusations, they're worse than the gestapo

So what was the first game you ever went up to at the City?

You vill answer ze question!!

Mentum · Apr 22, 2012

TheBigCowWandered said:
not really you would think they would want new members.... I just wanted to come along talk about my beloved coventry city didnt want all these false accusations, they're worse than the gestapo

Yep, we should all be sticking together in these dark times and not getting our knickers in a knot about outsiders. Like Roysten Vasey on here.

Sumo the Micky Quinn · Apr 22, 2012

TheBigCowWandered said:
been going since the 50s mate seen all the highs and the lows the point I was making was that sunderland are in a far better position now than we are and I dont see how they will be bitter

I know all those wins year after year in the 80's at Villa Park.

Another bitter Sunderland fan (1 Viewer)

Well-Known Member

New Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Banned

New Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency