Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Urgh, it’s a tedious argument, they are not going to concede. They will always try to justify themselves, either by saying they have more support, have bigger support in curtain circumstances etc.

In all honesty though, their stadium is too big for them. They can’t fill it and never really have been able too consistently. In League One it was a noose around their necks. Too much for the upkeep on a League One budget. If it wasn’t for some trust fund billionaire’s desire to emulate daddy by owning a football club, any football club, it would have spelt then end for them. Fact is, even in the Premier League they couldn’t fill it. I’m not saying that they don't have a decent sized following, and those who actually go to games are dedicated fans, what I’m saying is that a 49k seater stadium is about 15k too big for them.

You know what, that’s alright to say though, because even if they were getting 30k-35k, which is achievable, then that is still comparable to clubs in cities of their size.

 

If I was their owner, I’d honestly demolish the stadium and build a better but smaller capacity one in its place. As much as they try to differentiate it from the other flat pack stadium with their brickwork around it, it’s still just a run of the mill flat pack. A new stadium with more facilities for fans would be a much better way to go and a way to entice fans in. Right now though they look like they are going to be in trouble attracting fans. If we even start to become semi-successful, then places outside of Sunderland which has Sunderland fans, like South Shields, Washington, Durham etc will all start turning black & white, if they are still milling about in the Championship. On top of that the EFL are wanting to broadcast every game, and Sunderland is a place that’s been criticised for having a large amount of fans who would rather sit in a pub or at home watching games on foreign broadcasts. Broadcasting their games domestically will not help them. They are going to have to think outside of the box to entice an acceptable level of support to keep going to their games.

Link to post
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Dancing Brave said:

That clown actually believes that FFS ! 

Since 1893 we have had higher attendances in 96 seasons compared to them having the better attendances in only 21.

"Fair weather" :mackems:

 

Read this you daft SMB..

https://www.geordietimes.com/2012/10/nufc-v-safcaverage-gates1893-to-2012.html

What he fails to mention is our average that season we nearly went down under Keegan, was bigger than their average that season the daft fucker. I love the way they try and pull up attendances from Pre Taylor report, football was different animal completely then when even Man U got 20k attendances. The fact will always be as you stated above, at the given time in history we have nearly always had far bigger attendances.

 

 

 

Edited by Whitley mag

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Whitley mag said:

What he fails to mention is our average that season we nearly went down under Keegan, was bigger than their average that season the daft fucker. I love the way they try and pull up attendances from Pre Taylor report, football was completely a different animal then when even Man U got 20k attendances. The fact will always be as you stated above, at the given time in history we have nearly always had far bigger attendances.

 

 

 

 

Sunderland metropolitan area is bigger than Newcastle though , Micky gray told me a thousand times on talk sport. But erm Newcastle has a bigger catchment area so they get bigger crowds . Which one is it gimps?  Wanna hire a helicopter and look from the air? " That's Tyneside" what's that over there? " Biggest shipbuilding TOWN in the world, Kate adie, Bryan ferry, wearside jack blah blah blah"

Link to post
Share on other sites

I’ve said this before but Im sure the groomers site isn’t real and it’s been made as a training ground for folk with learning difficulties or prisoners nearing release after decades in captivity. 
 

 It’s like an alternative dimension where Sunderland town is some golden Mecca and not a piece of dog shit with a crisp packet stuck to it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why the fuck are they so obsessed with attendances? trying to compare themselves with the toon I mean ffs even the last time they were in the PL they had the most empty seats over 19 home pl games 168,777 fact. They just spout bs obviously that exile numpty has been dropped on his heed as a bairn probably on purpose,but another shit4 brains knacker ( skylon) was encouraging a bunch of snotty nose school bairns to fight the mags at a under21's game!! what a backward bunch of obsessed cunts.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Dancing Brave said:

That clown actually believes that FFS ! 

Since 1893 we have had higher attendances in 96 seasons compared to them having the better attendances in only 21.

"Fair weather" :mackems:

 

Read this you daft SMB..

https://www.geordietimes.com/2012/10/nufc-v-safcaverage-gates1893-to-2012.html

OK so their attendance nonsense has been debunked,can we at least agree that they are better at fighting, as that seems to be something they are proud of?  I read it's about a 10 to one knacking ratio in their favour according to statistics from the POOMA institute 

 

*Pulled Out Of a Mackem's Arse

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, 1964 said:

OK so their attendance nonsense has been debunked,can we at least agree that they are better at fighting, as that seems to be something they are proud of?  I read it's about a 10 to one knacking ratio in their favour according to statistics from the POOMA institute 

 

*Pulled Out Of a Mackem's Arse

 

 

 

Aye let them have that  especially that firm that follow their u21s they took the leazes and windmilled the fuck out of northumbria police, it definitely happened cos its on rtg.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, OpenC said:

Cannot wait until they build over the few fields that are left between Boldon Colliery and Castletown so the urban sprawl is complete and there can be no further guff spouted about catchment areas

 

:huff:

Link to post
Share on other sites

They’re hilarious. In one breath, “Newcassul are obsessed with attendances” and in the next “better pro-rata supporters” after analysing attendances from 1991, over years ago.

 

This in addition to the sad bastards having a thread counting each day how many tickets have been sold. :lol:

 

The Bungalow of Light gets sold out a handful of times each decade, most of them being to see football icons such as Pink and Elton John. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Being overly fair to them an citing our darkest days (as its when they go back to and what they use as a rule versus an exception) versus their regular times, an example of the fairweatheredness

 

in 1991/92

Sunderland v Newcastle 29,224  - Sunderland's game before that 12,790 (down 17k) , Sunderland's gate after that 13,575 (down 16k)

Newcastle v Sunderland 30,306 - Newcastle's gate before 23,138 (down 7k), Newcatle's gate after 21,125 (down 9k)

89/90

Sunderland v Newcastle 29,466 - before 15,042 (or 11,000 league cup) (down 14k), after 22,760 (down 7k)

Newcastle v Sunderland 31,572 - before 26,233 (down 5k), after 31,748 (up 200)

 

some clown on the phone in arrogantly said 'wrong' that we'd always been well supported because we only got 36,000 in the 90s (like every game somehow) not factoring in the ground was full. Just seen the number and got hard on without bothering with any logic or context. A worthy stone throw considering the mackems highest average attendance in the 90s until 1998 was 21,000.

 

 

Edited by Wolfcastle

Link to post
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Cattletrucked said:

I’ll just leave this here …..unbelievable :mackems:4640E88A-0982-4A0C-B17D-D8634933FAAE.thumb.png.c4e4c42cc591722c597b1c3729f34faa.png

 

I love how they just pick a random low attendance figure for us, then look for an attendance figure of theirs which is higher from some point in time and then kind of say, "there look, we're better than them". They never dare look at it over a long period of time or over a season, it's literally 1 random game we had back in the 80s when attendances were down everywhere and use it against us.

Link to post
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, John tolan said:

Sunderland metropolitan area is bigger than Newcastle though , Micky gray told me a thousand times on talk sport. But erm Newcastle has a bigger catchment area so they get bigger crowds . Which one is it gimps?  Wanna hire a helicopter and look from the air? " That's Tyneside" what's that over there? " Biggest shipbuilding TOWN in the world, Kate adie, Bryan ferry, wearside jack blah blah blah"

Kate Adie was born in Whitley Bay and Bryan Ferry is a Mag.Wearside Jack is a mackem through and through.One of their own.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Scoot said:

 

I love how they just pick a random low attendance figure for us, then look for an attendance figure of theirs which is higher from some point in time and then kind of say, "there look, we're better than them". They never dare look at it over a long period of time or over a season, it's literally 1 random game we had back in the 80s when attendances were down everywhere and use it against us.

Joe Bolton,the real one,is a Mag.So is Colin Todd.Both legends on Weirdside.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Wolfcastle said:

Being overly fair to them an citing our darkest days (as its when they go back to and what they use as a rule versus an exception) versus their regular times, an example of the fairweatheredness

 

in 1991/92

Sunderland v Newcastle 29,224  - Sunderland's game before that 12,790 (down 17k) , Sunderland's gate after that 13,575 (down 16k)

Newcastle v Sunderland 30,306 - Newcastle's gate before 23,138 (down 7k), Newcatle's gate after 21,125 (down 9k)

89/90

Sunderland v Newcastle 29,466 - before 15,042 (or 11,000 league cup) (down 14k), after 22,760 (down 7k)

Newcastle v Sunderland 31,572 - before 26,233 (down 5k), after 31,748 (up 200)

 

some clown on the phone in arrogantly said 'wrong' that we'd always been well supported because we only got 36,000 in the 90s (like every game somehow) not factoring in the ground was full. (until 98 the mackems highest average had been 21000 btw, so obviously they throw stones)

 

 

 

That mackem idiot called Ian on Total Sport said that.John Anderson put him straight.

Link to post
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, 1964 said:

OK so their attendance nonsense has been debunked,can we at least agree that they are better at fighting, as that seems to be something they are proud of?  I read it's about a 10 to one knacking ratio in their favour according to statistics from the POOMA institute 

 

*Pulled Out Of a Mackem's Arse

 

 

 

That simpleton called magcatcherhutch  wouldn’t bother turning up if there were only 10 Mags

Link to post
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Jonas said:

84/85 02/03 and 05/06 too.

Even if getting record low points in the latter two (ha ha) provides them with some cover then were responsible for that.

 

I like the distinction though of celebrating qualifying for the champions league twice whilst they were relegated whereas they celebrate qualifying for four points ahead, when were relegated. Almost like they celebrate our demise rather than any acievements of their own, because there aren't any, or something.

 

Even if they win,a draw for us seriously affects them in a negative way.Now when we win………oh dear !!! 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...