rss twitter facebook mobile

It’s Never Their Fault

Four minutes in to Manchester United’s 4-0 win over Wigan, the Stretford End starting singing the Luis Suarez “racist bastard” chant. The chant that followed was “always the victims, it’s never their fault“. This is a standard occurrence at Old Trafford and United’s away games, dating back to almost a year ago following Liverpool FC’s refusal to accept that Luis Suarez was guilty of racially abusing Patrice Evra.

These two songs have been sung every week, not by a quiet minority but by 1,000s of United fans. It is also sung by Everton fans who have been widely praised for their respectful behaviour ahead of their game against Newcastle this week.

Whilst it was Liverpool’s reaction to Suarez’s guilt that lead to the creation of the song, there are deeper meanings behind it. It’s likely that some people singing it are purely referring to Suarez but I’d guess the vast majority are referring to the nature of scousers in general. The stereotype being that they are a whining, grief-hungry bunch of victims, who revel in self-pity and aren’t prepared to take responsibility for their own actions.

Last weekend, the press decided to tell us that we were in fact singing about Hillsborough, after previously unreleased documents about the tragedy had been made available to the public earlier that week. Ben Smith from the BBC was the first to stir it up and then other media outlets followed. The Daily Express went with the headline: “Manchester United fans mock Hillsborough tragedy”. It’s incredible that they could publish an article with such an emotive, irresponsible, but most importantly, untrue headline.

Mick Dennis, The Express, wrote: They chanted about Liverpool supporters during the match against Wigan, singing: “Always the victims, it’s never your fault.” Later, the Manchester United Supporters Trust issued a mealy-mouthed statement in which they said those chants “didn’t refer to Hillsborough”. But you cannot clarify the meaning of abusive songs several hours later. And the point about the report of the Hillsborough disaster was that Liverpool fans were absolutely not to blame. They were victims of a truly terrible disaster and then victims again of a reprehensible cover-up. And so the chants at United were wretched and base. No ifs and buts. No debate.

I’m not writing this to claim that United fans are whiter than white. Unfortunately, no football club can claim to have fans who have never sung about something they shouldn’t have. I’m writing this because no media outlet has attempted to explain the reasons behind the chant, instead parcelling it off as sick and disrespectful, suggesting that United’s fanbase is full to the brim with people who would mock the deaths of 96 innocent people, and have been belting that song out every single week with the thoughts of those that died at Hillsborough on our mind. That quite simply is a lie and only serves to make it almost certain that this weekend there will be chants of the clubs’ tragedies from both sides. Liverpool fans will (rightly?) want to react, although they are reacting to something that didn’t even happen, which will (rightly?) mean United fans respond.

Of course we have some idiots who chant about Hillsborough and they bring shame on the club, but to suggest that 1000s of us are chanting about Hillsborough every game, and have been doing for almost a year, is beyond ridiculous. All clubs have an idiotic minority but this song is sung en masse by people who wouldn’t ever consider using Hillsborough as a tool to wind up a rival. Yes, we hate scousers, but Hillsborough was about sons, daughters, mothers and fathers, it was about people, not Liverpool FC, and if you can’t differentiate between the deaths of human beings and the deaths of Liverpool fans, thinking one is worthy of ridicule and mocking, there is something very wrong with you.

In reaction to the claims from the press, the Manchester United Supporters Trust quickly released a statement to clarify that despite what had been reported, the “always the victims, it’s never your fault” chant did not originate with thoughts of Hillsborough.

Following this week’s developments and release of revelatory information on the Hillsborough tragedy, MUST wishes to make it absolutely clear that just as we condemn chants mocking the Munich Air Disaster we also condemn any chants relating to Hillsborough or indeed any other human tragedy.

We did hear the usual anti-Liverpool chants at the match today but we’re pleased to say, despite some reports to the contrary, there was nothing that was specifically referencing Hillsborough. Any attempt to suggest otherwise is irresponsible given the forthcoming fixture between the clubs and furthermore risks needlessly upsetting the bereaved families further at a time when they are understandably trying to find closure.

We enjoy a fierce rivalry but these issues transcend that rivalry. We agree 100% with the statement made by Sir Alex Ferguson – this is the time for supporters of these two great clubs to represent their clubs with the integrity and honour that our glorious history demands.

However, there seem to be some fans and sections of the press that want the chant to be about Hillsborough. Rival fans want a stick to beat United with and the papers want to have a tasty story to write about. They have pointed to the words “always” and “never” which certainly suggest that the chant, whilst first sung because of Suarez, isn’t just about him.

So, if the song isn’t about Hillsborough, what is it about?

Suarez
Suarez changed his story several times when giving evidence to the FA and was caught in a lie when he claimed he pinched Evra’s arm to “defuse” the situation, before admitting that wasn’t the case at all. He admitted to calling Evra “negro” but claimed that he meant it in a friendly way. During a game between United and Liverpool, after kicking Evra in the knee, slapping the back of his head, and pinching him, the FA deemed that his defence was nonsense, there was nothing friendly about his actions towards Evra that day, and he intended for the word to be provocative and insulting.

In reaction to Suarez being found guilty of racially abusing Evra, Kenny Dalglish and all the team wore t-shirts with a picture of Suarez on the front and his name and number on the back. To offer their full backing to Suarez despite the findings of the FA was incredible, a total PR disaster, but Dalglish continued to argue that Suarez had done nothing wrong.

James Lawton, The Belfast Telegraph: Dalglish has always been an obdurate character but what he said of the return of Luis Suarez after his eight-match ban for racially abusing Patrice Evra brought a new edge of corrosion to his contribution to an affair which in a few days’ time will give us fresh evidence of a football culture saddled with hate.

There was some hope – though admittedly it was not high – that Dalglish might draw some kind of line under the case when Suarez reappeared against Spurs on Monday, especially with his player and Evra coming face to face again at Old Trafford on Saturday.

Instead, the Liverpool manager declared: “It was fantastic for Suarez to be back – but he should never have been out in the first place.”

So, it is not enough that he approved the wearing of Suarez T-shirts that scandalised so much of football outside the Liverpool enclave or expressed disbelief when asked if in any way he regretted that Evra was jeered and booed every time he touched the ball when he returned to Anfield.

Now Dalglish refuses to close the door on the issue. Indeed, he provokes a new sense of injustice, a new certainty that the dispute remains a raw, untreated sore on the face of football. This would be a lot easier to accept if Dalglish and the ownership of Liverpool had shown the courage of their belief that Suarez was innocent and fought his conviction. They had that option but they compromised. They chose the role not of fighters for truth but victims of injustice.

Always the victim, it’s never your fault.

It wasn’t just the club and fans, but the press too. Liverpool supporting journalists went on to claim that Suarez had been found guilty in a case that was one man’s word against another. They published this as fact in papers like The Guardian, despite Suarez’s own lawyer conceding that wasn’t the case at all in the FA report. Another journalist wrote that lip-readers couldn’t prove what Suarez had actually said, again trying to put doubt on his guilt, despite the FA report revealing that Suarez had confessed to calling Evra “negro” every time he was questioned. Had these Liverpool supporting journalists at The Guardian honestly not read the report? Or were they just lying to cover up Suarez’s wrong-doings in attempt to suggest he was innocent?

Dalglish was sacked at the end of the season and Sir Alex Ferguson believed his woeful handling of the Suarez case contributed to this.

Michael Shields
Michael Shields was arrested and later found guilty of attempting to kill a Bulgarian man with a paving slab whilst celebrating Liverpool FC’s European Cup win in 2005. The victim, father of two Martin Georgiev, didn’t die but suffered significant brain damage. Georgiev worked at Big Ben fish and chips and had come outside to intervene in a dispute between Bradley Thompson and his friend Anthony Wilson with other English people at the chippy.

Three Bulgarians witnesses, as well as Georgiev, all identified Shields in a line-up as the man who dropped the slab on Georgiev’s head after he had been punched and fallen to the floor. Whilst on the floor, he was kicked by two other men, who were identified by the witnesses as Wilson and Thompson.

Shields’ defence was that he was in bed by 3am at the Kristal hotel when the attack took place in a room with his friends Kieron Dunne, John Unsworth and others. A witness claimed he heard the three men who had attacked Georgiev say they were staying at this hotel and this is where the police seized their passports the following morning. Who was staying in the room next to Shields? Wilson and Thompson.

Thompson confessed that he had attacked Georgiev, along with Shields and Wilson, and received a six-month suspended sentence. However, when the trial began and Thompson was called to give evidence, he gave a highly contradictory and muddled account of events. It wasn’t just his changed story that was suspicious, but the testimonies of lots of defence witnesses who had all happened to stumble in to Shields’ room and see him asleep at the time of the attack. One said they had entered the room, apparently unlocked, because they thought there was a party there. Another said they went to retrieve a mobile phone, and so on.

His family began a yellow ribbon campaign and called on the Government to intervene to save their son, insisting that he was a “gentle giant”.

“I felt sorry for him at first,” Unsworth said of Georgiev, “but by insisting it was Michael that attacked him he is just trying to get his compensation money. Anyway, he only came out of the fish-and-chip shop to help out the Germans who were out there.”

Whilst Shields was in prison, Liverpool FC players warmed up wearing t-shirts in support of a criminal who had been convicted of attempted murder and Jamie Carragher even dedicated a goal to him!

“If I’d have known I was going to score I would have worn a t-shirt under my Liverpool shirt with Michael’s name on it,” he said. “I want to dedicate that goal to Michael Shields and all his family who are suffering so badly right now. When we got the news that he’d not only be found guilty for a crime he didn’t commit but actually been sentenced to 15 years, our hearts sank. For myself, Steven and the other local lads in the team, it really hit us. He’s one of us. He should have been here in Lithuania cheering us on but instead he’s locked up. Me and Stevie are heartbroken for the lad because it’s obviously an injustice.”

Always the victim, it’s never your fault.

After four years in prison, Jack Straw, the Justice Secretary at the time, gave Shields a Royal Pardon, the first for any British Citizen who had been convicted overseas. Straw claimed he had been made aware of “new evidence” but would not reveal what it was. The pardon came three weeks after news emerged that Shields’ father was planning to stand against Straw for his Blackburn seat, and would have received huge backing from Liverpool fans. A Royal Pardon is not the same as being not guilty of the crime but merely being forgiven for it, yet Shields has never attempted to clear his name, despite the supposed “new evidence” that apparently convinced Straw of his innocence.

Heysel
On May 29th 1985, 39 people died in the Heysel Stadium after Liverpool fans charged at a wall which collapsed. The stadium wasn’t fit to host a game of this magnitude, the European Cup final between Juventus and Liverpool, and Liverpool fans used this as their excuse. It wasn’t their fault that those fans died, it was the fault of the stadium.

Tony Evans at The Times, a Liverpool supporter who was at Heysel, touched on the denial more recently in his article “Our Day Of Shame”.

[Many Everton fans] feel that in some way they are the real victims of that dreadful day because their title-winning team could not play in the European Cup the next season. It taunted Liverpool supporters, some of whom still feel that they had nothing to do with the deaths of 39 people on that May night nearly 20 years ago. “A wall collapsed, that was all.” I have said it and heard it countless times. Except it is a lie.

Evans claimed that many Liverpool fans were still angry after attacks by Roma fans when they played in a victorious European Cup final the year before.

After the game, Rome erupted in rage, and the bloody events around the Olympic Stadium left everyone who was there — and those who had only heard talk of what happened — determined not to suffer again at the hands of Italian ultras. “The Italians won’t do that to us again,” was a refrain repeated in the weeks since the semi-final. It was not a matter of revenge. It was a wariness, a fear that built itself up to an enormous rage that would spill out at the slightest perceived provocation. The anger was palpable.

In conclusion, again discussing Liverpool’s attempt to relieve themselves of any blame, Evans concedes that they were at fault.

We limped home, quickly throwing off any shame, repeating the mantra that it was a construction problem, just a wall collapsing, hiding from the scale of what had happened. The disaster has a long causal chain — stabbings and beatings in Rome, hair-trigger tempers, aggression on both sides, excessive drinking, poor policing and a stadium ripe for disaster. Remove any one link and the game may have passed off peacefully. But it didn’t. So, Evertonians sing, with pathetic self-pity, “Thirty-nine Italians can’t be wrong.” Well they weren’t. We were. I was.

It wasn’t just the fans who denied they were at fault though. The official line from the club, as voiced by the chairman at the time, John Smith, was that Chelsea fans in the crowd were the cause of the deaths, not Liverpool fans. On the 19th anniversary of Heysel, Red and White Kop published some accounts of fans who at the game.

“Some lads had newspapers, they did not make nice reading. Painted as the scum of the earth by everybody who had anything to say, there was no real understanding of what had gone on, I don’t think there is to this day. John Smith had told reporters that he believed the trouble to be the fault of ‘Chelsea fans’ – it was nonsense, clutching at straws. There had been fans of other clubs there, there always is in major cup finals, but not in any significant numbers.”

Always the victim, it’s never your fault.

——

The press have told us the song is about Hillsborough, not even attempting to provide a rational argument concerning what else it could be about. I am now being told by the papers that when I’ve sung that song for months, what I have actually been singing about is Hillsborough. How on earth can out of touch journalists, who have no clue about the ill-feeling between rival fans, determine what I am singing about, what you are singing about? They know us better than we know ourselves, apparently.

Likewise, I’m not going to make the same mistake of saying that every single United fan who sings that song is coming from the same state of mind as me. I can’t categorically say there aren’t some United fans, that idiotic minority, that may sing the song with thoughts of Hillsborough in mind. For that reason, it was stupid for fans to sing it on Saturday, as even though your intention might not be to mock Hillsborough, it is easy to draw conclusions that singing “it’s never your fault” is in direct reference to what Liverpool fans have been saying about what happened in Sheffield for the past 23 years. The fans who may sing the song with Hillsborough in mind would argue that Liverpool fans had been singing about Munich for years before Hillsborough happened. The picture above shows a “Munich 58″ banner displayed by the Liverpool fans in the Heysel Stadium before the tragic events unfolded and obviously before Hillsborough too. But seriously, is that the best we’ve got? They started it? They were proper scum bags for mocking Munich for decades, it was sick and twisted, but is that justification for our fans to behave equally as badly? Of course not.

Whilst the media and clubs can bang on about how it’s time for the chants to stop, they are fighting a losing battle. There will always idiots on both sides who have little respect for their own dead and will use jibes of Munich/Hillsborough to provoke a reaction. The release of the Hillsborough files won’t stop that. Do you think the people who sing about Hillsborough care less that Liverpool fans weren’t at fault? The eight players who died at Munich weren’t at fault for the plane crashing, what difference did that make to Liverpool fans laughing at their deaths?

That song isn’t “mocking” Hillsborough though and I imagine there were plenty of reds who sang it on Saturday who were scratching their heads when they heard that’s what they were being accused of. The fact that some may interpret it as a dig at Hillsborough means that we should have skipped past it following the “racist bastard” chant last weekend though. Whilst the vast majority of people in the ground wouldn’t even think about mocking Hillsborough, there will be some who would, and now we’ve all been lumped in with them, regardless of our intentions or feelings about the song.

You’d like to think that the journalists in this country have just been too lazy to think of the alternative and the real motives behind the song, taking a dig at the scouse mentality, but surely they can’t all be that incompetent? It can’t just be a coincidence that every time Everton fans are heard singing it on derby day that it never gets reported. We won’t be seeing an “Everton fans mock Hillsborough on day of shame” headline any time soon. It doesn’t suit the agenda. If journalists acknowledge that Everton fans sing the song they will then have to acknowledge the song isn’t about Hillsborough. They’ll print anything to sell a story, whether it’s true or not, and that’s something we’re all a victim of.


About Scott

Scott is the editor of Red Matters - 50 Years of Supporting Manchester United and an author of Play Like Fergie's Boys and Not Nineteen Forever. He writes for ESPN, The Metro and Bleacher Report. Follow @R_o_M on Twitter.

View all posts by Scott »

 

185 Comments

  1. reds says:

    parryheid—you are beyond help,your stone awaits. that is as thick as saying man utd officials are guilty of the manslaughter of their own players because they didn’t insist on having their players removed from the aircraft after the second attempt, knowing the conditions were diabolical. so, going on your brain missing logic, why didn’t the people involved step forward and hold their hands up? you utterly stupid individual.

  2. Raizzen says:

    IT HAS BEEN SUNG FOR OVER A YEAR YOU STUPID FUCK. NO LESS BY THE FACT THAT LIVERSTOOL HAD CHOSEN TO STAND BY A RACIST.

    Immediate aftermath of the publication, my ass. We have been singing it whether or not the opponent was Liverstool. As always “Always the victim, never their fault”

  3. crazyhorse says:

    How did united get on tonight? Anbody?

  4. hATE2wAKE says:

    liverpool are great club but they have Retarted Fans and Racist palyer

  5. Scott the Red says:

    brett1985 – The 39 people who died at Heysel don’t chant racist abuse most weeks now. What a bizarre link for you to make.

    I have as much concern for the 39 people who died at Heysel as I would any other innocent people who are killed, obviously including the 96 at Hillsborough. The fact that Liverpool’s official response was to blame Chelsea, the fact that countless Liverpool fans claim they weren’t at fault, and the fact that Liverpool took 20 years to apologise, that’s the issue. That is what is relevant to the chant.

  6. Scott the Red says:

    mikeyboy – You accused me of revisionism. The fact that you were wrong about Suarez calling Evra “negrito” and the fact you were wrong about when the t-shirts were worn makes those comments ENTIRELY relevant. You’ve got to get your facts right yourself. It’s incredible that you hadn’t read the Suarez report before now… yet have been defending him. It’s incredible you could be so ignorant.

    There is nothing factually wrong in this post. That’s why you’re talking about Cantona and Rio as some lame response. THAT is irrelevant.

  7. parryheid says:

    reds.

    I spoke to my parents about your comment to me,my mother was ecstatic she was weeping when she said I always told you that you were special.My dad gave me a playful punch on the shoulder and said of all the window lickers Pool fans come in contact with you wont get a more coveted award anywhere it’s praise indeed so proud of you and will frame it for hanging in the lounge.And by the way have they managed to work out who killed the 96 of their fellow fans?

  8. parryheid says:

    reds.

    My stone awaits eh, well I hope it’s not that fucker Shields whose holding it. Did you manage to find reference to even One fan admitting his culpability? No well that’s a surprise isn’t it.So who did kill the 96? Away and trawl some other site in your hunt for sympathizers you dopey fucker.

  9. reds says:

    parryheid——- don’t make out you know who your ‘dad’ is. have you found any officials from your club that have held their hands up yet? yes, a bit stupid of you to even consider the remark you made., but why am i surprised. good to see you are such a big fan of mufc, that you attend all their games. oh, sorry, last night, you couldn’t make it could you? well, anfield it is then on sunday, what time are you setting off? no, setting off to pc world to get your computer fixed, so you can watch the game that way. ‘fans’ like you are a joke, armchair mouthpieces who know fuck all about anything. try actually getting off your arse and going to a stadium to watch your team or doesn’t mummy and ‘daddy’ let you? no respect for no show ‘fans’ that mouth off on sites like this, respect to those mufc fans who travel to anfield on sunday….try and do your club proud.

  10. brett1985 says:

    Scott:

    I’m just trying to establish if you see Juventus FC as a pack of worthless racists as per your previous article or as a collective outfit who have suffered a tragedy where the survivors and their fellow fans continue to suffer?

    You’ve no concern for the victims of heysel, the tragedy is just a convenient basis for you to aim a dig at the scousers. This is independant of whether the chant is about hillsborough.

    And it is about Hillborough. Always and never is all inclusive language and such terms as victim and fault are central to discourse surrounding the Hillsborough Disaster.

  11. parryheid says:

    Reds.

    Take a day off,you don’t have to be an idiot all the time.Crackerjack.

  12. Justice says:

    Mikeyboy, if you re-read my posts from yesterday, you will find out exactly when (virtually to the minute), where and why, the ‘Always the Victims’ song was first sung.

    It didn’t have any reference to Hillsborough that night, and hasn’t had any reference to that awful tragedy since (except in the minds of those who would prefer to twist the facts to cause trouble or to justify their own ignorance).

    Like the huge majority of United fans, we feel as outraged as you Liverpool fans at the unimaginable pain and indignity you have been forced to endure to simply to cover up the criminal incompetence of an inept and dishonest police force (and possible government figures, too). I, as a proud Briton, feel ashamed of my country over that entire episode.

    I’ve tried to explain to my grown-up sons what the mood of the country was like in those shameful days. Football was loathed by a prime minister who had surrounded herself with toadies, none of whom dared challenge her warped views. The South Yorkshire police had been the blunt weapon used by that prime minister to break the miners’ strike: in her eyes, they could do no wrong — and no-one dared tell her otherwise. The Sun was another of her blunt weapons, but, unwittingly (I hope) the BBC also played a not insignificant part. They had screened two highly successful series, the Boys from the Blackstuff and Bread, which portrayed Liverpool’s people as dole-loving, ducking and diving scroungers. That became the stereotype that those living south of Watford chose to believe was reality. Derek Hatton and Heysel didn’t help matters, and I’d argue that the accumulation of all those factors meant that sympathy and understanding was in short supply in the corridors of power. That is why it took 23 years for the truth about Hillsborough to come out and for the 96 and their families to get the first shards of justice.

    And that, Mikeyboy, is why I still feel extremely angry at what your fans have been made to suffer in the intervening 23 years. Believe you me, I’m sure at least 99.99 percent of true Old Trafford fans feel the same way, too.

    So, Mikeyboy, when I say the ‘Always the Victims’ song has nothing whatsoever to do with Hillsborough it is the truth. And you guys know how painful it can be when people choose to ignore the truth.

  13. Eric L'edieu says:

    Excellent article Scott.
    Although i was aware of most of this, it still educated on the part of Shields’s dads intention to stand against Straw.
    To the dippers coming on here, as regards some of their points,
    why sing it now, obviously aimed at hillsborough. -no, its sung at most games, not hand-picked for last weeks findings.

    Definition of irony, let the suarez thing go-
    Utd have kept a very dignified public silence on the matter, despite LFC trying to smear Evra’s name. If you want people to let it drop, tell it to Dalglish, Glen Johnson etc who keep bringing it up.

    As also pointed out by Liverpool fans ‘fergies even come out & condemned it’-
    Yep, because of the timing, not necessarily the content. However, compare and contrast your own clubs silence as regards your fans decades of Munich songs, & even banners in the ground pre-hillsborough.

    I want to make it totally clear i personally condemn any Hillsborough chants, i have seen truly stomach churning pictures of that tragic day, & its clearly very harrowing when you hear the victims families talking of their children, or other family members who died that day, no person of sane mind could take glee or pleasure from that.
    BUT, i would also point out, & this is my stuck record part here, go to YouTube, watch the videos WHO’S THAT DYING? and LIVERPOOL WANKERS from the last cup game a couple of years ago.
    I now challenge any Liverpool fan to claim its just a minority, or as many of them claim, they’ve NEVER heard ANYONE sing these songs. For the record, also the same day LFC supporters smashed up the toilets post game, & its alleged, daubed Munich 58 with their own excretement on the walls. The thing is, thats easy to believe when u bear in mind both those videos from that day, & LFC ‘fans’ previous toilet based behaviour to utd fans in cup games.

    Add to the charge sheet, Stevie G, & mates, assaulting a single bloke over his refusal to play Phil Collins, & despite cctv proving it was him, no charge, that fucker at the Guardian Scott has proved to be a liar over his claims from threats from utd fans, or the appaulling scum who showed no sentiment for the families feelings when lying, yet again, that utd fans were arrested last year for urinating on the Hillsborough memorial, when even Merseyside police came out to deny it, withoutany thought or sentiment for the obvious upset the families would feel upon hearing such a tale.

  14. brett1985 says:

    Justice

    To an extent I see where you are coming from with your well argued point. I’m quite sure that always the victim came about in response to the Suarez situation.

    However, until last week even some otherwise reasonable united fans would debate who was to blame for Hillsborough. This chant uses the words always and never so it’s referring to past events too. Heysel, Shields and Hillsborough as well as Suarez.

    I’ve not doubt the daily mail sensationaise things. However, there is nothing to gain by chanting about tragedies in a football stadium regardless of the motive. Sensible people know this. It’s time to do away with chants which make even incidental references to tragic events. If not always the victim, then how about we’ve won it 3 times…a chant that verges on despicable and most of the stadium are singing it.

  15. reds says:

    parryheid—— an apology, i didn’t realise i was trying to correct a juvenile. i am sure your mummy and ‘daddy’ or mummy’s special friend , as you are probably told, wouldn’t want you going to games on your own. fair enough. when you grow up and understand the adult world, you will look back and realise what a thicket you really were, making dumb comments that could be reversed back to your own club. if mummy or her ‘special friend’ can escort you to anfield on sunday or any match, i hope you enjoy the atmosphere….you really should try it one day.

  16. reds says:

    ps, parryheid——– crackerjack!?!?!?!?!?!?!? ah, bless you, poor little poppet.

  17. Brian T says:

    I will be shocked if this is allowed here. The Moderator wants to paint the picture that Man Utd fans are saints.
    Most have no idea or just ignore it.

    The Man Utd fan in Africa in a fit of rage after the 2009 CL final drove a bus into a group of Barcelona fans, killing 4 or them.

    You’ll never see much reference to that Crystal Palace fan who your supporters chased to his death under the wheels of a coach in the 1990s.
    It’s pretty tough to find anything on the teenage Spurs fan they killed by throwing him down the escalators at Seven Sisters tube station in the early 1980s or the two elderly Middlesbrough fans killed at Ayresome Park in the early 1970s. To all intents and purposes these incidents have been wiped from history.

    It’s ironic when most of you refer to LFC as the ‘murderers’.

  18. parryheid says:

    reds.

    Answer the question.why do you and your fellow supporters have so much difficulty.Who fucking killed them? Answer the Liverpool window lickers.

  19. reds says:

    parrydickheid——–why didn’t your officials act? answer my question….you can’t ( letter changed to equip the question, you may notice). i really can’t be bothered with brain cell free, scrotes, such as your self. are you going to the game sunday then? physically, not in your warped imagination. if no one can take you, are you going to any games, physically, this season. if you are going sunday, let me know what ‘macdonalds’ mummy and her ‘special friend’ take you to, in liverpool and i will answer any questions you want. you can answer the ones i have asked you too. somehow, i think you will be furiously logging on to watch it on your pc, then you can pretend you are a ‘real’ fan whilst mouthing off shit, that you have only been told about, by your deluded mummy and her ‘special friend. why don’t you go and watch someone closer to where you live……i suspect it is a probably near a town where, maybe, exeter city play. then you can make some real, valid judgements, when you grow up.

  20. Matthew Van Huizen says:

    With all those anti-scouse chants, no wonder Wanye Rooney lost his hair

  21. parryheid says:

    reds.

    Wriggle as much as you like,try and deflect as much as you like the question remains the same Who killed the 96? I accept that it is probably not 96 innocents as some of the fuckers who crashed in probably corked it as well,Karma eh it’s a bitch.Notwithstanding that little detail do the non Liverpool element not question all those standing at the back were not given a tug and ask to explain.Baffles me that as does the fact the citizens ofLiverpool seemingly did not ask the fans to identify them.Didn’t happen in Manchester with the Rangers support and there were not flocks of dead people,strange folk.Go on make an exception show yourself worthy answer the question.

  22. reds says:

    well as you have answered your own question, that you believe lfc fans killed themselves, why are you asking me? you are avoiding my two questions. you admit by your silence that you accept manchester united employees killed their own players, by not removing them from the aircraft, after the second aborted attempt. you also admit by your silence, that you accept you never go to games and therefore, are like most other ‘wet,limp,pathetic, sad” armchair fans on here. i probably know more about mufc and munich than you, a supposed ‘fan’, who only contributes clueless bile on sites like these. now mummy’s boy, who probably still lives at home (whichever traveller site that may be), be a good boy and do as you are asked. well done though, i never usually go near these forums, even lfc ones as they are, bar a minority such as myself who GOES to games, full of mouthy, no nothings who want to be ‘real ‘fans’ but are in reality, billy no mates who live in a virtual fantasy world, where, and you are a typical example, you can create a persona that makes you out to be something you really can only jerk off about. so, mr. fantasist, whats it going to be?

  23. parryheid says:

    Reds.

    I ask you the question who killed the 96? Mainly because you are on an MUFC site trawling for sympathy and the reason you are not on RAWK is because they are your doppelgangers with exactly the same views.News for you thicko no sympathy to be found here.You are correct I do already know the answer to the who killed the 96.just waiting for you to confirm it go on do it you may be surprised by the reaction on here,Hah.

  24. reds says:

    a message to brian t. 100% right fella, i do know about all of those incidents, and you have missed a couple, by the way. the problem you have on sites like these are the truly thick people that frequently post on them. i only visited this to actually see for myself how low the mufc ‘fans’ would sink after the report came out. but i have to realise, the majority on here (and others) just pay lip service to ‘supporting’ mufc and other clubs. it is very easy to be a hard man and come across all big and brash with their clueless views. most of them are sad fantasists, truly sad, who come match day, sit in their chairs, with the latest shirt on,( of course, that then validates them as a ‘real fan’). they never attend the games, they say they can’t get a ticket. bollocks!! if you want a ticket, you can get them, no problem. it’s safer to watch the tv and spout the shit they put on here, but as they come across so macho on here, i wonder why they won’t physically interact with the opposition fans AT the grounds and tell them exactly what they put on these sites? from the safey and comfort of their homes, it’s bigger and braver to do it via a keyboard….most don’t know any history about the club, but google can cure that now and make them look even more of a ‘fan’………..mufc is a great club, shame the modern world enables turgid scum to attach themselves to it’s name.

  25. Red Robin says:

    Liverpool fans are bunch of thick, useless, shameless, disilution, self-righteous wankers.

    Why oh why are you wanking on a United blog? Unbelieveble!

  26. Red Robin says:

    Get a life!
    Or get a job at least!
    Jesus!

  27. reds says:

    parrydickheid——for the last time, here we go. trawl for sympathy?? dear oh dear, read above, you are an fantasist in need of, that is plainly obvious. i trust my many observations are true of you, you have not denied anything………hope you get ‘sky go’ working in time for sunday, while us, REAL, PROPER, MATCH ATENDEES( non- shirt wearing, i don’t have to try to convince myself, im the real deal), enjoy the atmosphere, which i trust, the genuine mufc fans will positively contribute to…….and you and your like, can then, after the game finishes, quickly log on to this and other sites, with your trousers round your ankles and type big bad,brave insults aimed at the naughty scousers. then you can go back downstairs to your mummy and her ‘special friend’ (brother?) and tell them everything about how bad and naughty those scousers are. hahahahahahahahahahaha. INBRED CUNT!!!!

  28. parryheid says:

    reds.

    Oh another award for me thanks but your starting to overdo it our lounge wall is running out of hanging room.Just who the fuck killed the 96 anyway? Anticipating us tossing ourselves off are you this weekend,any guess how big our win will be.Just answer the question and stop kow towing to the Utd support that wont get you sympathy on here.

  29. SoccerLimey says:

    Probably the most common sense article I’ve read yet.

    Great stuff. I wish I’d written it myself.

  30. Sotos says:

    Well i can understand this point of view very clearly since i know how the media work.But what about a chant your fans were singing against Everton at Goodison park?The one that says “If it wasn’t for the scousers we could stand”??Wasn’t that reffering to Hillsborough?And i have to say that to me chants about Munich are so disgusting as well.With all the respect i believe there was no intention by man u fans to mock the 96 this time but i think you have done it in the past.

  31. OT says:

    While it is clear that lot of thought has been put into this piece, IMO it entirely misses the point. The jist of the article is:

    A. The chants are not about Hillsborough as evidenced by the number of other events where Liverpool an/or its fans refused to take responsibility for their actions; and

    B. Since the chants are not about Hillsborough, there is nothing wrong with them.

    The existence of those other events does not prove that that chants are not about Hillsborough, all it proves is that these chants are not NECESSARILY about Hillsborough, that’s all. The question whether or not these chants are ACTUALLY about Hillsborough is a matter of interpretation.

    As for interpretation, these chants are sang by thousands of ManU fans, each with his or or own view as to what they mean. Neither Scott nor any other person has the authority to produce a definitive interpretation as to whether or not they refer to Hillsborough. Just look at the responses to this post where come persons claiming to be ManU fans, still blame the Scousers for Hillsborough. Surely to those fans these chants do indeed refer to Hillsborough.

    If not all ManU fans share Scott’s interpretation, why should the media? Why should the families of the 96? Why should all those who fought for 23 years so that the 96 will get justice?

    Here is the simple truth. Regardless of what you think these chants mean, any time these chants are heard its it inflicts pain and suffering on the families of the 96. It hurts their loved ones. If you want to keep on with these chants, knock yourselves out, but please don’t argue that his is not an act of disrespect towards the 96. I cannot think of a greater act of disrespect towards that 96 than hurting their loved ones.

  32. Stigweard says:

    Can’t deny our stupidity behind the Suarez stuff. We should have just said “he’s being punished, we’ll take whatever the FA give him and move on”
    What happened istead is why Kenny most likely got fired.

    But on the Sheilds thing – Why did Graham Sankey confess to doing the crime. Yeah he later retracted it, but why confess if you know you’re not guilty?

    A big part of Heysel was LFC fans, correct. But what about the state of the stadium UEFA, which was deemed unfit and also the fact other factions from other English clubs had made the trip and were in with the LFC fans. I’m not saying we weren’t the blame because we were, but other things were also to blame.

    As for thw chant, you surely understand why it comes across as a Hillbrough chant (as well as a Surez, Sheild and Heysel one). It may not be it’s inteded use but it’s how it’s seen by everyone.

  33. anyone says:

    he confessed because there was no extradition likely and he yhought he’d get shields off the hook (which in the event happened )

    as soon as European Arrest Warrants came into force, he retracts his confession.

    simples.

  34. Baggie Dave says:

    I found some of this a bit rich. In 02 3000 Baggies fans enjoyed a day out at a generally very subdued Old Trafford.

    This inlcuded a rendition of the dam busters, to the chant of “yam yam” – a long standing anti Wolves song. Yam is a derogetory term as it is Black Country dialect for ‘You’ or ‘You are’. In the past the chant going back to the 70s was simply “we all hate Wolves and Wolves… we all ckin hate Wolves’. I think most terraces sang something similar about their neigbours.

    The Stretford Endboys seemed to assume that this was related to Munich and it got a bit tetchy afterwards., If there was anyone there trying to relate it to ’58 it is beyond me.

    I first saw Man U in 72 at the Hawthorns, when United fans sang on mass ‘Fuck off West Brom’. Charming. I thought that everyone had a soft spot for us.

LEAVE YOUR COMMENT BELOW

You must be logged in to post a comment.