FC United FA Cup thread

I have yet to meet a single FC fan who wants to play United. The thought of it makes me feel sick.

I'd just stick a pillow over my head for a couple of days and try to avoid what was happening.

It seems there are similar feelings among the Wimbledon fans who really don't want to play Milton Keynes, should both teams win their replays.

As mentioned, I'd love to get the likes of Citeh, or Liverpool, so we might have a crack at re-uniting the fanbase. Although I'm sad to say I can imagine certain sections of the United support being honorary bitters/dippers for the day.

Originally Posted by redloner

I have yet to meet a single FC fan who wants to play United. The thought of it makes me feel sick.

I'd just stick a pillow over my head for a couple of days and try to avoid what was happening.

Sadly there was a fan on football focus who seemed to think it'd be great.

AFC playing MK Dons isn't a fair comparison. The reason AFC don't want to play MK Dons isn't that they fear being beaten by them, it's that they feel quite rightly that MK Dons shouldn't exist at all. Which is the complete opposite of how FC fans feel about Big United.

how would FC go about refusing to be on TV then? say you draw United at home. ITV or Murdoch come knocking, as they certainly would. why would you turn that down? United will be on TV regardless of who they draw anyway ffs. even if you could tell TV to do one, to avoid putting money in glazer's pocket you'd have to boycott your own home match or withdraw from the FA Cup, thereby risking potentially being black-balled from the competition for a period.

Originally Posted by Tumescent Throb

how would FC go about refusing to be on TV then? say you draw United at home. ITV or Murdoch come knocking, as they certainly would. why would you turn that down? United will be on TV regardless of who they draw anyway ffs. even if you could tell TV to do one, to avoid putting money in glazer's pocket you'd have to boycott your own home match or withdraw from the FA Cup, thereby risking potentially being black-balled from the competition for a period.

They wouldn't turn it down.

The point being spectacularly missed is that they'd turn down TV down if it was to adversely affect travelling fans, ie if the last round had been away at Plymouth (as opposed to Rochdale) on a Friday night they'd have £#%&!ed ESPN off.

Originally Posted by andyroo

AFC playing MK Dons isn't a fair comparison. The reason AFC don't want to play MK Dons isn't that they fear being beaten by them, it's that they feel quite rightly that MK Dons shouldn't exist at all. Which is the complete opposite of how FC fans feel about Big United.

it's also unfair because the circumstances surrounding United and Wimbledon are very different - some fans left United (and set up a franchise if you like), whereas Wimbledon left all its fans to become a franchise. i'm sure this simplistic description will rub one or two up the wrong way but it's not intended to.

Originally Posted by Tumescent Throb

how would FC go about refusing to be on TV then? say you draw United at home. ITV or Murdoch come knocking, as they certainly would. why would you turn that down? United will be on TV regardless of who they draw anyway ffs. even if you could tell TV to do one, to avoid putting money in glazer's pocket you'd have to boycott your own home match or withdraw from the FA Cup, thereby risking potentially being black-balled from the competition for a period.

You can turn tele down if you want apparently. ESPN asked, we could have politely declined if we wanted, with no recriminations.

Originally Posted by Tumescent Throb

how would FC go about refusing to be on TV then? say you draw United at home. ITV or Murdoch come knocking, as they certainly would. why would you turn that down? United will be on TV regardless of who they draw anyway ffs. even if you could tell TV to do one, to avoid putting money in glazer's pocket you'd have to boycott your own home match or withdraw from the FA Cup, thereby risking potentially being black-balled from the competition for a period.

FC killed the FA Cup.

Originally Posted by carlosartorial

They wouldn't turn it down.

The point being spectacularly missed is that they'd turn down TV down if it was to adversely affect travelling fans, ie if the last round had been away at Plymouth (as opposed to Rochdale) on a Friday night they'd have £#%&!ed ESPN off.

ideally, maybe. practically though? only by negotiation.

Originally Posted by Withers

You can turn tele down if you want apparently. ESPN asked, we could have politely declined if we wanted, with no recriminations.

Why didn't you do it then Withers? It wasn't Saturday at 3 o'clock was it Withers? Withers?

Only kidding I hope they do well and that everyone involved has a thoroughly top time and moralistic high ground can be kept intact.

Originally Posted by Withers

You can turn tele down if you want apparently. ESPN asked, we could have politely declined if we wanted, with no recriminations.

oh ok. stand corrected then if true.

how does the boycotting your own home game in the event of drawing United hypothetical %@#$&!s pan out in reality?

Originally Posted by Withers

You can turn tele down if you want apparently. ESPN asked, we could have politely declined if we wanted, with no recriminations.

I daresay Rochdale might not have been too happy to miss out on the telly money.

It's all very well for people to bash FC over taking the TV shilling but they also have to consider their place in the football community. Yes they could always start their own idealist league I suppose, but surely that's taking it beyond the realms of practicality. As it is, there will always have to be compromises but I think they did the sensible thing by all parties here. Also full marks to Rochdale for dropping the ticket prices.

Originally Posted by Tumescent Throb

oh ok. stand corrected then if true.

how does the boycotting your own home game in the event of drawing United hypothetical %@#$&!s pan out in reality?

Home is harder than away but in theory, put the match on, give all the tickets to United. Go halfers on the gate money and those that never wanted to give a penny to Glazers still haven't.

Originally Posted by Tumescent Throb

it's also unfair because the circumstances surrounding United and Wimbledon are very different - some fans left United (and set up a franchise if you like), whereas Wimbledon left all its fans to become a franchise. i'm sure this simplistic description will rub one or two up the wrong way but it's not intended to.

Don't think there's anything wrong with saying that, it's true. The reasons behind the creation of AFC Wimbledon and FC United weren't the same. I don't think it makes FC any less valid though.

Originally Posted by Tumescent Throb

ideally, maybe. practically though? only by negotiation.

I don't £#%&!ing know. I've just told you what what the score is - they don't want the the fans to be inconvenienced by tv companies and to be schlepping all over the country at stupid hours at their behest. Whether the money on offer means that this 'principled, idealistic, moral high ground' has to be abandoned to certain peoples' delight and amusement remains to be seen I suppose.

ffs

Originally Posted by Withers

Home is harder than away but in theory, put the match on, give all the tickets to United. Go halfers on the gate money and those that never wanted to give a penny to Glazers still haven't.

it's a tricky one intit

Originally Posted by Zorg

Don't think there's anything wrong with saying that, it's true. The reasons behind the creation of AFC Wimbledon and FC United weren't the same. I don't think it makes FC any less valid though.

no question over FC's validity at all from my point of view. only question marks for were about the motivation behind it when it finally happened and whether i could be bothered with following two teams. 5 or 10 years too late for me.

Originally Posted by carlosartorial

I don't £#%&!ing know. I've just told you what what the score is - they don't want the the fans to be inconvenienced by tv companies and to be schlepping all over the country at stupid hours at their behest. Whether the money on offer means that this 'principled, idealistic, moral high ground' has to be abandoned to certain peoples' delight and amusement remains to be seen I suppose.

ffs

Looking forward to the stretching of moral boundaries arguments already tbh

Originally Posted by Tumescent Throb

Looking forward to the stretching of moral boundaries arguments already tbh

Aren't people just?

Originally Posted by Tumescent Throb

no question over FC's validity at all from my point of view. only question marks for were about the motivation behind it when it finally happened and whether i could be bothered with following two teams. 5 or 10 years too late for me.

Yeah I know that's not what you were saying, it's just a common criticism, usually from ABUs.

The TV issue is one loads of people are jumping on, but to be fair we have nothing in the manifesto or constitution about it. Many fans may cite it as one of the many reasons they stopped going to OT, but that doesn't make it a club rule.

http://www.fc-utd.co.uk/constitution.php

The closest thing is over-commercialism but how you interpret that is anyone's guess...?

We boycotted the Curzon game in 2007, but that was more to do with a broken promise about the clubs having the final decision. Both clubs rejected the move and the league and InVision moved it anyway.

In the case of last week's game, both clubs were given the option and having voted on the issue at an AGM some time ago, the board decided to go with it because it was local and not too inconveniencing to the members.

Originally Posted by Zorg

Yeah I know that's not what you were saying, it's just a common criticism, usually from ABUs.

ABFC's