Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
 Share
jonthefox

The "do they mean us?" thread

By jonthefox, in Leicester City Forum

Recommended Posts

Kitchandro

Kitchandro

Posted
Posted (edited)

Lets remember it only holds 24,000. And that away fans travel in their hundreds as oppose to their thousands when it comes to Rugby Union, ignoring the fact that the statement about league one is just factually incorrect if you actually head counted the number of home fans attending games I'd wager they probably out did is in the Championship as well bar possibly the promotion season. 

 

Rugby is very much a less followed sport than football and Premeir League Rugby is never going to match Premeir League football, in any town. The Tigers have the best support in England by some distance when it comes to Rugby Union so it's little surprise some people view the city as a Rugby orientated. 

 

 

Woah woah whoah....how did I miss Manwell's latest classic?

 

1. Yeh you're right they do only travel away in their hundreds. Including Tigers fans. 1-0 to City.

 

2. If you're going to question the credibility of the league 1 numbers then you have to question those of the rugby attendances too, especially since rugby fans are the most plastic sports fans you'll meet.

 

3. Your point about it only holding 24,000 bares no relevance if you also want the number of away fans to count in your argument as well. It's either not being filled, or it is filled but is too small for their fanbase. Pick one.

 

4. This is the Real Madrid of Rugby. We have just had the worst 10 years of our history. Yet we get bigger crowds than them in the 2nd tier (perhaps marginally for the last few years, definitely last season). I've no idea why you're really trying to argue, Leicester City are absolutely huge compared to the Tigers, it's barely even comparable. The fact you're splitting hairs about the league 1 season speaks volumes. You know it, everyone knows it.

 

5. If rugby really was as popular as you're suggesting, why does their ground only hold 24K in this day and age (baring in mind they're even older than us)?

 

In conclusion, anyone that refers to us as 'rugby orientated', 'a rugby town' or claims that we 'prefer rugby' (I'm looking at you Alan Smith from FIFA commentary) is an absolute and utter retard.

Edited by Kitchandro
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Manwell Pablo

Manwell Pablo

Posted
Posted

QPR's midfield looked really good on Saturday. I think that will give them a chance of staying up, particularly having brought Sandro in.

 

Austin didn't look up to it to me, but he took his goal excellently and I suppose they won't care if he offers the square root of feck all if he scores 10 goals doing so.

 

That's all Austin is a finisher. If he stays fit and plays 30 plus games he'll hit 10 easy I think (That's a big if given his shoulder could pop out at any given moment) I also think QPR could well end up staying up, not out of the question they'd finish above us if things don't go our way, as I've said before it's certainly not an opinion I would laugh at just yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Doctor

The Doctor

Posted
Posted

Woah woah whoah....how did I miss Manwell's latest classic?

 

1. Yeh you're right they do only travel away in their hundreds. Including Tigers fans. 1-0 to City.

 

2. If you're going to question the credibility of the league 1 numbers then you have to question those of the rugby attendances too, especially since rugby fans are the most plastic sports fans you'll meet.

 

3. Your point about it only holding 24,000 bares no relevance if you also want the number of away fans to count in your argument as well. It's either not being filled, or it is filled but is too small for their fanbase. Pick one.

 

4. This is the Real Madrid of Rugby. We have just had the worst 10 years of our history. Yet we get bigger crowds than them in the 2nd tier (perhaps marginally for the last few years, definitely last season). I've no idea why you're really trying to argue, Leicester City are absolutely huge compared to the Tigers, it's barely even comparable. The fact you're splitting hairs about the league 1 season speaks volumes. You know it, everyone knows it.

 

5. If rugby really was as popular as you're suggesting, why does their ground only hold 24K in this day and age (baring in mind they're even older than us)?

 

In conclusion, anyone that refers to us as 'rugby orientated', 'a rugby town' or claims that we 'prefer rugby' (I'm looking at you Alan Smith from FIFA commentary) is an absolute and utter retard.

 

You're being a complete tool again.

 

1. Really? Any source for the tigers travelling numbers - as far as I know, they travel very well.

 

2. Why do you have to question the rugby attendances, and how are rugby fans plastic? Their ground was packed, ours in the league one season certainly didn't seem that full, and it's fairly well known that the season tickets are just assumed to have attended.

 

3 - completely and utterly wrong; attendances include all fans, if other teams don't travel well, then it will pull the attendance down - both travelling support and a smaller stadium handicap the raw attendance numbers

 

4 - We have a bigger stadium; using that hitchinfox stat of 22,850 - they had an average attendance of 95% of capacity, We averaged 25k - 75% of the capacity per game. 

 

5 - Same reason they're expanding the stadium one stand at a time, at spaced out intervals - the money in football far outstrips the money in rugby; that has nothing to do with Leicester as a city, or Tigers - it's reflective of the national attitudes towards the two and the way the two are run.

 

The only retard here is you, it's quite clear that Leicester is a big Rugby city.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
PAPA LAZAROU

PAPA LAZAROU

Posted
Posted

You're being a complete tool again.

 

1. Really? Any source for the tigers travelling numbers - as far as I know, they travel very well.

 

2. Why do you have to question the rugby attendances, and how are rugby fans plastic? Their ground was packed, ours in the league one season certainly didn't seem that full, and it's fairly well known that the season tickets are just assumed to have attended.

 

3 - completely and utterly wrong; attendances include all fans, if other teams don't travel well, then it will pull the attendance down - both travelling support and a smaller stadium handicap the raw attendance numbers

 

4 - We have a bigger stadium; using that hitchinfox stat of 22,850 - they had an average attendance of 95% of capacity, We averaged 25k - 75% of the capacity per game. 

 

5 - Same reason they're expanding the stadium one stand at a time, at spaced out intervals - the money in football far outstrips the money in rugby; that has nothing to do with Leicester as a city, or Tigers - it's reflective of the national attitudes towards the two and the way the two are run.

 

The only retard here is you, it's quite clear that Leicester is a big Rugby city.

 

 

now then Kitch you should listen to your Doctor . :D  :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites
HitchinFox

HitchinFox

Posted
Posted

What do they expect from Charie Nicholas?

 

 

After the fortunate 1-0 over beskitas, he claimed arsenal were 2 players away from winning the champions league....lol.

I've never rated Charlie Nicholas as a pundit, mainly as I don't think I've ever heard him say anything insightful. Nothing wrong with being a bit biased towards your old club, but what annoys me about him is how he comes across as being certain about things - only to be proven 100 per cent wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Manwell Pablo

Manwell Pablo

Posted
Posted (edited)

Woah woah whoah....how did I miss Manwell's latest classic?

 

1. Yeh you're right they do only travel away in their hundreds. Including Tigers fans. 1-0 to City.

 

2. If you're going to question the credibility of the league 1 numbers then you have to question those of the rugby attendances too, especially since rugby fans are the most plastic sports fans you'll meet.

 

3. Your point about it only holding 24,000 bares no relevance if you also want the number of away fans to count in your argument as well. It's either not being filled, or it is filled but is too small for their fanbase. Pick one.

 

4. This is the Real Madrid of Rugby. We have just had the worst 10 years of our history. Yet we get bigger crowds than them in the 2nd tier (perhaps marginally for the last few years, definitely last season). I've no idea why you're really trying to argue, Leicester City are absolutely huge compared to the Tigers, it's barely even comparable. The fact you're splitting hairs about the league 1 season speaks volumes. You know it, everyone knows it.

 

5. If rugby really was as popular as you're suggesting, why does their ground only hold 24K in this day and age (baring in mind they're even older than us)?

 

In conclusion, anyone that refers to us as 'rugby orientated', 'a rugby town' or claims that we 'prefer rugby' (I'm looking at you Alan Smith from FIFA commentary) is an absolute and utter retard.

 

Fuking hell hit a nerve much lol.

 

If you actually read my post, when you sober up after your latest binge, or calmed down after your latest thai boxing class, or whatever it is that's got you so worked up, I've quite blatantly said Rugby Union will never compete with football in terms of popularity anywhere in this country the two sports or worlds apart in popularity . However, when talking relatively, the city is very rugby orientated when compared to others, there is certainly no other city where you could even hold the debate over which is more popular which should tell you something in itself. Given we house the best supported Rugby club in Europe, especially when considering the size of the city and indeed the crowds we are capable of attracting at the King Power, it is not a surprise the city is viewed as a big Rugby town.

 

Obviously if your talking literal numbers we are capable of pulling in the bigger crowds when in the same division, that's just the pull of Premier League football. As I've said though if you head count of home fans sat in home seats every year bar the year we actually went up, they'd of had more. And to be fair that's when Alan Smith was recorded as saying Leicester was a rugby town on FIFA, and I know you're a bit simple when it comes to things like commons sense and lateral thinking, so I'll help you out. That's not actually Alan Smith's opinion, it's what is known as a script, which will have been written for him.

 

Time for another "classic" vanishing act I think.

Edited by Manwell Pablo
Link to comment
Share on other sites
st albans fox

st albans fox

Posted
Posted

When he first came down here he was hailed as the new George Best..on that basis he was a major flop...but opinions are like arses ,everybody has one..

Like the great GB, he drank too much. And he didn't have George's skill . Not fit to lace his boots. I wouldn't pay too much attention to what he says. not sure I've ever heard him say anything that wasn't obvious.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...