|
Post by wuzza on Aug 26, 2017 20:21:05 GMT
Does anyone really think of us as 'City' ? It always has and will be 'Stoke'. City only really comes into play when there is another club with the same location - i.e. Manchester , Bristol etc. On a national recognition level 'City' has always referred to the Mancs. No not always only since they got rich I can go back as far as the late 60's and as I remember it 'City' was always a reference to Malcolm Allison's boys. There again I've generally resided in the N.West so perhaps I've had a slightly distorted experience of it.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 26, 2017 20:22:22 GMT
Call me old-fashioned l, but it really pisses me off when clubs get referred to as:
West Bromwich Albion
Preston North End
Aston Villa
Etc,
And we get referred to as Stoke.
It's Stoke City, so refer to us as that.
|
|
|
Post by dwr17477 on Aug 26, 2017 20:30:53 GMT
Nope. I cant really see the issue. I always refer to us as Stoke, most people just say Stoke. I never hear anyone complain that they don't add the City on to it. Many teams are commonly referred to using just one of their names...and if Man City are commonly referred to as just City, so fucking what! I really can't think of any occasion at all where it has caused any issues at all. Far more things to deal with and worry about and even yo get pissy knickers over What about when the radio STOKE commentary when we play Manchester City refers to them as City? What when Manchester United play Sheffield United and the commentator refers to United? What when it's acceptable to call both Sheffield clubs and both Bristol clubs by only the first name but you don't do this with the Manchester clubs? I'll tell you what it is. It's pampering to and fuelling the arrogance of the Manc clubs whose fans think they are the only clubs called by those names and remind us every time they visit us that there is only one City. BM Perfectly put. I call either of them Manchester when referring to them...or worse.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 26, 2017 22:13:33 GMT
We're Stoke. Always have been. Just Stoke.
"Who the fuck are you lot?"
"Stoke".
"And we haven't had our breakfast".
(Kicks off)
Citeh is Man City. They've always just called themselves Citeh. Nothing about arrogance. Just football culture history. Back when they were shit - just Citeh.
Not sure what is so complicated about this bit of tribal anthropology. People getting all precious over nothing.
|
|
|
Post by stokiejoeofalsager on Aug 26, 2017 22:38:56 GMT
I actually don't like it when we're referred to as 'Stoke City'. I prefer just Stoke. People who don't like football tend to say 'Stoke City' which is probably what has put me off it.
|
|
|
Post by Laughing Gravy on Aug 26, 2017 22:39:54 GMT
We're Stoke. Always have been. Just Stoke. "Who the fuck are you lot?" "Stoke". "And we haven't had our breakfast". (Kicks off) Citeh is Man City. They've always just called themselves Citeh. Nothing about arrogance. Just football culture history. Back when they were shit - just Citeh. Not sure what is so complicated about this bit of tribal anthropology. People getting all precious over nothing. We're Stoke we're Stoke we're Stoke (and all that) 😉
|
|
|
Post by mickstupp on Aug 26, 2017 22:51:51 GMT
It's mildly annoying, but the reality is to the wider British public they are City, plain and simple.
Personally, I make it a point to never ever refer to them as City when in football discussion with non stoke supporting colleagues at work.
|
|
|
Post by Gods on Aug 26, 2017 23:04:52 GMT
Am I the only person that this doesn't bother? No you're not. I don't get the faux outrage either. We don't even call ourselves 'City' do we? It's always 'Stoke' or 'Stoke City' or 'The Potters' so we can hardly complain that someone else has made it their own.
|
|
|
Post by BristolMick on Aug 26, 2017 23:08:13 GMT
It's mildly annoying, but the reality is to the wider British public they are City, plain and simple. Personally, I make it a point to never ever refer to them as City when in football discussion with non stoke supporting colleagues at work. You have to do your bit mate, no matter how little. I once had some twat burst into a bar when I was stood by the doors watching the football scores come through on the TV and ask me "how have united got on" and so as I am a man of the SW I told him that Torquay had drawn 1-1 at Lincoln. Unfortunately the dumb fuck didn't understand I was taking the piss out of his arrogance, gave me the look that I hadn't got a clue about football or the question he asked and moved on to the next person who satisfied his ego by telling him how Manchester had gone on.
|
|
|
Post by y_oh_y_delilah on Aug 26, 2017 23:24:34 GMT
Personally I think it's a bit naff when we're referred to simply as 'City' Much prefer to hear 'Stoke' with its unique identity. When wearing your team colours on holiday was an okay thing to do, never, not once, did anyone ever ask how 'City' are doing it was always "aren't 'Stoke' shite" or something similar. Could never argue because in the days when I did wear THE shirt on holiday, we were indeed shite!
|
|
|
Post by tijuanabrass on Aug 26, 2017 23:35:54 GMT
I find it irritating, not from the fans perspective who are fully entitled to tag their team however they see fit. It's the media and their melodramatic sycophancy that bugs me. They try to fuel their own importance by tethering themselves to popular football brands - using the informal and familial nomenclature liberally, as if to say, "we are you and you are us." Toadying shits!
And to those of you who don't think that our team are ever referred to as City, the late Jackie Trent begs to differ.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 27, 2017 2:00:25 GMT
Nope. I cant really see the issue. I always refer to us as Stoke, most people just say Stoke. I never hear anyone complain that they don't add the City on to it. Many teams are commonly referred to using just one of their names...and if Man City are commonly referred to as just City, so fucking what! I really can't think of any occasion at all where it has caused any issues at all. Far more things to deal with and worry about and even yo get pissy knickers over What about when the radio STOKE commentary when we play Manchester City refers to them as City? I don't give a fuckWhat when Manchester United play Sheffield United and the commentator refers to United? I especially dont give a fuckWhat when it's acceptable to call both Sheffield clubs and both Bristol clubs by only the first name but you don't do this with the Manchester clubs? I really REALLY dont give a fuckI'll tell you what it is. It's pampering to and fuelling the arrogance of the Manc clubs whose fans think they are the only clubs called by those names and remind us every time they visit us that there is only one City. ...and it has absolutely no impact on anything whatsoeverBM
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 27, 2017 2:06:23 GMT
Call me old-fashioned l, but it really pisses me off when clubs get referred to as: West Bromwich Albion Preston North End Aston Villa Etc, And we get referred to as Stoke. It's Stoke City, so refer to us as that. Are you going to start the revolution then? Make sure you tell everyone of this when they just call us Stoke... Start with the BBC: www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/40990429This is littered with "Stoke" and "West Brom". I can only imagine how outraged you must be!
|
|
|
Post by pyrus on Aug 27, 2017 4:45:42 GMT
Let them have it.
When people ask me who I support, I say 'Stoke'; the word 'City' doesn't come into it. Besides Stoke is only a city through some municiple fucking about with a map and a pencil in 1924 (I think it actually held county status before then) and it's all a bit confusing because Stoke is a town, Stoke-on-Trent is the city and the stadium is in a no-mans-land between Trentham and Blurton, which barely made it inside the 1924 pencil line - Christ we are very nearly Barlaston Rovers ...fuckit we are Stoke, that's all there is to it.
In any event, When I come across People who tell me they support 'Citeh', I like to say "you don't sound like you come from Leicester". Although, increasingly these people don't pronounce it 'Citeh' and the couldn't point to Manchester on a map if you asked them.
|
|
|
Post by rawli on Aug 27, 2017 5:48:44 GMT
Do the people who object go round Birmingham correcting people who say Blues or Villa?
Man City are City. Man Utd are United (though they are still The Shit, hardly media friendly term). Get over it and stop standing like King Cnut trying to get the tide to go back.
Enjoy the next Glasgow Rangers vs. Glasgow Celtic derby from your dull high horses.
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Aug 27, 2017 5:56:56 GMT
|
|
|
Post by rawli on Aug 27, 2017 5:57:28 GMT
Call me old-fashioned l, but it really pisses me off when clubs get referred to as: West Bromwich Albion Preston North End Aston Villa Etc, And we get referred to as Stoke. It's Stoke City, so refer to us as that. If you were really old fashioned you'd be pissed off we weren't referred to as Stoke. It was our name for 59 years. Imagine the uproar on here if they changed the name of the club. It's bad enough if the stripes are a quarter of an inch to wide. Bring back Stoke FC
|
|
|
Post by rawli on Aug 27, 2017 5:58:29 GMT
Nope. I cant really see the issue. I always refer to us as Stoke, most people just say Stoke. I never hear anyone complain that they don't add the City on to it. Many teams are commonly referred to using just one of their names...and if Man City are commonly referred to as just City, so fucking what! I really can't think of any occasion at all where it has caused any issues at all. Far more things to deal with and worry about and even yo get pissy knickers over What about when the radio STOKE commentary when we play Manchester City refers to them as City? What when Manchester United play Sheffield United and the commentator refers to United? What when it's acceptable to call both Sheffield clubs and both Bristol clubs by only the first name but you don't do this with the Manchester clubs? I'll tell you what it is. It's pampering to and fuelling the arrogance of the Manc clubs whose fans think they are the only clubs called by those names and remind us every time they visit us that there is only one City. BM Were we the last club to be named City?
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Aug 27, 2017 6:10:16 GMT
What about when the radio STOKE commentary when we play Manchester City refers to them as City? What when Manchester United play Sheffield United and the commentator refers to United? What when it's acceptable to call both Sheffield clubs and both Bristol clubs by only the first name but you don't do this with the Manchester clubs? I'll tell you what it is. It's pampering to and fuelling the arrogance of the Manc clubs whose fans think they are the only clubs called by those names and remind us every time they visit us that there is only one City. BM Were we the last club to be named City? Nope - there is another SCFC with that record.
|
|
|
Post by rawli on Aug 27, 2017 6:26:57 GMT
Were we the last club to be named City? Nope - there is another SCFC with that record. Swansea?
|
|
|
Post by rorymscfc on Aug 27, 2017 6:33:16 GMT
Swansea are AFC
|
|
|
Post by wuzza on Aug 27, 2017 7:54:38 GMT
I think I read somwhere that Exeter were the first club to use 'City' so perhaps it's them that should be getting uppity on this subject!
|
|
|
Post by woodstein on Aug 27, 2017 8:08:21 GMT
Call me old-fashioned l, but it really pisses me off when clubs get referred to as: West Bromwich Albion Preston North End Aston Villa Etc, And we get referred to as Stoke. It's Stoke City, so refer to us as that. Surely most folk refer to them as West Brom and Preston rather than adding the third bit on. Local people use the term City for Bradford in my area but Leeds don't use United. Also, Halifax town fans didn't even like calling themselves Halifax! - due to the same towns rugby league team, so it was "Shaymen". It's up to the fans really, but annoying that tv twerps think there's only 1 city and united.
|
|