The Official Sunderland thread
Discussion
had ham said:
At least we didn't lose.
And I see you're on RTG now
Couldn't make it today, have a few folk viewing our house here in East Herts - probably for the best!
Aye it was a long old way for a poor game, I'll be back down on boxing day for that one though, And I see you're on RTG now
Couldn't make it today, have a few folk viewing our house here in East Herts - probably for the best!
Been on there a while, I didn't post for a few years and forgot my login, which was tied to an old work email to which I no longer have access, so that's a new account
SpeckledJim said:
Blib said:
Heads up!
Netflix mini series on Sunderland's 2017-18 season starts on Friday 14th.
Should be interesting............
It was bloody brilliant. I binged the whole series on Friday night. Really enjoyed it.Netflix mini series on Sunderland's 2017-18 season starts on Friday 14th.
Should be interesting............
Short. What a tt.
pavarotti1980 said:
had ham said:
46,039.
Yup, 46,039.
League One.
There is something about this club.
still havent broken the record for 3rd tier football which was the whole purpose of this "Boxing Day Special".Yup, 46,039.
League One.
There is something about this club.
That goes to Sheffield derby in December 1979. Attendance 49,309
How could we intend to break a record that's bigger than the capacity of our stadium? Perhaps you should pipe down if you don't know what you're talking about?
Axionknight said:
No, it wasn't. It was always about getting a crowd larger than 40,000, a target set by one of the directors.
How could we intend to break a record that's bigger than the capacity of our stadium? Perhaps you should pipe down if you don't know what you're talking about?
it was the "League One" record. Despite the fact it is still the 3rd tier of league football. Football only started in 1992 didnt itHow could we intend to break a record that's bigger than the capacity of our stadium? Perhaps you should pipe down if you don't know what you're talking about?
pavarotti1980 said:
Axionknight said:
No, it wasn't. It was always about getting a crowd larger than 40,000, a target set by one of the directors.
How could we intend to break a record that's bigger than the capacity of our stadium? Perhaps you should pipe down if you don't know what you're talking about?
it was the "League One" record. Despite the fact it is still the 3rd tier of league football. Football only started in 1992 didnt itHow could we intend to break a record that's bigger than the capacity of our stadium? Perhaps you should pipe down if you don't know what you're talking about?
I know what it is and what it was - I don't need or want any lessons from you, as you appear to be making my argument up for me and then debunking it, you abject melt, learn to read.
Edited by Axionknight on Friday 28th December 14:26
Axionknight said:
Yeah, that's exactly what I implied.
I know what it is and what it was - I don't need or want any lessons from you, as you appear to be making my argument up for me and then debunking it, you abject melt, learn to read.
I dont seem to recall you impying anything.I know what it is and what it was - I don't need or want any lessons from you, as you appear to be making my argument up for me and then debunking it, you abject melt, learn to read.
Edited by Axionknight on Friday 28th December 14:26
Angry little person arent you.
Did you not get fed over Xmas?
Edited by pavarotti1980 on Friday 28th December 15:07
I suspect we actually fielded the youngest player tonight, and the average age of the teams is probably not as far apart as you might think. Hey ho, we're 4-0 up currently, but certainly no bragging rights with this game.
I understand there was much naughtiness before the game, and likely to be more after, given the 2,800 visitors and the result.
Not good.
I understand there was much naughtiness before the game, and likely to be more after, given the 2,800 visitors and the result.
Not good.
Thankfully I was only partially correct. Apart from a few seats being ripped out anda few isolated 'incidents' outside/on Metro, it seems it wasn't too bad after all.
And just for note, the two youngest players on the pitch (one of whom scored) were Sunderland. And Sunderland's midfield general last night was still in primary school the last time Newcastle beat us.
And just for note, the two youngest players on the pitch (one of whom scored) were Sunderland. And Sunderland's midfield general last night was still in primary school the last time Newcastle beat us.
had ham said:
I suspect we actually fielded the youngest player tonight, and the average age of the teams is probably not as far apart as you might think. Hey ho, we're 4-0 up currently, but certainly no bragging rights with this game.
I understand there was much naughtiness before the game, and likely to be more after, given the 2,800 visitors and the result.
Not good.
No not that far apart.I understand there was much naughtiness before the game, and likely to be more after, given the 2,800 visitors and the result.
Not good.
Of all the players who got on the field last night SAFC average age was 23 yrs 7 months and NUFC was 19 years 1 month.
SAFC had the youngest player in Mumba on the field (17), Hackett and Kimpioka both 18
NUFC had four players aged 18 (Walton, M Longstaff, Wilson, Toure)
Gassing Station | Football | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff