Potentially - wow!

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Hang on lads. Let's sort this out. Washington - little more than a village when I was a lad - was not historically part of the town of Sunderland. That, I think, is what Humbles' getting at. Gary Hutchinson is, I think, referring to the modern Greater Sunderland. So both are right on their own terms.

I've much appreciated the posts of Outlaw and Crammers on here - I'm dead keen on how the U.S. soccer scene is developing.
 
<laugh>

You must log in or register to see media

Truth never changes.

Truth never goes away….:emoticon-0103-cool:

You must log in or register to see media

No, but many people/places can have their fingers in one 'truth'. In medieval times, rich families inherited, bought, or were awarded by the king/queen, estates all over England. Each estate had a manor house, which was claimed to be "the home" of that family. As the head of the family toured around to inspect his estates, he would occasionally live at that house, so these claims are not inherently untrue. How often and for what periods they were actually in residence is a different matter. John o'Gaunt had estates in more than half the counties of England, so how many 'homes' claim him these days is anyone's guess!
 
  • Like
Reactions: C19RK73
You must log in or register to see media
No, but many people/places can have their fingers in one 'truth'. In medieval times, rich families inherited, bought, or were awarded by the king/queen, estates all over England. Each estate had a manor house, which was claimed to be "the home" of that family. As the head of the family toured around to inspect his estates, he would occasionally live at that house, so these claims are not inherently untrue. How often and for what periods they were actually in residence is a different matter. John o'Gaunt had estates in more than half the counties of England, so how many 'homes' claim him these days is anyone's guess!


Fair point, but George Washington and sunderland… can anyone show me the historical connection?
 
Fair point, but George Washington and sunderland… can anyone show me the historical connection?[/QUOTE]

No, on your terms , they can't, which is why you've got no disrespect from me. You've made a fair enough point yourself all along. The problem, I think, is that most people think in terms of modern Sunderland - and Washington is as much a part of Sunderland today as Salford is thought of as a part of Manchester. As places grew, traditional boundaries became less significant. No, fair does to you. You made a valid point.[/QUOTE]
 
Fair point, but George Washington and sunderland… can anyone show me the historical connection?

No, on your terms , they can't, which is why you've got no disrespect from me. You've made a fair enough point yourself all along. The problem, I think, is that most people think in terms of modern Sunderland - and Washington is as much a part of Sunderland today as Salford is thought of as a part of Manchester. As places grew, traditional boundaries became less significant. No, fair does to you. You made a valid point.[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]
Unless i'm being thick

http://www.washingtonlass.com/WashingtonFamilyGenealogy.html
 
Gary Hutchinson, Sunderland's commercial director.

Hutchinson, then representing Sunderland's chamber of commerce, laid the seed for the partnership on a cultural exchange a few years ago. Despite some vast differences, Washington and Sunderland are, in fact, sister cities. And Sunderland is the ancestral home of George Washington, D.C.'s namesake (sparking some permanent player loan jokes at Wednesday's reception).


You're a ****ing idiot <doh>