Yeh, mugged off again. Come up with something original next time. Not sure thats possible for fans of the two most unoriginal teams around but at least give it a go.
You copy others. Unoriginal. For example, your transfer stratagy used to be, "who are United scouting? Pay double" City too. Quite funny really. At least Chelsea have branched out in recent years occasionally. Still go for whoever we are linked with though City, they tend to drop tye City part and bank on people still thinking its United.
The set up of the bridge meana you dont cordone off as many seats. Basically because your ground is ****, it skews the results.
You're not just getting us confused with another team again are you? Or just literally making things up as you've been found out again...
Making what up? Thats why your top, the results are skewed and dont represent the true figures. It also has city at 48000 which as we all know, is wrong. Its a poor effort all round. Think of it like this. Club A has a ground that holds a maximum of 1000 people. Club B has a stadium that holds 10000 people. 999 people watch Club A in every game. 7580 people watch Club B. Which is better supported?
Who is better supported is not the issue though is it? The point being that if we fill our ground every week, then there is the demand for a ground expansion - which you have previously tried to argue we didn't need. Do try and keep up.