Just seen the Shawcross tackle on the weekly Premier League highlights show here. Difficult to see from first look what exactly happened, and of course it wasn't repeated, so I can't give much of my own personal opinion. However, the commentators here described it as (roughly translated) not a vicious / sinister foul, but rather a very hard challenge. Having said that, the tackling technique in the Bundesliga leaves a lot to be desired at times so I won't be taking their word for gospel.

Hope (and am sure) he'll make a fully recovery. Seems to be a great little player, with a lot of potential. Feel for Shawcross too. I guess that such incidents are unfortunately a part and parcel of contact sport. Thankfully he'll be in good hands and such injuries don't automatically signal the end of a career like they once may have.

I see what you're saying, but from a neutral's POV I can see the other side of the arguement - if the fans simply stopped paying their money and attending, there'd be another 10 fans waiting in the wings to take their seat. It's the nature of a big club. At least whilst they have the opportunity to attend matches, they can make their feelings known to the owners. Something which wouldn't happen if they stopped attending, and the 'football tourists' took their places.

How effective this campaign will be remains to be seen. I suspect, not so effective. Manchester United is such a massive club and product, and there's enough people out there with more money than sense that they'll never have a problem putting bums on seats as long as they're challenging for trophies.

If there truly is such a pent-up demand for MU tickets that a boycott would be ineffective because tourists would just buy up the tickets anyway, basically the Glazer's are never going to sell up. Why would you sell up when you have a licence to print money? A licence that will print money even though the "customers" cannot stand the fact they're giving you money.

If MUST cannot organize a proper boycott of a game, then really they should pack up, STFU and either bugger off to FCUM or accept they are the Glazers' bitches.

IMO a boycott can work. If the strength of feeling truly is there. But that does mean a sacrifice. Not just looking like a divvy Norwich fan. They've got to forfeit watching a match they've paid for with their season tickets. That way no tourist will be sitting in their seat. It'll mean all the people who would normally buy a match ticket not bothering. It'll mean persuading the tourists to make their yearly excursion another game, and not their target game.

If they do have the cash to buy the club, and they can arrange an effective boycott of a game/s, then they might achieve their goal and take back the club. They aren't going to do it with green/gold scarves alone though. But I do think the green and gold scarves are a very good start. It's just a question of whether they are willing to carry it on.

One swallow... His major contribution was crossing with his head down. He simply put it back into the box. name me a winger who couldn't do that?

I didn't say he was a one-trick pony. I simply said that there are a lot of players better than him. I guess you wouldn't have disagreed until he joined the team that you attach yourself to.

If we can go on one game, then Nigel De Jong is better than lampard and Essien combined as he dominated the Chelsea midfield in the game at CoM this season. Extending that logic further...Vidic is rubbish because Torres has a habit of embarrassing him.

A boycott will only work of it reduces United's income to the point that they cant pay the interest. In the short term they are more likely to respond to that by selling Rooney rather than selling out at a reduced price.

The Glazers would be concerned if the long term value of the club were to be undermined but everyone knows that the fans will return when the club is sold, as it undoubtedly will be at some point. Hence a boycott would have very little impact on the sale price of the club.

I don't think the aim of a boycott should be to buy the club at a reduced price. The aim of a boycott should be to persuade the Glazers to accept fair market value for the club, which will give the Glazers a profit of a few hundred million for their ownership of the club.

I think if anything was to persuade MU supporters to totally go against the Glazers, it would be the slightest hint that they were willing to sell Rooney. Ronaldo was different, he wanted to go and MU got fantastic money for him. But to even hint at selling Rooney, who hasn't given the slightest indication he wants to go, would be the most stupid thing the Glazers could do.



The Glazers won't care about the long term value of the club if they are getting a massive profit now.

One "soft" boycott of a PL game, one where only 40,000 people turn up, could be enough to persuade the Glazers to accept a fair offer for the club. A boycott shows and a fair offer on the table shows serious intent to buy the club. 40,000 people wearing Norwich City scarves while the stadium is still full every week is just a futile gesture IMO.

There's supposed to be a statement from the "Red Knights" today.

While most other managers don't claim that other teams go out to hurt their players and moan about awful challenges that were nothing of the sort. Wenger has turned into an Art form.

The Green and Gold campaign only started when United were faltering at the beginning of the season and we were throwing money around.

If we get into the CL this summer (personally, I don't think we will make it) and go on a spending spree, can we expect the Norwich campaign to be 'cranked-up'?

Yeah, it's all about Citeh. Man Utd fans never had an issue with the Glazers until Citeh became big time.

Who rattled your cage?

This issue became far more prominent as our spent more money. There were protests at the takeover but then there was hardly a peep after that until Sheikh Mansour took over and then it gathered momentum as the good Sheikh got his wallet out this summer.

Errr... the aim of the boycott should be to line the pockets of the Smurfs?

I would think the aim of the boycott is for the Glazers to leave. I wouldn't think United fans care about how much money they make, just as long as they are no longer the owners.

You truly are stupid if you think the Glazers are going to sell up before the next TV rights issue is resolved. They want the power to be able to sell individual TV rights (if memory serves, Barca and Real are doing this) of United games so they can charge £5 a time to overseas 'fans'. If they get this money, it wouldn't bother them if no-one turns up to watch them play.