C'mon United, we've told you once to move over.
If it's further proof of our superiority you're after, then
chew on this one, sucker...
SOPHIST's CHOICE
Why Barrow are a better team
than Manchester United
If team A can beat team B, and team B overcomes team C, then team C goes on to defeat team D, it follows quite logically that, all other things being equal, team A is more than capable of thumping the hell out of team D should the pair ever meet in a competitive game. For, as every true football fan knows in his heart - though he rarely admits it - the best team always wins. So the following set of results from the 1996-97 season prove only one thing; that Barrow are better than Manchester United...
- Bishop Auckland 0 Barrow 1
- Bishop Auckland 3 Northwich Victoria 2
- Northwich Victoria 3 Hednesford Town 1
- Blackpool 0 Hednesford Town 1
- Blackpool 2 Stockport County 1
- Southampton 1 Stockport County 2
- Southampton 6 Manchester United 3
So you can't really argue with that, can you? Unless you say that it's just a random list of a few freak cup results with a smattering of league fixtures thrown in to try to make a pathetic justification for what is, to anyone with any form of intelligence, a wholly fatuous argument. After all, you might say, Hyde United beat Barrow and then were dumped out of the FA Cup by Northern League side Whitby Town. Similarly, Accrington Stanley, who were gifted a 4-1 win over Barrow in the ATS Trophy met a similar fate in the FA Cup at the hands of Northern Counties East outfit, Ossett Albion. Oh, and Bishop Auckland got their revenge over us in the return game at Holker St. But no, not at all. What it also proves is that Hyde United, Whitby Town, Accrington Stanley, Ossett Albion and Bishop Auckland are all better than Manchester United.
So just why are they so popular, after all? It's a funny game, football.
Somewhat reworked from issue 031 - September
1997
