stewiek2 Posted September 21, 2007 Share Posted September 21, 2007 Brum is the 2nd city no doubt. IT is FAR more multi-cultural which gives it for me it's status. Only London I would say is more multi0cultural than Birmingham. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianrobo1 Posted September 21, 2007 Share Posted September 21, 2007 Brum is certainly the most intergrated of any city including London, few racial tensions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted September 21, 2007 Moderator Share Posted September 21, 2007 Have lived in both cities, the only thing Brum does better is curries. What do you prefer in Manc? Not having a go, just interested. Personally i prefer Liverpool to Manchester as a city and have never liked Manc at all Not answering for Risso, but as another (sort of) "both Cities" bod, I would say Manchester has a lot going for it. The centre of town is quite well contained, has been modernised very well. The pubs are, overall, better. The public transport is better, with the Trams. You can get a good curry in both places, IMO. Chinatown is better in Manchester, perhaps. Where Manchester falls short is that it is less "international" than Brum - it does seem more provincial (which doesn't have to be a bad thing). While they might try to claim (ridiculously) that they are the second City, they are more realistically the top Northern City (despite size). I like Liverpool a lot, another place with great pubs and culture, but it's kind of like an Island. It is "different". It's basically the underdog, and plays that part, whereas Manchester plays the Big "I am". The music scene is vibrant in both Manchester and Liverpool, more so perhaps than Brum. Basically all 3 places kind of reap what they sow. Brum for Donkeys years has been selling itself on it's central position and links with Europe, Manchester sells itself on boldness and Liverpool plays the plucky underdog with some serious virtues. Manchester's regeneration and distance from London are what it bases it's claim around - because of the distance, it has a media hub for the North, whereas Brum is too close to warrant a similar media thing. Manchester was also the birthplace of the co-operative movement, unions, standing up for the little man, and general reactionary forces for change. They're all great places, but only Brum has the Villa. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villadude Posted September 21, 2007 Share Posted September 21, 2007 I've never heard Manchester being referred to as the second city? It's Brum, always has been, always will. Close the thread please, there's nothing to see here.... :winkold: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jezza Posted September 21, 2007 Share Posted September 21, 2007 I've never heard Manchester being referred to as the second city? It's Brum, always has been, always will. Close the thread please, there's nothing to see here.... :winkold: Manchester has considered itself to be Britain's 2nd for a while. But it isn't. Birmingham has and always will be Britain's 2nd City. End of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jezza Posted September 21, 2007 Share Posted September 21, 2007 Excessive Mancunian civic pride is actually one of the least interesting things imaginable. Spot on. At the risk of alienating any Villa fans hailing from Manchester. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nrogers Posted September 22, 2007 Share Posted September 22, 2007 Not being funny, but why does it matter? What do get being the second city, apart from it being made the capitol if London is destroyed (which is highly unlikely)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b23avfc Posted September 22, 2007 Share Posted September 22, 2007 This is a non starter, everybody knows it's Birmingham.. just look at any atlas, uk map etc. Only people from manchester think they are the 2nd city. Scum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GasGasGas Posted September 22, 2007 Share Posted September 22, 2007 Isn't it a fact that it's Birmingham? Don't tell me you guys aren't sure or it's not official? And just because Manure are the biggest team doens't mean they get to own the whole of England and shape it the way they want it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lee_av Posted September 26, 2007 Share Posted September 26, 2007 Manchester, the Seventh City? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trekka Posted September 26, 2007 VT Supporter Share Posted September 26, 2007 I'm sure Liverpool feel worse anyway, they've been given the spot of Old Kent Road on the new UK Monopoly (err, sorry Bicks). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheSufferingVilla Posted September 26, 2007 Share Posted September 26, 2007 It's amazing to think that at one time Dublin was the second city of the British Empire. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lee_av Posted September 26, 2007 Share Posted September 26, 2007 It's amazing to think that at one time Dublin was the second city of the British Empire. Never heard that one before. TSV - sending you a PM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BennettVilla Posted September 26, 2007 Share Posted September 26, 2007 I live in Preston. At school the other day i had this argument, and because of where preston is positioned i just got told Birmingham is a ****hole. i asked the people who said manchester whether they had ever been to brum and they said no.... so how the **** can they make their mind up..... i stood my ground obviously and fought for my city..... i have lived in both cities and can tell you all who might like the life up north then stay away..... its cold and dirty.......birmingham 4ever Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b23avfc Posted September 26, 2007 Share Posted September 26, 2007 Good on ya Kid! There are good people everywhere... Except Manchester Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b23avfc Posted September 26, 2007 Share Posted September 26, 2007 Manchester, the Seventh City? Very interesting read that. Well I thought so anyway. I never realised they were so low down the ranks, poor souls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villanmike Posted September 27, 2007 Share Posted September 27, 2007 Anyone can say they are the 2nd City. Me personally, I think Birmingham is the first City of the World. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RonBurgundy Posted September 27, 2007 Share Posted September 27, 2007 Good grief, Walsall is bigger than Bolton. Thought Nottingham was bigger... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R.I.C.O. Posted September 27, 2007 Share Posted September 27, 2007 For population, area, location and heritage, Manchester cannot compete with Birmingham. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thetrees Posted September 27, 2007 Share Posted September 27, 2007 Isn't it amazing that Blackburn has a similar sized population to Sutton Coldfield? It makes their 20000 something gates quite impressive, and suggests that we should have a demand for 60000 seats every game! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts