advertisement


All purpose football thread 20-21 season II

webster said:
I'm no United fan but I don't see how you can compare the two.
City's spending since the new ownership is unprecedented and I suspect this summer will be no different.
You clearly should have, by now, won the Champions League and the blame for not having done so is clearly on Pep.
We'll never know for sure but I believe Fernandinho was left out because Pep didn't trust him to not pick up bookings against all the quick players that Chelsea had.
He said he wasn't bothered about who the ref was but I think that team selection indicated otherwise.
Click to expand...

Because, at that time, United broke the transfer record, repeatedly, and competed with the top European teams of the day.
 
oldius said:
Because, at that time, United broke the transfer record, repeatedly, and competed with the top European teams of the day.
Click to expand...
They may well have spent big on a player and of course that grabs all the headlines if it sets a new record.
Difference was that they were using money generated by the success of the football club on the pitch not riding roughshod over the rules like City so clearly have for the last 10 years.
United also had a nucleaus of high quality home grown players who were absolutely key to their success - City have ........................... Phil Foden!
 
webster said:
They may well have spent big on a player and of course that grabs all the headlines if it sets a new record.
Difference was that they were using money generated by the success of the football club on the pitch not riding roughshod over the rules like City so clearly have for the last 10 years.
United also had a nucleaus of high quality home grown players who were absolutely key to their success - City have ........................... Phil Foden!
Click to expand...

They were spending 30m on players 20 years ago. We could argue chicken and egg all day long but I contend that it was their spending that created their position and then the CL money that maintained it. Having members on the board of Uefa and on their own board also sowed the seeds of some dubious practice too. I am not here to besmirch United but your point has nothing to do with why United only won 2 CLs in 25 years of Fergie's leadership. I will be happy to win the CL but as as a supporter of City since 1968, it isn't the be-all and end-all that it appears to be to non-City fans.
 
I would have thought 'only 2' would sound pretty good to a City supporter whose only trophy in Europe dates back to 1970 and even that one was only the now defunct CWC?
I'm sure you will win it soon but my goodness with the amount of money spent it will hardly rank as any great achievement.
 
webster said:
I would have thought 'only 2' would sound pretty good to a City supporter whose only trophy in Europe dates back to 1970 and even that one was only the now defunct CWC?
I'm sure you will win it soon but my goodness with the amount of money spent it will hardly rank as any great achievement.
Click to expand...

It is interesting that it is both deemed a terrible failure if we do not, and no great achievement if we do, by rival fans. Personally, I consider the trophies we have won and the records we have set to be a fabulous achievement and all in a small number of Pep seasons.
 
oldius said:
It is interesting that it is both deemed a terrible failure if we do not, and no great achievement if we do, by rival fans. Personally, I consider the trophies we have won and the records we have set to be a fabulous achievement and all in a small number of Pep seasons.
Click to expand...
I would argue that any other top quality manager with unlimited funds would have done similar - the one difference would be that we wouldn't be here debating why City still haven't won the CL.
 
oldius said:
It is interesting that it is both deemed a terrible failure if we do not, and no great achievement if we do, by rival fans. Personally, I consider the trophies we have won and the records we have set to be a fabulous achievement and all in a small number of Pep seasons.
Click to expand...

3 PL titles in 4 seasons - I'll take that.

It's bordering on domestic dominance.
 
webster said:
I would argue that any other top quality manager with unlimited funds would have done similar - the one difference would be that we wouldn't be here debating why City still haven't won the CL.
Click to expand...

If it was as easy as that then Blackburn and Chelsea would have also broken 100 points and goals and won consecutive titles and the first-ever domestic treble.
 
webster said:
I would argue that any other top quality manager with unlimited funds would have done similar - the one difference would be that we wouldn't be here debating why City still haven't won the CL.
Click to expand...

Man Utd haven't exactly stopped spending but have nothing to show for it. You spent big and won the CL. We spent a bit & won another PL title & the League Cup. Sharing is caring. :)
 
It's possible that Manchester United could be on 4 Champions Leagues but for Pep, and arguably one of the greatest, if not the greatest club sides to grace a football pitch.
I'm surprised that Manchester City haven't won the Champions League yet, with as Webster said, unlimited funds, and your first choice world wide manager. As Webster alluded to, Manchester United, Liverpool, Tottenham, Arsenal to a degree, have all earned their right at the table to spend big money. They have the numbers in support to finance such ventures. I remember back in the day when Chelsea's support would be huddled under the roof of the shed end, and we were happy enough, but then Roman came along. However, it was well reported that Roman could have taken over Tottenham, so we thank our lucky stars.
Likewise, Manchester City could have been Sunderland, or Newcastle, there was nothing unique that made Manchester City the perfect choice, just good fortune. Even as a supporter of Chelsea, it's daft to argue about Manchester United spending more, they have the supporting numbers worldwide, that the rest of us can only dream of as a cash cow for our club.
 
This season's CL was the one I thought we were genuinely good enough to win it probably should have but I hate that kind of arrogant thinking as sport is and should be about the unexpected. A different sport but watching Lewis Hamilton make a mistake on Sunday that cost him a win gutted me but then you know sport is and should be about moments of surprise. We can take defeats, don't feel we're owed a CL just because we've spent money coming from virtually ground zero in football terms to be where we are now. We're still pinching ourselves that's is all really happening TBH. The owners are here for the long term, the support will grow over time. Lets have this conversation in another 50 years and see where we are then. :D
 
It all smacks of envy tbh, big clubs with global fan bases attract big money.
My issue with City's money isn't the amounts, it's the appalling human rights record of the regime behind it. Do I lose any sleep? No but I'd rather they weren't funded by medieval dictators.
 
Rack Kit said:
This season's CL was the one I thought we were genuinely good enough to win it
Click to expand...
Of course you were but you can't account for the manager getting his team selection and tactics horribly wrong.
As I've said many times before City in Europe is the gift that just keeps on giving.;)
 
So let’s strip Liverpool of their standard chartered sponsorship. A company convicted of laundering drug cartel money and strip United of their Saudi sponsorship and their Aeroflot, the soviet airline, sponsorship.
And let’s throw the Russian gangster who bankrolls Chelsea out of the country too and stop them spending money stolen from the Russian people.

Or is your high horse selective?
 
Blue Belle said:
It's possible that Manchester United could be on 4 Champions Leagues but for Pep, and arguably one of the greatest, if not the greatest club sides to grace a football pitch.
I'm surprised that Manchester City haven't won the Champions League yet, with as Webster said, unlimited funds, and your first choice world wide manager. As Webster alluded to, Manchester United, Liverpool, Tottenham, Arsenal to a degree, have all earned their right at the table to spend big money. They have the numbers in support to finance such ventures. I remember back in the day when Chelsea's support would be huddled under the roof of the shed end, and we were happy enough, but then Roman came along. However, it was well reported that Roman could have taken over Tottenham, so we thank our lucky stars.
Likewise, Manchester City could have been Sunderland, or Newcastle, there was nothing unique that made Manchester City the perfect choice, just good fortune. Even as a supporter of Chelsea, it's daft to argue about Manchester United spending more, they have the supporting numbers worldwide, that the rest of us can only dream of as a cash cow for our club.
Click to expand...

so just how much money do the gazillions of fans that United have contribute?
Do you really think that the shirts you see being worn in the Far East are genuine
United branded products? They will be rip offs like you buy in any UK street market.
As for Tottenham ”earning “ some right. Outside of London Spurs are are considered an utter irrelevance of a joke club. All fur coat and no nickers. A fancy new stadium but a crap team playing in it. What have they won? Arsenal have not been significant for several years now and despite spending more on individual players than City ever have United’s catastrophic club management means they will not be at the top table as long as they keep their current structure. Liverpool too have paid more for individual players than City ever have, flared like a shooting star momentarily then faded out of view.
Despite spending repeated record transfers it took Ferguson longer than Pep has been at City to win the the European cup. Considering the way they hoovered up any talent for decades and spent fortunes on the way his two champions league wins were a poor return.
 
webster said:
Of course you were but you can't account for the manager getting his team selection and tactics horribly wrong.
As I've said many times before City in Europe is the gift that just keeps on giving.;)
Click to expand...

This was always going to be the problem of losing the CL to another PL team, the endless jibes.:rolleyes:

Bore off! :D
 
Bob McC said:
So let’s strip Liverpool of their standard chartered sponsorship. A company convicted of laundering drug cartel money and strip United of their Saudi sponsorship and their Aeroflot, the soviet airline, sponsorship.
And let’s throw the Russian gangster who bankrolls Chelsea out of the country too and stop them spending money stolen from the Russian people.

Or is your high horse selective?
Click to expand...
I'd be happy to.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_the_United_Arab_Emirates
 
I keep reading that Barca appear to want to sign another 3 players from City which would bring it to 5. Laporte is supposedly close to signing for them and they also want Jesus and Gundogan..... I don't see it myself.

And Levy won't let Kane go for less than £150M, nice to see how much a gentleman's agreement costs these days....
 
Bob McC said:
so just how much money do the gazillions of fans that United have contribute?
Do you really think that the shirts you see being worn in the Far East are genuine
United branded products? They will be rip offs like you buy in any UK street market.
As for Tottenham ”earning “ some right. Outside of London Spurs are are considered an utter irrelevance of a joke club. All fur coat and no nickers. A fancy new stadium but a crap team playing in it. What have they won? Arsenal have not been significant for several years now and despite spending more on individual players than City ever have United’s catastrophic club management means they will not be at the top table as long as they keep their current structure. Liverpool too have paid more for individual players than City ever have, flared like a shooting star momentarily then faded out of view.
Despite spending repeated record transfers it took Ferguson longer than Pep has been at City to win the the European cup. Considering the way they hoovered up any talent for decades and spent fortunes on the way his two champions league wins were a poor return.
Click to expand...

Wow.. struck a raw nerve, Robert? Manchester United clearly service their debt, service the Glazer's greed, and allow for mismanagement spending of over a billion dollars, i believe you've quoted before.. so where is all that money coming from, Robert?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top