I think part of the resentment a lot of people feel towards City is in the inherent British dislike of winners. We seem to prefer gallant, bloodied losers to the real deal. I'm old enough to remember a certain Henry Cooper being the most popular boxer from these islands, later on whiny old Colin Montgomerie seemed to find favour with more golf fans than Nick Faldo and Andy Murray doesn't seem to attract the same hysteria that the serial loser Tim Henman used to.
Maybe it's a distrust of money, or people having money. I don't recall too many people complaining when Jack Walker bought the title for Blackburn Rovers shortly after the PL was created. And of course nor should they. It was Walker's money to spend and if he wanted to throw it at his football club it's his business, no one else's.
We read on these forums and hear on radio phone ins about people's "hate" clubs. They tend to be clubs that are successful. Very few people hate Fulham or QPR but their near neighbours Chelsea wouldn't win any personality contests. Arsenal & Spurs are frequently panned by fans of other clubs but very few people can be heard letting off steam about Birmingham or West Brom for example.
I'm convinced we, as a nation, prefer an honourable, gallant defeat rather than a win. As soon as someone, or some team, becomes successful people are queuing up to knock them.
Why Is There Only One Monopolies Commission. Isn't That A Monopoly?
Whiskyman wrote: ↑Sun May 19, 2019 3:58 pm
I think part of the resentment a lot of people feel towards City is in the inherent British dislike of winners. We seem to prefer gallant, bloodied losers to the real deal. I'm old enough to remember a certain Henry Cooper being the most popular boxer from these islands, later on whiny old Colin Montgomerie seemed to find favour with more golf fans than Nick Faldo and Andy Murray doesn't seem to attract the same hysteria that the serial loser Tim Henman used to.
Maybe it's a distrust of money, or people having money. I don't recall too many people complaining when Jack Walker bought the title for Blackburn Rovers shortly after the PL was created. And of course nor should they. It was Walker's money to spend and if he wanted to throw it at his football club it's his business, no one else's.
We read on these forums and hear on radio phone ins about people's "hate" clubs. They tend to be clubs that are successful. Very few people hate Fulham or QPR but their near neighbours Chelsea wouldn't win any personality contests. Arsenal & Spurs are frequently panned by fans of other clubs but very few people can be heard letting off steam about Birmingham or West Brom for example.
I'm convinced we, as a nation, prefer an honourable, gallant defeat rather than a win. As soon as someone, or some team, becomes successful people are queuing up to knock them.
From a purely personal point of view I think most of my enmity for other teams comes less from their relative success or failure and more the attitude of their fans, doubly so if I know some.
In a way success does have something to with that as it tends to be successful club's who attract the most wankers.
The number I've times I've had to listen to a United fan drone on about 'us' and 'we' only to discover they've no ties or connection to Manchester, and in most cases couldn't point to Lancashire/Greater Manchester on a map.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not a football snob, but glory hunting fans are cunts. And of course if we all loved a loser we'd have the biggest fan base in the country.
Communism deprives no man of the power to appropriate the products of society; all that it does is to deprive him of the power to subjugate the labour of others by means of such appropriations.
What rules have they broke ? Nothings been proved yet and have they spent more than Man U or Scouse ? I bet if we was owned by some rich oil shiek and winning things every year a lot of our fans would be giving it the big one because its what football fans do. We dont want to see clubs winning everything every year unless its us doing the winning. Fair play to Watford fans who was great at the game yesterday.
I've done a quick calculation, not for City because the amount will be huge and they will indeed have spent more than the Reds and the Dippers.
But those two are hardly paupers in the transfer and wages stakes.
Based on the last league game of the season, the Victims' team cost 305 million which would have been more had Firmino been fit as opposed to the 'cheaper' Origi.
To United's credit, Solskjaer fielded 5 home-grown players giving one, Greenwood, his debut. But they still had nearly 100 m worth of talent on the bench to add to the 175 million the starting X1 cost. And that's not including the crocked Alexis Sanchez who reportedly earns half a million pounds every single week.
The money sloshing around in the game is both astounding and obscene. In a country in which the amount of people visiting food banks grows by the week. And if City are found to have broken rules they should pay the penalty.
But it is what it is. I'd love to see some sort of cap placed on wages globally to even things up but it will never happen, so if we love watching the game we have to put up with it.
My general point is, it's not what you spend but the way you spend it and then manage what you've spent it on. In Pep, City have the best there is by a distance, but they lost four times in the league this season. They won the Carabao Cup on penalties and were two dodgy decisions away from being knocked out of the FA Cup at Swansea. So I don't subscribe to the idea of them 'dominating' the season. Imo it was a perfect storm.
It's up to the other teams, and we're one of them, to get a bit closer year by year. And it helps when you don't get turfed out of the cup by a team bottom of League One at the time.
A very good analysis Pale. I don't subscribe to the view that Man City being successful is somehow harmful to the sporting ethos. As you pointed out their "treble" success was achieved by fine margins.
The league by one point and only after Liverpool had squandered a 7 point lead. Man City could have easily won nothing this season or won the quadruple - it was that tight. The fact that they actually won three trophies is something to admire,not to look at and try to diminish or sneer about.
Some,just like to knock another's achievement. When Leicester won the league it didn't take long - a day - before voices were saying - they only won because all the big teams were all crap, all in the same year...
...some folks will always find a reason to mock - it's in their nature
I've done a quick calculation, not for City because the amount will be huge and they will indeed have spent more than the Reds and the Dippers.
But those two are hardly paupers in the transfer and wages stakes.
Based on the last league game of the season, the Victims' team cost 305 million which would have been more had Firmino been fit as opposed to the 'cheaper' Origi.
To United's credit, Solskjaer fielded 5 home-grown players giving one, Greenwood, his debut. But they still had nearly 100 m worth of talent on the bench to add to the 175 million the starting X1 cost. And that's not including the crocked Alexis Sanchez who reportedly earns half a million pounds every single week.
The money sloshing around in the game is both astounding and obscene. In a country in which the amount of people visiting food banks grows by the week. And if City are found to have broken rules they should pay the penalty.
But it is what it is. I'd love to see some sort of cap placed on wages globally to even things up but it will never happen, so if we love watching the game we have to put up with it.
My general point is, it's not what you spend but the way you spend it and then manage what you've spent it on. In Pep, City have the best there is by a distance, but they lost four times in the league this season. They won the Carabao Cup on penalties and were two dodgy decisions away from being knocked out of the FA Cup at Swansea. So I don't subscribe to the idea of them 'dominating' the season. Imo it was a perfect storm.
It's up to the other teams, and we're one of them, to get a bit closer year by year. And it helps when you don't get turfed out of the cup by a team bottom of League One at the time.
A very good analysis Pale. I don't subscribe to the view that Man City being successful is somehow harmful to the sporting ethos. As you pointed out their "treble" success was achieved by fine margins.
The league by one point and only after Liverpool had squandered a 7 point lead. Man City could have easily won nothing this season or won the quadruple - it was that tight. The fact that they actually won three trophies is something to admire,not to look at and try to diminish or sneer about.
Some,just like to knock another's achievement. When Leicester won the league it didn't take long - a day - before voices were saying - they only won because all the big teams were all crap, all in the same year...
...some folks will always find a reason to mock - it's in their nature
And remember, how the mighty fall, it was only 3 seasons ago that we finished above the likes of Liverpool and Chelsea
terrya1965 wrote: ↑Sat May 18, 2019 8:15 pm
The greatest English team I have ever seen.
Man U fans will be piping up and saying,"NO,we are the greatest ever,we did the proper treble".
I will state my case.
They have averaged 99 points in the last 2 seasons.
The first team to win 50 competitive games in a season.
The Domestic treble,the first time it has been ever done.If it wasn't for VAR,they'd be playing Liverpool next month in the CL Final(would have ripped Ajax a new arsehole).
In 1999,Man U scored 126 goals in all competitions,City have hit 25% more goals(168).
I'm pleased for City,has I can't stand United and I love to see their noses rubbed in it.F*CKING GREAT..WELL DONE CITY.
Exactly how I feel Terry. They are the best team I have ever seen in the English League in my lifetime and De Bruyne is up there as one of the best players. If he had been fit all season, they would have probably got over 100 points again.
I dont begrudge them this either, they spend money but it is mostly spent wisely (unblike their neighbours with their 90 million pound players) and I like their fans.
terrya1965 wrote: ↑Sat May 18, 2019 8:15 pm
The greatest English team I have ever seen.
Man U fans will be piping up and saying,"NO,we are the greatest ever,we did the proper treble".
I will state my case.
They have averaged 99 points in the last 2 seasons.
The first team to win 50 competitive games in a season.
The Domestic treble,the first time it has been ever done.If it wasn't for VAR,they'd be playing Liverpool next month in the CL Final(would have ripped Ajax a new arsehole).
In 1999,Man U scored 126 goals in all competitions,City have hit 25% more goals(168).
I'm pleased for City,has I can't stand United and I love to see their noses rubbed in it.F*CKING GREAT..WELL DONE CITY.
Exactly how I feel Terry. They are the best team I have ever seen in the English League in my lifetime and De Bruyne is up there as one of the best players. If he had been fit all season, they would have probably got over 100 points again.
I dont begrudge them this either, they spend money but it is mostly spent wisely (unblike their neighbours with their 90 million pound players) and I like their fans.
Well done City.
City have spent money,but they haven't gone out and broke individual transfer records like Man U,Liverpool and Chelsea have.They have done it at least twice too.
Pep takes very good players and makes them even better.
On City dominating?I have heard this so many times,United,Chelsea,Liverpool,Arsenal will all dominate for years on end after they have won a couple of titles.That's what our media do.No doubt in a couple years,it will be someone else's turn.
Saying that,I still think City is the best English side I have ever seen and probably only Barcelona under Pep have been better.
Marco Boogers Boots wrote: ↑Sun May 19, 2019 5:18 am
I get what some are saying here; we wouldn't complain if it was us. But, I'm not so sure.
It's a tough one, as I obviously want West Ham to be successful, but not at the expense of so obviously breaking the rules.
Yes, Man City fans are, on the whole, a good bunch and we have a good relationship with them. That doesn't mean that the club should get away with a blatant flouting of the rules. The Etihad "sponsorship" of the club is an absolute joke, but how much will be done about it? In 2014 they got a financial slap on the wrist, a slightly ironic fucking joke of a punishment for an organisation that is so rich.
Even if they get a season Champions League ban and a couple of windows without transfers, they'll be fucking fine. Their squad is plenty good enough to deal with that. So, much like actual doping in other sports, they will retain the strength that their cheating has produced. They should be forced to sell the players signed with the "dirty money" - it will never happen of course.
What rules have they broke ? Nothings been proved yet and have they spent more than Man U or Scouse ? I bet if we was owned by some rich oil shiek and winning things every year a lot of our fans would be giving it the big one because its what football fans do. We dont want to see clubs winning everything every year unless its us doing the winning. Fair play to Watford fans who was great at the game yesterday.
Nothing's been proven? They were fined 49 million quid and warned in 2014 for financial irregularities - this was an out of court settlement, so they were guilty or they wouldn't have agreed to it.
The latest charges stem from the fact that Sheikh Mansour owns City and Etihad. He can't directly pump his personal wealth in to the club because it breaches financial fair play rules, so he puts it in to Etihad instead.
Etihad then provide the club with what is, by a country fucking mile, the largest sponsorship deal in world football. Add to that the many other "smaller" sponsors that all originate in Abu Dhabi, all bank-rolled by Sheikh Mansour.
If you think that is doing nothing wrong, then fine - each to their own.
Personally I think it fucking stinks and an affinity with their fans will not cloud my judgement on that.
Exactly how I feel Terry. They are the best team I have ever seen in the English League in my lifetime and De Bruyne is up there as one of the best players. If he had been fit all season, they would have probably got over 100 points again.
I dont begrudge them this either, they spend money but it is mostly spent wisely (unblike their neighbours with their 90 million pound players) and I like their fans.
Well done City.
City have spent money,but they haven't gone out and broke individual transfer records like Man U,Liverpool and Chelsea have.They have done it at least twice too.
Pep takes very good players and makes them even better.
On City dominating?I have heard this so many times,United,Chelsea,Liverpool,Arsenal will all dominate for years on end after they have won a couple of titles.That's what our media do.No doubt in a couple years,it will be someone else's turn.
Saying that,I still think City is the best English side I have ever seen and probably only Barcelona under Pep have been better.
Before I start, I'll say that; Pep is an unbelievable manager / coach and definitely makes players better. City are also brilliant to watch and I'm glad they pipped the Scousers to the league.
But... Pep has hardly spent pennies, has he!? The cunt did 200 million quid on full backs in one transfer window!!!
What rules have they broke ? Nothings been proved yet and have they spent more than Man U or Scouse ? I bet if we was owned by some rich oil shiek and winning things every year a lot of our fans would be giving it the big one because its what football fans do. We dont want to see clubs winning everything every year unless its us doing the winning. Fair play to Watford fans who was great at the game yesterday.
Nothing's been proven? They were fined 49 million quid and warned in 2014 for financial irregularities - this was an out of court settlement, so they were guilty or they wouldn't have agreed to it.
The latest charges stem from the fact that Sheikh Mansour owns City and Etihad. He can't directly pump his personal wealth in to the club because it breaches financial fair play rules, so he puts it in to Etihad instead.
Etihad then provide the club with what is, by a country fucking mile, the largest sponsorship deal in world football. Add to that the many other "smaller" sponsors that all originate in Abu Dhabi, all bank-rolled by Sheikh Mansour.
If you think that is doing nothing wrong, then fine - each to their own.
Personally I think it fucking stinks and an affinity with their fans will not cloud my judgement on that.
No I dont think its doing nothing wrong. This financial fair play is all bollocks. If a blokes got zillions and wants to give it away it aint no one elses business is it. All its doing is stopping others from throwing cash at other teams. Makes sure the top teams stay the top teams. Like people say were only pissed off because its some other team and not West Ham. If we was buying Messi we wouldnt hear our fans moaning about it but because its someone else were complaining.
Morning,
Pep still has unfinished business, Champions League, and I hope he achieves his goal because he would have taken them as far as he could ala Barca B Munich, PSG or Juve maybe being his next destination, then I reckon the ego that is mourinho would move in and destroy City like he did their neighbours.
