NoLogo
Full Member
They will always justify it with "Everyone is doing it" or "There is no other way to break up the big 6". Humans are amazing at denying unpleasant truths.
I don't suppose there were many complaints here in 1999 when Man Utd won a treble having gone round buying up other teams players for fees that most could not match or when Man Utd were buying the likes of Rio and Rooney for £30m apiece twenty plus years ago, which would be £100m+ now.
it isn't about money; it's about ability and reputation.
Man United spend as heavily as Man City - they just don't do it anywhere near as efficiently. How many bad signings have each of the two teams made in the last six/seven years?
They will always justify it with "Everyone is doing it" or "There is no other way to break up the big 6". Humans are amazing at denying unpleasant truths.
This.bUT buT CiTy CheAts bUU
This site is getting more and more rawkish with it's whining. They are better than us and FFP is complete BS. Fergie would've loved this challenge to become better and that's the attitude needed. Not this whining cult of fans we've got
I think what we can see with City is, in addition to some other factors obviously, a monumental failure of sports journalism. The absence of steady and serious criticism, the sycophantic coverage they received, the experts coming from within the game refusing to criticise them, the lack of investigative research within sports journalism (most findings came from journalists usually not involved with sports if I remember correctly) and so on are infuriating. And it shows how sports journalism works. They are doing PR but not journalism. They are marketing a product instead of looking behind how it’s being made. And instead of being critical towards City, they are just happy that they can write their little but simple transfer stories.
In regards to City, sports journalism has failed miserably. They have exposed themselves as unwilling and incapable of understanding and portraying the mechanisms behind City’s ascend. They left behind any shred of journalistic integrity. They just pretend that everything is normal.
From time to time when watching games with City taking part, they shortly mention the accusations. They will then proclaim to ignore them for the rest of the game. Because they want to concentrate on football, not politics. They openly admit to their failures without noticing.
I don’t know if that’s always been the case with sports journalism. But it’s not a good situation. It allows these criminals to keep stealing this game from us. And while they pretend to be indifferent, they are actually helping them going forward.
Any journalist writing stories on City’s success without making serious mention of the reasons for it, has failed their profession.
@cheekybackheel I've had similar anecdotal conversations about City lately. Brilliant ones in your post there, but some Liverpool season ticket holders have been saying "feck them both" which is honestly about as high praise as I'd ever imagine because normally it would have been only United they'd have it in for, so the hate for the blue side is finally getting to even the scousers
Some neutrals I knew wanted United to win on Saturday which is probably the first time I've heard a neutral genuinely to want us winning since the 90's. It's unheard of.
They were found guilty by UEFA so by your definition it's already taintedPeople keep saying "tainted" but it is a wrong word to decribe it.
Imo, tainted is when you win something by obvious cheating or with refs help (Barca CL 2009).
City is guilty or not guilty by the law. If they will be found not guilty, it is legit treble. Yes, they "bought" it with insane spending but it is still legit.
If they will be found guilty (i hope) then they will lose all these titles.
BUT, if verdict says that they are guilty (even for one single case) and they keep titles THEN it is tainted and it will be huge football travesty.
Yeah because know just how much it would feck off our rivals and ABU media
We have the option of just not following the club if that happensNo they couldn't. Name me one club that has. There is simply no way for a historically small club to rise to the top of modern football without this type of spending.
I don't want to defend City but the problem is the sport's broken structure. We really need to move away from this pointless tribalism (especially when we could soon be financially doped as well).
Will the fans who are rooting for Qatar owenership accept all of our trophies won will be tainted too if they take over?
Yup. It will be interesting I must say. I mean it already happened with the world cup, people who were angry at Qatar world cup turning a blind eye on potential Qatar ownership of United.There isnt a scenario in which you dont get tossed in with Newcastle and Man City if you are Qatari owned. No having your cake and eating it too im afraid.
Depends if we start breaking FFP rules.Will the fans who are rooting for Qatar owenership accept all of our trophies won will be tainted too if they take over?
Yes, but what about state ownership per se.Depends if we start breaking FFP rules.
Will the fans who are rooting for Qatar owenership accept all of our trophies won will be tainted too if they take over?
I don’t think they’ll be the ones arguing City’s success is tainted to be fair, they just want trophies and don’t really care how that happens or if they’re lumped in with other state owned clubs.Will the fans who are rooting for Qatar owenership accept all of our trophies won will be tainted too if they take over?
That's all true but we wont be able to mock City for their state ownership anymore, we'll be in the same basket as them and Newcastle.If we break the rules and are slapped with 115 charges then yeah, sure. But still United have done it all before having a mega rich owner. We won all the trophies and attracted all the players just by being the biggest club in the world. There isn’t a single City player, manager or coach that would be anywhere near city if it wasn’t for the money. City are in reality no bigger than Wigan or Reading.
Yeah, but there will be a number of people who will just change their opinion over night.I don’t think they’ll be the ones arguing City’s success is tainted to be fair, they just want trophies and don’t really care how that happens or if they’re lumped in with other state owned clubs.
The way I see it, yes they massively cheated the FFP rules early on in the new owners' time. They used all sorts of chicanery to inject money into the club and broke some rules - they should very likely be punished for that. But, the problem we have is that in reality in the last few years they have really run the club extremely well, while we and others have spaffed money away, so it is really hard to say 'it is tainted' without acknowledging that to some extent.
If you don't follow the rules of the sport then it is cheating, simple.I don't suppose there were many complaints here in 1999 when Man Utd won a treble having gone round buying up other teams players for fees that most could not match or when Man Utd were buying the likes of Rio and Rooney for £30m apiece twenty plus years ago, which would be £100m+ now.
it isn't about money; it's about ability and reputation.
Man United spend as heavily as Man City - they just don't do it anywhere near as efficiently. How many bad signings have each of the two teams made in the last six/seven years?
More than you believeYeah, but there will be a number of people who will just change their opinion over night.
Yes, unfortunately.More than you believe
Their success is tainted because of the cheating not because of who the owners areWill the fans who are rooting for Qatar owenership accept all of our trophies won will be tainted too if they take over?
Not really. It's both.Their success is tainted because of the cheating not because of who the owners are
Really, really good point here. My argument with city fans begins with asking "would it be fair for the German government to buy and run Manchester United". It's equally ridiculous to the situation we have at Manchester City. The usual whataboitisms get levied - Berlusconi at AC Milan, Franco at Madrid - and the problem is that it's completely correct. Government entities, states, and politicians as a whole should NOT be fit persons to run football clubs because of the reasons you mention here (undue influence etc) and their various conflicts of interest.There's so much that can be criticized about City, though. I wish there were far more reports about the human rights abuses committed by the owners of the club or what they are actually trying to achieve with this whole sportswashing thing, how they try to influence European politics, etc. It is kind of telling that stuff that should be less important gets so much more media attention. People seem to be bothered more by the fact City abolished the dominance of traditional clubs through a monetary advantage than the fact that family members of the owner can go unpunished after raping a business partner, burning him alive and running him over with a car and that's sad.
That is something I would want Guardiola to be asked about.
Their success is tainted because of the cheating not because of who the owners are
Really, really good point here. My argument with city fans begins with asking "would it be fair for the German government to buy and run Manchester United". It's equally ridiculous to the situation we have at Manchester City. The usual whataboitisms get levied - Berlusconi at AC Milan, Franco at Madrid - and the problem is that it's completely correct. Government entities, states, and politicians as a whole should NOT be fit persons to run football clubs because of the reasons you mention here (undue influence etc) and their various conflicts of interest.
Not withstanding another tangential point - if I was a person working in such states, would I be happy knowing my government was funding Erling Haaland instead of (say) a working health system and benefits, roads, projects in my country of origin. Felt the same about Abramovich spending what was essentially laundered Russian petrodollars in order to win trophies - the British government and premier league were complicit in that, essentially simply rubbing their hands at the investment without ever caring where it came from.
Not really. It's both.
That is your point of view though, many fans of other clubs complained about how money is the problem and were not happy how football is dominated by a few clubs because of it.It's the cheating that's the problem, mate. Are you unaware of the serious financial irregularities and cosy sponsorships from companies all owned by the same people who own the feckin club?
Of course you're not, so stop playing dumb.
I am not sure I agree, other clubs have spent similar amounts but City have spent it better. Liverpool have spent a lot less but were keeping up with City for a time.City being state owned is bad for the league, it's rendered the league uncompetitive in my opinion but that's a different argument. If that was the only issue there'd be a lot of sour grapes for them having won the lottery etc. but there wouldn't really be much other genuine criticism.
Then there's the second part of this which is who that state are, the undoubted sports washing angle to the ownership which you can literally see working in this very forum. That's again another argument but one I don't think people can really justify as being good in any way.
However, even ignoring the above, the issue is very simply for the criticism of the team, Pep and the club (after all they can't really affect the ownership) is that they have cheated to become what they are today.