Gee Male
Full Member
- Joined
- Apr 10, 2009
- Messages
- 4,314
In this context, his penalty is fecking hilarious.
In this context, his penalty is fecking hilarious.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Ok then, let’s make it simple Nic….Ha ha, “proven incorrect”. I know you want a monopoly on the truth, but it’s not yours to give. I’ve no idea what you think I’ve ignored but I reply to a ridiculous amount of messages on here. I’m sure I’ve missed some, and I’m sure I’ll continue to do so. At some point you’re just going to have to accept that without being flouncy. I fully accept that for your narrative to work I have to be some troll who is deliberately avoiding questions that you consider definitive. You can continue to push that narrative but it won’t make it any more true: I tell you what, I’ll have a trawl back through your multiple posts tomorrow and do my best to answer every one. Would that help you to acknowledge that I’m not trying to ignore you?
Tottenham bring in more revenue than Arsenal?Ok then, let’s make it simple Nic….
• Can you accept that Manchester United pre-Abu Dhabi, were only the top spenders for 3 years of 16 since the league began, with Liverpool spending much more time at the top?
• Can you accept Tottenham absolutely and categorically have closed the revenue gap substantially on Manchester United in the past 15 years and have done so organically, even surpassing one of the former “Old guard” in their North London rivals?
And Chelsea….Tottenham bring in more revenue than Arsenal?
Is that cos of the new ground? Regardless it’s hugely impressive to have done that without winning anything.And Chelsea….
Nic keeps ignoring this though and repeating that no club could possibly close the gap on the old guard organically.
One of the big reasons yeah, they’ve been very savvy. But without Abu Dhabi there’s a big chance they’d have even surpassed Liverpool, but missing out on CL football too often hurts them.Is that cos of the new ground?
They’ve been pretty reserved over the years and Levy has taken a lot of flack but you have to admire them in a lot of aspects. Been pretty competitive despite that.One of the big reasons yeah, they’ve been very savvy. But without Abu Dhabi there’s a big chance they’d have even surpassed Liverpool, but missing out on CL football too often hurts them.
But seriously though, Abu Dhabi having a football team is only bad for United.
Definitely the stadium and the cheese roomAnd Chelsea….
Nic keeps ignoring this though and repeating that no club could possibly close the gap on the old guard organically.
And now imagine Spurs revenue without Abu Dhabi in the league, aren’t they about to miss out on CL football once again due to the Abu Dhabi project having a permanent place in the top 4?
I can’t shift the goalposts ‘again’ as I never shifted them previously. Though you may have misunderstood something I said. I don’t feel responsible for that though.This first paragraph is a parody, right? Ironic at the very least.
You might respond to this part - your second paragraph dismisses the notion that clubs can catch up to United - you seem to think that this is a fantasy of United fans - but all published financial information disputes your view. You have stated previously that if your view is found to be incorrect you will acknowledge that - will you do so on this point? Or just shift the goalposts again?
Answer the fecking question manI can’t shift the goalposts ‘again’ as I never shifted them previously. Though you may have misunderstood something I said. I don’t feel responsible for that though.
Yes, acknowledging when wrong applies to all and everything of course!
1) i believe Utd spent more than slanting else between, in the period up to then city takeover. Obviously if you go all the way back to 1880 or something, that may not be the case.Ok then, let’s make it simple Nic….
• Can you accept that Manchester United pre-Abu Dhabi, were only the top spenders for 3 years of 16 since the league began, with Liverpool spending much more time at the top?
• Can you accept Tottenham absolutely and categorically have closed the revenue gap substantially on Manchester United in the past 15 years and have done so organically, even surpassing one of the former “Old guard” in their North London rivals?
I literally did!!!!Answer the fecking question man
Eh?1) i believe Utd spent more than slanting else between, in the period up to then city takeover. Obviously if you go all the way back to 1880 or something, that may not be the case.
I very much doubt it!A moment of silence for @NicolaSacco
The gap is still very much there, it’s not been closed.And Chelsea….
Nic keeps ignoring this though and repeating that no club could possibly close the gap on the old guard organically.
And now imagine Spurs revenue without Abu Dhabi in the league, aren’t they about to miss out on CL football once again due to the Abu Dhabi project having a permanent place in the top 4?
You are so ridiculously keen to score points. It’s in the edit, man! Jesus Christ.Eh?
I showed you the damn video yesterday that proves that absolutely wasn’t the case.
The Prem started in 92 and Liverpool/Blackburn spent the most until 99-00, then United took top spot with Liverpool close behind (hardly surprising as we’d just had the most successful spell in our history) and in 2003 Chelsea took over until City came in 2008.
How many times do people need to tell you this man? A few more hundred?
Conveniently ignored question 2 I see.
trueI very much doubt it!
English is your second language?2) ‘closed the gap’ means their revenue is now equal to or greater than yours.
I would actually quite like a moment’s silence for me one day (whilst I’m still alive), I don’t think many people get to experience that.true
weyyy, another witty response.English is your second language?
I've used my demi-godly powers* to give this post a Like. Not because the post itself is Like worthy but because you have the patience of a fecking Saint still trying to debate with someone who is clearly a City fan pretending they're not.Eh?
I showed you the damn video yesterday that proves that absolutely wasn’t the case.
The Prem started in 92 and Liverpool/Blackburn spent the most until 99-00, then United took top spot with Liverpool close behind (hardly surprising as we’d just had the most successful spell in our history) and in 2003 Chelsea took over until City came in 2008.
How many times do people need to tell you this man? A few more hundred?
Conveniently ignored question 2 I see.
Arguing semantics to avoid the actual point. The phrase means that it is reducing the deficit.2) ‘closed the gap’ means their revenue is now equal to or greater than yours. I’ve not seen anything that states that is the case, and I’ve seen a lot which directly contradicts that idea.
If the cabin crew say to you, can you please stop wumming on your mobile at RedCafe Sir, you’re causing a queue behind so we’d appreciate it if you can you please close the gap to the passenger ahead of you.weyyy, another witty response.
I hope no one ever asks you to close the door on an aeroplane.
Welcome to the Caf. We're an argumentative bunch!I would actually quite like a moment’s silence for me one day (whilst I’m still alive), I don’t think many people get to experience that.
Aye, it really is the only logical explanationI've used my demi-godly powers* to give this post a Like. Not because the post itself is Like worthy but because you have the patience of a fecking Saint still trying to debate with someone who is clearly a City fan pretending they're not.
*They're not powers, they're a curse. You've got to give likes to newbie posts within three seconds otherwise Cheimoon gets there first, and the reward for this is the power authority equivalent of the piss dribbling from Invictus' impressively engorged, monacled knob after a dozen shakes. There's nothing. No power whatsoever. Someone could tell me to eat shit and the Staff members would tell me to stop being a little bitch in the mod chat if I complained about it. Solius stole my lunch and the rest of them just laughed. Even Niall.
Eh? I said no teams could catch Utd financially. He now seems to be saying that he’s proved me wrong because Spurs got closer! And you think the semantic quibbling is coming from me?! You simply cannot have that little a grasp in language.Arguing semantics to avoid the actual point. The phrase means that it is reducing the deficit.
Spurs have reduced the financial deficit with United and overtaken old money without state ownership. Do you agree with that?
I’d catch up with them though. I wouldn’t walk 2 feet forward and say ‘look I’ve done it”!If the cabin crew say to you, can you please stop wumming on your mobile at RedCafe Sir, you’re causing a queue behind so we’d appreciate it if you can you please close the gap to the passenger ahead of you.
Don’t go and steamroll the guy/girl ahead of you down the aisle, that’s not what they mean.
He even cherry picked it too, I actually posted…Arguing semantics to avoid the actual point.
I didn’t even watch the City game, if I had a second team it would be Arsenal as I lived there for 15 years. But don’t let that get in the way of a good assumption!I've used my demi-godly powers* to give this post a Like. Not because the post itself is Like worthy but because you have the patience of a fecking Saint still trying to debate with someone who is clearly a City fan pretending they're not.
*They're not powers, they're a curse. You've got to give likes to newbie posts within three seconds otherwise Cheimoon gets there first, and the reward for this is the power authority equivalent of the piss dribbling from Invictus' impressively engorged, monacled knob after a dozen shakes. There's nothing. No power whatsoever. Someone could tell me to eat shit and the Staff members would tell me to stop being a little bitch in the mod chat if I complained about it. Solius stole my lunch and the rest of them just laughed. Even Niall.
Ah so silly beggars it is, I don’t believe you’re honesty this unintelligent, not a chance.I’d catch up with them though. I wouldn’t walk 2 feet forward and say ‘look I’ve done it”!
Because no one has done it in this country it doesn’t mean it’s impossible now does it? As pointed out Spurs are very close to United now and have done it in a pretty organic way.Eh? I said no teams could catch Utd financially. He now seems to be saying that he’s proved me wrong because Spurs got closer! And you think the semantic quibbling is coming from me?! You simply cannot have that little a grasp in language.
It’s another absolutely ludicrous argument even if true, because even if the best Spurs can do is get to 85% of United’s revenue and Liverpool to 99% as in 2022:Because no one has done it in this country it doesn’t mean it’s impossible now does it? As pointed out Spurs are very close to United now and have done it in a pretty organic way.
Yeah pretty clear on the wum. But weird if they are a City fan given they were on here when their team was playing. Again ducked my question and I see keeps ducking the same from others.He’s had this pointed out to him a tonne of times, but just completely ignores it.
He does exactly the same when talking about United not wanting anyone to challenge their spending power, it gets pointed out to him continuously that pre Abu Dhabi United’s spending power was constantly challenged and they had only a bunch of seasons after the treble in which they were top dog.
The fact he continues to ignore this yet engages daily by repeating his points that were proven incorrect the previous day, tells you all you need to know about why he’s actually in this thread and it aint for genuine discussion.
Actually if you check their activity, they have been active for many days recently during the hours of 7-10 except tonight where they were quiet up until extra time. "I didn't even watch the game" are some great words but actions speak louder.Yeah pretty clear on the wum. But weird if they are a City fan given they were on here when their team was playing. Again ducked my question and I see keeps ducking the same from others.
That, or is genuinely terrible at maths.
Well said.City are purchased by Abu Dhabi in September 2008. Manchester City placed 9th the season prior. Abu Dhabi get to work buying players who wouldn't otherwise even look in City's direction. 9th place in 2007/'08 becomes 8th place in 2008/'09; the initial steps of the process take a while to bed in, as the old is replaced with the new. City's first big leap takes place the next season with 8th place bested by three positions. They finish the 2009/'10 season in 5th position. We're now in 2010/'11 and City have sacked Hughes and got their first big name coach in Roberto Mancini. They finish 3rd that season and are now a Champions League club. They've been a perennial fixture in the CL places ever since.
There are no cyclic ups or downs, no consequence for poor purchases where normal clubs are lumped with players whose value plummets who they then cannot get off their books because they cannot afford to pay up their contracts willy-nilly and no other club will take them on without subsidy. There is no fear or regard for any of the recognised norms clubs who are not state-owned are hamstrung by. City are a guaranteed lock for a CL place, thus taking it away from any legitimate contender who is then vying with the remainder for 'a go'. The established Old Order are hurt by this, but the remainder are absolutely crushed by it because they have to have more luck than ever before, or take on more financial risk than ever before to try and break this new status quo.
Meanwhile, of the Old Order, not one of them has been a lock in the CL positions as a perennial fixture since 2009/'10
Manchester United have missed out on the CL 5, going on 6 times (once this season concludes).
Liverpool have missed out on the CL 6 times.
Chelsea have missed out on the CL 4, going on 5 times (once this season concludes).
Arsenal have missed out on the CL 6 times.
This is the Old Order, look how many times these so-called behemoths have failed to qualify for the Champions League since City became an indubitable fixture in the competition. Whether you wish to count Chelsea or not, the point remains - Chelsea are more an example of a club with no hope forcing themselves into the conversation, but not overstepping the mark to the point they have broken football.
Now, as stated by numerous people and their painstaking efforts to make clear how damaging what City are doing is, it's not the clubs above who are the most put out by City, it's the teams below them who, without City's permanency would have had a chance to make their play for the top table. Spurs are going to have been the biggest fall guys, but now it's also the likes of Villa as they try and push through the glass ceiling to compete directly with the teams above (and not City).
There is no time in English football history where Old Orders (they used to be dynamic: Wolves, for example, used to be a big dog up to the conclusion of the 1950's) as there have been - or supposedly established - where those teams remained, perennially, at the helm. In fact, most are defined by golden periods followed by fallow times where they cannot compete for the league nor CL (or previously, the European Cup).
Great periods for these sides are attributed to great men doing unbelievably shrewd work within a financial remit that whilst at the higher end, was not obliterating those around them - the clubs ebbed and flowed with the passage of these managers. City are a faceless state, as @Regulus Arcturus Black stated, there is no way for them to fail because they will always have the best in class, will always replace the best with the best and there will never be a lull due to financial instability or uncertainty. In other words, completely and utterly artificial conditions, especially when contrasted with what history has told us about every one of the Old Order, who all, to a club, could/did/have slumped and have had to re-establish themselves once more years down the line.
It's clear that what some see as "Manchester United" is actually an infernal loathing of Alex Ferguson and the brilliance he ushered into the club, which immediately lost its way without him at the top. In the following 10 years, the cluelessness, and more importantly, the consequences of that cluelessness, have not only seen Manchester United fall back into the pack, but for most of the time, be behind them by some distance. The exact same thing befell Liverpool when Dalglish handed over to Souness and sent them flailing, not only off the top spot, but to be out of the running for the title for years. In very short order, both clubs went from halcyon periods with great players to an exodus and squads and managers who hadn't a prayer. This is how the Old Order works and what their pitfalls are. One or two bad managerial hires and they can fall like a house of cards because consequence for poor decisions then comes back to haunt them as a debt that needs paying in full. These old clubs don't just get to wipe the slate clean each season and go again with a brand new set of players if the bad buys don't work out. They are lumped with them and the general bar for the side will steadily diminish. Arsenal experienced exactly the same thing once Wenger stopped shitting gold. The stadium didn't help, but it wasn't their downfall, but it highlights another point and consequence: the either, or. By pouring money into the new stadium, they were going to be hamstrung for years. A conscious decision made to better their stadium meant less money could be pumped into the team, and anyone coming to manage them had to accept that. At City? Nope, we'll redevelop a portion of the city - yes, the literal city - whilst still hiring best in class across all facets on off and the pitch with no fallout whatsoever. Hmm... clearly the same playing field as what everyone else is uuming and ahhing from.
The worst thing of all is City didn't have to cheat as a state is going to be Borg-like in its assimilation by its very nature. It cannot be anything else, which is why it has no place in football, but that's besides the point as this is about cheating to achieve ends as hurriedly and as artificially as one can imagine.
As much as the Old Order could be despised by those who were not part of it, they were not infinite or unmovable. Every single one of them had sizeable lulls multiple times in their histories and provided opportunities for others to take their slice of the pie should they be so fortunate to go upwind at the time of a boon for the game. We'll never know what would have happened without City in the picture, but history tells us, quite clearly, that even the biggest of English clubs has never been too big to not fail, until now. With Ferguson's retirement, there was no guarantee status quo would have remained, but unlike in the past, where new players could gobble up space, things quickly became established in this new, most broken order where the winningest team's biggest concerns are in how to hide their wrongdoing. The footballing side of things, a total formality due to them having no consequences for anything that goes wrong.