Yes and give Lance Armstrong back his medals while you are at it.
The whole point of sport is fair competition. If one club are cheating you don't just get on with it, you point it out.
Do City leave you cold?
- Thread starter Pogue Mahone
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) and Imran (@Annihilate Now!) are here to discuss United's last 3 games - two much-needed wins vs. Burnley in the Premier League and Palace in the League Cup, as well as a the 4-3 loss away at Bayern. They discuss the defence, new options in midfield with Hannibal and Amrabat now in contention and look forward to games vs. Palace (again!) and Galatasary.
The whole point of sport is fair competition. If one club are cheating you don't just get on with it, you point it out.
Cooking or grilling books aside, my question is would we have afforded at the time of their transfers, without cooking books, players like Ake, Akanji, Rodri, Gundogan, Mahrez, B Silva, Alvarez or Stones?
This is why i expected Inter to give a good fight, they play striker partnerships which i believe can make a comeback soon
Or the governing bodies who sanction this cheating...
Another City fan in disguise.
Cup finals are edgy affairs. Not as though any of the trophies United won featured a feast of champagne football in the final. The one and only final we played scintillating football in we ended up losing ! (to Arsenal in 2005 FA cup) I don’t think any neutral would describe the way City eviscerated Madrid in the semi as “boring football”
The thing about City that leave me cold is not the financial doping, which is obviously terrible and ruins the sport in its own way, but their playing style. The focus on ball retention, statistics and being efficient takes the fun out of the game. There are no flicks, no tricks, no dribbles, and for me no entertainment about the way they play football. Even when they are at their absolute best, 80-85 minutes of a game is a snooze-fest.
Don't mistake this for quality, as they are undoubtedly one of the best all-time teams. They are brilliant. The quality in their passing, movement, work ethic, team play are all outstanding.
What leaves me cold is how cynical their game is. Don't take chances. Unfortunately, their success is contagious so other teams emulate their approach, turning football into a more cynical game where the element of entertainment is fading quickly. Watching a neutral game is becoming more and more boring, and thus I rarely find the effort to do so. There are less flair players because they do lose the ball and obviously even the best dribblers in the world are not always successful. That's just me though, but in terms of entertainment, they leave me completely cold.
Don't mistake this for quality, as they are undoubtedly one of the best all-time teams. They are brilliant. The quality in their passing, movement, work ethic, team play are all outstanding.
What leaves me cold is how cynical their game is. Don't take chances. Unfortunately, their success is contagious so other teams emulate their approach, turning football into a more cynical game where the element of entertainment is fading quickly. Watching a neutral game is becoming more and more boring, and thus I rarely find the effort to do so. There are less flair players because they do lose the ball and obviously even the best dribblers in the world are not always successful. That's just me though, but in terms of entertainment, they leave me completely cold.
I don't understand the point of your question?
The question should be, in my mind, are we willing to accept long term and systemic cheating in football?
Yeah, i've never seen a pub/bar empty as quickly when they won and to celebrate so little when a team won a game before.
Yeah I just couldn't give two shits about them. I felt it a lot more when Liverpool won the league, and would have been proper devastated if they'd done the treble last season.
On a side note, I actually found I wasn't really that upset when City won the treble at all. I try to really base my enjoyment of football on how my team does, rather than the success/failure of other teams anyway, but I just don't care. Part of that is probably just being older, but I also think the sports washing, combined with the Glazer nightmare, has really just hollowed out what I used to enjoy about the sport. Still love it mind, just in a far more detached way.
Also, it's been over 20 years since United won the treble. Nothing will take away the magic of that season. Coupled with the drama, I don't think there will ever be a season like it. But it was 20 years ago, we need to move on. The club has been cashing in on its past glories for too long, we need to start looking forward again.
Hopefully that will start soon under a new ownership soon. Although judging by who will end up owning the club, that's likely going to leave me feeling even more detached in many ways.
On a side note, I actually found I wasn't really that upset when City won the treble at all. I try to really base my enjoyment of football on how my team does, rather than the success/failure of other teams anyway, but I just don't care. Part of that is probably just being older, but I also think the sports washing, combined with the Glazer nightmare, has really just hollowed out what I used to enjoy about the sport. Still love it mind, just in a far more detached way.
Also, it's been over 20 years since United won the treble. Nothing will take away the magic of that season. Coupled with the drama, I don't think there will ever be a season like it. But it was 20 years ago, we need to move on. The club has been cashing in on its past glories for too long, we need to start looking forward again.
Hopefully that will start soon under a new ownership soon. Although judging by who will end up owning the club, that's likely going to leave me feeling even more detached in many ways.
It'd be worse if Liverpool did it, and that's because them doing it means something.
City doing it is just meh.
City doing it is just meh.
nobody gives a toss about city. they're no craic.
It's great to be idealistic and everything, but football's regulatory bodies are themselves massively corrupt. the industries that serve it and its stakeholders are invested massively in it and they WILL receive their profits whatever happens. 'Willing to accept long term and systemic cheating in football' isn't really the point, because the game is already filthy. A better question might be, 'Are you capable of turning a blind eye to long term and systematic cheating and just enjoy the game as a spectacle?'
It was worse when Liverpool just won the league compared to City doing the treble
Yes, I think we should.
Otherwise all clubs should start every season with the same budget so every club on the planet should spend the same amount of money.
It’s a desert. Oil in the rocks below. It’s a country ruled by an elite. United Arab Emirates is who we competed with for the FA Cup. Not Manchester City. Just cos the beast is dressed in the skin of a once middle range sports organisation, do not be fooled.
I posted in another thread a video from Tom Peck of them desperately trying to look elated in the changing room afterward. You had lads in the background on their phones, just sat down.
Depends how you define "fair".Yes and give Lance Armstrong back his medals while you are at it.
The whole point of sport is fair competition. If one club are cheating you don't just get on with it, you point it out.
If City have cheated within the current rules they should be heavily punished or there's no point having the rules in the first place, but let's not pretend that the rules are designed to level the playing field in any meaningful way. The rules help the rich clubs stay at the top table and make it difficult for any other clubs to break in, even if their owners are just as rich.
When I first started following United they were outspending rivals left and right. Record transfer after record transfer when most other clubs just couldn't do it. Buying the better players from rival teams. No United fans were moaning about it because we were succesful and challenging year after year as other rivals came and went.
The justification from some United fans seems to be that the money is self generated so that's fine and whilst that's technically correct, it's an arbitrary distinction, in my opinion.
City have spent a fortune on players, but they've mostly spent it well. A number of key players in that side were not superstars when they joined and were players other clubs could have had: Gundogan, Rodri, Ake, Stones, Ikanji etc. They could all be turning out for other PL sides of varying levels.
I don't enjoy seeing City win but I wish United was run as well as they are from a footballing point of view.
Complete myth. Sure United had transfer records but it certainly didnt happen every year and for instance Liverpool spent more than United when we were in our pomp. Also not sure about better players from rival teams too.
Fair bit isn't about City spending and how did they do it, its about 115 FA charges.
Not much of a stir on the news or anywhere about their treble, so it looks like everyone gave it a wide berth.
"And finally, a monkey who can play the drums has become an internet sensation. Bongo the monkey..... and well done to Manchester City who have won the champions league...."
"And finally, a monkey who can play the drums has become an internet sensation. Bongo the monkey..... and well done to Manchester City who have won the champions league...."
Yeah once the parade is done things will calm
Compared to the Liverpool hysteria when they finally won the league again, there doesn't seem to be much noise about City winning the treble? Granted I'm not currently home and viewing it all from abroad, so my perception might be warped.
They definitely leave me cold but I do despise the little amount of fans they have claiming they've done nothing wrong and pointing fingers to United saying "tHeY sPeNt MoRe ThAn Us" as if that's what this is all about.
Maybe if you're following City's socials. Only thing any of the general football accounts I follow have posted is Grealish being pissed and Lukaku memes. For reference, when Liverpool won their title, it was all over the same pages.
It has not been covered like the Queen's funeral, don't say such ludicrous things.
How is it a myth?
Off the top of my head - Pallister, Keane, Cole, Stam, Veron, RvN, Ferdinand - all record signings of one type or another. Shearer would have been a record fee had he not chosen Newcastle. When United were buying Ferdinand and Veron for £60 million (both british transfer records), Arsenal - our nearest rivals at the time had a record signing of Slyvain Wiltord at £12 million-ish.
Who were Liverpool buying during our "pomp"? Fact is, Fergie was a tremendous manager who, for most of the 90's could buy pretty much whoever he needed to create the great teams he did. He won the Champions League with 4 strikers who would have been first choice at probably any other club. His last title was on the back of buying Arsenal's best player. He didn't care that he had more resources, and neither did any of the fans.
Your last comment makes no sense to me. What does it even mean?
As I said in my post, if City have broken the rules they should be punished properly or there's no point in having any rules but let's not pretend that the vast majority of United fans upset by this actually want a level playing field where all the clubs can compete and the rich clubs are prevented from spending more than those who don't have the money.
I assume that if the Qatar takeover happens you'll be disgusted if the club tries to find away around FFP so they can send £300 million in the summer and gutted if we then go on to win the title.
This is a staggering comment, even from an internet forum.
They leave me cold. I didn’t watch the CL final and didn’t bothered at all when they won the treble. I just switched off. I am waiting, as usual the transfer market and the new season. It’s like it didn’t happen.
Maybe it’s easier if you’re not from Manchester of England. But I am kind of confident that even in England it’s like a non-event. Is it ?
Maybe it’s easier if you’re not from Manchester of England. But I am kind of confident that even in England it’s like a non-event. Is it ?
Didn't help them that WHUM won the EL conference just before and hammered home, no pun intended, the gulf in support.
All news outlets will automatically push the most clicked/read stories to the top of their pages, it was amazing how quickly the City articles disappeared and then the only thing I remember seeing was Grealish getting drunk being apparently worth a few separate stories.
Yes we had transfer records, you're right but you should check Liverpool and Newcastle spending during our pomp years and we didn't brake any laws while spending and actually has a core made of youth players.
Most fans are upset one club can circumvent the rules and spend that way not that rich clubs are prevented to spend more than the others. But on the other hand it seems many of them would turn a blind eye to the whole thing if Qatar would take over and would welcome them with open arms which is a sad state of affairs.
As for the last part you're right. I would be disgusted. It's easy to see which camp you're in.
I think this is a fantastic assessment. I use to watch football obsessively, particularly in the Premier League. Now I can barely watch any of the big games. There is no individual moments of brilliance. You hardly see a screamer from 30 yards even. IMO the modern version of football has become extremely boring.
That's a myth that SAF was a big spender.
1992/93
The biggest spenders: Blackburn
The spend: £8.46m
Manchester United : £2.3m
1993/94
The biggest spenders: Blackburn
The spend: £8.5m
1994/95
The biggest spenders: Everton
The spend: £10.9m
1995/96
The biggest spenders: Newcastle
The spend: £24.5m
1996/97
The biggest spenders: Newcastle
The spend: £17.5m
1997/98
The biggest spenders: Newcastle
The spend: £24.65m
1998/99
The biggest spenders: Manchester United
The spend: £29.35m
1999/2000
The biggest spenders: Liverpool
The spend: £35.9m
Out of the 1990s Manchester broke the record spent 1 season. Then Liverpool broke it the next.
United breaking English transfer records multiple times is not a "myth". Additional context might make the situation come off better, but that's a different thing.
It's all so tainted more than anything, no near as bad as Liverpool or even Arsenal. Then again I live in Ireland, I actually don't know any City fans, maybe in a few years there will be a big new generation of them. I don't have any respect for them more than anything, I think the players play a great brand of football. They are cheating bstrds as most fans admit, 115 charges fc. Cooking the books more than the mafia(allegedly).
Any suggestion that other clubs had comparable spending is simply untrue. United bought two almost £30 million players in consecutive summers and one of them (Veron) couldn't even get in the team. The Ferdinand record stood till the mid 2000's. Nobody could compete financially, and consistently, until Abramovich came in.
As I keep saying - clubs who break the rules should be punished, but my main point here is that the vast majority of the fans crying about this (as if it is in anyway a surprise that owners of a club from a country where money solves all wouldn't' try to circumvent the rules, as I suspect multiple clubs have over the years) wouldn't be pissed off if it was their club doing it and it lead to success. Those fans are not upset because FFP helps secure the future of the game, nor do they actually want a level playing field, they just want United to do better than City.
And in terms of which "camp" I'm in - I'm in the camp which much preferred football before countries were buying clubs and it became the mess it is now, at least at the top level. As a result I'm much more bothered about the fortunes of my local football league club than I am United, which is a shame, but there you go.
Last edited:
Interesting.
Did any club spend more than United over that period overall? Also - why do you stop at the end of the 1990's? Veron and Ferdinand were early 2000's and are very much in the era of United dominance I mention above.
No that much is true but the additional context is pretty damn important too. I can’t remember who but a poster did a comprehensive breakdown of PL spending throughout the 90s and United were very rarely the biggest spenders in any given year throughout the period people say they outspent everyone.
We outspent the opposition in 98/99 and i think thats it for the 90's. For a decade we are famous for dominating.
Yeah and I know Chelsea were the biggest spenders in the year 2000. Can’t remember if it was 99/00 or 00/01.
If the period is PL era up to 2000, the answer is (I'm pretty sure) no.
(Individual seasons, yes - but not overall 1992-2000. Happy to be corrected on this.) *
In the whole PL era (including post 2000), the answer is (obviously): City and Chelsea.
* The actual amount spent on transfers + salaries is probably not available. And it obviously matters.