montpelier
Full Member
- Joined
- Oct 24, 2011
- Messages
- 10,637
It's an horrific insipid disgusting shade of blue that they insist on using for the kit.
Last edited:
Oh my godLondon, Merseyside, Newcastle were all alternative destinations for their investment but they want to build a world class club here in Manchester providing increased wealth, employment and opportunities for this previously deprived region.
They definitely do. I can't remember any times when they've had a number of key players out at the same time though, until now. Especially when they first won the PL, they were practically invincible that year whilst we were playing Carrick and Fletcher in defence and had lost Vidic for the season.Kompany and Aguero do have a lot of injuries.
The year they won it on goal difference we had numerous injuries every week.They definitely do. I can't remember any times when they've had a number of key players out at the same time though, until now. Especially when they first won the PL, they were practically invincible that year whilst we were playing Carrick and Fletcher in defence and had lost Vidic for the season.
Good grief, the delusion is strong with this one"Your fellow Arabs"?
I'd laugh but the camels in my Salford back garden need feeding.
"Arabs and oil money"
Is that money tainted in comparison to American/Jewish/Irish investment obtained from leveraged buyout parasites and a man who sold condemned meat to schoolkids and who died before he could be properly held to account for his actions?
And to suggest that ADUG wanted to piggyback United's fame when choosing their club is just risible.
London, Merseyside, Newcastle were all alternative destinations for their investment but they want to build a world class club here in Manchester providing increased wealth, employment and opportunities for this previously deprived region.
Make your mind up.The main reason why ADUG chose City was that because they got a new shiny stadium for absolutely peanuts thus saving any new owner potentially hundred of millions. It had nothing to do with wanting to increase employment, wealth and opportunities for the people of Manchester. That's just a very good side effect.
Believe or not I came onto this thread to try to constructively put my opinion on the original OP question rather than argue about history, oil money, manky meat, empty council houses and the like as that's all been done to death but a thread like this is doomed from the start on a United forum as a sizeable number of respondents just want to resort to playground name calling. I do realise it would be same on BM if the same question came up there about United BTW.Most fair minded people thought that because we had the best team, the best coach, a winning mentality and our competition for the title was no where near as strong as it now. Plus the rest of the premier league wasn't as close in terms of overall ability in teams. We were the best, no doubt about it.
Now that there's a genuine 3/4 horse race for the title, as well as teams like Swansea, West Ham, Crystal Palace & Stoke being capable of beating anyone on their day, no one can say with certainty that any one team will walk the league.
Before the season started Chelsea were favourites. Then after their collapse - City became favourites with Arsenal behind, if we win our next few matches and keep our advantage over City we'll be favourites. It doesn't mean that these analysts know what they're talking about, it just means that no one can predict the league anymore.
There's a narrative that United are sleeping giants, we're past our best and won't reach the levels of where we were before. That's what most opposition & neutral fans and journalists and "analysts" alike want, because we've dominated for so long, we're the team that everyone wants to beat. Even in defeat, opposition fans get glory out of us losing, regardless of their own team results. That's why so many clickbait articles reference Manchester United in the title, because if it just had Manchester City it would hardly get any clicks or comments.
So while it's taken us a couple of years to get adjusted to life without SAF (as any other club would if they had the greatest manger ever) to suggest that we've lost our aura is ridiculous at best.
What is it with Liverpool and City fans being so obsessed with fear and teams being scared of them. It's pathetic. It's professional football we're talking about, not a playground bully.Make your mind up.
Are the investors so rich that they throw money around carelessly or are they hard nosed businessmen
Believe or not I came onto this thread to try to constructively put my opinion on the original OP question rather than argue about history, oil money, manky meat, empty council houses and the like as that's all been done to death but a thread like this is doomed from the start on a United forum as a sizeable number of respondents just want to resort to playground name calling. I do realise it would be same on BM if the same question came up there about United BTW.
I didn't put my point over well about the benefit to the Manchester area of the City project. If anyone took that as an act of philanthropy rather than a spin off bonus then that's my fault for not explaining myself properly.
This current trend, though, of posters saying that the investment only came about as a result of United's success at the time is terribly arrogant. There is an interesting debate to be had as to whether it was a factor but anyone who thinks it was the main or only factor in the choice is the one who is deluded.
I am new on the main forum (close to promotion but currently a trialist) and will have to grow a thicker skin and ignore the simple minded comments by responding only to points made by fair minded posters such as yourself.
Oh, by the way, United have lost their aura of a decade ago. It can be regained and van Gaal seems to be turning the club around but none of England and Europe's elite fear United at the moment. You'll have to do a lot more than be top of the table in September and get a few goals from Martial to change that perception.
I'm guessing you're either 10 years old or not the brightest lamp in the street?Most fair minded football students used to look at United at the start of each season and expect them to win the PL and be in at least the SF stage in CL.
Now you have lost that aura. You sacked Fergie's hand picked successor after less than a season, panic bought some players who added nothing much and were quickly jettisoned and were on the point of revolt against LVG a few short weeks ago.
United have made up some of the lost ground in recent weeks with Martial, Shaw, Smalling and Depay showing some good form but that can quickly change.
What is it with Liverpool and City fans being so obsessed with fear and teams being scared of them. It's pathetic. It's professional football we're talking about, not a playground bully.
Under Ferguson many teams arrived at Old Trafford, under Shankley and Paisley they arrived at Anfield pretty much knowing that therewas nothing down for them that day.
United, Liverpool and even now Chelsea have lost that invincible aura that they once had at home.
Teams drawn against them in Cup competitions pretty much knew it was the end of the road but not so at the moment.
Neutrals and supporters of other teams would point to improvements in strength of domestic rivals but European competition results don't bear that out at the moment, do they?
it was I don't really know what the point is but if you're saying England's and Europe's best teams have no reason to be wary when playing us, then you're wrong, and it certainly wouldn't be a position held by the management at your club for instance.
Wary yes. Fearful no.
Given Van Gaal's record in big games with us (we've either won or been the best team in every big fixture), maybe teams would do well to 'fear' us a bit more.
Moot but can't be bothered dissecting individual games.
Next time maybe you could read my posts a little more carefully before going in all guns blazing?I'm guessing you're either 10 years old or not the brightest lamp in the street?
Wow, such a warm greeting. Nice to meet you too.
Lost our aura? Sorry mate, we've been there tons of times over the years. But they still always want to watch us.
I was talking about about United as a team not a tourist attraction where I concede that you're as strong as before (almost).
You'd think Ferguson never had a poor United side at his disposal. There was plenty of seasons (2003-2007 quite frankly) when United were not favourites for the title at all given Arsenal's great side and Chelsea's massive investment later on
I have already praised Ferguson's effective management style in this thread.
Yet you resorted to it, try harder if you really arent here on the wum.Believe or not I came onto this thread to try to constructively put my opinion on the original OP question rather than argue about history, oil money, manky meat, empty council houses and the like.
Yes because when childish posters perpetiate untruths and pass off wild guesses as fact it bugged me somewhat.Yet you resorted to it, try harder if you really arent here on the wum.
You come across very contrary and argumentative in your posts. Just trying to help you out.Yes because when childish posters perpetiate untruths and pass off wild guesses as fact it bugged me somewhat.
Thanks for your advice and have a nice day.
Bollocks. City were chosen as the underperforming neighbours of the biggest brand in football for a simple reason. Bought, lock, stock and barrel as a vehicle/host for an exercise in brand detoxificationMake your mind up.
Are the investors so rich that they throw money around carelessly or are they hard nosed businessmen
Believe or not I came onto this thread to try to constructively put my opinion on the original OP question rather than argue about history, oil money, manky meat, empty council houses and the like as that's all been done to death but a thread like this is doomed from the start on a United forum as a sizeable number of respondents just want to resort to playground name calling. I do realise it would be same on BM if the same question came up there about United BTW.
I didn't put my point over well about the benefit to the Manchester area of the City project. If anyone took that as an act of philanthropy rather than a spin off bonus then that's my fault for not explaining myself properly.
This current trend, though, of posters saying that the investment only came about as a result of United's success at the time is terribly arrogant. There is an interesting debate to be had as to whether it was a factor but anyone who thinks it was the main or only factor in the choice is the one who is deluded.
I am new on the main forum (close to promotion but currently a trialist) and will have to grow a thicker skin and ignore the simple minded comments by responding only to points made by fair minded posters such as yourself.
Oh, by the way, United have lost their aura of a decade ago. It can be regained and van Gaal seems to be turning the club around but none of England and Europe's elite fear United at the moment. You'll have to do a lot more than be top of the table in September and get a few goals from Martial to change that perception.
No. This is a risible post in its entirety from comparing dodgy business practice to despotic regimes (yes there are hierarchies of wrongness) as well as claiming the investment is somehow borne out of a sudden burning desire to help deprived Mancunians. All you need to know is here.."Your fellow Arabs"?
I'd laugh but the camels in my Salford back garden need feeding.
"Arabs and oil money"
Is that money tainted in comparison to American/Jewish/Irish investment obtained from leveraged buyout parasites and a man who sold condemned meat to schoolkids and who died before he could be properly held to account for his actions?
And to suggest that ADUG wanted to piggyback United's fame when choosing their club is just risible.
London, Merseyside, Newcastle were all alternative destinations for their investment but they want to build a world class club here in Manchester providing increased wealth, employment and opportunities for this previously deprived region.
What injuries? They were able to field a team with Aguero, De Bruyne, Sterling, Otamendi and Yaya Toure. It's not like they had half of their team missing.I have to say I don't see much wrong with them barring the injuries. Then again, I can't remember them having a serious injury crisis like this since the takeover, so they're due. Sure, they've occasionally melted down after losing a single player (Silva once, Touré in the ACoN, Aguero once or twice), but they've never endured a mass loss of key players like this. Which (until this season so far, touch wood, fingers crossed etc) is pretty much an annual occurrence for us. Especially losing the entire defence all at once, our speciality.
The Spurs game was the first I've seen them really deserve to lose this season, and clearly the injuries are to blame. How they didn't beat West Ham I still can't fathom - there was nothing solid or special about the defending, and nothing lacking in City's attacking, the ball just somehow didn't go in the net.
Even Aguero doesn't really look out of form to me, just not getting the rub of the green.
We'd do well not to expect them to keep dropping points.
The quality of the league is so unprecedented that it's unthinkable that City could drop any points outside of PL... oh wait, they just lost to a Juventus team at home, a Juventus team that won 1 in 6 league games this season and have been absolutely horrid all season. It can't possibly be that City are just in poor shape and both West Ham and Spurs results had a lot to do with that.The quality of the PL is unmatched. The strongest squads can and will lose a lot of games they are predicted to win easily. It doesn't mean there is a crisis, and i'd still have them as favourites to win the league.
Bollocks. City were chosen as the underperforming neighbours of the biggest brain football for a simple reason. Bought, lock, stock and barrel as a vehicle/host for an exercise in brand detoxification
No. This is a risible post in its entirety from comparing dodgy business practice to despotic regimes (yes there are hierarchies of wrongness) as well as claiming the investment is somehow borne out of a sudden burning desire to help deprived Mancunians. All you need to know is here..
http://www.theguardian.com/football/2013/jul/30/manchester-city-human-rights-accusations
Spot the irony of a club that still has fans claiming it to be a "working class club" being consumed for its own purposes by a group that has nothing but disdain for the rights of workers. They don't give a feck so stop telling yourself otherwise and we might take you more seriously? You won't find anyone here defending the Glazers business practices and plenty who'd rather they never showed their faces so comparisons, as well as being entirely inappropriate, are simply unwarranted
There'll be a couple more City fans along in a minute to explain how it's no different from investment at any other club and that it was needed to catch up because, back at the birth of professionalism, United got a couple of grand more from local business men than they did.
The lengths you lot go to in order to portray your club as a paragon of virtue compared to us or anyone else is hilarious.
Mate I'm trying to step back from arguing about which club has more skeletons in the cupboard than the other (as stated in previous posts) but I will just say that I don't present City as a 'paragon of virtue' at all but I don't take the arrogant, misplaced self righteousnessness of some posters very kindly.Bollocks. City were chosen as the underperforming neighbours of the biggest brain football for a simple reason. Bought, lock, stock and barrel as a vehicle/host for an exercise in brand detoxification
No. This is a risible post in its entirety from comparing dodgy business practice to despotic regimes (yes there are hierarchies of wrongness) as well as claiming the investment is somehow borne out of a sudden burning desire to help deprived Mancunians. All you need to know is here..
http://www.theguardian.com/football/2013/jul/30/manchester-city-human-rights-accusations
Spot the irony of a club that still has fans claiming it to be a "working class club" being consumed for its own purposes by a group that has nothing but disdain for the rights of workers. They don't give a feck so stop telling yourself otherwise and we might take you more seriously? You won't find anyone here defending the Glazers business practices and plenty who'd rather they never showed their faces so comparisons, as well as being entirely inappropriate, are simply unwarranted
There'll be a couple more City fans along in a minute to explain how it's no different from investment at any other club and that it was needed to catch up because, back at the birth of professionalism, United got a couple of grand more from local business men than they did.
The lengths you lot go to in order to portray your club as a paragon of virtue compared to us or anyone else is hilarious.
And that's it, what could possibly go wrong? He new players need a bit of time to adapt to make the team function as a unit but in the end it's just a massive competition..The quality of the PL is unmatched. The strongest squads can and will lose a lot of games they are predicted to win easily. It doesn't mean there is a crisis, and i'd still have them as favourites to win the league.
Well actually the guts of that Guardian article are the opinions of Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch but gloss over it all you like.All your opinion.
If I looked at the great sides of the PL era, united 92-96, 97-03, arsenal 97-04, chelsea 04-06, united 06-09 - city of 2011-15 are not fit to lase those teams boots. With city I know what to expect from them, look good in periods of the season, inept in Europe, and quiet beatable there is nothing progressive about the football, its been the same since they put the team together, nothing really has improved. The great sides of united, chelsea, arsenal had that aura of invincibility and a mentality of a champions unmatched, if we look at city's 2 title victory's it was never impressive or convincing, they failed to beat a united team coming to an end of a cycle on goal difference, and had to rely on a liverpool collapse for them to nick the title, there was nothing dominating about how they have won these league titles, while in the process getting beat in europe every time by madrid, barcelona, juventus, it becomes a comedy show, not once have they even looked like a challenger of the elite of CL.What injuries? They were able to field a team with Aguero, De Bruyne, Sterling, Otamendi and Yaya Toure. It's not like they had half of their team missing.
City are the new Chelsea on here. Even if they lose convincingly, they are still amazingly wonderful and head and shoulders above United. It was like that with Chelsea between 2009 and 2013 when they were poor by their standards but maintained their incredibly high opinion for some reason. It was infuriating at times because we could have 50 points while they'd be sitting on 30-something and people would still speak of them as if United's tally was pure fluke while Chelsea were incredibly underrated by the low points total that they did not deserve at all.
City haven't been great this season, first couple of games aside - and even then it was 'only West Brom', then Chelsea in deep crisis and Everton they beat. Watford at home is not a difficult fixture and they didn't even deserve to win at Palace. Then they proceeded to lose all 3 important games, two of them at home but somehow nothing is wrong with them even though if United went through similar spell people would be laughing at anyone suggesting we're still title challengers (even though it'd be true).
They are still title favourites by a small margin for me. If things don't work out they will just throw money at the problems in the Winter and get done with it but I wouldn't say that they are champions elect like the vast majority on here seem to think, or even clear favourites.
You're reaching mate.What injuries? They were able to field a team with Aguero, De Bruyne, Sterling, Otamendi and Yaya Toure. It's not like they had half of their team missing.
City are the new Chelsea on here. Even if they lose convincingly, they are still amazingly wonderful and head and shoulders above United. It was like that with Chelsea between 2009 and 2013 when they were poor by their standards but maintained their incredibly high opinion for some reason. It was infuriating at times because we could have 50 points while they'd be sitting on 30-something and people would still speak of them as if United's tally was pure fluke while Chelsea were incredibly underrated by the low points total that they did not deserve at all.
City haven't been great this season, first couple of games aside - and even then it was 'only West Brom', then Chelsea in deep crisis and Everton they beat. Watford at home is not a difficult fixture and they didn't even deserve to win at Palace. Then they proceeded to lose all 3 important games, two of them at home but somehow nothing is wrong with them even though if United went through similar spell people would be laughing at anyone suggesting we're still title challengers (even though it'd be true).
They are still title favourites by a small margin for me. If things don't work out they will just throw money at the problems in the Winter and get done with it but I wouldn't say that they are champions elect like the vast majority on here seem to think, or even clear favourites.
They aren't really champions though, they finished 2nd last year and at one point it looked like we might finish above them (then we imploded). They have certainly improved with three high-money, high-quality signings but so have we and I reckon maybe even more all things considered.You're reaching mate.
City has it all to prove in Europe, despite their recent success in the league, so all we have to go off on is the West Ham defeat (where they could have got the win on another day if not for West Ham's stout defense), and the loss away at Tottenham. That doesn't change the fact that they are champions and their quality in the league is proven. We and other teams rightly have to prove ourselves before we get the benefit of the doubt. Totally different scenario from the Chelsea teams that got that benefit despite doing worse than us in the league after Mourinho left.
They're still favourites for the title with Chelsea's bad start, but I don't think they are that much better than us, Chelsea or Arsenal.Their CM can't control games, neither on the ball nor off the ball. It's their biggest weakness, it's why they go on great runs and follow it up with bad runs every season. It's difficult to be consistent when you can't predict how your own team plays. So much is about momentum with them, about the run one of their stars is on. It's also why they struggle so much in Europe where control is much more important. When City is on flow, they're almost impossible to contain for PL sides, because few teams in England can control the game and the more open it is, the more City excels. Yaya is the perfect example for the problem, a great individual who struggles heavily to fit into a bigger concept.
Was on bench against Spurs.Isn't Zabaleta out? He is a huge outlet for their attack. This is a blip until proven otherwise.
Yeah agreed. Makes me laugh how people on here and the pundits make excuses for them whenever they inevitably go on a bad result when Kompany/Silva are injured. They should've a squad to cope up with injuries. Strangely enough the same excuses aren't used for United whenever we're performing badly or losing.Truth be told they have a rather unbalanced squad that is overly reliant on 2 or 3 players. If Kompany is in bad form or injured their defence is generally terrible. Aguero is injured or out of form and they struggle to score goals. Toure is out of form and teams tend to walk through their midfield. They needed to sign a couple of top class midfield players in the Summer to firstly give Toure the rest he needs and to secondly replace the poor Fernando & give extra protection to their defence, instead they signed the equally uninspiring Delph who hasn't yet featured due to injury. They also don't seem to be able to change tactics to cope with player's being out of form or injured - they seem to just throw more of the same at the opposition and hope for a different result.
They spent over £50m more than United this Summer (over £75m net) and if their fans were perfectly honest they'd trade transfer windows in a heartbeat. Schweinsteiger alone would have been invaluable for them (let alone Darmian, Schneiderlin, Depay & Martial).
This post also sums it up quite well:
They're still favourites for the title with Chelsea's bad start, but I don't think they are that much better than us, Chelsea or Arsenal.
Likewise the excuses for how bad they've been in the transfer market. They have spent insane amounts of money, far more than United or any other team over the last 5-10 years, but you still read in the press about "Van Gaal's £300m spree" and how we've spent insane amounts of Martial (without context as to the player's who've left). Yet you look at their squad and their inability to perform well when any of Kompany, Aguero, Toure or Silva are out of form or injured is very telling, particularly given the insane amounts of money spent.Yeah agreed. Makes me laugh how people on here and the pundits make excuses for them whenever they inevitably go on a bad result when Kompany/Silva are injured. They should've a squad to cope up with injuries. Strangely enough the same excuses aren't used for United whenever we're performing badly or losing.
The Moyes era shook the invincibility, but Van Gaal's home record is actually very good. Just 3 losses last year in the league, one of which was his first game in charge, and one was the 2nd last home game of season when the foot was coming off the pedal. We've had plenty worse years than that at home under Ferguson. Zero losses so far this year and I don't anticipate many teams getting much from us. Away is more of a concern, especially with the league's lesser lights making big strides.What is it with Liverpool and City fans being so obsessed with fear and teams being scared of them. It's pathetic. It's professional football we're talking about, not a playground bully.
Under Ferguson many teams arrived at Old Trafford, under Shankley and Paisley they arrived at Anfield pretty much knowing that therewas nothing down for them that day.
United, Liverpool and even now Chelsea have lost that invincible aura that they once had at home.
Teams drawn against them in Cup competitions pretty much knew it was the end of the road but not so at the moment.
Neutrals and supporters of other teams would point to improvements in strength of domestic rivals but European competition results don't bear that out at the moment, do they?
it was I don't really know what the point is but if you're saying England's and Europe's best teams have no reason to be wary when playing us, then you're wrong, and it certainly wouldn't be a position held by the management at your club for instance.
Wary yes. Fearful no.
Given Van Gaal's record in big games with us (we've either won or been the best team in every big fixture), maybe teams would do well to 'fear' us a bit more.
Moot but can't be bothered dissecting individual games.
I'd agree with that. City players aren't in it for the trophies their in it for the money. Without a very good manager I don't see them as a team that really worries me.Missing players (injured) have obviously had a big impact for City, but that's no real excuse considering the vast amounts of money they've spent and the virtually unlimited amounts of money available to them.
So I can't help thinking that they're suffering from the potential downside of sugar-daddy money, namely a lot of players on huge wages who've fooled themselves into thinking - mainly because they're paid so much - that they've "made it" and so feel that they don't need to prove that much and can just cruise towards winning most of their games as part of a big money team.
They were missing their best goalkeeper, their best CB by a mile and their most important and best creative player, all three of whom have been excellent this season. If we lost De Gea, Smalling and Mata+Young (combined, their contribution this season is about equal to Silva's), you wouldn't be saying 'what injuries?'What injuries? They were able to field a team with Aguero, De Bruyne, Sterling, Otamendi and Yaya Toure. It's not like they had half of their team missing.
and this ladies and gentlemen is exactly the answer to the OP. This washing their hands of where the money comes from is what is wrong with City at the moment. Forget football, it pales in comparison. Once you bring the subject up all I hear is this bull. The, well, we're not responsible, but we're enjoying it and all money is dirty really because if we keep telling ourselves that then we can forget that our club and all recent success is tarnished in blood and suffering.Mate I'm trying to step back from arguing about which club has more skeletons in the cupboard than the other (as stated in previous posts) but I will just say that I don't present City as a 'paragon of virtue' at all but I don't take the arrogant, misplaced self righteousnessness of some posters very kindly.
Mea culpa for getting involved on a United forum I guess. Lessons learned and all that.
I respect your brother's decision but at the same time I can understand a City supporter whose been behind the team through thick and (mostly) thin continuing to support the club and enjoying the trophies. After all, the fans can't control who buys their club. I do think the hero worship of the Sheikhs and the whitewashing of their human rights abuses is disgusting, though.and this ladies and gentlemen is exactly the answer to the OP. This washing their hands of where the money comes from is what is wrong with City at the moment. Forget football, it pales in comparison. Once you bring the subject up all I hear is this bull. The, well, we're not responsible, but we're enjoying it and all money is dirty really because if we keep telling ourselves that then we can forget that our club and all recent success is tarnished in blood and suffering.
I come from a family of mancs who supported both teams. My grandad was the typical watch one week at Old trafford then travel to maine rd the next. My brother was an ardent city supporter and me a red. My family are also pretty religious christians. (i'm an atheist but the rest aren't) My brother decided that he had to stop supporting the club as he couldn't condone where the money was coming from and the suffering involved. Every major signing, every bit of silverware is slap in the face of human rights but it's OK because United once had a guy who sold dodgy meat.
There's no excuse or argument for it.
This covers what i think.Their CM can't control games, neither on the ball nor off the ball. It's their biggest weakness, it's why they go on great runs and follow it up with bad runs every season. It's difficult to be consistent when you can't predict how your own team plays. So much is about momentum with them, about the run one of their stars is on. It's also why they struggle so much in Europe where control is much more important. When City is on flow, they're almost impossible to contain for PL sides, because few teams in England can control the game and the more open it is, the more City excels. Yaya is the perfect example for the problem, a great individual who struggles heavily to fit into a bigger concept.