Manuel Pellegrini (cont)

Status
Not open for further replies.
de niro said:
KnaresboroughBlue said:
J_Bow said:
This was the rumour going about that swayed Alexis to London and apparently Fabregas was more keen on London too.

Any decent man would be having none of it and putting his career first.

Perhaps they thought those moves were best for their careers.

and if west ham came knocking? suddenely london isn't such a draw. footballers want it all. money, shopping, trophies.

It's a balance of them all though isn't it? location, money, and potential. If you're neck and neck on two of them, then the third can swing a decision.

People underestimate player's families too. Obviously wives will have a say, but it can be parents and other family members too painting Manchester as cold and miserable, and London as 'short hop' back to Spain etc.

I don't think Manchester's got the pull that London has, but I'm sure it's ahead of Brum, Newcastle, Leeds, and Liverpool!
 
de niro said:
cleavers said:
JoeMercer'sWay said:
it doesn't really.
We'll have to differ then, but I've lived within 30 miles of London for the last 25 years, its certainly nothing special.

Manchester may not have the quantity of places that London has, but London doesn't really have anything that Manchester doesn't have, other than a queen, and London doesn't have Manchester City.

Manchester is a village compared to London.
Indeed it is, but its easy to find everything in a village, and you can get around much easier.

A footballer should head to the best place to ply his trade, and generally they do, which is why Arsenal used to attract the best, but rarely do these days, same with united. Luckily for Manchester, it has great links with most of the best places in Europe, and even the world, and obviously this will always help. There's not much between us and Chelsea on the football front, but we should offer the better project imho, better stadium, better facilities, better plans, and as a few have alluded too above, if they prefer shopping in London, then they probably aren't suited to City. I don't think we've missed out on anyone due to location, just the fact we couldn't pay the transfer fee, or the wages due to UEFA. That will end, so lets see how we compete then.

One other thing that should be factored in, is that City are looking for a specific character of player to fit the clubs vision, so just because the daily rag says we lost out on player x, doesn't mean its true, and nobody knows who we have actually negotiated for.
 
cleavers said:
de niro said:
cleavers said:
We'll have to differ then, but I've lived within 30 miles of London for the last 25 years, its certainly nothing special.

Manchester may not have the quantity of places that London has, but London doesn't really have anything that Manchester doesn't have, other than a queen, and London doesn't have Manchester City.

Manchester is a village compared to London.
Indeed it is, but its easy to find everything in a village, and you can get around much easier.

A footballer should head to the best place to ply his trade, and generally they do, which is why Arsenal used to attract the best, but rarely do these days, same with united. Luckily for Manchester, it has great links with most of the best places in Europe, and even the world, and obviously this will always help. There's not much between us and Chelsea on the football front, but we should offer the better project imho, better stadium, better facilities, better plans, and as a few have alluded too above, if they prefer shopping in London, then they probably aren't suited to City. I don't think we've missed out on anyone due to location, just the fact we couldn't pay the transfer fee, or the wages due to UEFA. That will end, so lets see how we compete then.

One other thing that should be factored in, is that City are looking for a specific character of player to fit the clubs vision, so just because the daily rag says we lost out on player x, doesn't mean its true, and nobody knows who we have actually negotiated for.

agree with this. i can only understand a player wanting to go to london if he's from there originally/has family links there etc, which could apply to any city in the world. if a player wants a london club for non football related reasons like shopping/nightlife, then i'm afraid that player isnt in football for the right reasons imo.
 
mikeyboy said:
cleavers said:
de niro said:
Manchester is a village compared to London.
Indeed it is, but its easy to find everything in a village, and you can get around much easier.

A footballer should head to the best place to ply his trade, and generally they do, which is why Arsenal used to attract the best, but rarely do these days, same with united. Luckily for Manchester, it has great links with most of the best places in Europe, and even the world, and obviously this will always help. There's not much between us and Chelsea on the football front, but we should offer the better project imho, better stadium, better facilities, better plans, and as a few have alluded too above, if they prefer shopping in London, then they probably aren't suited to City. I don't think we've missed out on anyone due to location, just the fact we couldn't pay the transfer fee, or the wages due to UEFA. That will end, so lets see how we compete then.

One other thing that should be factored in, is that City are looking for a specific character of player to fit the clubs vision, so just because the daily rag says we lost out on player x, doesn't mean its true, and nobody knows who we have actually negotiated for.

agree with this. i can only understand a player wanting to go to london if he's from there originally/has family links there etc, which could apply to any city in the world. if a player wants a london club for non football related reasons like shopping/nightlife, then i'm afraid that player isnt in football for the right reasons imo.

Most players when plying their trade abroad like to make sure that their family are happy. That doesnt necessarily mean that they want to indulge them in shopping trips and nightlife. But if, for example, they know that there are a few coffee shops frequented mainly by Chileans, or at least Spanish speakers, where the missus can go and meet other Chilean women in the morning for a natter while the player is training, that will have a greater appeal than the proximity of Harrods. Its easier for foreigners to settle in London than Manchester because there are likely to be more ex pats from their country, more restaurants serving their national dishes, more of their country's culture.
 
mikeyboy said:
cleavers said:
de niro said:
Manchester is a village compared to London.
Indeed it is, but its easy to find everything in a village, and you can get around much easier.

A footballer should head to the best place to ply his trade, and generally they do, which is why Arsenal used to attract the best, but rarely do these days, same with united. Luckily for Manchester, it has great links with most of the best places in Europe, and even the world, and obviously this will always help. There's not much between us and Chelsea on the football front, but we should offer the better project imho, better stadium, better facilities, better plans, and as a few have alluded too above, if they prefer shopping in London, then they probably aren't suited to City. I don't think we've missed out on anyone due to location, just the fact we couldn't pay the transfer fee, or the wages due to UEFA. That will end, so lets see how we compete then.

One other thing that should be factored in, is that City are looking for a specific character of player to fit the clubs vision, so just because the daily rag says we lost out on player x, doesn't mean its true, and nobody knows who we have actually negotiated for.

agree with this. i can only understand a player wanting to go to london if he's from there originally/has family links there etc, which could apply to any city in the world. if a player wants a london club for non football related reasons like shopping/nightlife, then i'm afraid that player isnt in football for the right reasons imo.

why? would be like turning down New York to live in Baltimore, just because they might pay you more or do better in whatever American Sport for a couple of years.

Could hardly think of anything I'd really spend my money on, or time doing in Manchester, than going to City.
 
Davs 19 said:
Got everything pretty much spot on today and bossed maureen in his own back yard.

Tactically I don't think we were lacking but it's obvious we need to put more time on on our corners..
 
Davs 19 said:
Got everything pretty much spot on today and bossed maureen in his own back yard.

Not only that he will land us the league again this season.
 
Davs 19 said:
Got everything pretty much spot on today and bossed maureen in his own back yard.

Not sure what he specifically did, his selection was predictable due to having no Nasri or Yaya.

We used our width well today for a change, just lacked the final ball and getting more bodies into the danger area.

I didn't like his late subs of Aguero & Silva.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.