bluevengence
Well-Known Member
I just came across this on goonersweb...the op and some of the posters seems to have grasped what our owners are all about,then you have the usual numpty replys of... "no history,would`nt want their owners,doing it the right way "
heres the ops post..
City's Owners
City's owners get a lot of stick from a lot of people. I think some of it is down to the fact that they're from the Middle East and there's a bit of latent racism there (not on this messageboard though), and there's also a lot of populism surrounding their takeover and the actions they have taken.
If you examine their record, they've actually been quite sensible in their ownership. They gave Mark Hughes a lot of time to get things right, and only after failing to convince that he was the right manager did they sack him. Moreover, they've retained Gary Cook as Chief Exec and Brian Marwood as Football Adminstration Officer, making use of their local knowledge having accepted that there are many things about English football that they don't understand yet.
Yes, they've spent a lot of money, and they've ruffled a few feathers with some of their transfer dealings (i.e. Lescott) but which club hasn't? Transfers don't always go through smoothly, and some of them go through after a lot of acrimony (you only need to look at Arsenal)
Furthermore, they are working hard to improve the local area around the stadium, building new schools and trying to regenerate a quite deprived area. You could say this is just a PR stunt, but all the information coming out suggests the owners have a real commitment to the club and the local area, understanding that the club is not just a business but a social institution that means a lot to people.
I think sometimes we're too quick to jump down the City owners' throats, thinking of them as some tinpot Arab Charlatan when their actions suggest they're anything but. Moreover, they actually seem to care about football and success on the pitch, rather than simply using City as a vehicle for a vanity project and to line their pockets with gold. Can you honestly say you get the same impression with our owners? Do you really think our owners put the welfare of the fans and sucess on the pitch ahead of seeing a good return on their investment?
here`s a taster of some replys..:-)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Join Date:May 2011
I think City's owners are rightly hated for two reasons, one moral and the other a football reason.
The moral angle is obvious. Oil, Middle East, USA - the dead bodies are piled sky high on the back of that association, once you do your reading beyond the BBC and BP's press office. But not many people look in that direction, especially the FA with the ludicrous "fit and proper" test.
In football terms I suppose the thing that I dislike most about them is their ignorance. Their ignorance of the game, its history and traditions but even more their ignorance of the damage they are doing to it. That's because when you drench a sand rat in cash he'll make a chav look cultured. Oh yes, they have their Oxford education, much like a whore dresses nice so the neighbours won't talk. Is that racist? If so, I don't really care. I know I'm not a racist and that's good enough for me. So even if I call a rat in a suit a rat in a suit and even if people take offence at that, don't bother to talk to me about it because my interest in the issue will have longed waned by the time you get the first word out.
City are the lottery winning gypos who have chosen your street to live in - caravans and all. The socially sterile city banker who has the biggest car in the street but lacks the manners not to park it in your space. We all have to live together in the football world or else the competition ceases to be all that it could be and the entertainment suffers as a result. If things go on then eventually Chelsea, City, Real Madrid and probably some obscure Russian team manned round the clock by scrubbers trying to get the blood off the changing room floors - that will be all there is. And the City fans can sit there and sing, "We are top of the fucked up league", but I think they'll probably look back instead and yearn for a cold English winter, pies on the terraces and a must win clash with the bitter rivals from up the road.
These "gentlemen" from the Middle East can't ever buy the history, that's safely locked away beyond their reach and it's still something we can tell our kids, "I was there before the arabs came, when Thierry Henry and Dennis Berkgamp and Tony Adams and the rest of the Invincibles were showing the world how the game should be played." Try buying that - you can't for any amount of money. You need class to produce that, a thing City will never, ever have.
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.goonersweb.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=639" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.goonersweb.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=639</a>
heres the ops post..
City's Owners
City's owners get a lot of stick from a lot of people. I think some of it is down to the fact that they're from the Middle East and there's a bit of latent racism there (not on this messageboard though), and there's also a lot of populism surrounding their takeover and the actions they have taken.
If you examine their record, they've actually been quite sensible in their ownership. They gave Mark Hughes a lot of time to get things right, and only after failing to convince that he was the right manager did they sack him. Moreover, they've retained Gary Cook as Chief Exec and Brian Marwood as Football Adminstration Officer, making use of their local knowledge having accepted that there are many things about English football that they don't understand yet.
Yes, they've spent a lot of money, and they've ruffled a few feathers with some of their transfer dealings (i.e. Lescott) but which club hasn't? Transfers don't always go through smoothly, and some of them go through after a lot of acrimony (you only need to look at Arsenal)
Furthermore, they are working hard to improve the local area around the stadium, building new schools and trying to regenerate a quite deprived area. You could say this is just a PR stunt, but all the information coming out suggests the owners have a real commitment to the club and the local area, understanding that the club is not just a business but a social institution that means a lot to people.
I think sometimes we're too quick to jump down the City owners' throats, thinking of them as some tinpot Arab Charlatan when their actions suggest they're anything but. Moreover, they actually seem to care about football and success on the pitch, rather than simply using City as a vehicle for a vanity project and to line their pockets with gold. Can you honestly say you get the same impression with our owners? Do you really think our owners put the welfare of the fans and sucess on the pitch ahead of seeing a good return on their investment?
here`s a taster of some replys..:-)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Join Date:May 2011
I think City's owners are rightly hated for two reasons, one moral and the other a football reason.
The moral angle is obvious. Oil, Middle East, USA - the dead bodies are piled sky high on the back of that association, once you do your reading beyond the BBC and BP's press office. But not many people look in that direction, especially the FA with the ludicrous "fit and proper" test.
In football terms I suppose the thing that I dislike most about them is their ignorance. Their ignorance of the game, its history and traditions but even more their ignorance of the damage they are doing to it. That's because when you drench a sand rat in cash he'll make a chav look cultured. Oh yes, they have their Oxford education, much like a whore dresses nice so the neighbours won't talk. Is that racist? If so, I don't really care. I know I'm not a racist and that's good enough for me. So even if I call a rat in a suit a rat in a suit and even if people take offence at that, don't bother to talk to me about it because my interest in the issue will have longed waned by the time you get the first word out.
City are the lottery winning gypos who have chosen your street to live in - caravans and all. The socially sterile city banker who has the biggest car in the street but lacks the manners not to park it in your space. We all have to live together in the football world or else the competition ceases to be all that it could be and the entertainment suffers as a result. If things go on then eventually Chelsea, City, Real Madrid and probably some obscure Russian team manned round the clock by scrubbers trying to get the blood off the changing room floors - that will be all there is. And the City fans can sit there and sing, "We are top of the fucked up league", but I think they'll probably look back instead and yearn for a cold English winter, pies on the terraces and a must win clash with the bitter rivals from up the road.
These "gentlemen" from the Middle East can't ever buy the history, that's safely locked away beyond their reach and it's still something we can tell our kids, "I was there before the arabs came, when Thierry Henry and Dennis Berkgamp and Tony Adams and the rest of the Invincibles were showing the world how the game should be played." Try buying that - you can't for any amount of money. You need class to produce that, a thing City will never, ever have.
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.goonersweb.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=639" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.goonersweb.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=639</a>
