Champions League ban?

GAZZA said:
Having money isn't just about buying players though, it also helps you keep hold of your better players - look at the side Southampton would have had now if they'd been able to hold on to their better players ;-

- Insert Goalkeeper -
Clyne, Lovgren, van Dijk, Shaw
Oxlade-Chamberlain, Lallana, Wanyama, Walcott
Mane + striker
Click to expand...
You forgot Bale.
 
GAZZA said:
Having money isn't just about buying players though, it also helps you keep hold of your better players - look at the side Southampton would have had now if they'd been able to hold on to their better players ;-

- Insert Goalkeeper -
Clyne, Lovgren, van Dijk, Shaw
Oxlade-Chamberlain, Lallana, Wanyama, Walcott
Mane + striker
Click to expand...

Yup, beautifully illustrates the anachronistic nature of the rag and dipper "b-b-b-but we earned our money" anthem, and the impossibility, in the modern Chimps League era, of "growing organically". They are concepts that belong in the 1970's, yet they are levied at us as the only acceptable path to success. And to pre-emptively counter the claim that clubs like Southampton "don't have to sell", Lovren threatened to go on strike and Van Dyke downed tools. What choice did Southampton have?
 
Exeter Blue I am here said:
Yup, beautifully illustrates the anachronistic nature of the rag and dipper "b-b-b-but we earned our money" anthem, and the impossibility, in the modern Chimps League era, of "growing organically". They are concepts that belong in the 1970's, yet they are levied at us as the only acceptable path to success. And to pre-emptively counter the claim that clubs like Southampton "don't have to sell", Lovren threatened to go on strike and Van Dyke downed tools. What choice did Southampton have?
Click to expand...
None, in reality.

Don’t forget that the shift from being able to ‘grow organically’ (aka: ‘doing things the right way’) to the current closed shop was orchestrated principally by the rags and Liverpool (along with their cohorts in the form of Arsenal, Spurs and Everton).
 
the thing is with any other business/sport it would welcome the investment and sheikh mansour with open arms, and both uefa and the premier league did the same thing when up selling the rights to the tv company's with there plans, both want the best players and managers playing in there competitions and offer this on the world stage to sell there tv rights to the fans, without manchester city and sheikh mansour football would be a lot worst then it is so why change it with FFP

we all know WHY AND WHO are right behind this ??? but its to late manchester city are now bigger than manchester united and its time to open up and shout it from the hill tops, from the playing fields to the market to investment to success MANCHESTER CITY are the power house and control the market, the tag little old city was a dig by united lets all laugh at city lets have banners mocking city on stands we was never ever ?? not in my life time (fergie) going to be bigger than united ????

the thing is football is about the here and now glory is for the history books and once you win the day after its gone and you move on, or you stand still and gloat about have a look at what we have won and year after year you still preaching the same old shit, UNITED still ring out the shit glory glory man utd song is pumped over the booo's of jose football being dished up and then you look at manchester city and pep and it must hurt like mad hahahahaha
 
I suspect CAS would see a CL ban as anti-competitive. I think we must also remember the muddled explanations we got from Platini's UEFA on the aims of FFP. Firstly to deal with the problem of debt in the game, in which it has signally failed since many of the "biggest" names in European football carry at least as much debt now as in 2011 and some much more. It was also ensure that the game and the clubs making up UEFA were all on a much sounder financial basis than before by having to operate on a break even basis. This involved all kinds of UEFA supervision of a club's accounts and interference with the value of sponsorships. What angered City fans especially was the significant involvement of United officials in the judgement of our "case". And we can't forget the smirking lectures from a common oik at UEFA about how UEFA was protecting our club from its owner. I can only look forward to the ECJ's judgement of a governing body that uses rules designed to do such wonderful things for the game to punish an owner who bought an ailing club £90 million in debt, invested in it as is his right in European law, transformed it into one of the powerhouses of European football, and the only debt free one at that, and at the same time made it into a profitable club with one of the highest turnovers recorded in football history. Then to the courts reminder to UEFA that the court deals in law and that the law is on the side of Sheikh Mansour.
 
BluessinceHydeRoad said:
I suspect CAS would see a CL ban as anti-competitive. I think we must also remember the muddled explanations we got from Platini's UEFA on the aims of FFP. Firstly to deal with the problem of debt in the game, in which it has signally failed since many of the "biggest" names in European football carry at least as much debt now as in 2011 and some much more. It was also ensure that the game and the clubs making up UEFA were all on a much sounder financial basis than before by having to operate on a break even basis. This involved all kinds of UEFA supervision of a club's accounts and interference with the value of sponsorships. What angered City fans especially was the significant involvement of United officials in the judgement of our "case". And we can't forget the smirking lectures from a common oik at UEFA about how UEFA was protecting our club from its owner. I can only look forward to the ECJ's judgement of a governing body that uses rules designed to do such wonderful things for the game to punish an owner who bought an ailing club £90 million in debt, invested in it as is his right in European law, transformed it into one of the powerhouses of European football, and the only debt free one at that, and at the same time made it into a profitable club with one of the highest turnovers recorded in football history. Then to the courts reminder to UEFA that the court deals in law and that the law is on the side of Sheikh Mansour.
Click to expand...

Great post!
 
What I don't understand is why the hell are we not suing these twats who are smearing us?
It really is about time we stuck up for ourselves as a club a bit more, for a start ban some of the journalists who enjoy our hospitality but then write shit about us.
I don't get it.
 
BLUEMATT23 said:
What I don't understand is why the hell are we not suing these twats who are smearing us?
It really is about time we stuck up for ourselves as a club a bit more, for a start ban some of the journalists who enjoy our hospitality but then write shit about us.
I don't get it.
Click to expand...

Because it's a long game.
 
We're not robots. Had a bad feeling after Raheem missed the tap in and Leroy had a shot when he needed a sideways touch for a near open goal. Not arguing with the result - despite our statistical dominance. Sergio is irreplaceable - even on a bad day he strikes fear into defenders. Amazed that we've coped so well without Kevin, but eventually his absence catches up with us. Benjamin still recovering from injuries and hasn't yet produced what he's capable of, but Pep signed him for a reason - mainly his attacking threat - albeit we haven't seen him defend as well as he did against us yet.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

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.