City - big club or not ?

Normally wouldn't have piped in on a strictly Man City thread, but yesterday I tried to watch a bit of the latest episode of "The Overlap" on youtube. I don't follow that show and I haven't really watched PL matches this season, only read abut them; still, I thought it would be interesting to watch a discussion/recap of the season as told by various PL fans. About halfway through though, there was an Arsenal fan (from the audience, not even being interviewed) who ruined the discussion by continuously shouting over the Tottenham guy they were interviewing. He was eminently triggered by the fact that they were saying Arsenal didn't have such a great season and were comparing it to Tottenham's. His angry reiterated response was always that Arsenal were a "much bigger club historically" than Tottenham, and so according to him this Tottenham guy didn't even have the right to discuss Arsenal's current form or make a comparison with Tottenham.

That's obviously utter nonsense but it's not the first time I heard this argument from a PL fan. Recently it's been coming mainly from United and Arsenal fans, that is to say fans of struggling teams who were successful in the past.

The thing is, if you're a "big club", shouldn't you be even more ashamed of not living up to your history? Shouldn't you look up to a club that becomes successful in the present when you can't wrap your head around how to win anymore?

Here in Italy there isn't really that exact concept of "being a big club"; it's only the amount of trophies won that gets specifically used in arguments, but if they're too old you'll get mocked because of that (i.e. Inter still going on about their 2010 triplete during our 9-titles win streak). But for example nobody would ever mock a team like Sassuolo just because they haven't got a great history, it's like mocking a high jumper for being short. If he keeps improving the height of his jumps you can only applaud him. And if he ends up jumping higher than you, who are taller and declining in form, you can only be ashamed of your performance and say you're currently inferior. The only history you have to take as reference is your own, to try and keep improving it.
 
The definition of 'big club' seems to change depending on the subjective opinion of the person using the term. Given that point, it's something of a futile debate.

Sheffield Wednesday, for instance, are often lauded as 'big' in the General Forum on here, yet it's easy to denigrate those credentials if you're so inclined. They've been outside the top flight for over 20 years (during which they've been relegated to the third tier three times), have won one League Cup since before the start of WW2, and haven't averaged 30K crowds across a home league season during my lifetime (I'm in my fifties). But they're clearly a club with an illustrious pass and an impressive support base that has potential to do much better if someone can harness the potential. I'd say they're a 'big' club, albeit one that's seriously underachieving.

Back in the late nineties, when we were grubbing around outside the top flight like they are now, nearly all neutrals I met would tell me what a big club Manchester City were. These days, in terms of week-in, week-out home attendances, relative income and global reach, we're objectively 'bigger' than we've ever been, and yet bedwetting social media arseholes try to tell me that we're 'small'. It doesn't make much sense. It's a relative term and we're still not 'big' compared with, say, Real Madrid - even if we're growing all the time - but 'small'? Not by sensible measures.

But who cares? It's a hollow and unproductive debate, and is better left to those pathetic souls who need their club to be 'the biggest' to give them a measure of validation in their squalid, piteous lives. What we are, beyond doubt, is a TOP club, and one whose ownership and executives have built a superb infrastructure that gives us an excellent chance to maintain that status over an extended period. That'll do me just fine.
 
We're a big club. When we get to 10 First Division titles (we're at 8 right now).. we'll be a massively HUGE club!

That'll mean we've dominated at least a full decade of football in our land!
 
Uffa said:
Normally wouldn't have piped in on a strictly Man City thread, but yesterday I tried to watch a bit of the latest episode of "The Overlap" on youtube. I don't follow that show and I haven't really watched PL matches this season, only read abut them; still, I thought it would be interesting to watch a discussion/recap of the season as told by various PL fans. About halfway through though, there was an Arsenal fan (from the audience, not even being interviewed) who ruined the discussion by continuously shouting over the Tottenham guy they were interviewing. He was eminently triggered by the fact that they were saying Arsenal didn't have such a great season and were comparing it to Tottenham's. His angry reiterated response was always that Arsenal were a "much bigger club historically" than Tottenham, and so according to him this Tottenham guy didn't even have the right to discuss Arsenal's current form or make a comparison with Tottenham.

That's obviously utter nonsense but it's not the first time I heard this argument from a PL fan. Recently it's been coming mainly from United and Arsenal fans, that is to say fans of struggling teams who were successful in the past.

The thing is, if you're a "big club", shouldn't you be even more ashamed of not living up to your history? Shouldn't you look up to a club that becomes successful in the present when you can't wrap your head around how to win anymore?

Here in Italy there isn't really that exact concept of "being a big club"; it's only the amount of trophies won that gets specifically used in arguments, but if they're too old you'll get mocked because of that (i.e. Inter still going on about their 2010 triplete during our 9-titles win streak). But for example nobody would ever mock a team like Sassuolo just because they haven't got a great history, it's like mocking a high jumper for being short. If he keeps improving the height of his jumps you can only applaud him. And if he ends up jumping higher than you, who are taller and declining in form, you can only be ashamed of your performance and say you're currently inferior. The only history you have to take as reference is your own, to try and keep improving it.
Click to expand...
It's an English culture thing mate, born out of the old class system.

There's an Upper Class in this country (royalty and the gentry) that no matter what someone achieves in their life, you can never break into, no matter what. You are born into it.

Similar with our upper house of government the House of Lords, you can actually get in there on merit, but many are just plonked in there because of who their great, great grandfather was. They're apparently born to rule.

For this ruling class to remain in existence, they've had to convince the rest of the country that they're worthy of the entitlement of power. To convince them that they're somehow better, more worthy, based on history.

The media in this country do a sterling job of selling that story, and the masses gobble it up and so the royal family remain popular, and in positions of authority.

It's similar with the "Big clubs", especially United and Liverpool, Arsenal as well, and bizarrely Tottenham seem to weasel their way in somehow (to a lesser extent).

The media promote the narrative that these "Big" clubs are somehow superior to everyone else. Entitled. The achievements of any other club couldn't possibly be as worthy or as great as the elite, because they are more worthy.

It's a ruling elite that no amount of hard work or achievement can help you break into. And the general public lap it up like serfs.
 
My club. I don't bother with all the "my dad is bigger than yours " shit. Small club big club..it's school playground talk. We're as small/big as we are. It's not an issue.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TFC
Shaelumstash said:
It's an English culture thing mate, born out of the old class system.

There's an Upper Class in this country (royalty and the gentry) that no matter what someone achieves in their life, you can never break into, no matter what. You are born into it.

Similar with our upper house of government the House of Lords, you can actually get in there on merit, but many are just plonked in there because of who their great, great grandfather was. They're apparently born to rule.

For this ruling class to remain in existence, they've had to convince the rest of the country that they're worthy of the entitlement of power. To convince them that they're somehow better, more worthy, based on history.

The media in this country do a sterling job of selling that story, and the masses gobble it up and so the royal family remain popular, and in positions of authority.

It's similar with the "Big clubs", especially United and Liverpool, Arsenal as well, and bizarrely Tottenham seem to weasel their way in somehow (to a lesser extent).

The media promote the narrative that these "Big" clubs are somehow superior to everyone else. Entitled. The achievements of any other club couldn't possibly be as worthy or as great as the elite, because they are more worthy.

It's a ruling elite that no amount of hard work or achievement can help you break into. And the general public lap it up like serfs.
Click to expand...
I tug my forelock in appreciation of this post !!!
 
eyalluvitt said:
In Scotland Celtic get bigger crowds than Rangers (bigger ground) and have won many more trophies in the last 15 years but Rangers dwarf them size wise in Scotland with almost 1 in 5 of the population supporting the teddy bears.
Click to expand...
and 4/5ths loathing the bigoted fuckwits
 
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.