City launch legal action against the Premier League | Unconfirmed reports that City have secured "potentially significant victory" (p 808)

inbetween said:
The problem is they're all indoctrinated to believe that United and the others should be able to do anything because that's how it used to be. They only have to look at what our owners have done for east Manchester. I mean bloody hell, there are conference teams trying to play Pep's football, none of this would of happened.

I'm not confident we'll win the league this year because we didn't really buy well over the summer and now we've lost our best player. How they can call us cheats is just ridiculous. We haven't even been in the top 10 spenders for 5 years now. Crystal Palace and Forest have net spent more on transfers than we have over the last 5 years!

United meanwhile have spent net £550m, Chelsea £750m and neither barely have a trophy between them!! And it's us ruining the transfer market and football! The rest is just an argument over whether a club and its owner should be allowed to spend its own money.

If they want to moan about competition and spending then they need to look at it this way. 2 years ago United could of spent £15m like we did on Akanji but instead they spent £500k a week on Ronaldo. Akanji played a major part of us winning the treble and Ronaldo sulked off to Saudi, that's on them and that's why they're shite and can't compete.

The whole saga is utterly pathetic.
Click to expand...
100% correct,

What was to stop them going after Alvarez or Ortega instead of Hojund or Onana?

We are an excuse for other clubs failings.
 
Chris-NCL said:
Newcastle fan here.

Anyway, the teams like Palace etc are happy to vote with the Red tops (Spurs, and Chelsea included) because FFP to them means that they get to lock out teams below them, and it gives them a greater ability to just stay in the league. They will never rock the boat, and so long as there is a Burnley, Luton, and Sheffield United ready to drop down, they are happy.
The strange thing is that their own fans don’t realise it.

Brighton, and Brentford are happy for now because they can sell their players, and still replace them. Things will change though once teams they want to buy from suddenly want more money from them, or bigger sell on clauses. It will only take a couple of flops, and/or other teams beating them to players, and suddenly things may change for them.

It’s amazing how blind to it other clubs fans are. It’s as if Man Utd haven’t been buying the league since the 50’s, Liverpool didn’t start buying it since the 70’s on the back of someone who introduced off course gambling to the U.K., and has done arguably caused the damage to the U.K. society by a non government person other than Murdoch.

They also like to forget that the likes of Liverpool, and Man Utd tried to steal football a few years ago with ‘Project big picture’, then again with the ESL. Both clubs should have been thrown out of English football just for that.
On top of that, I think in time people will start to realise how much damage Klopp has done to the Premier League by pressuring the 5 subs rule, then getting officials to give 2 months of stoppage time in games where they need a goal.

All in all, I can’t wait until they try and create the ESL again, a chance to boot them out of English football once and for all.
Click to expand...

You can stay.
 
inbetween said:
To be fair, anybody could argue that United bring in their own income which is fair enough.

However, even if United bring in X income, what's the argument? Is that to say that it's better and fairer for United to win the league and get the best players because of their income? It's a shit argument and it reduces football to nothing more than an excel spreadsheet.

If anything, the only way to break the Premier League in terms of competition is to allow clubs to compete and unfortunately in this day and age that means allowing them to spend money.

Look at your club Newcastle, you had a big investment and you could be challenging the top 4 but that's now probably never going to happen. It can only happen if your owners find ways to bring in sponsor money to allow that investment but apparently that is cheating.

Look at the Wrexham story, it's amazing but if city are cheats then aren't Wrexham exactly the same? It's sad what the accountants and corporate clowns are doing to football and it's even worse that the fans are buying into it too.
Click to expand...
We oldies can remember when United did not by any stretch of the imagination bring in their own income. In fact the last time was when Ferguson became manager and the club tried to knock Liverpool "off the f****** perch" by embarking on a massive spending spree to rebuild their squad. In fact they rebuilt it three times, each time funded by asking the shareholders to dip in their pockets. Funnily enough they changed their minds on the wisdom of allowing "other clubs" to take this approach and so, ironically, it was United who proposed regulations to limit severely the money owners could put into their clubs, because it was only fair play to do so because it ruined the profitability and sustainability of such clubs, whereas a debt of £1 billion did not.

This is a well known chronicle but it is amazing how many still trot out the rubbish that the rags make and spend their "own" money whereas City don't. Investment combined with good management made United successful, just as with City, just as with any company or enterprise. It's what makes British public services so poor and German and Scandinavian so good. But football knows better. Thanks to the rags et al.
 
StillBluessinceHydeRoad said:
We oldies can remember when United did not by any stretch of the imagination bring in their own income. In fact the last time was when Ferguson became manager and the club tried to knock Liverpool "off the f****** perch" by embarking on a massive spending spree to rebuild their squad. In fact they rebuilt it three times, each time funded by asking the shareholders to dip in their pockets. Funnily enough they changed their minds on the wisdom of allowing "other clubs" to take this approach and so, ironically, it was United who proposed regulations to limit severely the money owners could put into their clubs, because it was only fair play to do so because it ruined the profitability and sustainability of such clubs, whereas a debt of £1 billion did not.

This is a well known chronicle but it is amazing how many still trot out the rubbish that the rags make and spend their "own" money whereas City don't. Investment combined with good management made United successful, just as with City, just as with any company or enterprise. It's what makes British public services so poor and German and Scandinavian so good. But football knows better. Thanks to the rags et al.
Click to expand...
Great post, from one oldie to another well done.
 
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.