conn having a dig again

[BringBackSwales]

saw his book on sale in one of the pound shops in Altrincahm at Christmas time, for you guessed it, a pound - says it all about this moron

 

[prestonibbo_mcfc]

I'm very much of the premier league era, the halcyon days of paying sixpence for your ticket are well before my time, but surely nobody other than David Conn thought that we could get to the top table without a shitload of money?

I understand Conn's frustration that it's not the game he grew up with, much like Colin Schindler, I just wish they wouldn't use City as the example of all that's wrong with modern football, we didn't make it this way. I also think his sentence about the kids not enjoying it in the same way is petty, I'd have given anything to walk down Wembley Way to watch City in a cup final as an 11 year old.

Whether an 8 - 11 yr old kid or 52 as I am now, I'm going to enjoy this, if we win, as I have done every other cup win.
The amount of money said cup has cost will be of no relevance to me.

 

[Blue Mist]

I find David Conn to be 'Thought Provoking' and there is nothing wrong with that.

Some might see his writings as moans and bitter digs at modern day City. I prefer to consider them to be the sharp contrasting blacks in our modern colourful appearance. In short, they actually add to the overall mosaic of what is the story of Manchester City!

Like most I prefer to look at the brighter more colourful parts of the picture but we still need the darker shades. Amongst all his darker tones are important themes however such as the changing age of the average football supporter now being a mid 40's middle income man. This worries me and should worry everyone as much as it worries Conn.

Sorry but it is not thought provoking at all, it is just his usual (re-hashed) whinge. I haven't seen him provoke any thought with an article about £ooney's £300,000 a week, Suarez racist remarks, Abromovichs hundreds of millions, Arsenals exorbitant prices. Why can't he write about all the bad things in football that have happened to other top clubs like a decent football writer would write about.
Sad man who should keep his gob and his laptop shut.

 

[Matty]

Conn clearly hates what football has become. He longs for the days when football was dirt cheap for all, when players were paid well but not extortionately, and where a good manager, good tactics, and sensible transfer policy, could see the likes of Nottingham Forest and Ipswich Town winning European trophies. If I'm honest, there's probably a bit of all of us that longs for those days.

The issue here is that the rest of us realise that Conn's desires are a total pipe dream, and that football has been forever changed by the money that now flows through it. What he needs to do is either accept that modern football is not the same, and never will be the same, as the football he knew as a child in the 1970's, or else step away from football altogether and treat it as a former love that he has grown apart from.

What we all find galling, and unacceptable, is that Conn seems to be constantly using Manchester City's newfound success as a lightning rod for his own displeasure with football as a whole. This results in acticles like the aforementioned one, where he waxes lyrically about the good old days, complains about where Manchester City are now, and in the process portrays himself as a "better man" and "better supporter" than you or I, because we have accepted the state of modern football as opposed to rile up against it.

 

[tolmie's hairdoo]

I picked him up on the £1bn figure on twitter, this was his response.

David Conn ‏@david_conn · 20m
@motoroffencelaw How is it misleading; it's an accurate figure of the money Mansour has put in to City, principally to amass the team.


What he conveniently ignores is the money spent on improving infrastructure and facilities. Even the most dewy eyed sentimentalist would not want to turn the clock back to the 70s and 80s surely?

He's a fucking fraud. It's a misleading figure because he has gone with the £1bn figure for three years, before any training ground or stadium redevelopment.

It's a generalised figure and also factors in the best part of £220m which our owner paid to the previous owners, not MCFC.

'Principally' is his get out of jail card - it actually equates to a quarter of his fucking £1bn figure.

 

[rick773]

A socially awkward misfit, which is why he works for the Guardian..

Lol @ this.

I hate that his profession allows him to complain about England's youth set up and also a teams lack of English players.

About what football has become financially and how poorly players were treated in "the good old days".

The fact that he thinks the economics of today's game will somehow ruin Sunday for an 11 year old in attendance speaks volumes of how fucking awful he must of been as a kid.

 

[Exeter Blue I am here]

His friend's 21 year old brother is one of the people I'm going down to Wembley with. He won't hear the end of this!

Well give him some stick from me. The deluded belief that it's still possible to assemble a trophy winning side through "effort" and the "development of youth" never fails to press my buttons.

 

[Dave Ewing's Back 'eader]

Fuck him.

He's a dinosaur. He doesn't represent modern day football fans, he is not the voice of MCFC. No need to get angry at an old codger who refuses to move with the times.

He merely deserves our contempt and pity.

I would like to pass up that invitation.

I can see what he is saying. I used to go to Maine Road as a primary school pupil and for two shillings (ten pee in shit money) I would get the bus at Moston Lane, bus in Piccadilly and return for a single penny each bus. I think the admission for Juniors was 1s3d and the programme (about six pages stapled together!) was a tanner (two and a half pee!) I've coughed up £45 for my heavily subsidised ticket on Sunday, and thirty odd quid for the coach. I expect the programme will be the best part of a tenner.

I wouldn't swap either experience, when I was real kid and now I'm a FOC kid! The goals are the same size, the balls the same size, it's still eleven v eleven, the whistling wankers are still wankers and still whistling. Roll on a few more seasons!!

 

[Rodney]

A socially awkward misfit, which is why he works for the Guardian..

Lol @ this.

I hate that his profession allows him to complain about England's youth set up and also a teams lack of English players.

About what football has become financially and how poorly players were treated in "the good old days".

The fact that he thinks the economics of today's game will somehow ruin Sunday for an 11 year old in attendance speaks volumes of how fucking awful he must of been as a kid.

He doesn't say that at all.

 

[lancs blue]

I find David Conn to be 'Thought Provoking' and there is nothing wrong with that.

Some might see his writings as moans and bitter digs at modern day City. I prefer to consider them to be the sharp contrasting blacks in our modern colourful appearance. In short, they actually add to the overall mosaic of what is the story of Manchester City!

Like most I prefer to look at the brighter more colourful parts of the picture but we still need the darker shades. Amongst all his darker tones are important themes however such as the changing age of the average football supporter now being a mid 40's middle income man. This worries me and should worry everyone as much as it worries Conn.

Sorry but it is not thought provoking at all, it is just his usual (re-hashed) whinge. I haven't seen him provoke any thought with an article about £ooney's £300,000 a week, Suarez racist remarks, Abromovichs hundreds of millions, Arsenals exorbitant prices. Why can't he write about all the bad things in football that have happened to other top clubs like a decent football writer would write about.
Sad man who should keep his gob and his laptop shut.

Tbf to Conn when he was at the Independent he did write a number of good articles about corruption and shady dealings in the game, both here and in Europe. I think moving to the Grauniad has dulled his investigative senses and now he's turned into a grumpy middle-aged romantic who burbles on about the money. I still find his comments about him not being aware in the past that football clubs had owners ridiculously naive and overplayed both in his book and this article.