Enough is enough

M M

mcfcphil

Well-Known Member
Joined
4 Jan 2009
Messages
3,031
I am a Manchester City supporter and professional journalist ( i won't say what publication but it isn't the MEN) and i have been left appalled by the criticism levelled at our club this week.
The things that have been said this week have been misinformed and unwarranted.
Therefore i have written the following piece in response and will be posting it anywhere i can to try and level the playing field and give a balanced opinion of the current situation.
Please feel free to use my copy and post it anywhere you wish:

IT seems the potential transfer of Kaka has divided opinion among football fans more than almost any other issue in the history of the game.
Those opinions seem to differ dramatically depending on which club you support, so from the outset I feel I should state that I am a Manchester City supporter born and bred.
I am a great believer in healthy debates and accepting differing opinions – that’s part of the beauty of our wonderful game – but some of the criticism levelled at Manchester City in the past few days has been hypocritical and xenophobic.
Apparently spending £107million on one player is ‘bad for the game’. Well it is all very well making this statement but as yet I have yet to hear anyone back it up with a credible argument.
I would like someone to explain how having arguably the best player on the planet playing in the premiership is bad for football in this country.
And if by signing that player it opens up the possibility for another club to achieve success in the division how that can also be a bad thing.
Now here comes the hypocracy.
Name almost any club in the Premiership and I could tell you something they have done that is ‘bad for the game’.
Is having a foreign owner come along and, overnight, plunge a club into hundreds of millions of pounds of debt good for the game? Well that’s exactly what Manchester United and Liverpool did. At least Manchester City are completely debt free.
Wigan chairman Dave Whelan stated yesterday that this transfer will ‘rip the soul out of football’. I would argue that charging extortionate prices to away fans at the JJB Stadium rips the heart and soul out of the game. And as an aside Dave Whelan is the same man who, in his position at Wigan Warriors, has consistently broken the rugby league salary cap year after year.
Much of the heart and soul was ripped out of the game a long time ago (possibly around the time Sky took over and 3pm Saturday kick offs were consigned to history).
Arsene Wenger yesterday stated there will be a ‘disturbance’ in the transfer market, but he is way wide of the mark.
Manchester City are unique and the Kaka transfer is unique. What West Ham would charge Manchester City for a player will be different to what they charge Tottenham but that is the problem of Manchester City and their decision if they choose to pay it.
People are saying that Kaka will only be coming to Manchester City for the money and that he doesn’t really ‘love’ the club.
Well does Berbatov ‘love’ Manchester United and does Febregas ‘love’ arsenal? Let’s get real. Robinho doesn’t ‘love’ Manchester City but he loves us as much as any other player in the Premiership 'loves' their club.
If City can convince Kaka that they can win the Premiership in three years then you may well see him wearing sky blue in the very near future and he wouldn’t be wearing it just for the money.
Possibly the root of these wild accusations is that the money being spent is not that of an Englishman but of a faceless Sheik (described by Mr Whelan as ‘some Arab fella’) from a part of the world many have little understanding of.
But in 2009 should it not be possible for someone to buy a football club regardless of their race, religion or gender? His money is as good as anyone else’s – the problem only arises because he has more than anyone else.
The money being spent is his own personal wealth and he can do with it whatever he chooses within the confines of the law.
Would you tell someone that they couldn’t buy a car because they are paying too much for it? He is not spending the supporters’ money or even television rights money – it is his own cash.
And I have also heard ludicrous suggestions that £107million pounds could build two hospitals. Could anyone tell me why an Abu Dhabi Sheik should have to pay for two hospitals? If anyone could possibly use this argument it would be the people of Abu Dhabi. And for the record he does give very generously to many charities.
There is also the argument that City could buy four £20million players and build the team. Again the uniqueness of the situation has misled people. The fact is that Manchester City don’t just have £100million in the bank – they will buy Kaka as well as four other players and many more in the future.
Many comments have been made regarding Mark Hughes and how he has been undermined by this transfer and that he has had no part to play in the negotiations.
This is grossly unfair.
It is not the job of the modern manager to take part in negotiations other than to speak with the player once a fee has been agreed.
All a manager does at any club is identify a player he would like and ask the club’s hierarchy to purchase him – this transfer is no different to any other.
But all of this is in many ways immaterial because, no matter what anyone says, Manchester City will continue to spend huge amounts of money.
So if you are one those people who don’t agree with it you will just have to learn to live with it.
I am reluctant to use the term ‘jealousy’ because it is such an easy and perhaps childish accusation to throw around.
But judging by the backlash from the Kaka transfer there are many people within the game and sections of the media who are feeling very uneasy about the future.
But I feel assured in the fact that none of this criticism will be giving our owner, or our supporters, any sleepless nights.
 
Well said Phil, that could do with being posted on every football forum.
 
The fact that Chelsea sniffed Kaka in the summer for €100M and it was ok, but we want to better ourselves and suddenly we're ruining football.

I didnt want Kaka originally, but now warming to it. Especially if reports are true and we're after Nigel De Jong too!
 
Fantastic Phil, I might just email that to the Bolton Blunderers fans I have the displeasure of working with.
They don't realise they might actually sell ALL their seats in their crappy little stadium when Man City are in town if the man from Brazil says YES!
 
I've posted this before but I'll do it again. I've worked for most of the national newspapers (not a journo though) and especially at the Mirror/People offices, the walls of the sports editors office were plastered with pix of U....D players and teams. When I queried how they could report on City with an anti City bias they said they were 'professionals' . My arse!!
Well written Phil - Martin Samuel's piece in the Mail yesterday was good too.
 
Well, that's all fair enough and some of the ponts argued from some areas (hospitals, etc) are ridiculous.

However, to fail to acknowledge that the central aspect to any cricism/disenting voices revolves around a lack of healthy competition and City signalling the ratcheting up of this is to ignore the main issue.

Football has been moving towards removing real competition, outside of the chosen few, for a long time. It will continue to do so, with or without what happens at City. That's not City's fault but they now obviously currently represent the excessive side of this process.

If you think that many people aren't going to express those concerns then you are mental.

In fact, prior to becoming super rich they would often be expressed on here and amongst City fans.

This sudden about face, constant cries of 'fuck everyone else' and a complete about turn by many as to what is healthy for football/the game and what isn't is a bit laughable to be honest. Combine it with the ridiculous sensititvity being expressed by many City fans regarding what was always going to come in the media (regardless of what club it was) and it is in danger of making us the most hated, arrogant, paranoid set of fans around. Can't we leave those sort of attributes to the rags?

And to add racism in as an accusation just fuels this paranoid persecution complex. That is clutching at straws because, unless I've missed something, there's been nothing written (on mass at least) even veering towards that. Questioning foriegn ownership does not equate to racism.
 
Oh, and the mad rush to castigate every article that dares to question City or the 'good of the game' whilst praising every single article that is pro City as 'brilliant' 'superbly written' etc, is embarrassing and top class RAG esque paranoid behaviour
 
Great article Phil but I feel it is still missing one important point. Many of the people up in arms over the money involved in this transfer are of the opinion that the money is just for a player to kick a ball around. I feel there is so much more to it than that. It is all about the global brand the Shiek Mansoor is trying to create at City. There are very few players that could have such an instant impact in raising the profile of our club on a global scale. It is in fact setting a foundation for the future because if the club is good enough for Kaka, it's good enough for any player. This in turn makes City more saleable. Viewers around the world will want to watch City and major companies will want to assciated with us for advertising and sponsorship. MCFCTV is just around the corner.
 
I did actually make the point about competition. City will be another club capable of success. And yes i agree there is a very considerable danger of becoming paranoid ragesque - the point i made near the bottom that i am very reluctant to use the word jealous.
Okay point taken about racism - perhaps too strong a word - post ammended to xenophobic. That i feel is accurate.
I also 100% agree that it is easy to say every post written about city in a positive way is good and negative ones bad - i am not that naive. However i feel that many of the points i have made are valid.
Throughout the history of the game there has always been some clubs richer than others.
 
Well, yeah, I agree with some bits of what you are saying, some criticism has been brin dead and hypocritical.

I just don't know what people realisitically expect though. There's always going to be debate and questions raised. Sometimes in a valid way, sometimes in a justified way. The same questions would be put forward with gusto no doubt if it were another club.

I am seeing the City fan base turn into something resembling the RAGS in rapid fashion here. Not this article or you but the geenral reaction to the past few days. As if anyone who dares question it has no right to. All the RGS bad aspects, persecution complex, hypocritical, one eyed and it is not good.
 
Tremendous read,
All this whining amounts to nothing more than "It's not fair". Personally I have a four year old boy to do all that for me. If you dont have the delights of a small child yet then that is pretty much what they sound like, admittedly not ALL of the time.
 
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