I believe this is Alan Green of 606 fame reporting spurious drivel as fact.
Please be warned reading this article may cause food to be spat on you screen.
I struggle with Manchester City. While presenting 6-0-6 on Saturday night I read out the comments of a City fan 'Londis' who'd posted a message on Facebook: "This is the worst day of my life." He/ she was reflecting on the derby defeat by United as well as the Spurs' victory over Chelsea, that radically lessened City's chances of qualifying for the Champions League.
It was a ludicrous exaggeration. Are City fans so caught up in the club's new-found wealth that they've blindly bought into the vision propagated by the likes of Garry Cook?
I saw the Chief Executive walk into Eastlands on Saturday in the company of an obvious bodyguard but still smiling all around him as if he's the centre of attention.
Cook proclaims City's proposed pre-season tour of the United States this summer as reflecting "the support there is for us in America" and how it reaches out to "the existing Blues fans across the world" -- their 'tens' I would suggest. He is preposterous.
I've always really liked City but they're rapidly transforming from being one of the country's best loved clubs into the one that's most hated: worse than Chelsea under Abramovic and that's saying something.
Open your paper, listen to the radio or, if you can stand the constant gossiping, switch on to Sky Sports News: City are 'linked' with every player under the sun.
'X' is your best player: bet City are prepared to pay him oodles more than he's worth, and not necessarily to enhance their team, as much to weaken yours. It borders on the immoral.
Amongst the latest gossip was that concerning Joe Cole.
I can certainly believe that City are prepared to pay him Pounds 200,000 a week but, tell me, in just whose mind is he remotely worth it?
City have already collected an obvious bunch of mercenaries: Toure, Barry, Bellamy, Tevez, and Adebayor amongst them. And they're mostly 'expendable'.
In a quiet moment I ran my eye down the City team during Saturday's derby and wondered who might be first choice next season. I settled on four: Given (if they haven't paid a ludicrous amount to Juventus for Buffon), Bridge, Barry and Tevez.
And who'd be spending this money? Roberto Mancini who (perhaps he appealed as more of a fashion item) quite unnecessarily replaced Mark Hughes? Before the United game he said this was "the most important (run-in) in the club's history": afterwards he said, as rashly as Benitez, "we'll finish fourth."
They may do but after the fantastic week they've had (that's if you only start counting AFTER last Sunday) my money would be on Spurs.
But, if it's City, count on them spending money as if there is no tomorrow, blasting every other club out of the water. And then ask yourself this question: if the top of the Premier League is self- perpetuating, wouldn't you rather the monopoly was challenged by a club that had history and sound management, rather than one built solely on money?
Oh, and Mancini, you'll be out that revolving Eastlands door if you don't finish fourth. Beware the madness that is Manchester City.
