Manchester United's high moral ground

[gregblag]

An argument that you hear quite often is that Manchester United earned their money to buy their players through good management, commercial enterprise etc. whereas City have a sugar daddy and simply depend on being given money.

I never bought that as an argument because ADUG did buy us and are developing us ultimately for commercial reasons. We are publicity for them and if ADUG are a sugar daddy then so are the shirt sponsors of any and every football club, after all shirt sponsors spend money on a team in return for publicity.

That's a point of view that gets lost with people, certainly with UEFA and hence the "fair play" rules.

However United are in no position to take any high moral ground:

Their board member, then chairman, then majority shareholder Louis Edwards was scum. His son Martin Edwards - who is honorary lifelong president of Manchester United - wasn't much better.

Louis Edwards infamously made money out of selling condemned meat to schoolchildren. That's money that was invested into Manchester United. He conned and bullied his way - as he did with his businesses - into control of Manchester United. In 1978 he ended up skint. He used a dodgy share issue to get around the FA rules of the time and pay himself money out of the club. At the time of his death he was under police investigation.

Martin Edwards took over United after his father's death. He knew nothing of football but turned United into a ruthless money making vehicle. He was behind many of the rule changes that benefited the bigger clubs at the smaller clubs expense. Was a leading supporter of a super league for the biggest clubs to the detriment of all the other clubs.

He was also cautioned by police for peeping at women using the OT toilets. And this is the honorary life president of Manchester United!!!

Let me say at this point that Manchester United have been a wonderful football club - if we're talking purely the footballing side of things. Even if you are a City fan you should recognise this. From the days of Matt Busby as manager they have had some of the best footballers ever to play the game and some wonderfully skillful and exciting teams.

Unfortunately their business side has been greedy and corrupt and with their influence as the biggest club in England (sorry Liverpool) have authored a great many of the problems that football now suffers from. They bullied and blackmailed their way to the top and shaped the financial landscape of modern football. United fans will say that's paranoia and WUMing. It isn't. The Glazers didn't come to United through bad luck, they came to United because United earned them.

Visit here to read for yourself: <a class="postlink" href="http://www.meattradenewsdaily.co.uk/news/120710/uk___manchester_united_and_butcher_louis_eswards_.aspx" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.meattradenewsdaily.co.uk/new ... ards_.aspx</a>

 

[Sugarloaf]

An argument that you hear quite often is that Manchester United earned their money to buy their players through good management, commercial enterprise etc. whereas City have a sugar daddy and simply depend on being given money.

I never bought that as an argument because ADUG did buy us and are developing us ultimately for commercial reasons. We are publicity for them and if ADUG are a sugar daddy then so are the shirt sponsors of any and every football club, after all shirt sponsors spend money on a team in return for publicity.

That's a point of view that gets lost with people, certainly with UEFA and hence the "fair play" rules.

However United are in no position to take any high moral ground:

Their board member, then chairman, then majority shareholder Louis Edwards was scum. His son Martin Edwards - who is honorary lifelong president of Manchester United - wasn't much better.

Louis Edwards infamously made money out of selling condemned meat to schoolchildren. That's money that was invested into Manchester United. He conned and bullied his way - as he did with his businesses - into control of Manchester United. In 1978 he ended up skint. He used a dodgy share issue to get around the FA rules of the time and pay himself money out of the club. At the time of his death he was under police investigation.

Martin Edwards took over United after his father's death. He knew nothing of football but turned United into a ruthless money making vehicle. He was behind many of the rule changes that benefited the bigger clubs at the smaller clubs expense. Was a leading supporter of a super league for the biggest clubs to the detriment of all the other clubs.

He was also cautioned by police for peeping at women using the OT toilets. And this is the honorary life president of Manchester United!!!

Let me say at this point that Manchester United have been a wonderful football club - if we're talking purely the footballing side of things. Even if you are a City fan you should recognise this. From the days of Matt Busby as manager they have had some of the best footballers ever to play the game and some wonderfully skillful and exciting teams.

Unfortunately their business side has been greedy and corrupt and with their influence as the biggest club in England (sorry Liverpool fans) have authored a great many of the problems that football now suffers from. United fans will say that's paranoia and WUMing. It isn't. The Glazers didn't come to United through bad luck, they came to United because United earned them.

Visit here to read for yourself: <a class="postlink" href="http://www.meattradenewsdaily.co.uk/news/120710/uk___manchester_united_and_butcher_louis_eswards_.aspx" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.meattradenewsdaily.co.uk/new ... ards_.aspx</a>

You didn't really qualify your statement that the rags..."earned their money to buy their players through good management, commercial enterprise etc. whereas City have a sugar daddy and simply depend on being given money."

Then you just descended into a tabloid-esque rant about selling meat and public toilets??

You have made yourself look rather silly and childish.

 

[gregblag]

An argument that you hear quite often is that Manchester United earned their money to buy their players through good management, commercial enterprise etc. whereas City have a sugar daddy and simply depend on being given money.

I never bought that as an argument because ADUG did buy us and are developing us ultimately for commercial reasons. We are publicity for them and if ADUG are a sugar daddy then so are the shirt sponsors of any and every football club, after all shirt sponsors spend money on a team in return for publicity.

That's a point of view that gets lost with people, certainly with UEFA and hence the "fair play" rules.

However United are in no position to take any high moral ground:

Their board member, then chairman, then majority shareholder Louis Edwards was scum. His son Martin Edwards - who is honorary lifelong president of Manchester United - wasn't much better.

Louis Edwards infamously made money out of selling condemned meat to schoolchildren. That's money that was invested into Manchester United. He conned and bullied his way - as he did with his businesses - into control of Manchester United. In 1978 he ended up skint. He used a dodgy share issue to get around the FA rules of the time and pay himself money out of the club. At the time of his death he was under police investigation.

Martin Edwards took over United after his father's death. He knew nothing of football but turned United into a ruthless money making vehicle. He was behind many of the rule changes that benefited the bigger clubs at the smaller clubs expense. Was a leading supporter of a super league for the biggest clubs to the detriment of all the other clubs.

He was also cautioned by police for peeping at women using the OT toilets. And this is the honorary life president of Manchester United!!!

Let me say at this point that Manchester United have been a wonderful football club - if we're talking purely the footballing side of things. Even if you are a City fan you should recognise this. From the days of Matt Busby as manager they have had some of the best footballers ever to play the game and some wonderfully skillful and exciting teams.

Unfortunately their business side has been greedy and corrupt and with their influence as the biggest club in England (sorry Liverpool fans) have authored a great many of the problems that football now suffers from. United fans will say that's paranoia and WUMing. It isn't. The Glazers didn't come to United through bad luck, they came to United because United earned them.

Visit here to read for yourself: <a class="postlink" href="http://www.meattradenewsdaily.co.uk/news/120710/uk___manchester_united_and_butcher_louis_eswards_.aspx" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.meattradenewsdaily.co.uk/new ... ards_.aspx</a>

You didn't really qualify your statement that the rags..."earned their money to buy their players through good management, commercial enterprise etc. whereas City have a sugar daddy and simply depend on being given money."

Then you just descended into a tabloid-esque rant about selling meat and public toilets??

You have made yourself look rather silly and childish.

The point of the post was that the rags financial muscle has corrupt origins and has been gained at the expense of football as a whole. If that doesn't come across read the original link and come to your own conclusions.

 

[blueplan]

An argument that you hear quite often is that Manchester United earned their money to buy their players through good management, commercial enterprise etc. whereas City have a sugar daddy and simply depend on being given money.

I never bought that as an argument because ADUG did buy us and are developing us ultimately for commercial reasons. We are publicity for them and if ADUG are a sugar daddy then so are the shirt sponsors of any and every football club, after all shirt sponsors spend money on a team in return for publicity.

That's a point of view that gets lost with people, certainly with UEFA and hence the "fair play" rules.

However United are in no position to take any high moral ground:

Their board member, then chairman, then majority shareholder Louis Edwards was scum. His son Martin Edwards - who is honorary lifelong president of Manchester United - wasn't much better.

Louis Edwards infamously made money out of selling condemned meat to schoolchildren. That's money that was invested into Manchester United. He conned and bullied his way - as he did with his businesses - into control of Manchester United. In 1978 he ended up skint. He used a dodgy share issue to get around the FA rules of the time and pay himself money out of the club. At the time of his death he was under police investigation.

Martin Edwards took over United after his father's death. He knew nothing of football but turned United into a ruthless money making vehicle. He was behind many of the rule changes that benefited the bigger clubs at the smaller clubs expense. Was a leading supporter of a super league for the biggest clubs to the detriment of all the other clubs.

He was also cautioned by police for peeping at women using the OT toilets. And this is the honorary life president of Manchester United!!!

Let me say at this point that Manchester United have been a wonderful football club - if we're talking purely the footballing side of things. Even if you are a City fan you should recognise this. From the days of Matt Busby as manager they have had some of the best footballers ever to play the game and some wonderfully skillful and exciting teams.

Unfortunately their business side has been greedy and corrupt and with their influence as the biggest club in England (sorry Liverpool fans) have authored a great many of the problems that football now suffers from. United fans will say that's paranoia and WUMing. It isn't. The Glazers didn't come to United through bad luck, they came to United because United earned them.

Visit here to read for yourself: <a class="postlink" href="http://www.meattradenewsdaily.co.uk/news/120710/uk___manchester_united_and_butcher_louis_eswards_.aspx" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.meattradenewsdaily.co.uk/new ... ards_.aspx</a>

You didn't really qualify your statement that the rags..."earned their money to buy their players through good management, commercial enterprise etc. whereas City have a sugar daddy and simply depend on being given money."

Then you just descended into a tabloid-esque rant about selling meat and public toilets??

You have made yourself look rather silly and childish.

The point of the post was that the rags financial muscle has corrupt origins and has been gained at the expense of football as a whole. If that doesn't come across read the original link and come to your own conclusions.

You mean Tainted & Soiled origins?
Origin of Old Toilet & night soil monikers? Do the rags deserved or earned it?
Peep Show Theatre of Wet Dreams? ;}

 

[Rammyblues]

Don't give a shit but if this stuff upsets you and you want to get back at them just tell them their money was made on the back of sponsoring a disaster.

 

[Damocles]

Rag 1: City are ruining football, their owners are buying success by spunking their own money.

Rag 2: I hate our owners, they are leeches off of our club, they take a wage and don't put a penny in.


Sometimes, I'm impressed with the amount of delusional hypocrisy it takes to be a United fan.

 

[thepole]

We got bought because we were a good, investable prospect, with limited (compared to other teams) debt, a good loyal fanbase and a decent bit of history. Not liked we were picked out of a hat. Maybe if other clubs made themselves into decent investment opportunities they'd get taken over, rather than moaning about our "sugar daddy" all the time

 

[scarscarscar]

We got bought because we were a good, investable prospect, with limited (compared to other teams) debt, a good loyal fanbase and a decent bit of history. Not liked we were picked out of a hat. Maybe if other clubs made themselves into decent investment opportunities they'd get taken over, rather than moaning about our "sugar daddy" all the time

and because the Newcastle owner wanted too much money.

It's the geordies that should be pissed off more than anybody.

 

[Damocles]

and because the Newcastle owner wanted too much money.

It's the geordies that should be pissed off more than anybody.

Myth. The Shiekh chose us in front of Liverpool, Newcastle and Villa.

 

[Gar]

I'm sure every penny in Sheik's bank account is squeeky clean. In fact, every owner of every big club in Europe is an honest bloke who hasn't made any money unethically. Seriously, your team is an a path of massive ascention and you're favorites to win the F.A Cup today. How do you have time for this?