Metalartin
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 15 Jul 2015
- Messages
- 12,383
That was some of the most arbitrary jealous nonsense I've heard from a City hater.I wasn’t sure where to post this but as this is in “the media “ I thought this would do.
A friend sent this to me. It’s too funny.
And the Rags have the gall to call us bitters
Man City news: Mark Goldbridge argues why City are ruining football — GIVEMESPORT
Mark Goldbridge has put his case forwardapple.news
Highlights:
"There's no identity"
There very much is, that's one of the things that been cultivated better than pretty much any other club in the PL. City have become synonymous with a particular brand of football and this season in particular, shows that more than any other. The system is as much a part of why City are so good, as any player in it that you want to mention(hit form without KDB or Aguero playing) and that's down to how good Pep is and how good the recruitment has been. Swap 6 players per game at any other club and the football would change from game to game.
"Maybe that could change in the future if they could bring in a Neymar or Mbappe like PSG have done" <facepalm>
So City should aspire to be like PSG. The only state owned big club, the one that buys ready made galacticos like some people buy trainers. That's what an identity is to Goldbridge? Typical rag sentimentality.
"Guardiola's job is too easy"
"Mourinho wouldn't fail at Manchester City either"
Haha, what a muppet he is. Didn't Mourinho fail to win the CL at Chelsea(first spell) and Real Madrid? Who won more like for like in either of those jobs? At the time he was with Chelsea he had the most backing in the PL by far(still the top transfer market inflators of the PL era with most of those signings done under Mourinho) and Real Madrid had by far the strongest squad in Europe, with a massive spending budget on top of that. Nobody else comes in and does what Pep has done with their feet up, like he's suggesting.
"They spent £1.5bn since the owners took over, nobody else has come close to that"
Except his very own United, £1.3bn since 2008 and their net spend is closer to City's than it is Liverpool, so they've no room to preach about that either.
If it weren't for City they'd be left trying to explain why they have the highest netspend in Europe, the highest wages in the PL, with over a billion spent in just 7 years and still haven't won much at all since Fergie left.
Since 2008 City have spent £1.8bn, Chelsea £1.5bn, United £1.3bn. Lets not forget City had catching up to do because of how far ahead(and how much was spent) the rest of the then sly4 were before City were invested in. The only thing we could do better on is net spend but then again it's like there's some pact not to give City a fair price on outgoing transfers, where as Liverpool, Chelsea and United get good money for old wood.
It's almost as if they are cheating the system with it. It wouldn't surprise me if they try and make net spend part of FFP in the next iteration of it. That way they can funnel money into the cartel clubs by the way of inflated outgoing transfers, paid by offshore accounts and what not.
Last edited:
