Milner / Sterling, so what's the difference?

Thanks for posting that link. I have to say if you transplant Sterling's name with Sturridge's, there's not much difference to the way Liverpool fans are reacting just at the moment. Almost identical reasoning, comments and predictions.

Apart from the death threats to himself and his family and apart from every pundit criticising the move and supporting the bin dippers angst and dismay at what is a young player wanting to better himself/ The Sturridge move was no wear near as acrimonious. Benteke has a clause which states that any bids over 32+ million will activate a transfer but the candle holding arsewipes are not meeting that price, we got slated for the very same thing.
 
The whole concept of measuring the "size" of a club is arbitrary, it depends upon how you measure size. Fanbase? Liverpool are far bigger than City. Overall trophy haul? Again, Liverpool far exceed City. Performances over the past decade (i.e. current place in World football)? Well, now you'll find City are actually a bigger club than Liverpool by that measure.

Being a "bigger club" by the measures most use (which is, indeed, fanbase and past success) is all well and good, but it doesn't actually mean all that much when it comes to the present day, to actually winning trophies in the here and now, to attracting top players to join your club. In all of those categories City outweigh Liverpool. Obviously, over time, that can change, but that's not relevant right now. Right now, when you consider the 2015/16 season, and the prospects for future seasons, Manchester City are a bigger club than Liverpool. Let Liverpool have their past glories, as impressive as they are they matter little to the present day, or to the current crop of world class footballers. Winning multiple trophies in the 1970's and 1980's doesn't bring success in 2015/2016. I'll take our situation at present, thanks all the same.

And how did they get there, by spending big and forcing other teams to sell their best players.
 
A
Apart from the death threats to himself and his family and apart from every pundit criticising the move and supporting the bin dippers angst and dismay at what is a young player wanting to better himself/ The Sturridge move was no wear near as acrimonious. Benteke has a clause which states that any bids over 32+ million will activate a transfer but the candle holding arsewipes are not meeting that price, we got slated for the very same thing.
Agree with everything you say. Was just commenting on the forum posts which sounded very similar to what the dippers have been posting i.e he's shit anyway, he'll be on the bench, end up at a shit club in 2 or 3 years, moneygrabber etc etc.
 
A

Agree with everything you say. Was just commenting on the forum posts which sounded very similar to what the dippers have been posting i.e he's shit anyway, he'll be on the bench, end up at a shit club in 2 or 3 years, moneygrabber etc etc.

I get you mate and you are spot on. I think the problem is that Chelsea probably were a bigger side at the time but scousers genuinely don't have the capacity to believe that their cult is smaller than our club ;)
 
I have no problem with what Milner said. Mainly because it is true. I have no problem with him leaving the way he did either. He realised that his role would be diminished each year with constant new signings. You have to respect when a bloke knows his own limits. The truth is there is no good way a player can leave any club without upsetting some fans. He chose playing time for trophy's, simple as that. So although he was right that "historically" Liverpool are the bigger club, they are not bigger right now and hopefully will never be...
 
I have no problem with what Milner said. Mainly because it is true. I have no problem with him leaving the way he did either. He realised that his role would be diminished each year with constant new signings. You have to respect when a bloke knows his own limits. The truth is there is no good way a player can leave any club without upsetting some fans. He chose playing time for trophy's, simple as that. So although he was right that "historically" Liverpool are the bigger club, they are not bigger right now and hopefully will never be...

I think little Jimmy disagrees with you.


http://www.manchestereveningnews.co...manchester-city-liverpool-bigger-club-9651401
 
I have no problem with what Milner said. Mainly because it is true. I have no problem with him leaving the way he did either. He realised that his role would be diminished each year with constant new signings. You have to respect when a bloke knows his own limits. The truth is there is no good way a player can leave any club without upsetting some fans. He chose playing time for trophy's, simple as that. So although he was right that "historically" Liverpool are the bigger club, they are not bigger right now and hopefully will never be...

Agree with this 100%. By the way, exactly what Jimmy says is this: "Man City, maybe over the course of history, isn’t quite as big as Liverpool." (My emphases). This doesn't mean we've got no history (of course), but I think anybody with a modicum of judgement has to accept that it's true. I've come to loathe their fans, especially since spring of 2014 — bricking of visiting supporters' coaches, cheering off an opposition player because he's injured, printing shirts that they're champions four weeks before it's even been decided — but personally, I've got no problem with that judgement. The past was theirs, and if they want to live in it, fine. The present — and the future — are ours.
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.