gordondaviesmoustache
Well-Known Member
One thing that has hallmarked our owners since the takeover is their reticence. They have been very restrained in making public utterances and happy to get on with the job in hand, which they have masterminded. It is clear this culture has trickled down throughout the club. Patrick Vieira apart, none of our players spoke negatively about united last season, in stark contrast to the likes of Rooney, Smalling and Ferdinand - who cannot even bring himself to refer to us by our name, such is the bile that courses through his veins.
I suspect this matter, if its implementation is lobbied for further, may mark a departure from that policy. UEFA FFP was a different matter. It occurred too soon after the takeover for the club to have any political weight in lobbying effectively in relation to it. That is no longer the case - we are now a proven entity. A real power within the game. A 'massive club' if you will.
I am greatly encouraged that the club has strongly indicated their antipathy to this idea. Doubtless self-interest is a big factor. For a start we should always oppose anything which can and will give united a competitive advantage over us (which this proposal surely will) now we are in a position to do something about it. Moreover whilst I have no doubt that Gill's vision for the future encompasses (at best) a two horse league like Spain or (at worst) a breakaway European league, it is equally possible that our owners believe, unlike Gill, that the current arrangement best serves their commercial interests - not killing the Golden Goose and all that.
I would like to think there is a further reason. Since 2008 our owners have displayed themselves to be a very different type from the Henry's and the Glazer's of this world. From their support of community projects to their vision for the club they have displayed a way of thinking that sets them apart. I'm not so naive to think that the wider interests of the game are what motivate them, but I'd like to think that they recognise that a stronger domestic game is in everybody's best interests and a complete absence of competition is not.
I would like this matter to be their opportunity to demonstrate to the majority of the Premier League (and the Football League) what this notion will actually mean. What its real motive is and why the likes of Henry and Gill are so robustly in favour of it. I would like them to ensure that the same misconceptions that surfaced when UEFA FFP was introduced do not replicate themselves in this instance.
And I would like them to suggest alternatives which ensure a degree of competition within the league that prevents united from riding off into the sunset.
They should do this for the good of football, but most of all they should do it for the good of Manchester City.
I suspect this matter, if its implementation is lobbied for further, may mark a departure from that policy. UEFA FFP was a different matter. It occurred too soon after the takeover for the club to have any political weight in lobbying effectively in relation to it. That is no longer the case - we are now a proven entity. A real power within the game. A 'massive club' if you will.
I am greatly encouraged that the club has strongly indicated their antipathy to this idea. Doubtless self-interest is a big factor. For a start we should always oppose anything which can and will give united a competitive advantage over us (which this proposal surely will) now we are in a position to do something about it. Moreover whilst I have no doubt that Gill's vision for the future encompasses (at best) a two horse league like Spain or (at worst) a breakaway European league, it is equally possible that our owners believe, unlike Gill, that the current arrangement best serves their commercial interests - not killing the Golden Goose and all that.
I would like to think there is a further reason. Since 2008 our owners have displayed themselves to be a very different type from the Henry's and the Glazer's of this world. From their support of community projects to their vision for the club they have displayed a way of thinking that sets them apart. I'm not so naive to think that the wider interests of the game are what motivate them, but I'd like to think that they recognise that a stronger domestic game is in everybody's best interests and a complete absence of competition is not.
I would like this matter to be their opportunity to demonstrate to the majority of the Premier League (and the Football League) what this notion will actually mean. What its real motive is and why the likes of Henry and Gill are so robustly in favour of it. I would like them to ensure that the same misconceptions that surfaced when UEFA FFP was introduced do not replicate themselves in this instance.
And I would like them to suggest alternatives which ensure a degree of competition within the league that prevents united from riding off into the sunset.
They should do this for the good of football, but most of all they should do it for the good of Manchester City.