City_Gentleman
Well-Known Member
"Shifting sands at Eastlands give Manchester United a new headache. City's new-round threat has found favour with many, an oddity given the Chelsea experience under Roman Abramovich...
That most elusive figure, the neutral observer, is drawn towards the underdog. Anything for an interesting time. Anything to escape the status quo. Anything to give the bully a bloody nose.
This is true in life and it is true in sport. It has been especially true in Manchester football over this past week, where the confluence of two disparate events – Leeds United's 1‑0 FA Cup victory at Old Trafford, and the announcement that City's owner Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed al-Nahyan has in effect gifted the club £395m – has been spun into a heart-warming tale of a world turned upside down. Where once City were the cash-strapped underdogs, destined to live in the shadow of their richer, more glamorous neighbours, it is now United's turn to be cast as the paupers (relatively speaking, of course).
Throw in the respect and admiration many have for City's strong local roots and their fans' noticeable good humour in the face of some lean years, and then measure it against the ill-will many feel towards United – either because they are suspicious about the dilettante inclinations of the prawn-sandwich brigade or simply fed up with the long run of success under Sir Alex Ferguson – and no wonder there is glee in the air at this latest turn of events.
Yet if it is easy to understand why many are happy at the prospect of watching the mighty take a fall, it is probably wise to offer a word or two of warning. After all, as my colleague Daniel Taylor pointed out here the other day, we have been here before with United, in 2005, when Roy Keane made his infamous appearance before the MUTV cameras to decry the efforts of his then team-mates. Two and a half years later Keane was retired and Rio Ferdinand and Co were in Moscow, picking up the European Cup.
The difference this time is that two or three years hence Ferguson is unlikely to be around. Even if he was, it is hard to imagine, given his current squad and the obvious financial constraints that now apply at Old Trafford, that even he could fashion a side capable of beating the best in Europe.
A more likely scenario is that the great Scot will be retired and on a golf course, while the club he built will have settled into some form of decline. Obviously, nothing is certain in football but if the recent history of the game has taught us anything it is that while talent, guile and luck matter, what matters most of all is money. The more you spend, the more you increase your chance of success.
In which case we should perhaps ready ourselves for the era of City dominance. If Sheikh Mansour doesn't flinch when asked to hand over £395m in the first 18 months of his ownership of the club, it is hard to believe he will be disturbed at the notion of spending double that amount, or triple it, when it comes to assembling his own collection of sky blue galácticos.
Should the sheikh succeed with his ambition to build a team that will dominate England, and Europe, it is to be hoped that the neutrals who find themselves inclined to celebrate City's current ascent will have woken to the pernicious reality of what is actually taking place at Eastlands. After all, here is a company which yesterday announced an annual loss of £93m. Next year, the losses will be even greater. After that, who knows?
What we do know is that Mansour's pockets are as deep as the oil reserves of Abu Dhabi are vast and that, consequently, his stewardship of City is remarkably similar to the profligate early years of Roman Abramovich's ownership of Chelsea. How strange it is that while the Russian was the target of widespread criticism for his spending habits, the sheikh has been lauded as the man most likely to break the long monopoly held by England's big four.
Call this good luck, or call it a serious oversight on the part of those who have long called for reform in football's finances. But if – or, more likely, when – City finally do establish themselves as the leading club in the land, just don't call it a change for the better. It is just more of the same, in different colours."
Lawrence Donegan
The Guardian 7/01/2010
Celebrate good times, c'mon!
That most elusive figure, the neutral observer, is drawn towards the underdog. Anything for an interesting time. Anything to escape the status quo. Anything to give the bully a bloody nose.
This is true in life and it is true in sport. It has been especially true in Manchester football over this past week, where the confluence of two disparate events – Leeds United's 1‑0 FA Cup victory at Old Trafford, and the announcement that City's owner Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed al-Nahyan has in effect gifted the club £395m – has been spun into a heart-warming tale of a world turned upside down. Where once City were the cash-strapped underdogs, destined to live in the shadow of their richer, more glamorous neighbours, it is now United's turn to be cast as the paupers (relatively speaking, of course).
Throw in the respect and admiration many have for City's strong local roots and their fans' noticeable good humour in the face of some lean years, and then measure it against the ill-will many feel towards United – either because they are suspicious about the dilettante inclinations of the prawn-sandwich brigade or simply fed up with the long run of success under Sir Alex Ferguson – and no wonder there is glee in the air at this latest turn of events.
Yet if it is easy to understand why many are happy at the prospect of watching the mighty take a fall, it is probably wise to offer a word or two of warning. After all, as my colleague Daniel Taylor pointed out here the other day, we have been here before with United, in 2005, when Roy Keane made his infamous appearance before the MUTV cameras to decry the efforts of his then team-mates. Two and a half years later Keane was retired and Rio Ferdinand and Co were in Moscow, picking up the European Cup.
The difference this time is that two or three years hence Ferguson is unlikely to be around. Even if he was, it is hard to imagine, given his current squad and the obvious financial constraints that now apply at Old Trafford, that even he could fashion a side capable of beating the best in Europe.
A more likely scenario is that the great Scot will be retired and on a golf course, while the club he built will have settled into some form of decline. Obviously, nothing is certain in football but if the recent history of the game has taught us anything it is that while talent, guile and luck matter, what matters most of all is money. The more you spend, the more you increase your chance of success.
In which case we should perhaps ready ourselves for the era of City dominance. If Sheikh Mansour doesn't flinch when asked to hand over £395m in the first 18 months of his ownership of the club, it is hard to believe he will be disturbed at the notion of spending double that amount, or triple it, when it comes to assembling his own collection of sky blue galácticos.
Should the sheikh succeed with his ambition to build a team that will dominate England, and Europe, it is to be hoped that the neutrals who find themselves inclined to celebrate City's current ascent will have woken to the pernicious reality of what is actually taking place at Eastlands. After all, here is a company which yesterday announced an annual loss of £93m. Next year, the losses will be even greater. After that, who knows?
What we do know is that Mansour's pockets are as deep as the oil reserves of Abu Dhabi are vast and that, consequently, his stewardship of City is remarkably similar to the profligate early years of Roman Abramovich's ownership of Chelsea. How strange it is that while the Russian was the target of widespread criticism for his spending habits, the sheikh has been lauded as the man most likely to break the long monopoly held by England's big four.
Call this good luck, or call it a serious oversight on the part of those who have long called for reform in football's finances. But if – or, more likely, when – City finally do establish themselves as the leading club in the land, just don't call it a change for the better. It is just more of the same, in different colours."
Lawrence Donegan
The Guardian 7/01/2010
Celebrate good times, c'mon!