tolmie's hairdoo said:
Mate, would you not consider it extremely arrogant to pass comment on my supposed state of mind, or any other poster for that matter?
Just a friendly comment regarding the tone of your recent posts over the last month or so. You seem to have become very single minded on numerous issues whereas you used to look at things from a larger perspective. As I say, just a friendly comment not designed to offend.
It makes me no less of a fan to admit I want us to become one of the biggest clubs in the world and win everything in sight.
I support City because I want to win, otherwise what is the point? I'm sure the owners and players aren't in it for some moral crusade.
I don't support City because I want to win. In fact, I'm pretty sure that you don't support City because you want to win. Logically, if you followed a football club because you wanted to win, you'd be a United fan. But you aren't a United fan. Why is that? Why didn't you just change?
I would hazard a guess that it's because you recognise the difference between the clubs, off of the pitch.
Either that or because morally, you see that changing football clubs for the purpose of gaining success is wrong. We call these people gloryhunters and they are probably the least likeable people in the spectrum of football supporters.
I suppose my question is this; if we understand that changing the football club that you support for the reason of success is morally wrong, why should we accept that changing the ethos of the current football club for success is morally correct?
This is under the presumption that we care about morals in football more than success, otherwise we'd all be rags.
I've forgotten nothing. If anything, I remember everything, and that's why it hard for other Blues to accept this club wants and will move closer to what United have become.
Those last words seem to sum this up though. We need to move closer to what United have become, but the manner in which we do this is incredibly important to us as individuals and fans.
I have no problem with the globalisation of our fanbase, and I actively encourage this. This will not only financially support the club but we get to share our passion with a million more people. I can't see any scenario in which we can see that that is a bad thing. I'm not arsed about getting tickets "stolen" by holidayers because I've got a shitload of loyalty points and it isn't an issue.
The manner in which we reach the globalisation is the issue that we seem to be arguing over. Tevez is just a player, no different from thousands of others in our 115 year history. However, we have made the Tevez issue a big deal. We have made it a line in the sand that is bigger than football, and I think that Tevez putting on a blue shirt again makes us hypocrites, makes us weak and more importantly, disregards our moral stance for the sake of success.
And lets be fair, Tevez when he can't be arsed is shit. At the beginning of this year he was donkey balls and I would guess that he will be when he comes back. Even if he was Messi in disguise, I still don't want him.
It might cost Mancini his job, but it doesn't matter. City have to be bigger than this. There's always next season to win the league; we have all the time in the world. There won't be another Tevez situation (or at least we pray there won't be!)
Globalisation and driving for success doesn't automatically mean becoming lying hypocritical cunts. Barcelona as an example, have the ability to succeed without this. Mes que un club. They don't always live up to this of course, but in a long term vision I think you'd be hard pressed to argue with their singular vision of Catalonia's club; the club of the rebels. They have managed to become one of the world's biggest clubs and kept their identity whilst doing so.
Part of my problem with United is that they are essentially a nomadic club. You can pick up Old Trafford and plonk it anywhere in the country and it wouldn't make any difference to the club or its fanbase. I don't personally feel that the same is true of City. I think we have tried to brand ourselves as "Manchester's club" and we do have links to the local community and councils that we are strengthening. But I digress.
This is the first time that City has really taken a stand on something that gains us worldwide acclaim and respect. It is building our image and is starting to build our ethos on a larger scale. Gary Cook once said that we would become the biggest club in the world but that we had the financial resources and the mindset to do it in an entirely different way from what United did, where it alienated its fanbase. Bringing Tevez back in would be the first brick in that wall.
And I wouldn't swap that for 10 Premier Leagues. I think that once the title race is over and the pressure of that has died down, many will look at this issue in a completely different way.
