The historic abuse of power.

[VOOMER]

I know the gooners bought their way into the top tire and the rags had a new stadium built for free. I have seen that in the past Leeds City were forcibly closed down so their players could be taken by other clubs, Same happened to Huddersfield and us. I notice this always seemed to benefit two clubs in particular, the gooners and the rags. I'm wondering if any has the name of a book which has been written on the history of abuse power certain English clubs?

 

[Corky]

City are not blameless, some would pint to Manchester Central and the current academy.

 

[davymcfc]

Remember Liverpool and Everton had littlewoods money.

 

[bigstanhibbert]

Remember Liverpool and Everton had littlewoods money.

What they got 8 out of 10 score draws - that's lucky for both of them...at least they didn't have far to deliver the money

 

[Man_City_Loyal]

City are not blameless, some would pint to Manchester Central and the current academy.

We did United a favor with Manchester Central.

The current academy is doing just fine, we may not be having players in the 1st team but they were being moved onto other clubs for a profit.

 

[Gareth Barry Conlon]

All clubs have history. Don't forget it was public money that built our stadium.

As for the dippers and Littlewood's don't see how that is different to any other sponsors.

There has always been money in football- you can make it sound dodggy but many clubs have similar stories behind them.

 

[malg]

I blame Thatcher.......and now that fucker Trump....

 

[NowInMilnrow]

Don't forget it was public money that built our stadium.

True of course, but it's not strictly our stadium is it. Manchester City Council do very well out of the lease payments we make for it, and also get a certain share of the gate money when attendances are above a certain figure IIRC? It's a business transaction, we aren't in any "favoured position" over it.

 

[Metalartin]

All clubs have history. Don't forget it was public money that built our stadium.

As for the dippers and Littlewood's don't see how that is different to any other sponsors.

There has always been money in football- you can make it sound dodggy but many clubs have similar stories behind them.

With the stadium it just made sense rather than have it going to ruin, wasn't it already planned so it could be used as a football stadium after the games finished? It's not like the West Ham deal which cost a shitload to convert and with what they are paying to lease it probably wont ever pay off the cost. We improved the Etihad, expanded it and if I remember right will have paid off the public money that was spent on it within the next few years(may already be the case), meaning Manchester Council will be profiting from the deal. I still think the club should one day look into owning the stadium outright, it's not like the council could give it to anyone else but for a club of our size it should be ours.

 

[Gorton_Tubster]

hmmm didnt know anything about Leeds City and Arsenal history, interesting, especially about WM formations that Patrick Viera is now using