the money stick we get beaten by

[mancityvstoke]

the amount of crap being spouted about us buying the league is getting ridiculous,the fact is that everyone buys a team unless you bring them all through the academy like the Trafford red sox.the amount of money spent line is irrelevant as if you bring in players from other teams to improve your team your spending money trying to get better,i bet if you went through every teams squads there will be very few that havnt been bought.

i wish we had an owner like arsenal have, i could look forward to the dearest season ticket prices to keep the unwashed masses at bay and wouldnt have to worry about the tedium of winning silverware (so working class)

I coughed up £58 yesterday for my seat in the South Stand Entrance L, block 124. That is hardly a big difference to the prices we charge.

Thanks for the cash Mr Jealous.............we'll add it to the kitty.

Our sugar daddy is very grateful.............

 

[Piegilles]

Sugar Daddy? hmmmmmmmmm another Arsenal snide dig


I love jealous spouting's from divvy opposition fans who wish they were in our position.

I think you misspelt hmmm.............unnecessary hyperbole there ;^)

 

[mancityvstoke]

Sugar Daddy? hmmmmmmmmm another Arsenal snide dig


I love jealous spouting's from divvy opposition fans who wish they were in our position.

I think you misspelt hmmm.............unnecessary hyperbole there ;^)

unnecessary jealous comments from you....do one<br /><br />-- Sun Dec 15, 2013 4:39 pm --<br /><br />

It is a truth universally acknowledged that there is a direct correlation between money spent on a squad and league position.

City has spent the most, has the strongest squad and because of that is deservedly hot favourites to lift the title in May.

City can also afford to pay the best wages which means that all things being equal, it can better attract the best players.

These are all facts. You can't have it both ways - you have to accept that you could not achieve your success without having splashed the cash on the best players available. If UEFA thinks that's fine and you comply with the FFP rules, then so what? Enjoy your success. Before the Abu Dhabi money, you were more often than not, a yo yo team unable to match the big clubs for honours. So, rather than bleat that other fans are being horrid to you because of your Arab sugar daddy, accept that with money and success comes the rightful accusation it was money bought. After all, that's just stating the bleedin' obvious.

As to the match yesterday, I was in the away end in the south stand. We lost, you were the better team and although it pains me to say it, the title is yours to lose. Our lack of squad depth was highlighted yesterday by the result which showed we lack your ability to rotate key players. I thought we looked very leggy in the last 20 minutes. Your strong squad will prove pivotal over a season. As much as I'd hope to strengthen in January, I suspect we won't.

I don't understand you have billionaire owners and the most expensive tickets in Europe yet somehow all you lot do is go on about money. You need to ask serious questions what the fcuk is going on in your club.

But but but...we do it the right way, the organic way.

The difference is that our billionaire owner doesn't put his money into the club. Even if he did, he'd be a relative pauper compared to Sheik Mansour.

We can't afford to pay players £200k a week. We have had to finance a new stadium. Who paid for yours? Our net spending on players over the past 8 years has been minimal. You get hit by the big money stick? Diddums. We don't have your cash and we get hit by the no trophies won stick. So what. Support your team and move on.

diddums

 

[Dynamo11]

Anyone noticed it's the big clubs' fans that only ever bring this up en masse? I think that demonstrates the negative nature of these fans and their insistence on keeping the established footballing hegemony over the league. Other teams further down the league don't mind as much as they enjoy challenging the small club of dominating "big teams" in the league as we also did prior to the takeover.

 

[mrbelfry]

The best kind of billionaire owners are the ones that don't spend a penny of their own money

 

[stony]

It is a truth universally acknowledged that there is a direct correlation between money spent on a squad and league position.

City has spent the most, has the strongest squad and because of that is deservedly hot favourites to lift the title in May.

City can also afford to pay the best wages which means that all things being equal, it can better attract the best players.

These are all facts. You can't have it both ways - you have to accept that you could not achieve your success without having splashed the cash on the best players available. If UEFA thinks that's fine and you comply with the FFP rules, then so what? Enjoy your success. Before the Abu Dhabi money, you were more often than not, a yo yo team unable to match the big clubs for honours. So, rather than bleat that other fans are being horrid to you because of your Arab sugar daddy, accept that with money and success comes the rightful accusation it was money bought. After all, that's just stating the bleedin' obvious.

As to the match yesterday, I was in the away end in the south stand. We lost, you were the better team and although it pains me to say it, the title is yours to lose. Our lack of squad depth was highlighted yesterday by the result which showed we lack your ability to rotate key players. I thought we looked very leggy in the last 20 minutes. Your strong squad will prove pivotal over a season. As much as I'd hope to strengthen in January, I suspect we won't.

I don't understand you have billionaire owners and the most expensive tickets in Europe yet somehow all you lot do is go on about money. You need to ask serious questions what the fcuk is going on in your club.

But but but...we do it the right way, the organic way.

The difference is that our billionaire owner doesn't put his money into the club. Even if he did, he'd be a relative pauper compared to Sheik Mansour.

We can't afford to pay players £200k a week. We have had to finance a new stadium. Who paid for yours? Our net spending on players over the past 8 years has been minimal. You get hit by the big money stick? Diddums. We don't have your cash and we get hit by the no trophies won stick. So what. Support your team and move on.

You can afford to pay £200k a week but choose not to in order for your board to make a profit every year and line their pockets.
Who paid for our stadium ? We do, it's called rent. The council also got Maine rd in return and we paid for the conversion from athletics to football. Not exactly the "free stadium" that you and your ilk like to bleat about.

Arsenal fans are the biggest smacked arses in the football. What about all the money invested in Arsenal in the 90s ? Read Tony Adams book, he's quite open about it. Without it you wouldn't have been able to reach that high horse you're currently sat on.

 

[Piegilles]

i wish we had an owner like arsenal have, i could look forward to the dearest season ticket prices to keep the unwashed masses at bay and wouldnt have to worry about the tedium of winning silverware (so working class)

I coughed up £58 yesterday for my seat in the South Stand Entrance L, block 124. That is hardly a big difference to the prices we charge.

Thanks for the cash Mr Jealous.............we'll add it to the kitty.

Our sugar daddy is very grateful.............

Good seat, though. I was on the upper level. Stewards were good, too. Well organised. Leaving the result aside, definitely one of the better away venues. Only gripe is after a match, you should have much more metro link trams lined up to take fans back to Manchester. Very poor having to queue up for so long. Surely metro link can sort this out?!

 

[sir baconface]

City's home performances are arguably the most attractive the Premier League has ever seen.

We are fortunate enough to be looking at the best collection of players in our history.

We brought the likes of Merlin, Sergio and Yaya into the English game.

Quite clearly we are ruining football.

 

[Chris in London]

Hi Guys, LFC fan here.

Just wondering, when Chelsea were buying success, before you got the money, did you not have a go at Chelsea fans for doing it? Yet now you're in the same situation as them you say things like "You need money to succeed" etc?

I do think you have gone about it in the right way though, you have, unlike Chelsea, put money into the academy and are trying to do things properly. But you're team has SO FEW English players. The only one I can think of is Milner! Surely you cannot deny that you would have liked to have seen City work they're socks off and earn their way to the top? Surely?

Obviously it must be nice to see your team where they are, but come on!

Anyway, its my first post so hello everyone!
Not looking forward to playing you guys in... 2 weeks time is it? :)

No, I wasn't arsed. Neither were the majority of City fans. City weren't anywhere near Chelsea, never mind the other Sky 3, which included Liverpool, when it came to the title, CL places, or winning trophies.

United fans, Arsenal fans, and to a lesser extent Liverpool fans, have been the most vociferous fans regarding City's spending and success. Why? Because just like Chelsea this meant we could buy the best players available and outbid any of those 3 clubs mentioned. This made us another threat alongside Chelsea, off and on the pitch. Which in turn meant less success and less trophies for United, Arsenal and Liverpool.

Just out of interest. How many English players have Liverpool got? How many play on a matchday compared to your foreign players? And where would Liverpool be without *Luis Suarez*?

I'd go further than jrb on this - not only did it not affect us directly because we were nowhere near Chelsea, but in fact most City fans I knew welcomed the Abramovic takeover because it meant that the Arsenal/rags duopoly was challenged. For the previous ten years before Abramovic took over if Arsenal didn't win the title, the rags did. The league was about as predictable as the Scottish league. Many of us didn't much care who won the lIeague so long as it wasn't the rags, so another contender who made life at the swamp more difficult was seen as a good thing.

So no, before 2008 I don't think many of us did say that Chelsea were buying success. What they showed is the level of investment that was necessary to challenge the teams who had gorged themselves on the benefits of Champions league and Sky TV money for 20 years.

I remember one game when we lost to Chelsea 1-0 at home (Lampard penalty) not long before the takeover. I remember some Chelsea fans talking about City's average players being no match for Chelsea's superstars, or some such guff. It hurt to hear that, and I thought that comment showed a degree of arrogant disdain that I thought was particularly unattractive, but it showed the gulf in class between an ordinary mid table side and a league title contender. It showed again what level of investment is necessary to challenge the established elite.

I am delighted that my team is now dining at the top table because it means I get to watch players like Silva and Aguero and Nasri and Yaya every home game, which is just brilliant. But I don't think you will find many City fans who think it is good for football that you can't break into the elite without spending upwards of £500m.

 

[garymj]

The Arsenal fan said we should, support your team and move on... bit like the sugar daddy crack, all getting a bit boring now, so move on I say.