United thread 2018/19

Status
Not open for further replies.
mancity2012_eamo said:
The ban was between 1985 and 1990 and an extra year for Liverpool.
I agree with your conclusion above. I think the main gripe of any City fan is the hypocrisy. Whether you argue that leagues are bought or investment pays off, it's the branding of similar courses of action differently and the media spin of the two, that really grates.
I think the article that mancityvstoke posted illustrated very well that United were very well placed as a brand back in the 80's, even after a lean spell football-wise.
They had a management that were already thinking of the monetising of football, when the likes of us( supporters) were probably still thinking all was fair in the sport.
Whether it was the right place at the right time or careful management or some mixture of skullduggery in the higher circles, Ferguson spent huge for the time with very little return and was just kept in a job by winning the FA Cup.
Now whether that's any different to us heavily investing and paying over the odds for us to win the League Cup in 2011 or not, I don't care.
My main issue with what Mr.Feeney seems to be arguing is that The Ferguson era was somehow different. It is different to what is going on at United now, but I would say not a whole lot different to the early days of our current project. Ferguson however didn't have to fight an elite cartel at the same time, trying to curtail his investment once he made the breakthrough.
Ferguson has a brilliant history at that club, there is no denying, but I would argue what Mancini did for us and also Pellegrini who really was hamstrung financially in comparison to Ferguson, is more remarkable. We are only at the start of our journey but we are fighting financial restraints coming from an elite group who didn't have them at the time of their rise to their lofty positions.

If I have a criticism of Mr.Feeney's arguments it is not that he is saying anything particularly untrue, but he is selectively or genuinely (whatever) presenting a slant that seems more bent on preserving Ferguson's legacy than purely telling it as it is and was.
In my view part of that legacy is the desperation we are seeing now at United. I put a lot of that down to Ferguson's ego coming above the club in his last two years.

If I've got you wrong Mr.Feeney, then I'm sorry, but this is how you are coming across to me.
Click to expand...

Fair enough. It's a matter of perception. I accept that. It wasn't what I was trying to do because I have no reason to explicitly care an iota about Ferguson but if that's the perception I've given, then there must be something in my writing that's a little strong. I just tried to compare his situation with Mourinho's.

It's wrong to state that he didn't spend because he obviously did, and lots of it. He didn't get to break world transfer records the way Mourinho has at United, nor bring in players that are in the top 5 in wages world wide. That was my entire point and I think some of the stuff got derailed.
 
mancity2012_eamo said:
Depends. did Ferguson?
Click to expand...

In my opinion, neither we nor he did. That's my entire argument. Consistency is what matters here. It's hypocritical for either fanbase to accuse the other team of buying success while not applying the same level to their own.

Great players play a big role in success and as a general rule, big players require big money. But that's not always the case. Nor does looking at things that way take coaching into account. Team moral. Team spirit. It's simplistic.
 
Mr.Feeny said:
-Exactly my point. Thanks for understanding something that was very simple.

- Which is exactly what I said

-Schmeichel (500k). Cantona 1 m. The two most important players cost 1.5 million. The rest of the 90s squad were academy players. Incidently, Bruce and Kanchelskeis cost relatively little, Even back then.

If they bought their success, then so did we. It's fine to look at it this way. You just have to be consistent. I'd look at it the other way and say that more than money played a role in us dominating now and them dominating 20 years ago. But there's nothing wrong with looking at it the way you do. We aren't arguing here. The only thing that matters is consistency because - as you said yourself - it's the hypocrisy that's pisses people off.
Click to expand...


Shown yourself up for what you really are now
 
Mr.Feeny said:
In my opinion, neither we nor he did. That's my entire argument. Consistency is what matters here. It's hypocritical for either fanbase to accuse the other team of buying success while not applying the same level to their own.

Great players play a big role in success and as a general rule, big players require big money. But that's not always the case. Nor does looking at things that way take coaching into account. Team moral. Team spirit. It's simplistic.
Click to expand...
And my argument would be that let whoever wants to call it "buying the league" do so. The fact is that the only way any team were ever going to challenge the stranglehold of the top two in England and the top 3 or 4 in Europe was to heavily invest, matching the spending power.
The fact that as soon as we tried, restrictions were placed upon us financially that were never their for those who got to their positions, of both financial clout and political power also, makes it all the more remarkable that we have achieved as much as we have on the field, while at the same time investing so much into the infrastructure at the club.
We invested huge amounts in the community and into securing the future of the club and put out a team consistently challenging for the league.

We haven't got there in europe yet and I'm of the opinion we won't until we stop booing their anthem. It won't be allowed happen in a final.
But why do we boo the anthem. To highlight the corruption and the uneven treatment we get.

United and Ferguson never had to contend with that and it still took him over 10 years of investment to win. This at a time where they had got themselves into domestic dominance and would customarily poach whoever was the other team's best players simply because they could.

I think call it what you want. It doesn't matter. It is similar. It requires smart management and United were better managed than us. We are better managed now. There the similarity ends though. They got to the top and then pulled up the ladder. Our success now is all the sweeter but we are having to contend with off the field influences that Ferguson never had to deal with.
 
mancity2012_eamo said:
And my argument would be that let whoever wants to call it "buying the league" do so. The fact is that the only way any team were ever going to challenge the stranglehold of the top two in England and the top 3 or 4 in Europe was to heavily invest, matching the spending power.
The fact that as soon as we tried, restrictions were placed upon us financially that were never their for those who got to their positions, of both financial clout and political power also, makes it all the more remarkable that we have achieved as much as we have on the field, while at the same time investing so much into the infrastructure at the club.
We invested huge amounts in the community and into securing the future of the club and put out a team consistently challenging for the league.

We haven't got there in europe yet and I'm of the opinion we won't until we stop booing their anthem. It won't be allowed happen in a final.
But why do we boo the anthem. To highlight the corruption and the uneven treatment we get.

United and Ferguson never had to contend with that and it still took him over 10 years of investment to win. This at a time where they had got themselves into domestic dominance and would customarily poach whoever was the other team's best players simply because they could.

I think call it what you want. It doesn't matter. It is similar. It requires smart management and United were better managed than us. We are better managed now. There the similarity ends though. They got to the top and then pulled up the ladder. Our success now is all the sweeter but we are having to contend with off the field influences that Ferguson never had to deal with.
Click to expand...

Completely agree with everything you said. That's my entire argument. Consistency is the only thing that matters. Now, they're bitter now that the tables have turned and we're the ones dominating.

As you said, we do face many off-the-pitch trammels that they didn't. But I wouldn't say that's what makes the success sweeter. For me, it's the fact that we are playing what is - by consensus - the best football in the country and possible the planet at the moment, and what very well might be the most aesthetically pleasing football ever seen in England.

Winning is one thing, but winning in style is something else. And we play the best football that most people following English football have seen in the country. That includes the Liverpool teams in the 80s and United teams in the 90s.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.