Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

Manchester City - Guardiola confirmed

13468911

Comments

  • Seemed ok when we had lots of 1-0 when Peeters was in charge, although must say it wasn't too exciting.

    They also lost Andre Gray to Watford.
  • Title race done before Christmas. What an exciting league the Premier is.......
  • Title race done before Christmas. What an exciting league the Premier is.......

    To be fair your still going back to 06/07 - 07/08 - 08/09 when a club won back to back Premier League titles

    (Man Utd won it three years on the trot on that occasion)
  • Title race done before Christmas. What an exciting league the Premier is.......

    To be fair your still going back to 06/07 - 07/08 - 08/09 when a club won back to back Premier League titles

    (Man Utd won it three years on the trot on that occasion)
    And that... makes it exciting? Because last year it was won by a Russian oligarch?
  • JiMMy 85 said:

    Title race done before Christmas. What an exciting league the Premier is.......

    To be fair your still going back to 06/07 - 07/08 - 08/09 when a club won back to back Premier League titles

    (Man Utd won it three years on the trot on that occasion)
    And that... makes it exciting? Because last year it was won by a Russian oligarch?
    No it makes it unpredictable
  • JiMMy 85 said:

    Title race done before Christmas. What an exciting league the Premier is.......

    To be fair your still going back to 06/07 - 07/08 - 08/09 when a club won back to back Premier League titles

    (Man Utd won it three years on the trot on that occasion)
    And that... makes it exciting? Because last year it was won by a Russian oligarch?
    No it makes it unpredictable
    Four teams in eight (or eleven) seasons. And with the two richest owners winning it this season and last. That is stretching ‘unpredictable’ a little bit.
  • Sponsored links:


  • JiMMy 85 said:

    JiMMy 85 said:

    Title race done before Christmas. What an exciting league the Premier is.......

    To be fair your still going back to 06/07 - 07/08 - 08/09 when a club won back to back Premier League titles

    (Man Utd won it three years on the trot on that occasion)
    And that... makes it exciting? Because last year it was won by a Russian oligarch?
    No it makes it unpredictable
    Four teams in eight (or eleven) seasons. And with the two richest owners winning it this season and last. That is stretching ‘unpredictable’ a little bit.
    Who's gonna win next year? Russian state-backed oil or Middle East state-backed oil.

    Don't understand the argument that 'at least they play entertaining football'. If you spend a billion quid how could the end result be anything other than entertaining football?
  • Fiiish said:

    Man City are just that classic rags to riches story of a football team actively assisted by two country's governments and spending north of a billion pounds in order to win a domestic trophy most years.

    Indeed - having followed us for over 50 years without anywhere near that level of success, I would take a businessman taking us over and funding a PL title. Indeed, I don't recall too many of us complaining when the best player I've seen playing in a Charlton shirt, Allan Simonsen signed but certainly many of us bemoaning that his stay was so short. The difference is that we couldn't sustain that expense. City can. Will we have supporters refusing to go to watch because we are "buying" trophies in which the Club really can't win. In reality, we are kings compared to the likes of Orient who would love to be in our position.

    It is one thing to spend a shed load of money, another to have domestic success, another to dominate like no other team has (only dropped points in the draw against Everton when Walker was sent off), another to win the Champions League, another to play fantastic football and yet another to coach and improve individuals - Stones (knows when to defend and when to play now), Sterling (knows when to pass and when to finish now), Delph (successfully converted to a full back having never played there previously), Aguero (getting him to defend from the front) and Otamendi (double the player he was last season). That is the mark of a great coach like Guardiola. Not a Mourinho who will "park the bus" against the big sides and accuse the lesser teams of being "lucky" when United don't win. Or a Wenger whose stubbornness in refusing to rectify the obvious deficiencies of his side.

    With the PL title all in the bag, the football at another level, the improvement of those individuals and the record breaking run, that only leaves the CL. And I wouldn't rule out City landing that too this season.
    There’s a couple of things I want to address here - firstly the “fans wouldn’t complain if it was their club” which you touch on with the Simonsen thing. In that regard, I think a LOT of people complained when they realised we didn’t actually have the money for that deal.

    Secondly, none of us asked to be given such a shitty choice - support a club struggling to survive or sell your soul to repressive middle eastern regime. That’s not on us. It’s fair to want to do things sustainably and fairly. I’d sooner support a club that did it that way and kept trying earnestly rather than the financial dope hit City have had.

    As for City themselves. They are playing the best football and are improving players like Stones cos they’ve thrown money at EVERY level of the club, including the coach. Hiring Pep is part of that doping.

    This has taken financial doping to the top possible level. Not because Sheikh Mansour loves the club (Jack Walker style) or because he loves the sport, but because he has a plan to win every league on every continent.

    As I understand it, and I’m happy to be corrected as I’m no expert, he does this because he’s the son of the founding fathers of the UAE and he sees it as his duty to wean them off of oil and promote tourism in a country with very dubious human rights record. Playing fancy football just makes it more palatable to the country he’s destroyed competition in.
  • Fiiish said:

    JiMMy 85 said:

    JiMMy 85 said:

    Title race done before Christmas. What an exciting league the Premier is.......

    To be fair your still going back to 06/07 - 07/08 - 08/09 when a club won back to back Premier League titles

    (Man Utd won it three years on the trot on that occasion)
    And that... makes it exciting? Because last year it was won by a Russian oligarch?
    No it makes it unpredictable
    Four teams in eight (or eleven) seasons. And with the two richest owners winning it this season and last. That is stretching ‘unpredictable’ a little bit.
    Who's gonna win next year? Russian state-backed oil or Middle East state-backed oil.

    Don't understand the argument that 'at least they play entertaining football'. If you spend a billion quid how could the end result be anything other than entertaining football?
    Both United and Chelsea have and they don't play football anywhere near as entertaining as City do.
  • JiMMy 85 said:

    Fiiish said:

    Man City are just that classic rags to riches story of a football team actively assisted by two country's governments and spending north of a billion pounds in order to win a domestic trophy most years.

    Indeed - having followed us for over 50 years without anywhere near that level of success, I would take a businessman taking us over and funding a PL title. Indeed, I don't recall too many of us complaining when the best player I've seen playing in a Charlton shirt, Allan Simonsen signed but certainly many of us bemoaning that his stay was so short. The difference is that we couldn't sustain that expense. City can. Will we have supporters refusing to go to watch because we are "buying" trophies in which the Club really can't win. In reality, we are kings compared to the likes of Orient who would love to be in our position.

    It is one thing to spend a shed load of money, another to have domestic success, another to dominate like no other team has (only dropped points in the draw against Everton when Walker was sent off), another to win the Champions League, another to play fantastic football and yet another to coach and improve individuals - Stones (knows when to defend and when to play now), Sterling (knows when to pass and when to finish now), Delph (successfully converted to a full back having never played there previously), Aguero (getting him to defend from the front) and Otamendi (double the player he was last season). That is the mark of a great coach like Guardiola. Not a Mourinho who will "park the bus" against the big sides and accuse the lesser teams of being "lucky" when United don't win. Or a Wenger whose stubbornness in refusing to rectify the obvious deficiencies of his side.

    With the PL title all in the bag, the football at another level, the improvement of those individuals and the record breaking run, that only leaves the CL. And I wouldn't rule out City landing that too this season.
    There’s a couple of things I want to address here - firstly the “fans wouldn’t complain if it was their club” which you touch on with the Simonsen thing. In that regard, I think a LOT of people complained when they realised we didn’t actually have the money for that deal.

    Secondly, none of us asked to be given such a shitty choice - support a club struggling to survive or sell your soul to repressive middle eastern regime. That’s not on us. It’s fair to want to do things sustainably and fairly. I’d sooner support a club that did it that way and kept trying earnestly rather than the financial dope hit City have had.

    As for City themselves. They are playing the best football and are improving players like Stones cos they’ve thrown money at EVERY level of the club, including the coach. Hiring Pep is part of that doping.

    This has taken financial doping to the top possible level. Not because Sheikh Mansour loves the club (Jack Walker style) or because he loves the sport, but because he has a plan to win every league on every continent.

    As I understand it, and I’m happy to be corrected as I’m no expert, he does this because he’s the son of the founding fathers of the UAE and he sees it as his duty to wean them off of oil and promote tourism in a country with very dubious human rights record. Playing fancy football just makes it more palatable to the country he’s destroyed competition in.
    City have had a massive injection of funds but are sustainable and do make a profit albeit only just over £1m compared to the £13m they made the year before.Their revenue has risen, for the ninth consecutive season, to £473.4m. That is the result of building a new stadium, attracting new fans and being successful on the pitch and long term planning. This is the breakdown of that:

    Matchday £51.88m
    Broadcasting – UEFA £47.94m
    Broadcasting – All Other £155.58m
    Other commercial activities £218.01m

    Meanwhile last year our total income was £12m and we made a loss of £13m . Our business model is built on bringing through youngsters, putting them in the shop window and selling them as soon as a derisory bid is forthcoming. City, on the other hand, have no less than six youngsters to have played in England's successful age U17, U19 and U20 sides and are, of course, under no pressure to offload their assets.

    One of them is 17 year old Phil Foden who has now played in the PL and CL and joins England internationals Walker, Stones, Delph and Sterling in City's squad. City spent less on those four than PSG did on Neymar or, indeed, United did on Pogba and Lukaku. Chelsea have spent the same sort of money as City in the last decade but didn't have a single English player in the 14 that took the field yesterday. Chelsea did originally buy De Bruyne and Salah for £17.5m combined but promptly off loaded them - would Guardiola have done that or would he have tried to improve them as footballers? So money spent wisely is a positive but throwing it at players doesn't make them better footballers. Coaches such as Guardiola do but the likes of Mourinho don't.

    If we rule out every owner that people in the UK have issues with then we must exclude Russia, China, the US, the UAE, Thailand, in fact any individual who has a whiff of being connected to anything or anyone undesirable. In doing so we are, possibly, limiting ourselves to an altruistic supporter who has the odd £30m or £40m in loose change. But that is, of course, only the start of the expenditure. I would love it if that person or institution were out there. I suspect, though, that they aren't. Because top football is a business now and to compete at the very top, on a sustained basis, a club has to have serious backing and income. I fear that the takeover thread will either run for years or we will not get what we are looking for from any new owner. And it will be yet another case of the fans demanding that the owners get out of the club. Because for a lot of my time, going right back to the days of Glicksten, that is exactly what we have been doing.
  • edited December 2017
    Fiiish said:

    JiMMy 85 said:

    JiMMy 85 said:

    Title race done before Christmas. What an exciting league the Premier is.......

    To be fair your still going back to 06/07 - 07/08 - 08/09 when a club won back to back Premier League titles

    (Man Utd won it three years on the trot on that occasion)
    And that... makes it exciting? Because last year it was won by a Russian oligarch?
    No it makes it unpredictable
    Four teams in eight (or eleven) seasons. And with the two richest owners winning it this season and last. That is stretching ‘unpredictable’ a little bit.
    Who's gonna win next year? Russian state-backed oil or Middle East state-backed oil.

    Don't understand the argument that 'at least they play entertaining football'. If you spend a billion quid how could the end result be anything other than entertaining football?
    Well you'd hope so but Chelsea never have, United barely did at the height of Ferguson's time.

    Struggling to think of a team when England had a better overall team than City do right now. Potentially Arsenal 2003-04 but I think even De Bruyne, Silva, Sane, Sterling etc. would tear them apart.

    Not saying the situation is ideal but at least one team is deciding to play high quality football that the Premier League has been sadly lacking the last few years.
  • I never had a problem with the idea of a rich owner ‘buying’ us the title - I’m not sure a team has won a title in the last 30 or 40 years without a fairly hefty investment in players relative to others in the league.

    The problem I have these days is the shear scale of spending required. It’s utterly obscene given what good might be achieved in the world if it was spent somewhere else. Of course football isn’t the only ‘frivolous’ thing that spends vast sums of money, but it still leaves a bad taste in my mouth and until (if it ever) gets a bit more realistic, I genuinely don’t have a big problem with not being part of the craziness.
  • I am hearing little rumors here that if Pep wins the CL and the PL this season, he may consider "going out on top", move back to NYC, where he has a house, and take over as the US Men's National Coach. He might like the idea of doing for the US what Johan Cruyff did for Spain.
  • edited December 2017
    Fiiish said:

    Man City are just that classic rags to riches story of a football team actively assisted by two country's governments and spending north of a billion pounds in order to win a domestic trophy most years.

    Which cannot be repeated as easily because of FFP. FFP is a way to keep the rich, rich, while keeping smaller clubs from finding their own sugar daddy.
  • Fiiish said:

    JiMMy 85 said:

    JiMMy 85 said:

    Title race done before Christmas. What an exciting league the Premier is.......

    To be fair your still going back to 06/07 - 07/08 - 08/09 when a club won back to back Premier League titles

    (Man Utd won it three years on the trot on that occasion)
    And that... makes it exciting? Because last year it was won by a Russian oligarch?
    No it makes it unpredictable
    Four teams in eight (or eleven) seasons. And with the two richest owners winning it this season and last. That is stretching ‘unpredictable’ a little bit.
    Who's gonna win next year? Russian state-backed oil or Middle East state-backed oil.

    Don't understand the argument that 'at least they play entertaining football'. If you spend a billion quid how could the end result be anything other than entertaining football?
    Well you'd hope so but Chelsea never have, United barely did at the height of Ferguson's time.

    Struggling to think of a team when England had a better overall team than City do right now. Potentially Arsenal 2003-04 but I think even De Bruyne, Silva, Sane, Sterling etc. would tear them apart.

    Not saying the situation is ideal but at least one team is deciding to play high quality football that the Premier League has been sadly lacking the last few years.
    Barely? Are you having a laugh? United under Fergie were far more entertaining than this City side, maybe not as technically or tactically tuned but boy did they entertain.

    Remember this side?

    1 Peter Schmeichel
    4 Steve Bruce
    6 Gary Pallister
    2 Paul Parker
    3 Denis Irwin
    8 Paul Ince
    16 Roy Keane
    7 Eric Cantona
    14 Andrey Kanchelskis
    11 Ryan Giggs
    10 Mark Hughes
  • JiMMy 85 said:

    Fiiish said:

    Man City are just that classic rags to riches story of a football team actively assisted by two country's governments and spending north of a billion pounds in order to win a domestic trophy most years.

    Indeed - having followed us for over 50 years without anywhere near that level of success, I would take a businessman taking us over and funding a PL title. Indeed, I don't recall too many of us complaining when the best player I've seen playing in a Charlton shirt, Allan Simonsen signed but certainly many of us bemoaning that his stay was so short. The difference is that we couldn't sustain that expense. City can. Will we have supporters refusing to go to watch because we are "buying" trophies in which the Club really can't win. In reality, we are kings compared to the likes of Orient who would love to be in our position.

    It is one thing to spend a shed load of money, another to have domestic success, another to dominate like no other team has (only dropped points in the draw against Everton when Walker was sent off), another to win the Champions League, another to play fantastic football and yet another to coach and improve individuals - Stones (knows when to defend and when to play now), Sterling (knows when to pass and when to finish now), Delph (successfully converted to a full back having never played there previously), Aguero (getting him to defend from the front) and Otamendi (double the player he was last season). That is the mark of a great coach like Guardiola. Not a Mourinho who will "park the bus" against the big sides and accuse the lesser teams of being "lucky" when United don't win. Or a Wenger whose stubbornness in refusing to rectify the obvious deficiencies of his side.

    With the PL title all in the bag, the football at another level, the improvement of those individuals and the record breaking run, that only leaves the CL. And I wouldn't rule out City landing that too this season.
    There’s a couple of things I want to address here - firstly the “fans wouldn’t complain if it was their club” which you touch on with the Simonsen thing. In that regard, I think a LOT of people complained when they realised we didn’t actually have the money for that deal.

    Secondly, none of us asked to be given such a shitty choice - support a club struggling to survive or sell your soul to repressive middle eastern regime. That’s not on us. It’s fair to want to do things sustainably and fairly. I’d sooner support a club that did it that way and kept trying earnestly rather than the financial dope hit City have had.

    As for City themselves. They are playing the best football and are improving players like Stones cos they’ve thrown money at EVERY level of the club, including the coach. Hiring Pep is part of that doping.

    This has taken financial doping to the top possible level. Not because Sheikh Mansour loves the club (Jack Walker style) or because he loves the sport, but because he has a plan to win every league on every continent.

    As I understand it, and I’m happy to be corrected as I’m no expert, he does this because he’s the son of the founding fathers of the UAE and he sees it as his duty to wean them off of oil and promote tourism in a country with very dubious human rights record. Playing fancy football just makes it more palatable to the country he’s destroyed competition in.
    City have had a massive injection of funds but are sustainable and do make a profit albeit only just over £1m compared to the £13m they made the year before.Their revenue has risen, for the ninth consecutive season, to £473.4m. That is the result of building a new stadium, attracting new fans and being successful on the pitch and long term planning. This is the breakdown of that:

    Matchday £51.88m
    Broadcasting – UEFA £47.94m
    Broadcasting – All Other £155.58m
    Other commercial activities £218.01m
    "Other commercial activities" account for over four times the matchday revenues and more than the total from broadcasting revenues.

    It's roughly double the "other commercial activities" revenue of Chelsea or Liverpool, nearly three times that of Arsenal and around four times the "other commercial activities" of Tottenham. Obviously it's many multiples of the equivalent revenues of small clubs like Everton, Newcastle and West Ham

    What are the "other commercial activities" and how do Man City make so much from these?
  • Sponsored links:


  • Probably a huge sponsorship/advertising deal from Etihaad Airlines.
  • I don't blame Man City or Chelsea for the crazy amount of money they spend, I save that annoyance for Arsenal, Man Utd and Liverpool who created the system that meant if you don't do what City/Chelsea have done then nobody can ever(other then once in a generation like Leicester) challenge our football monarchy on a regular basis.

    FFP should be scrapped, it purely exists to keep every club in it's place, so the traditional European elite can be sure of their dominance for the generations to come, if they truly want fairness then let every club only spend the exact same budget and if it is about protecting clubs from going out of business due to debt then make it a law that any owners can never loan a club money, only gift it.
  • iaitch said:

    Probably a huge sponsorship/advertising deal from Etihaad Airlines.

    No doubt. Plus a number of other sponsors highlighted in their annual report:

    https://annualreport2017.mancity.com/assets/download/City-Football-Group-AR-16-17.pdf
  • iaitch said:

    Probably a huge sponsorship/advertising deal from Etihaad Airlines.

    Probably. Who owns Etihad Airlines?

    Man City keep making profit.
  • Riviera said:

    Fiiish said:

    JiMMy 85 said:

    JiMMy 85 said:

    Title race done before Christmas. What an exciting league the Premier is.......

    To be fair your still going back to 06/07 - 07/08 - 08/09 when a club won back to back Premier League titles

    (Man Utd won it three years on the trot on that occasion)
    And that... makes it exciting? Because last year it was won by a Russian oligarch?
    No it makes it unpredictable
    Four teams in eight (or eleven) seasons. And with the two richest owners winning it this season and last. That is stretching ‘unpredictable’ a little bit.
    Who's gonna win next year? Russian state-backed oil or Middle East state-backed oil.

    Don't understand the argument that 'at least they play entertaining football'. If you spend a billion quid how could the end result be anything other than entertaining football?
    Well you'd hope so but Chelsea never have, United barely did at the height of Ferguson's time.

    Struggling to think of a team when England had a better overall team than City do right now. Potentially Arsenal 2003-04 but I think even De Bruyne, Silva, Sane, Sterling etc. would tear them apart.

    Not saying the situation is ideal but at least one team is deciding to play high quality football that the Premier League has been sadly lacking the last few years.
    Barely? Are you having a laugh? United under Fergie were far more entertaining than this City side, maybe not as technically or tactically tuned but boy did they entertain.

    Remember this side?

    1 Peter Schmeichel
    4 Steve Bruce
    6 Gary Pallister
    2 Paul Parker
    3 Denis Irwin
    8 Paul Ince
    16 Roy Keane
    7 Eric Cantona
    14 Andrey Kanchelskis
    11 Ryan Giggs
    10 Mark Hughes
    Can't really compare
    Uboat said:

    Thanks to Man City, it's a one horse race.

    Meanwhile in the Conference South:

    image

    I don't think my nerves could handle that.
  • JiMMy 85 said:

    Fiiish said:

    Man City are just that classic rags to riches story of a football team actively assisted by two country's governments and spending north of a billion pounds in order to win a domestic trophy most years.

    Indeed - having followed us for over 50 years without anywhere near that level of success, I would take a businessman taking us over and funding a PL title. Indeed, I don't recall too many of us complaining when the best player I've seen playing in a Charlton shirt, Allan Simonsen signed but certainly many of us bemoaning that his stay was so short. The difference is that we couldn't sustain that expense. City can. Will we have supporters refusing to go to watch because we are "buying" trophies in which the Club really can't win. In reality, we are kings compared to the likes of Orient who would love to be in our position.

    It is one thing to spend a shed load of money, another to have domestic success, another to dominate like no other team has (only dropped points in the draw against Everton when Walker was sent off), another to win the Champions League, another to play fantastic football and yet another to coach and improve individuals - Stones (knows when to defend and when to play now), Sterling (knows when to pass and when to finish now), Delph (successfully converted to a full back having never played there previously), Aguero (getting him to defend from the front) and Otamendi (double the player he was last season). That is the mark of a great coach like Guardiola. Not a Mourinho who will "park the bus" against the big sides and accuse the lesser teams of being "lucky" when United don't win. Or a Wenger whose stubbornness in refusing to rectify the obvious deficiencies of his side.

    With the PL title all in the bag, the football at another level, the improvement of those individuals and the record breaking run, that only leaves the CL. And I wouldn't rule out City landing that too this season.
    There’s a couple of things I want to address here - firstly the “fans wouldn’t complain if it was their club” which you touch on with the Simonsen thing. In that regard, I think a LOT of people complained when they realised we didn’t actually have the money for that deal.

    Secondly, none of us asked to be given such a shitty choice - support a club struggling to survive or sell your soul to repressive middle eastern regime. That’s not on us. It’s fair to want to do things sustainably and fairly. I’d sooner support a club that did it that way and kept trying earnestly rather than the financial dope hit City have had.

    As for City themselves. They are playing the best football and are improving players like Stones cos they’ve thrown money at EVERY level of the club, including the coach. Hiring Pep is part of that doping.

    This has taken financial doping to the top possible level. Not because Sheikh Mansour loves the club (Jack Walker style) or because he loves the sport, but because he has a plan to win every league on every continent.

    As I understand it, and I’m happy to be corrected as I’m no expert, he does this because he’s the son of the founding fathers of the UAE and he sees it as his duty to wean them off of oil and promote tourism in a country with very dubious human rights record. Playing fancy football just makes it more palatable to the country he’s destroyed competition in.
    City have had a massive injection of funds but are sustainable and do make a profit albeit only just over £1m compared to the £13m they made the year before.Their revenue has risen, for the ninth consecutive season, to £473.4m. That is the result of building a new stadium, attracting new fans and being successful on the pitch and long term planning. This is the breakdown of that:

    Matchday £51.88m
    Broadcasting – UEFA £47.94m
    Broadcasting – All Other £155.58m
    Other commercial activities £218.01m
    There’s no doubt that the richest man in the world knows how to run a business. I don’t think anybody would bother questioning that. And clearly he’s got a much better grasp than our own owner. But of those figures, 40% comes from “other commercial activities”, much of which is almost certainly sponsorship, primarily by Etihad, which is owned by Mansour’s brother! It’s nuts to imply that a club spending £723m on players alone in 5 years is in any way sustainable when a huge chunk of their revenue comes from... themselves.


    If we rule out every owner that people in the UK have issues with then we must exclude Russia, China, the US, the UAE, Thailand

    Well that’d be great! I don’t think we should accept what’s happening just because, you know, that’s the way it is. I don’t have a realistic solution by any means, I just think it’s irritating to lavish praise on City when they’ve not only spent big, but spent HUGELY to do it. They’re playing exactly how a club should play when a billion quid has been chucked at doing it. The experiment is done, the results are in. Now I’d like to watch a competition again please! Or at the very least, not ignore why they’re doing it cos we’ve been charmed by the football.
  • JiMMy 85 said:

    JiMMy 85 said:

    Fiiish said:

    Man City are just that classic rags to riches story of a football team actively assisted by two country's governments and spending north of a billion pounds in order to win a domestic trophy most years.

    Indeed - having followed us for over 50 years without anywhere near that level of success, I would take a businessman taking us over and funding a PL title. Indeed, I don't recall too many of us complaining when the best player I've seen playing in a Charlton shirt, Allan Simonsen signed but certainly many of us bemoaning that his stay was so short. The difference is that we couldn't sustain that expense. City can. Will we have supporters refusing to go to watch because we are "buying" trophies in which the Club really can't win. In reality, we are kings compared to the likes of Orient who would love to be in our position.

    It is one thing to spend a shed load of money, another to have domestic success, another to dominate like no other team has (only dropped points in the draw against Everton when Walker was sent off), another to win the Champions League, another to play fantastic football and yet another to coach and improve individuals - Stones (knows when to defend and when to play now), Sterling (knows when to pass and when to finish now), Delph (successfully converted to a full back having never played there previously), Aguero (getting him to defend from the front) and Otamendi (double the player he was last season). That is the mark of a great coach like Guardiola. Not a Mourinho who will "park the bus" against the big sides and accuse the lesser teams of being "lucky" when United don't win. Or a Wenger whose stubbornness in refusing to rectify the obvious deficiencies of his side.

    With the PL title all in the bag, the football at another level, the improvement of those individuals and the record breaking run, that only leaves the CL. And I wouldn't rule out City landing that too this season.
    There’s a couple of things I want to address here - firstly the “fans wouldn’t complain if it was their club” which you touch on with the Simonsen thing. In that regard, I think a LOT of people complained when they realised we didn’t actually have the money for that deal.

    Secondly, none of us asked to be given such a shitty choice - support a club struggling to survive or sell your soul to repressive middle eastern regime. That’s not on us. It’s fair to want to do things sustainably and fairly. I’d sooner support a club that did it that way and kept trying earnestly rather than the financial dope hit City have had.

    As for City themselves. They are playing the best football and are improving players like Stones cos they’ve thrown money at EVERY level of the club, including the coach. Hiring Pep is part of that doping.

    This has taken financial doping to the top possible level. Not because Sheikh Mansour loves the club (Jack Walker style) or because he loves the sport, but because he has a plan to win every league on every continent.

    As I understand it, and I’m happy to be corrected as I’m no expert, he does this because he’s the son of the founding fathers of the UAE and he sees it as his duty to wean them off of oil and promote tourism in a country with very dubious human rights record. Playing fancy football just makes it more palatable to the country he’s destroyed competition in.
    City have had a massive injection of funds but are sustainable and do make a profit albeit only just over £1m compared to the £13m they made the year before.Their revenue has risen, for the ninth consecutive season, to £473.4m. That is the result of building a new stadium, attracting new fans and being successful on the pitch and long term planning. This is the breakdown of that:

    Matchday £51.88m
    Broadcasting – UEFA £47.94m
    Broadcasting – All Other £155.58m
    Other commercial activities £218.01m
    There’s no doubt that the richest man in the world knows how to run a business. I don’t think anybody would bother questioning that. And clearly he’s got a much better grasp than our own owner. But of those figures, 40% comes from “other commercial activities”, much of which is almost certainly sponsorship, primarily by Etihad, which is owned by Mansour’s brother! It’s nuts to imply that a club spending £723m on players alone in 5 years is in any way sustainable when a huge chunk of their revenue comes from... themselves.


    If we rule out every owner that people in the UK have issues with then we must exclude Russia, China, the US, the UAE, Thailand

    Well that’d be great! I don’t think we should accept what’s happening just because, you know, that’s the way it is. I don’t have a realistic solution by any means, I just think it’s irritating to lavish praise on City when they’ve not only spent big, but spent HUGELY to do it. They’re playing exactly how a club should play when a billion quid has been chucked at doing it. The experiment is done, the results are in. Now I’d like to watch a competition again please! Or at the very least, not ignore why they’re doing it cos we’ve been charmed by the football.
    But other clubs have spent hugely too - Man United and Chelsea to name but two.

    So, just to be clear, if we get new owners and they then spend £20m on six new players and that then means that we win League 1 by a streak and play the most fantastic football in the division, will we be saying that we should ignore that success and not "lavish praise" on them for doing so?

    Because I struggle to see how that is different to what City are doing in the PL or why they should be singled out more than say United or Chelsea who have spent virtually as much in the last five years?
  • edited December 2017

    JiMMy 85 said:

    JiMMy 85 said:

    Fiiish said:

    Man City are just that classic rags to riches story of a football team actively assisted by two country's governments and spending north of a billion pounds in order to win a domestic trophy most years.

    Indeed - having followed us for over 50 years without anywhere near that level of success, I would take a businessman taking us over and funding a PL title. Indeed, I don't recall too many of us complaining when the best player I've seen playing in a Charlton shirt, Allan Simonsen signed but certainly many of us bemoaning that his stay was so short. The difference is that we couldn't sustain that expense. City can. Will we have supporters refusing to go to watch because we are "buying" trophies in which the Club really can't win. In reality, we are kings compared to the likes of Orient who would love to be in our position.

    It is one thing to spend a shed load of money, another to have domestic success, another to dominate like no other team has (only dropped points in the draw against Everton when Walker was sent off), another to win the Champions League, another to play fantastic football and yet another to coach and improve individuals - Stones (knows when to defend and when to play now), Sterling (knows when to pass and when to finish now), Delph (successfully converted to a full back having never played there previously), Aguero (getting him to defend from the front) and Otamendi (double the player he was last season). That is the mark of a great coach like Guardiola. Not a Mourinho who will "park the bus" against the big sides and accuse the lesser teams of being "lucky" when United don't win. Or a Wenger whose stubbornness in refusing to rectify the obvious deficiencies of his side.

    With the PL title all in the bag, the football at another level, the improvement of those individuals and the record breaking run, that only leaves the CL. And I wouldn't rule out City landing that too this season.
    There’s a couple of things I want to address here - firstly the “fans wouldn’t complain if it was their club” which you touch on with the Simonsen thing. In that regard, I think a LOT of people complained when they realised we didn’t actually have the money for that deal.

    Secondly, none of us asked to be given such a shitty choice - support a club struggling to survive or sell your soul to repressive middle eastern regime. That’s not on us. It’s fair to want to do things sustainably and fairly. I’d sooner support a club that did it that way and kept trying earnestly rather than the financial dope hit City have had.

    As for City themselves. They are playing the best football and are improving players like Stones cos they’ve thrown money at EVERY level of the club, including the coach. Hiring Pep is part of that doping.

    This has taken financial doping to the top possible level. Not because Sheikh Mansour loves the club (Jack Walker style) or because he loves the sport, but because he has a plan to win every league on every continent.

    As I understand it, and I’m happy to be corrected as I’m no expert, he does this because he’s the son of the founding fathers of the UAE and he sees it as his duty to wean them off of oil and promote tourism in a country with very dubious human rights record. Playing fancy football just makes it more palatable to the country he’s destroyed competition in.
    City have had a massive injection of funds but are sustainable and do make a profit albeit only just over £1m compared to the £13m they made the year before.Their revenue has risen, for the ninth consecutive season, to £473.4m. That is the result of building a new stadium, attracting new fans and being successful on the pitch and long term planning. This is the breakdown of that:

    Matchday £51.88m
    Broadcasting – UEFA £47.94m
    Broadcasting – All Other £155.58m
    Other commercial activities £218.01m
    There’s no doubt that the richest man in the world knows how to run a business. I don’t think anybody would bother questioning that. And clearly he’s got a much better grasp than our own owner. But of those figures, 40% comes from “other commercial activities”, much of which is almost certainly sponsorship, primarily by Etihad, which is owned by Mansour’s brother! It’s nuts to imply that a club spending £723m on players alone in 5 years is in any way sustainable when a huge chunk of their revenue comes from... themselves.


    If we rule out every owner that people in the UK have issues with then we must exclude Russia, China, the US, the UAE, Thailand

    Well that’d be great! I don’t think we should accept what’s happening just because, you know, that’s the way it is. I don’t have a realistic solution by any means, I just think it’s irritating to lavish praise on City when they’ve not only spent big, but spent HUGELY to do it. They’re playing exactly how a club should play when a billion quid has been chucked at doing it. The experiment is done, the results are in. Now I’d like to watch a competition again please! Or at the very least, not ignore why they’re doing it cos we’ve been charmed by the football.
    But other clubs have spent hugely too - Man United and Chelsea to name but two.

    So, just to be clear, if we get new owners and they then spend £20m on six new players and that then means that we win League 1 by a streak and play the most fantastic football in the division, will we be saying that we should ignore that success and not "lavish praise" on them for doing so?

    Because I struggle to see how that is different to what City are doing in the PL or why they should be singled out more than say United or Chelsea who have spent virtually as much in the last five years?
    I tried to cover this earlier - I don’t see why that question is so relentlessly asked in this situation.

    We didn’t ask for any of this. We don’t deserve to have to make that choice. Its not our fault and it’s really not the point. You’re basically saying it’s ok for the current situation to stand, because otherwise I’m a hypocrite. It’s a shitty argument.

    I’m not asking Man City fans to stop supporting their club. I’m saying the current situation sucks, and I don’t see why it’s so important to you to have to prove that I or we would be happy for us to be bought by a despot to undermine that point.

    City are not being singled out either - they’re top of the league by an utterly ludicrous margin. So why wouldn’t we talk about them?

    The same conversation occurred when Roman took over, and he did so at a point when we had respectably built a club up to the level where we were competing with the richest clubs in the land, on and off the pitch.

    Roman introduced the new era of mega rich owners and as a result, our upward trajectory got utterly fucked. Whether I would like us to be financially doped up now is utterly irrelevant to me citing mega rich owners as a negative aspect to the game I used to love.

    Edit - City's net Spend is nearly triple Chelsea’s over the last five years.
  • The situation does "suck" but I'm not sure that it is a "shitty argument". Successful football teams have almost without question had some sort of financial backing. I'm certainly not saying that it is right - all I am trying to do with City is to embrace a type of football that has never been seen in this country before. And in saying that United and Chelsea they have spent huge too, I am trying to make the point that City are not unique in doing so.

    I was a season ticket holder, along with my Dad, at the time when home gates were 5,000-6,000 and absolutely loved it because the players were not hyped, over paid journey men that we see at every level of football but ordinary people. My Dad played football in Hungary at the time of Puskas and came here in 1956. He taught me that the game was all about caressing and loving the ball as the Magnificent Magyars did so effectively in thrashing England 7-1 and 6-3. England never learnt from that and winning the World Cup in '66 deceived us into believing that we were actually good at the game.

    I hope that I have made it clear that I too do not like what has happened to the game but that doesn't mean that I can't divorce the financial aspect of the game from admiring the football that a team like City plays. Because it is refreshing to see it and if our players like Sterling, Stones, Delph, Walker, Foden and all those young City players learning from Guardiola. It will help our international side far more than a wholly foreign side that Chelsea regularly put out or a Mourinho side that is asked to limit the opposition rather than trying to play total football.

Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out!