Dont get this stick City are getting for spending money...Since the day dot the only exception being a few, the richest clubs who spend millions win the major trophies...Its now City's turn for a few years.
I find it hard to respect them when they’ve spent so much. Not just a lot, but a huge amount. Breaking the rules with abandon and disdain in the process.
But it not just about the expenditure. It’s why the money is being spent, and what the spenders are guilty of that leaves a bad taste.
I've got respect for clubs that generated huge revenue from support, Spurs, Arse, Man U, Liverpool, Everton. Man City and Chelsea did neither - just sugar daddies of dubious income streams, and their new fans, thinking anything else is the truth - cringeworthy - like palace
Dont get this stick City are getting for spending money...Since the day dot the only exception being a few, the richest clubs who spend millions win the major trophies...Its now City's turn for a few years.
I find it hard to respect them when they’ve spent so much. Not just a lot, but a huge amount. Breaking the rules with abandon and disdain in the process.
But it not just about the expenditure. It’s why the money is being spent, and what the spenders are guilty of that leaves a bad taste.
As if really pretty football makes it all ok.
Where have you been in the last 40 years, they have all done it...We had Manchester Utd playing the perfect game, then Chelsea and now City, years before it was Liverpool (who bought the best mostly non English players)...As I said its been done before...
I've got respect for clubs that generated huge revenue from support, Spurs, Arse, Man U, Liverpool, Everton. Man City and Chelsea did neither - just sugar daddies of dubious income streams, and their new fans, thinking anything else is the truth - cringeworthy - like palace
Dont get this stick City are getting for spending money...Since the day dot the only exception being a few, the richest clubs who spend millions win the major trophies...Its now City's turn for a few years.
I find it hard to respect them when they’ve spent so much. Not just a lot, but a huge amount. Breaking the rules with abandon and disdain in the process.
But it not just about the expenditure. It’s why the money is being spent, and what the spenders are guilty of that leaves a bad taste.
As if really pretty football makes it all ok.
Where have you been in the last 40 years, they have all done it...We had Manchester Utd playing the perfect game, then Chelsea and now City, years before it was Liverpool (who bought the best mostly non English players)...As I said its been done before...
Did you only read the first part of my post and none of my other posts?
I’ve said a few times, but I will take the likes to Liverpool, Everton, Spurs, Villa, Leeds - over likes of Man City and Chelsea any day.
Proper ‘tier 1’ clubs. Man City and Chelsea are tier 2 in my eyes
A friend of mine who has followed English football for decades says he thinks the greatest team he ever saw was 84-85 Everton. That was admittedly, three years ago he said that.
Going about it QPR style...... if that owner goes they are stuffed. At least Spurs, Liverpool, Arsenal, Man Utd have proper levels of income based on global heritage and support.
points deduction next season surely as a financial ban means nothing to them really
Going about it QPR style...... if that owner goes they are stuffed. At least Spurs, Liverpool, Arsenal, Man Utd have proper levels of income based on global heritage and support.
points deduction next season surely as a financial ban means nothing to them really
Never understand it when people say this about the likes of City and Chelsea. You think there won't be people interested in 2 of the top clubs in world football?
If and when Mansour and Abramovich get bored, there will be other billionaires ready to take over from them.
Going about it QPR style...... if that owner goes they are stuffed. At least Spurs, Liverpool, Arsenal, Man Utd have proper levels of income based on global heritage and support.
points deduction next season surely as a financial ban means nothing to them really
Has anyone in the media called Liverpool bottlers yet for bottling a 7pt lead at Christmas?
Just wondering on behalf of a team from North London like?!
Fantastic that the micky's have now gone another year without winning the title.
Hopefully now they will crush tottenham in the Champions League, it will be unbearable to see tottenham win it.
Surely not as unbearable as Liverpool winning it?
For the record, I still see no mention of Liverpool bottling their 7 point lead. Although when Spurs 'lost' the title to Leicester and Chelsea, Spurs were never leading the league at any point in the chase and 'bottled it'.
When people talk of rich teams, at least the other big teams in the Premier League are largely rich due to building a brand around their football and therefore attracting sponsors.
If it wasn't for oil and slavery in the Middle East, City would still be in the Championship.
Going about it QPR style...... if that owner goes they are stuffed. At least Spurs, Liverpool, Arsenal, Man Utd have proper levels of income based on global heritage and support.
points deduction next season surely as a financial ban means nothing to them really
They represent everything that is wrong with the game - maybe I’m showing my age but outside of the safety issues attending matches such as the Hillsborough disaster, football was so much purer back in the 80s. It doesn’t have to be Liverpool...... Spurs Arsenal or Everton will do. Just someone start the descent back into mid table / lower prem where City belong. They have bought enough success now - should have been a one off Blackburn thing.
I've got respect for clubs that generated huge revenue from support, Spurs, Arse, Man U, Liverpool, Everton. Man City and Chelsea did neither - just sugar daddies of dubious income streams, and their new fans, thinking anything else is the truth - cringeworthy - like palace
They generated a decent amount of revenue from support, before the TV came along. And they were lucky enough to have directors who invested that revenue back into the club rather than line their pockets like certain east end timber merchants we could name.
Once the TV came along and brought those clubs into the living rooms of folk the length and breadth of Britain, "fans" of Arsenal started to appear in Coventry and Liverpool "fans" in Truro. Their constant coverage on TV Saturday night and Sunday afternoon meant that they could charge more for their sponsorships, I assume they earned more from TV facilities fees? Though I am prepared to be corrected if there was some kind of general pool from which all 92 clubs gleaned an equal share - but I doubt it. So their income stream was already increasing, and it had nothing to do with clever business practice.
The "legalising" of shirt sponsorship and the rise in marketing meant that those few elite clubs were garnering more and more revenue from the game and "stealing" support from other clubs all over the land.
The arrival of Sky and the magnifying of what was a nationwide phenomenon into a worldwide phenomenon has just strengthened the position of those clubs more and more. TV made them what they are (and being in the right place at the right time).
I would also argue that both city and Chelsea already hade pretty large (albeit somewhat latent) fanbases before the sugar-daddies came along.
Anyway - it stopped Liverpool winning the title, so hooray!!!
Has anyone in the media called Liverpool bottlers yet for bottling a 7pt lead at Christmas?
Just wondering on behalf of a team from North London like?!
Fantastic that the micky's have now gone another year without winning the title.
Hopefully now they will crush tottenham in the Champions League, it will be unbearable to see tottenham win it.
Surely not as unbearable as Liverpool winning it?
For the record, I still see no mention of Liverpool bottling their 7 point lead. Although when Spurs 'lost' the title to Leicester and Chelsea, Spurs were never leading the league at any point in the chase and 'bottled it'.
Liverpool have won the trophy so many times winning again does not matter. tottenham have NOT won it, long may it continue.
Has anyone in the media called Liverpool bottlers yet for bottling a 7pt lead at Christmas?
Just wondering on behalf of a team from North London like?!
Fantastic that the micky's have now gone another year without winning the title.
Hopefully now they will crush tottenham in the Champions League, it will be unbearable to see tottenham win it.
Surely not as unbearable as Liverpool winning it?
For the record, I still see no mention of Liverpool bottling their 7 point lead. Although when Spurs 'lost' the title to Leicester and Chelsea, Spurs were never leading the league at any point in the chase and 'bottled it'.
Liverpool have won the trophy so many times winning again does not matter. tottenham have NOT won it, long may it continue.
Liverpool winning it for the 6th time or Spurs winning it for the first , the year ends in 1 mob won’t stop chirping , scousers winning won’t be as massive for them as spurs winning would be horrendous and how anyone who lives in and around London can’t see the horrors of that I’ll never know .
Comments
But it not just about the expenditure. It’s why the money is being spent, and what the spenders are guilty of that leaves a bad taste.
As if really pretty football makes it all ok.
This.
Hopefully now they will crush tottenham in the Champions League, it will be unbearable to see tottenham win it.
Going about it QPR style...... if that owner goes they are stuffed. At least Spurs, Liverpool, Arsenal, Man Utd have proper levels of income based on global heritage and support.
points deduction next season surely as a financial ban means nothing to them really
If and when Mansour and Abramovich get bored, there will be other billionaires ready to take over from them.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-7025045/Manchester-City-plan-200m-summer-spree-threat-transfer-ban-hanging-them.html
For the record, I still see no mention of Liverpool bottling their 7 point lead.
Although when Spurs 'lost' the title to Leicester and Chelsea, Spurs were never leading the league at any point in the chase and 'bottled it'.
If it wasn't for oil and slavery in the Middle East, City would still be in the Championship.
They represent everything that is wrong with the game - maybe I’m showing my age but outside of the safety issues attending matches such as the Hillsborough disaster, football was so much purer back in the 80s. It doesn’t have to be Liverpool...... Spurs Arsenal or Everton will do. Just someone start the descent back into mid table / lower prem where City belong. They have bought enough success now - should have been a one off Blackburn thing.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/48265079
Once the TV came along and brought those clubs into the living rooms of folk the length and breadth of Britain, "fans" of Arsenal started to appear in Coventry and Liverpool "fans" in Truro. Their constant coverage on TV Saturday night and Sunday afternoon meant that they could charge more for their sponsorships, I assume they earned more from TV facilities fees? Though I am prepared to be corrected if there was some kind of general pool from which all 92 clubs gleaned an equal share - but I doubt it. So their income stream was already increasing, and it had nothing to do with clever business practice.
The "legalising" of shirt sponsorship and the rise in marketing meant that those few elite clubs were garnering more and more revenue from the game and "stealing" support from other clubs all over the land.
The arrival of Sky and the magnifying of what was a nationwide phenomenon into a worldwide phenomenon has just strengthened the position of those clubs more and more. TV made them what they are (and being in the right place at the right time).
I would also argue that both city and Chelsea already hade pretty large (albeit somewhat latent) fanbases before the sugar-daddies came along.
Anyway - it stopped Liverpool winning the title, so hooray!!!
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/13/sports/manchester-city-champions-league-uefa.html
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/48265079