Manchester City - Guardiola confirmed

JiMMy 85 said:

Garrymanilow said:

JiMMy 85 said:

And that’s precisely what Sheikh Mansour wants to hear.

That his massive investment encourages people to come and watch his football team? Almost certainly. Why do you think football stadiums have seats?

I can’t tell if you’re intentionally or inadvertently missing the point.

Riviera said:

City have pulled out of the race to sign Sanchez.

Chris_from_Sidcup said:

Riviera said:

City have pulled out of the race to sign Sanchez.

Don't blame them. Sanchez was close to signing in the summer and had supposedly given his word that he'd sign for them either this month or at the end of the season. Yet as soon as Man U come in and offer a higher salary, he changes his mind. Hardly suggests he's that fussed on City.

If he wants to turn down a club who could dominate for the coming years, with an almost guaranteed premier league title medal plus potentially 1-2 cups this season just to sign for United on more money then it's no surprise City have said fuck off.

Chris_from_Sidcup said:

paulie8290 said:

Chris_from_Sidcup said:

Riviera said:

City have pulled out of the race to sign Sanchez.

Don't blame them. Sanchez was close to signing in the summer and had supposedly given his word that he'd sign for them either this month or at the end of the season. Yet as soon as Man U come in and offer a higher salary, he changes his mind. Hardly suggests he's that fussed on City.

If he wants to turn down a club who could dominate for the coming years, with an almost guaranteed premier league title medal plus potentially 1-2 cups this season just to sign for United on more money then it's no surprise City have said fuck off.

Think its money to Arsenal as well

City only want to pay £20 million
United happy to pay £35 million

Whats funny is i saw a report saying pep spoke to the owner and they both agreed that £35 million is to much for someone they can get on a free in the summer,
But if he goes United they cant get him on a free.

Surely with all there money its worth an extra £15 million, not only do they get a top player but they stop a rival getting him

It's not about the money though. Obviously City could afford an extra 15m. It's the principle of the situation for them.

A player gives his word he wants to sign for you and we're led to believe a deal was verbally agreed on the same terms as back in the summer, but then his agent comes back and says i want a 5m payment on top of the transfer fee and my client now wants an extra 100k+ a week.

City's reaction was probably you either want to sign for us at the terms previously agreed and win trophies..........or you can go elsewhere and earn more money.

JiMMy 85 said:

Addick Addict said:

JiMMy 85 said:

Addick Addict said:

JiMMy 85 said:

Addick Addict said:

I'm sorry but you clearly stated "by buying all of the best possible players they can". I've just demonstrated that they have only bought one of the 20 most expensive players - and their most expensive player is the 15th in terms of cost!

In my opinion that’s a bit disingenuous. ‘The best possible players they can’ means they clearly can't buy players who have just been bought (and 'best' is in the eye of the beholder anyway). They have bought the best manager on the planet, then asked him who he needs to make up his squad. Neymar and Messi weren’t possible options, apparently, but Pep has identified who he needed and it seems that, as far as we can tell, 99% of the time they got their man. Mostly by spending big on each player (it doesn’t need to be a world record fee for it to be a big sum).

Those sums, along with the likes of PSG and United, have pushed the ever-increasing transfer market into a realm that is, frankly, astonishing, and is going to rapidly accelerate the ever-widening gap between the biggest clubs and the rest, resulting, I believe, in an inevitable breakaway. Particularly as clubs are getting fed up with the CL group stages.

Addick Addict said:

You have come back with a figure of £753m but haven't mentioned that they have re-couped £250m of that so have actually spent £500m net. They would get that for Aguero, Sane, De Bruyne and Sterling alone in the current market. So not quite as "obscene" as you make out.

Well… I don’t have to. Because none of that detracts from my point.

Whenever I cite any figure you come back with a whataboutism, whether that's money recouped (which I believe is misleading anyway, and takes us down a rabbit hole figuring out which owner paid for them, when they paid for them and so on), or you mention another club, as though City spending big is somehow not a bad thing, cos other clubs do it too.

One stat you cannot counter is that Man City have spent more than any other club on the planet on players. In the history of football, adjusted for inflation or not. I really don't see why United spending big or City recouping 25% of their expenditure (potentially on players they have made a loss on, or were bought by a previous regime) changes that fact.

Addick Addict said:

What they haven't done is pay £89m for Pogba or £75m for Lukaku.

I don’t care if they have the world record for a player. I have a more expensive phone than my friends, but most of my friends spend more money than me. And I don’t know if my mate Alf stole his money from an old lady and locked her up in a small broom cupboard because she’s gay.

Addick Addict said:

And they don't park the bus.

No shit! They spent 753m on players and bought Pep Guardiola.

Addick Addict said:

I hope that explains why I defend them.

Not really, no. It still sounds like “They play nice football and others are dodgy too”, and none of that remotely convinces me I should be happy about the situation.

Addick Addict said:

And why I have previously brought up the issue that if we get taken over and buy our way out of the division we would be no different - I cannot see how you would feel, using your argument, comfortable when other clubs that won't have that luxury.

No, I absolutely wouldn’t be comfortable. If we were owned by someone with dubious connections, I would not go. I've only been half a dozen times in the last two years to see a club owned by a twat. He’s not even an evil twat (relatively speaking, making microchips isn’t akin to locking someone up because they brushed past someone in a bar).

Addick Addict said:

Presumably you feel the same way about Wolves and the Championship too?

They are owned by a Chinese conglomerate. Fuck that, I would hate for that to happen to us. I don’t know much about the Chinese, but I know they are buying up an awesome amount of real estate here. And I would not want to ignore anything they’ve done wrong just because they hire Curbs as a director of football and build a lovely footballing team.

And yet City aren't prepared to pay £35m for Sanchez even if they can afford to do so and he wants to go there. Perhaps they don't just buy all the best possible players whatever the cost.

You’re really clinging onto that one.

I'm not "clinging onto" anything. It's just that you seem to have a steadfast refusal to accept anything I say - from net spend, to changing the face of the football played in this country, to not just buying the best players at any cost, to improving the footballers under Pep, to plenty of other clubs spending more money than anyone else in their respective divisions and to value for money for fans watching them.

In fact, rarely have I witnessed anyone dig quite as big a hole as you have on this thread!

I think you’re clinging to a simplistic point that I’ve dealt with at least twice - in fact, when I dealt with your points one by one, the best response you could muster was “agree to disagree” - and then waited a few days before bizarrely trying to imply the Sanchez deal somehow backed up everything you’re saying.

I’ve never denied the qualities Pep brings - I just don’t jerk off over his presence because I detest the manner in which an Emirate state has paid for the best manager and players, and the reasoning behind that business plan. A point you seem to think is invalid, which is your perogative, you’ve just failed miserably to convince me otherwise. Not because I’m pigheaded, I’m all for being corrected in discussion. You just seem to rely on the brilliance of the players to justify the presence of Mansour and the spending of a billion quid. I’m willing to admit, quite how that’s digging a hole for myself truly is beyond me.

Callumcafc said:

JiMMy 85 said:

Addick Addict said:

JiMMy 85 said:

Addick Addict said:

JiMMy 85 said:

Addick Addict said:

I'm sorry but you clearly stated "by buying all of the best possible players they can". I've just demonstrated that they have only bought one of the 20 most expensive players - and their most expensive player is the 15th in terms of cost!

In my opinion that’s a bit disingenuous. ‘The best possible players they can’ means they clearly can't buy players who have just been bought (and 'best' is in the eye of the beholder anyway). They have bought the best manager on the planet, then asked him who he needs to make up his squad. Neymar and Messi weren’t possible options, apparently, but Pep has identified who he needed and it seems that, as far as we can tell, 99% of the time they got their man. Mostly by spending big on each player (it doesn’t need to be a world record fee for it to be a big sum).

Those sums, along with the likes of PSG and United, have pushed the ever-increasing transfer market into a realm that is, frankly, astonishing, and is going to rapidly accelerate the ever-widening gap between the biggest clubs and the rest, resulting, I believe, in an inevitable breakaway. Particularly as clubs are getting fed up with the CL group stages.

Addick Addict said:

You have come back with a figure of £753m but haven't mentioned that they have re-couped £250m of that so have actually spent £500m net. They would get that for Aguero, Sane, De Bruyne and Sterling alone in the current market. So not quite as "obscene" as you make out.

Well… I don’t have to. Because none of that detracts from my point.

Whenever I cite any figure you come back with a whataboutism, whether that's money recouped (which I believe is misleading anyway, and takes us down a rabbit hole figuring out which owner paid for them, when they paid for them and so on), or you mention another club, as though City spending big is somehow not a bad thing, cos other clubs do it too.

One stat you cannot counter is that Man City have spent more than any other club on the planet on players. In the history of football, adjusted for inflation or not. I really don't see why United spending big or City recouping 25% of their expenditure (potentially on players they have made a loss on, or were bought by a previous regime) changes that fact.

Addick Addict said:

What they haven't done is pay £89m for Pogba or £75m for Lukaku.

I don’t care if they have the world record for a player. I have a more expensive phone than my friends, but most of my friends spend more money than me. And I don’t know if my mate Alf stole his money from an old lady and locked her up in a small broom cupboard because she’s gay.

Addick Addict said:

And they don't park the bus.

No shit! They spent 753m on players and bought Pep Guardiola.

Addick Addict said:

I hope that explains why I defend them.

Not really, no. It still sounds like “They play nice football and others are dodgy too”, and none of that remotely convinces me I should be happy about the situation.

Addick Addict said:

And why I have previously brought up the issue that if we get taken over and buy our way out of the division we would be no different - I cannot see how you would feel, using your argument, comfortable when other clubs that won't have that luxury.

No, I absolutely wouldn’t be comfortable. If we were owned by someone with dubious connections, I would not go. I've only been half a dozen times in the last two years to see a club owned by a twat. He’s not even an evil twat (relatively speaking, making microchips isn’t akin to locking someone up because they brushed past someone in a bar).

Addick Addict said:

Presumably you feel the same way about Wolves and the Championship too?

They are owned by a Chinese conglomerate. Fuck that, I would hate for that to happen to us. I don’t know much about the Chinese, but I know they are buying up an awesome amount of real estate here. And I would not want to ignore anything they’ve done wrong just because they hire Curbs as a director of football and build a lovely footballing team.

And yet City aren't prepared to pay £35m for Sanchez even if they can afford to do so and he wants to go there. Perhaps they don't just buy all the best possible players whatever the cost.

You’re really clinging onto that one.

I'm not "clinging onto" anything. It's just that you seem to have a steadfast refusal to accept anything I say - from net spend, to changing the face of the football played in this country, to not just buying the best players at any cost, to improving the footballers under Pep, to plenty of other clubs spending more money than anyone else in their respective divisions and to value for money for fans watching them.

In fact, rarely have I witnessed anyone dig quite as big a hole as you have on this thread!

I think you’re clinging to a simplistic point that I’ve dealt with at least twice - in fact, when I dealt with your points one by one, the best response you could muster was “agree to disagree” - and then waited a few days before bizarrely trying to imply the Sanchez deal somehow backed up everything you’re saying.

I’ve never denied the qualities Pep brings - I just don’t jerk off over his presence because I detest the manner in which an Emirate state has paid for the best manager and players, and the reasoning behind that business plan. A point you seem to think is invalid, which is your perogative, you’ve just failed miserably to convince me otherwise. Not because I’m pigheaded, I’m all for being corrected in discussion. You just seem to rely on the brilliance of the players to justify the presence of Mansour and the spending of a billion quid. I’m willing to admit, quite how that’s digging a hole for myself truly is beyond me.

Your point seems to be "they spent a lot of money and I don't like them spending a lot of money" but then lots of people have come back with evidence to show that a. their net spend on playing and coaching staff is no higher than their rivals and b. they won't sign anyone at any cost just because they can.

The transfer market is f*cked and I hate it but the problem isn't just down to one team, it's the system as a whole.