I can't think of a worse final than between the two PL teams that typify the worst in modern football excess. Two teams that shouldn't even exist in their current form and wouldn't if anyone had any balls to stop them. It makes all the ejaculating over the performances of these teams from the pundits all the harder to take when actually the conclusion is 'spend unlimited money, results unsurprisingly follow'. It's even so bad that there is no a sense of entitlement that these two mock-clubs should be where they are, completely forgetting where they came from and how they got there. Anyone can see that City and their main sponsor Etihad are effectively the same company, but they get away with it. And when UEFA find something they are prepared to enforce, they balls up the prosecution by failing to keep to their own rules (!) So stop praising the best manager in the world (TM) and lauding it over the results, why not pull him up as a failure when he doesn't win the league, or point out that with the billions that he has spent with various mega-teams, he's only (to date) won the CL once. So yes, argue away about us being a lesser team, but wouldn't it look a lot different if two of the teams above us didn't even exist in that form (which they shouldn't)?
We didn't play Liverpool in a final at the weekend I guess your nasty case of Small Club Syndrome must be affecting your brain somewhat...
Add to that what the profits the two clubs have made in the history of the Premier League The Sheikh Mansour team: -760.7m Chelsea: -765m It isn't feasible for clubs to lose so much money in a healthy system, and there's a reason for that: the Premier League is not a healthy system, it's one that allows two clubs to spend three quarters of a billion pounds beyond their means as if that's normal - and it looks especially bad when you look at some of the basket cases people cite Leeds: -27.7m Portsmouth: -55.4m Blackburn: -77.8m Bolton: -107.1m Sunderland: -211.m Villa: -434.9m The combined total of those basket case clubs is equal to just one of the supposed pinnacles of the league But of course, people tend to post the graphics for this to slag off Levy, because there's a section of our support who couldn't get the point if it kicked them in the bollocks
The Roman grand plan to have Chelsky running as a non-loss making business by 2013(3) is well on track.
But there is not a single sport's presenter/football pundit who is willing to stand up and say it in the main press.
Even head WUM on TalkShite Durham hasn't tried to WUM the dogdy monetary aspects of Citeh and Chelski (as far as I know). Which makes his wumming even worse - the fact that he isn't prepared to dish it out evenly. So for someone who on the face of it seems prepared to WUM almost anything, even quite distasteful at times, won't touch this. Wonder why? Although there is a certain acceptance by presenters that discuss footie that those clubs have always been around in their current form, which is crap of course, which means that important stuff never gets discussed.
Juan Foyth smashing it with Villarreal I’m about 91% convinced we are cursed as a club or just **** at everything.
Poch took 2 seasons to work out that he wasn't a centre back....Mourinho gave him 45 minutes. He's a good footballer but we never got the best of him because both managers were too stubborn to play him consistently wher he'd be at his best. It's massively frustrating.
I'm sure it reflects really well on our recently-sacked manager that Unai Emery has got him performing as a pretty useful utility player, with him getting games at CB, RB and as a DM
I haven't seen the Roma penalty, is it one that a PL ref would have given? Also I understand Roma are a disaster away from home, conceding over 3.5 goals each game, so having scored a couple so far (with three of their players gone off injured!) they haven't done too badly regardless of what the final result is.
