Do Man U fans feel jealous of the money and buying power Man City now have? Do you guys think it's fair a football club can have a false advantage like City or Chelsea do? Has Mansour gone too far??? http://www.thedailytackle.com/2011/06/manchester-city-to-bid-for-2026-world.html
Won't there always be a question mark over any Man City title? United fans will argue it was bought, surely?
I don't think Utd will be the only ones putting the question mark there. To be honest I might be jealous if I supported Liverpool, Arsenal, Spurs, Everton or Villa and had seen my club trying to build towards the title / CL places over the past few years only to see City shoot past them on a wave of oil money. But as a Utd fan I've seen us face off against Blackburn, Newcastle, Leeds and Chelsea over the years all of whom had significant financial support, and we are still the top dogs. I don't expect City to be any more successful at knocking us off the top than Chelsea have been, and even if they win a few titles over the next few years we will still be up there at the top.
Regardless of the cash spent, as with Chelsea, not until Maureen arrived were they able to win the prem. Man City are a team. The finances are the finances, if City were 16 last season there would be very little talk of their money spending except to laugh maybe. But because they are now a threat it is all we hear, no football discussion, player discussion, its the cash. Well they have got a team that is in the league and is in the CL and talking about their money isn't going to have any bearing on the outcome of their season. it is what it is, no point in crying over it, certain clubs have had the financial advantage over the other 14 15 clubs for years, not that united's financial power has weakened everyone else is trying to buy the league. Simply put, Football is business, big fkn business and investing in a project, beit a football club mall chain or even a hotel is normal practise in business as clubs now become major earners, the rules will always be 5 steps behind behind the money men! if I bought a club and had the intention of turing it into a profitable business I would indeed inject millions if that was the strategy. Owners specifically buying their own choice of players for me is a step too far!!. I also know and lets not deny it, if the Glaziers had made 200m available for Fergie at the start of the season without risk to the club financially, United fans would be very happy indeed and rubbing their hands at the possible arrival prospects. So lets be fair eh and stop all this nonsense about injecting money into a business
It's not that they have money. In an ideal situation, everyone would have the same means to challenge during the transfer windows but that isn't the case. It's how the money is raised that is the issue and what will taint (any) silverware. Having said that though, it has just occured to me that I frankly don't care how Chelsea won their titles. All that bothers me is that we didn't win.
Like you say, money isn't everything. After all, Liverpool have spent around the same as United since 1992 on transfers and wages. In that period Utd have won 12 league titles and Liverpool have won none. So even if Man City continue to spend like they are doing there is no guarantee their team will ever actually win the PL. In which case the whole discussion will be fairly moot. To be honest I don't think Chelsea and City's owners have any intention of turning their clubs into profitable businesses. Chelsea in particular are still dumping their young players like Mancienne, Sinclair, Sala and possibly now Bruma in favour of expensive imports and that's eight years after the initial takeover. If Roman seriously expects to make a profit on his £800 million plus investment in his lifetime then he's gonna need to get more sustainable pretty soon! I doubt anyone would complain, but personally I'm quite happy that the club is still funding its own spending rather than relying on a sugar daddy. Although obviously that would change if we weren't being quite so successful. And in my opinion there is a difference between injecting capital, in the form of new players or a new stadium, and covering ongoing losses like they are doing at Chelsea and City. If the club doesn't have the income to pay the wages of the players it has signed, then I personally think that club has gone too far and is no longer being run as a football club, and more as a rich man's toy.
unfortunately, we'd all love to be idealistic,. Money is really power as cheesy as it sounds. Money got Qatar hte WC for all the worth the RULES did. Ireland with achance of getting a fairly handy tie and possibly France having to face portugal in the play off, all 4 teams were not good enough to go into the seeded comp finals. fair enough, Rules. FAir you say. What does Platini do, change the rules, seeding the playoffs. I won't even mention the direction given to officials before that game.. So you can see, Rules what do they give us, they give us the rules they want us to play by, rules that benefit the organsiation not the members, again Qatar getting the World cup, to the detriment of player conditions especially after a WC there I would say there will be a few underperformers in the following league season. If UEFA and FIFA can act in the manner they have publicly then how hte hell are stinking rich owners and corp owners going to to be marshalled?
How can you expect the governing officials to deal with it when they can't deal with what's wrong amongst themselves? I say we need Harvey Dent. He's the face to save Gotham. I mean football.
