If City win the title tomorrow it would be such a breath fresh air if some of us could just wish Nasri well. There is no one on this board who wouldnt change jobs if they were offered twice the money....as for what he's supposed to have said...well i wouldnt be surprised if the papers had a lot to do with that.
He's basically insulted the whole club via the media, we have every right to feel aggrieved with him.
Im not sure exactly what he said but I find it extremely difficult to believe that a sportsman making millions of pounds per year would do or say anything to insult hundreds of thousands of fans, especially of his ex club....it just doesnt make sense...its not as if he will gain anything out of it....hence why i think the papers have twisted quotes etc...its in the medias interest to create anomosity/hatred. Im trying to change my Avatar...cant seem to find the setting (probably because im using the ipad...will try on laptop)
Nasri is a **** Citeh are Money-Whore with Arab Money United are United (nuff said) Rather United won it than Citeh, because it would be a disgrace to all teams that a team like Citeh can win it
Of course I would change jobs for twice the money, but if I was already being paid 50k per week, then getting 100k instead would make little difference to me.
If he had just moved in June, kept his mouth shut and behaved with class, no one would begrudge him success. However, he hung on until the last moment so that he could extract the most money out of City and didn't care that he left us in the lurch. Then to add insult to injury, he basically said, I care about me and I don't care about Arsenal at all. At that point all I can do is say the same thing in return. I don't care about a Manchester City bench warmer. If there is karma in the world his career is going down the toilet.
I don't see the problem some of you have with Nasri. He pretty much told the club what he wanted to see - investment in the club. He saw Jenkinson and Gervinho - so he buggered off. Meanwhile he saw Aguero go to City - no brainer. I think some Arsenal fans like to deny the problems at the club and that a player can actually leave for genuine reasons and not be a money grabber. You would have an argument if in early 2010 Nasri had not spoken of what he wanted to see at the club. We have only ourselves to blame for losing Nasri - we showed no ambition in the time he was here so why should he stay ?
City winning is no different from Chavski winning...or the Galacticos winning la liga back in the days..they all practically bought the league...and let's not pretend that money wasn't a factor in United's dominance either. If leaving the club amounts to shafting then so did a whole host of other players who left us for pastures new. As for twitter, I'd be surprised if anyone can quote anything which justifies even half the level of vitriol he gets. Whether or not getting £100k a week makes any difference in ones life compared to getting £50k a week is completely different to saying you would actually decline and say no to getting an extra £50k per week (approx an extra £2.6m per year)...those who would are lying or are plain silly. Yes it was disappointing he left so soon...but some of the reaction from some fans is irrational to the point of being bitter.
I dont think we can really blame NAsri for leaving, but we can blame him for opening his trap once he left.
Maybe you could say it's dirty oil money that should really go into improving their sh!tty 3rd world cess-pitt of a country?
Abu Dhabi is far from being a cess pit/third world country (its a city anyway)..frequently listed as one of the world's richest cities...its 420,000 citizens are worth on average $17 million dollars each. These cititzens have invested a total of $1 trillion in overseas assets. That's one thousand billion, making the Man City investment look like pocket change. Also, the oil from which all this money comes isn't dirty because it actually does exist under their own soil i.e. not stolen. Something tells me that some of the Man City hatred stems from ignorance...or perhaps there's more to it than meets the eye. http://tendtotravel.com/2010/11/the-worlds-richest-city-abu-dhabi/ http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2007/03/19/8402357/index.htm
All that oil is owned by a few wealthy men in a population of.... millions? They all have the same right to it. I know full well that Abu Dhabi appears modern, and has brand spanking new skycrapers, but who do you think builds them? There is a massive underclass. The gap between rich and poor is staggering.
You just called Abu Dhabi a 3rd world cess pit of a country when actually EVERY single one of it's citizens is worth on average $17 million! It doesn't have a population of millions...each one of its approx 420,000 citizens is a multi millionaire. The oil is under their own city-state so they don't have to share it with anyone from another country...do we have a right over the USA's oil just because we share the same Anglo Saxon heritage? Thats where you're getting confused...you're looking at their ethnicity not their nationality...that's the problem....not that it justifies the initial spiteful comment. As for who builds it, yes the migrant workers are poor but they only chose to go there to find work...without that option they'd probably have no work in their own country....that is no different from the poor American migrant workers or Russian migrant workers who do not see a penny of the Glazier's and Abramovich's money. So tell me, going back to the original question...why is Man City's money dirtier than Chelsea's, Man Utd's etc?
Me tell you? I didn't make the claim. Bill Gates and a penniless pauper are worth on average 31 billion. That statement equally makes light of a rich-poor divide. What do you mean by "they" when you talk about who owns the oil? They as in who? Everyone in Abu Dhabi, or a few extraordinarily wealthy individuals? Its population appears to be more like 900,000.
