You've already been more than supplied with them. However,you choose to ignore that, and still repeat the same old excuses.
ffp for pl
- Thread starter totsfan
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
You've already been more than supplied with them. However,you choose to ignore that, and still repeat the same old excuses.
You really are upset, must be awful for you not only are you slipping down the London rankings but along come City with a new stadium, bigger crowds and winning things, I feel your pain! in the meantime start getting your stats ready for QPR, once they see through Hughes and get a decent manager I think you are going to need them, then you have the Hammers with a new stadium, Fulham playing some good football, a picture is emerging that's not good for you, but on the bright side in 22years when it is 26-27 you will be able to say to your grandchildren we were once beating them 26-5!!!!!!!!!!!
I was going to carry on this debate - but I've decided to leave it. I don't know why I get sucked into his sort of stuff TBH, anyway, I'm leaving it now, because it's just not worth it.
EDIT I see DL has quoted what I wrote, but as I say I regret writing it now, because it's all so pointless. anyway, that's it for me on this subject.
I retract all that I've written on this subject, City and Chelsea have never been in Spurs shadow, they always been on about our level, whatever makes people happy.
I just get so wound up about things that don't actually matter, I don't know why I do it. Just stupidity on my part I'm afraid.
So not only did you not know that Spurs were vastly superior to City before you got your lucky lottery wins, you also didn't know that we were much bigger than Chelsea for the vast majority of the history of professional football in this country.
For over a hundred years we were bigger than Chelsea and it wasn't till they got their lucky jackpot numbers come up, that they became bigger than us. Some would argue they're not bigger than us, to this day, but I leave that to them
How amazing this amnesia of yours about what actually happened in football before your and the other 'sugar daddy' club got lucky. Both of your clubs lagged well behind us in terms of trophies, style, glamour and support. Both were very much in our shadow for many years. Chelsea never actually went down to Div 3, but they were a so-so 2nd div club for quite a few seasons.
Anyway, happy to be of help again in your football education.
I don't need a book, because I know a lot about football history, far more than you obviously. So it's time for you to run off back to school now, you never know you might learn something, but considering the lack of knowledge you've demonstrated so far it's unlikely
Chelsea and City were never in your shadow at all
In United and Arsenals? Yes Everton and Liverpool? Yes.
I don't think we lost a game against Spurs from about 1990 to 2006. 19 years unbeaten at your ground and 22 years and counting since defeat at SB.
You can only really be in the shadow of a club that has endured significantly more success than you in which case Arsenal were winning league titles, nearly always beating us. United the same minus the latter.
Being more successful doesn't necessarily make you bigger, when Liverpool were winning everything in sight people still considered United to be the bigger club and rightly.
Nobody would consider Villa a bigger club than Everton or City or even Spurs
Be fair, i think most people over the last 30 years would consider Spurs to be a bigger club than City, the only difference now is spending power not world wide fame or support.
I think this should settle any argument about City getting within FFP regs anytime soon.
http://www.goal.com/en-gb/news/2896/premier-league/2012/09/15/3376783/-
http://www.goal.com/en-gb/news/2896/premier-league/2012/09/15/3376783/-
Domestically Spurs are a huge club with a solid fanbase. At a rough estimate I believe outside the old "Sky 4", Spurs are easily in the top 3 best supported clubs in the country.
My only contradiction to GHoddle10's claim is that City nor Chelsea were in their shadow.
To be in the shadow of a team is to see a team consistently win trophy after trophy whilst you flounder in mediocrity.
Right now Spurs are not in Arsenal's shadow, Everton are not in Liverpool's shadow, City are not in United's shadow no matter what fans of the latter say.
From 1985-2000 Chelsea won 2 FA Cups, Spurs won 1 Carling Cup. In that 15 year period I'd hardly say we lived in your shadow albeit you were a better team than us for half of it and more established.
GHoddle10 (rightly IMO) believes Chelsea had a better season than Spurs because we won 2 trophies that's why I find his argument City were in their shadow a bit strange.
I didn't say we did, currently renting to see how things pan out but will probably need something bigger! how's your Olympic stadium bid doing?
