Jump to content

they had it comin for a long time


Recommended Posts

I don't think Man Utd based their team on a massive influx of cash spent though, during the so called 'Premier League' era they started off with that core of players in Giggs, Scholes, Beckham and the Nevilles from their youth team and built from their didn't they? For me Man City's 'achievement' isn't the same, as Stevie quite rightly said you could get Stalybridge Celtic winning the league with the sort of money Man City's been throwing around.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mostly Tom theyve been very fortunate because of the tragedy in February 1958. Some would say they exploit this to make money. If you're keen on reading about this try Manchester United: The Betrayal of a Legend by Michael Crick and David Smith. The thing about that book is it was written in 1989, 3 years before the Premier League was formed. Its been going on a long time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mostly Tom theyve been very fortunate because of the tragedy in February 1958. Some would say they exploit this to make money. If you're keen on reading about this try Manchester United: The Betrayal of a Legend by Michael Crick and David Smith. The thing about that book is it was written in 1989, 3 years before the Premier League was formed. Its been going on a long time.

 

Good call.

 

Also, if anyone thinks that having the entire national media on their side doesnt give them an obviously massive advantage in absolutely everything commercial they ever do then that's a bit of a bizarre position to take. They benefit hugely from constantly being in the public consciousness. If you actually had to pay for that sort of advertising as a fan recruitment tool it would probably eclipse what City have spent on players.

 

Couldn't give a fuck tbh, it's a load of whinging at the end of the day. It's shit that they've had to spend that much to win but that bar was set by the clubs before them so blame them as much as anyone else. If it was us getting bankrolled we'd be telling critics to sling it, Man U included.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mostly Tom theyve been very fortunate because of the tragedy in February 1958. Some would say they exploit this to make money. If you're keen on reading about this try Manchester United: The Betrayal of a Legend by Michael Crick and David Smith. The thing about that book is it was written in 1989, 3 years before the Premier League was formed. Its been going on a long time.

 

That may or may not be true but this is the squad that they sent to Belfast for Harry Gregg's testimonial in front of just 14,000 fans, two days after losing the league title.

 

Squad

: Amos, Lindegaard; Evans, Ferdinand, Evra, Jones, Giverin, Fornasier; Giggs, Young, Park, Scholes, Cleverley, Valencia, Nani; Rooney, Chicharito, Owen, Berbatov.

 

That speaks volumes for them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That may or may not be true but this is the squad that they sent to Belfast for Harry Gregg's testimonial in front of just 14,000 fans, two days after losing the league title.

 

Squad

: Amos, Lindegaard; Evans, Ferdinand, Evra, Jones, Giverin, Fornasier; Giggs, Young, Park, Scholes, Cleverley, Valencia, Nani; Rooney, Chicharito, Owen, Berbatov.

 

 

That speaks volumes for them.

 

Even I'm not cynical enough to criticise that. Fergie is a stand up bloke, I'd imagine you can pretty much take him at his word and if he agrees to a friendly for one of the Munich survivors you can be sure he wouldnt take it lightly by sending the youth team. But it has to be said that Harry Gregg has regularly annihilated Manchester United FC (as they were in the late 50s and eaarly 60s) and Sir Matt Busby in particular for their harsh treatment of the other players who survived. Thats all in Michael Crick's book too. They kicked one lad who couldnt kick a ball ever again out of his club house, cant remember his name now. Albert Scanlon signed for us, but I dont think he did a lot tbh...perhaps Leazes saw him as a lad? ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

26 years of record transfer signings in a vain attempt to win their (or was it the media's) Holy Grail whilst having some of the dirtiest hacking bastards around. Man U can fuck off with their elitist 'history' shit. They're not alone though, Chelsea fans having a pop at Arsenal for not winning a trophy in the last six years or so, honestly, you have got to be kidding or have a very short term memory. Chelsea were having a decent period in an otherwise patchy club history when Roman came in and funded their title bids, I seriously doubt those titles and near misses would have occurred without the coin as Ken Bates knew they were up shit creek minus the paddle. 13,000 v Sheff Utd in Sky's all new shiny Premier League after 30,000* had watched their home LC tie against 2nd Div NUFC anyone?

*8,000 of that attendence were travelling Mags.

 

To Arsenal fans turning their noses up at Chelsea and Man City in a holier than thou attitude and claiming some sort of historical high ground, do they remember pre-Wenger or even pre-Graham? They were an average side and an average club, maybe your average Gunner knows as much about Martin Hayes, Brian Talbot and Stewart Robson as I do about the back of the moon but Arsenal have not always been this giant of the league that some seem to believe. I've said this before but all clubs have had their dodgy spells in less glamorous times and had some apathetic support through the years and Arsenal are no exception, (Goddard getting the winner at Highbury in front of 19,000). ;) As for their 'how well we've done in qualifying for the CL all these years patter', they have to be joking? Clubs like Man Utd, Arsenal, Liverpool and the European sides like Inter, Barcelona etc put pressure on UEFA to have this super duper competition which pays lots of money and attracts players and sponsorship money that non-CL clubs cannot therefore a way to break through this glass ceiling for other clubs is getting a rich man on board. Arsenal have had this advantage for about 15 years so spare me the hard luck stories.

 

Liverpool have have done their level best to squander this CL advantage and are 100% living off their 70's and 80's exploits since Roman and Sheik Monsieur came along, £25M a year kit deal? Nice if you can get it. Liverpool's glorious history dove-tailed nicely with having a (then) rich family owning their club. Man Utd were adored and respected by a far less tribal nation after their tragedy and like it or not that helped cement their stature which has ended up like a runaway juggernaut through the lucrative CL period and the modern marketing world not to mention a slavish media re-inventing them as the only club to be called 'United'. They did spend 26 years trying to buy the title though lest they forget.

 

Last time Sunderland had a good side they were known as the 'Bank of England' club. Money has always talked, so anyone getting all precious about new money has never looked at all histories of all clubs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

26 years of record transfer signings in a vain attempt to win their (or was it the media's) Holy Grail whilst having some of the dirtiest hacking bastards around. Man U can fuck off with their elitist 'history' shit. They're not alone though, Chelsea fans having a pop at Arsenal for not winning a trophy in the last six years or so, honestly, you have got to be kidding or have a very short term memory. Chelsea were having a decent period in an otherwise patchy club history when Roman came in and funded their title bids, I seriously doubt those titles and near misses would have occurred without the coin as Ken Bates knew they were up shit creek minus the paddle. 13,000 v Sheff Utd in Sky's all new shiny Premier League after 30,000* had watched their home LC tie against 2nd Div NUFC anyone?

*8,000 of that attendence were travelling Mags.

 

To Arsenal fans turning their noses up at Chelsea and Man City in a holier than thou attitude and claiming some sort of historical high ground, do they remember pre-Wenger or even pre-Graham? They were an average side and an average club, maybe your average Gunner knows as much about Martin Hayes, Brian Talbot and Stewart Robson as I do about the back of the moon but Arsenal have not always been this giant of the league that some seem to believe. I've said this before but all clubs have had their dodgy spells in less glamorous times and had some apathetic support through the years and Arsenal are no exception, (Goddard getting the winner at Highbury in front of 19,000). ;) As for their 'how well we've done in qualifying for the CL all these years patter', they have to be joking? Clubs like Man Utd, Arsenal, Liverpool and the European sides like Inter, Barcelona etc put pressure on UEFA to have this super duper competition which pays lots of money and attracts players and sponsorship money that non-CL clubs cannot therefore a way to break through this glass ceiling for other clubs is getting a rich man on board. Arsenal have had this advantage for about 15 years so spare me the hard luck stories.

 

Liverpool have have done their level best to squander this CL advantage and are 100% living off their 70's and 80's exploits since Roman and Sheik Monsieur came along, £25M a year kit deal? Nice if you can get it. Liverpool's glorious history dove-tailed nicely with having a (then) rich family owning their club. Man Utd were adored and respected by a far less tribal nation after their tragedy and like it or not that helped cement their stature which has ended up like a runaway juggernaut through the lucrative CL period and the modern marketing world not to mention a slavish media re-inventing them as the only club to be called 'United'. They did spend 26 years trying to buy the title though lest they forget.

 

Last time Sunderland had a good side they were known as the 'Bank of England' club. Money has always talked, so anyone getting all precious about new money has never looked at all histories of all clubs.

 

nailed on, absolutely correct from start to finish.

 

it won't be long before Man City are crowing just as unbearably as Man U fans have done, you don't need to be Mystic Meg to see that, and unlike Arsenal and ManU on a few occasions, they have nothing to be proud of this season or preach about others following the behaviour of some of their players.

Edited by LeazesMag
Link to post
Share on other sites

Great post hmhm.

 

Also, from a Manchester perspective, City have always been much more of a community club than Man U and they've kept that up even during their big money period tbf. Not that that ever gets any recognition outside of Mcr.

 

Man U is all about money first, second and third so it's no surprise they start bawling the instant that someone gets more than them to play with for a change. Diddums tbh, they can go and fuck themselves.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Even I'm not cynical enough to criticise that. Fergie is a stand up bloke, I'd imagine you can pretty much take him at his word and if he agrees to a friendly for one of the Munich survivors you can be sure he wouldnt take it lightly by sending the youth team. But it has to be said that Harry Gregg has regularly annihilated Manchester United FC (as they were in the late 50s and eaarly 60s) and Sir Matt Busby in particular for their harsh treatment of the other players who survived. Thats all in Michael Crick's book too. They kicked one lad who couldnt kick a ball ever again out of his club house, cant remember his name now. Albert Scanlon signed for us, but I dont think he did a lot tbh...perhaps Leazes saw him as a lad? ;)

 

:lol:

 

no I didn't. Noelie may have done though .........

Link to post
Share on other sites

26 years of record transfer signings in a vain attempt to win their (or was it the media's) Holy Grail whilst having some of the dirtiest hacking bastards around. Man U can fuck off with their elitist 'history' shit. They're not alone though, Chelsea fans having a pop at Arsenal for not winning a trophy in the last six years or so, honestly, you have got to be kidding or have a very short term memory. Chelsea were having a decent period in an otherwise patchy club history when Roman came in and funded their title bids, I seriously doubt those titles and near misses would have occurred without the coin as Ken Bates knew they were up shit creek minus the paddle. 13,000 v Sheff Utd in Sky's all new shiny Premier League after 30,000* had watched their home LC tie against 2nd Div NUFC anyone?

*8,000 of that attendence were travelling Mags.

 

To Arsenal fans turning their noses up at Chelsea and Man City in a holier than thou attitude and claiming some sort of historical high ground, do they remember pre-Wenger or even pre-Graham? They were an average side and an average club, maybe your average Gunner knows as much about Martin Hayes, Brian Talbot and Stewart Robson as I do about the back of the moon but Arsenal have not always been this giant of the league that some seem to believe. I've said this before but all clubs have had their dodgy spells in less glamorous times and had some apathetic support through the years and Arsenal are no exception, (Goddard getting the winner at Highbury in front of 19,000). ;) As for their 'how well we've done in qualifying for the CL all these years patter', they have to be joking? Clubs like Man Utd, Arsenal, Liverpool and the European sides like Inter, Barcelona etc put pressure on UEFA to have this super duper competition which pays lots of money and attracts players and sponsorship money that non-CL clubs cannot therefore a way to break through this glass ceiling for other clubs is getting a rich man on board. Arsenal have had this advantage for about 15 years so spare me the hard luck stories.

 

Liverpool have have done their level best to squander this CL advantage and are 100% living off their 70's and 80's exploits since Roman and Sheik Monsieur came along, £25M a year kit deal? Nice if you can get it. Liverpool's glorious history dove-tailed nicely with having a (then) rich family owning their club. Man Utd were adored and respected by a far less tribal nation after their tragedy and like it or not that helped cement their stature which has ended up like a runaway juggernaut through the lucrative CL period and the modern marketing world not to mention a slavish media re-inventing them as the only club to be called 'United'. They did spend 26 years trying to buy the title though lest they forget.

 

Last time Sunderland had a good side they were known as the 'Bank of England' club. Money has always talked, so anyone getting all precious about new money has never looked at all histories of all clubs.

 

A genuinely good post. Makes a change from the usual 8 paragraph rambles about nowt from people that get an automatic 'great post!'

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't believe people are having a go at City for buying the league :lol: Man U invented that approach in the Premier League Era!

 

There was a bloke on 5Live last night that said the people who are saying this about City are blinkered. Look at Barcelona, Real Madrid, Bayern etc. If you want to compete in the league you have to spend a serious amount of cash. Man Utd have done for years previous, but since the sale of Ronaldo they havent and look whats happening to them. Yeh, finishing runners up is great but if you look they wont be challenging as strongly next season IMO.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Man Utd make their own money, they're big because they are. Man City have cheated. Well they haven't cheated but they have had an artificial advantage over everyone else. Who decides what a big club is, it's certainly not the media, if you win trophies and have a good history you're a big club. Until Blackburn, in this country none of it was artificial investment, I'm sorry like it just doesn't sit right with me that clubs can overtake not just us, but everyone else because a few Arabs are bored and have nothing better to do with their money.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Man Utd make their own money, they're big because they are. Man City have cheated. Well they haven't cheated but they have had an artificial advantage over everyone else. Who decides what a big club is, it's certainly not the media, if you win trophies and have a good history you're a big club. Until Blackburn, in this country none of it was artificial investment, I'm sorry like it just doesn't sit right with me that clubs can overtake not just us, but everyone else because a few Arabs are bored and have nothing better to do with their money.

 

Aye its wrong tbh but no going back now!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have the Arabs gained their money as legitimately as Louis Edwards did? How could Man U afford to break a transfer record that stood for most of a decade when they signed Bryan Robson? Could Newcastle have afforded a million pound player in 1980-81. Until then Manu's record was good, but not brilliant (to be fair no teams dominated at the time, Liverpool aside-ish) and Robson didnt make them much more than a good cup team (if that) during the 80s. But the fact they also took Stapleton from Arsenal and Birtles from Forest about the same period marks them out as huge spenders for the times. Louis Edwards was a middle class millionaire meat importer and Liverpool were backed by the Moores family who owned Littlewoods, the countries biggest football pools company (google it kids ;) ) That was a significant advantage over other clubs, its just that manu squandered it with Dave Sexton and Ron Atkinson not being good enough. The finance was there to dominate. And of course the "Munich" factor helped too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Man Utd make their own money, they're big because they are. Man City have cheated. Well they haven't cheated but they have had an artificial advantage over everyone else. Who decides what a big club is, it's certainly not the media, if you win trophies and have a good history you're a big club. Until Blackburn, in this country none of it was artificial investment, I'm sorry like it just doesn't sit right with me that clubs can overtake not just us, but everyone else because a few Arabs are bored and have nothing better to do with their money.

 

You're love in with Man U, Fergie and Colleen Rooney is fucking weird Stevie

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have the Arabs gained their money as legitimately as Louis Edwards did? How could Man U afford to break a transfer record that stood for most of a decade when they signed Bryan Robson? Could Newcastle have afforded a million pound player in 1980-81. Until then Manu's record was good, but not brilliant (to be fair no teams dominated at the time, Liverpool aside-ish) and Robson didnt make them much more than a good cup team (if that) during the 80s. But the fact they also took Stapleton from Arsenal and Birtles from Forest about the same period marks them out as huge spenders for the times. Louis Edwards was a middle class millionaire meat importer and Liverpool were backed by the Moores family who owned Littlewoods, the countries biggest football pools company (google it kids ;) ) That was a significant advantage over other clubs, its just that manu squandered it with Dave Sexton and Ron Atkinson not being good enough. The finance was there to dominate. And of course the "Munich" factor helped too.

 

correct, no point in people getting all moralistic about money and proclaiming proudly that you aren't sinking to their levels, because at the end of the day, football is all about money, money can buy you success in life, the people with the money rule the world, the people with the money have the means to rule football, nobody complained about money when we bought Alan Shearer and they won't moan if we ever pull off such a signing again which would be fantastic if we ever do.

 

I don't like Man City winning the league, I accept reluctantly they have bought it [ because I'm jealous and I admit that I am jealous without having to make comments bathed in bitterness about it ] but it is sad they have won the league on a footballing level because of the behaviour of two of their players in particular that have disgraced the game. I would rather clubs won the prizes who perform and behave like good or great professional, disciplined football clubs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...