It's becoming clear that City are the new Utd. We may laugh at their drubbing of the Scum but

[Mo Britain less Europe]

consider this - when the ref ended the game on 50 mins by incorrectly sending off Rose an awarding a penalty a game which could have been 1-1 then (Dawson's goal was good) went 0-2 and spur a man down. Game over.

Their 6-3 against us equally flattered them. In the last few minute we had a good goal disallowed and they had a very dodgy penalty awarded. The 6-3 "thrashing" should have been 5-4, not such a thrashing eh?

They are a very good team and are playing very well, but they are also getting that little help which will put them out of sight.

[CrossGun]

Clear dive by Rose. So that decision evened itself out over the course of 30 seconds.

City getting a lot of big decisions. Fairly sure there were two goals incorrectly ruled offside for Arsenal and a pen not given. Then the Liverpool game they had a goal disallowed for offside. Tiote goal too...lot of big calls going their way.

[TRENT COLTON]

It's an outrage

[redgunamo]

[Lar d'Arse]

Citeh will never be anything close to Man Utd. They are far closer to Chelsea. Not a club that can survive without billionaire benefactor support as yet.

The Glazers may be coonts but at least Man Utd generate their own money.

[Mo Britain less Europe]

[redgunamo]

[Mc Gooner]

[Mc Gooner]

[redgunamo]

hadn't you noticed.

[Lar d'Arse]

but they couldn't care less whether their fans are glory hunters or not. If they are willing to swell the club's coffers then fair enough and we would have done the same.

They are probably a little fortunate that their success coincided with the huge growth in the games finances following the establishment of the Premiership in 1992 and Sky's TV money shortly thereafter. They were also very fortunate that their ground was in a Salford wasteland and easy to develop at relatively small cost.

I can't stand a large proportion of their plastic fans, and I detested Ferguson for the obnoxious bully that he is/was but I can't deny Ferguson's achievements and as a football club they have tended to do things the right way rather than just relying on the wealth of a billionaire benefactor. Sure they have had plenty of money but for the most part they have earned it.

[Mc Gooner]

Some success earned I grant you but a very significant amount of that success is due in no small measure to the media, FA, refs making life easier

Fergie Time
Mike Riley
The ****e they got away with to end our 49 game unbeaten run
Baby Faces Assassin and Sol
Shrek diving
The Ginger Cünt punching (iirc) Freddie
Etc
Etc

Yes, I'm bitter and grudge them it

[Mo Britain less Europe]

[Lar d'Arse]

Its hard to win anything without a little luck going your way but you can't be as successful as they have been consistently for over 20 years without doing a lot right also.

[Lar d'Arse]

[Mc Gooner]

Just because I'm paranoid does not mean they weren't out to help them

[Ashberto]

Graham Poll once admitted that Ferguson was able to influence him in their favour, and the 2004 game with Mike Riley was not refereed fairly, for anyone who cares to examine the evidence. In fact it was an absolute shocker. I understand the desire to not be 'paranoid' about such things, and agree that we should be balanced and not biased in our own assessments, but Ferguson had influence over managers as well, as was seen with the spat with Alan Pardew, where he effectively said "I made you. I own you".

It's not just opposition fans that feel that he had power over referees. Some Man United fans admit this too, albeit in the context of his relationship the the Glazers and how he got some very average teams to win the title.

[Lar d'Arse]

I acknowledged he was an obnoxious bully. But having strength of character was good for his team and his club. Not a crime.

The Riley match in 04 was a mockery but in the scheme of things you are always going to get the occasional game where refs have shockers. Remember your man Poll v Newcastle a few years earlier at Highbury when then won 3-1 I think. Several appalling decisions. I think Henry was charged and got a ban for his entirely justified reaction.

But we have also had games where refs decisions have gone in our favour.

I happen to believe that there was a brief period in the late 1990s when Sky owned a significant stake in Man United that there was not just the possibility of them having influence in terms of how they presented clubs in the primary broadcast media but several examples of this occurring to United's benefit. That was far more worrying than anything Ferguson may have done. Thankfully the holding they had was sold before too long.

But my primary point is that I do not compare Man Utd to either Chelsea or to Man Citeh. Both of the latter were bought by people with more money than 99% of other football clubs can ever dream of and spent what is small change to them making their acquisitions successful. I will never put Man Utd in that category. I will never treat any success that is enjoyed by fans of Chelsea or Man Citeh in the same way as I view any success Man Utd have had, or that we have had (or may have in the future).

Even when Blackburn won the League they won it because of the passion a fan had and was prepared to invest almost his entire fortune making his side competitive. His money eventually ran out and at least Walker had a feeling for his club. Neither Abramovich nor Mansour had probably even heard of their clubs before looking for something to buy (possibly a slight exaggeration).

[Ashberto]

and at the risk of Godwinising the discussion we might describe Stalin and Hitler as having "huge strength of character" but I agree with your main point.

Chelsea and Man City have had their success bought for them way beyond the scale of any previous era (including Liverpool and Arsenal), to the point that they can spend fortunes several times over and afford to fail again and again until they have a manager and group of players who have got thing right. And Man City have really got it right now. http://www.awimb.com/images/smiley_icons/ohwell.gif

[Lar d'Arse]

much as it pains me to admit it.

Chelsea Mk1 under Mourinho used to bore other teams into losing. Even if Man Citeh have bought their way to success it is hard not to admire the way they play.

[Lar d'Arse]

of Hitler and Stalin, Ferguson stuck to something less genocidal than they did.

[redgunamo]

Let's see if their next hundred years of existence is somewhat more fruitful than their first, shall we, before we overreact. Otherwise they may start accusing us of having carved up the game for our own benefit ;-)

[Mo Britain less Europe]

[Ashberto]

Man City fans enjoy their cheap tickets, subsidised by an oil state, while sneering at Arsenal prices, with the media cheering them on.

Arsene got it spot on when he said they if you had 20 clubs all bankrolled by oligarchs and oil states, those owners would eventually come to an agreement to stop each of them killing each other over endlessly inflated costs.

Man City had their stadium paid for by the taxpayer. Arsenal had theirs paid for by their own fans. Meanwhile, every other club just dreams of a Mansour/Abramovich to buy their way to glory.

[redgunamo]

whatever cash billionaires spend on football is peanuts to them? And it's not as if the money is coming out of their own pockets, in any case. Supporters are footing the bill; me, basically, buying all the latest replica junk for my four sons every five minutes and sending them games on the Eurostar.

And it's all very well for the Premier League Top Twenty but what about when Brentford or Swindon Town decide they would like to win the European Cup too? How are they supposed to do this when a cabal including the likes of Bayern München and Manchester United and Barcelona have been colluding with UEFA for years over the rules and putting all their best men onto all the committees that can decide these things in their favour. Level playing field?

I'm just not sure which side we're on here, or even which battle we are supposed to be fighting. Unless we want to have our cake and eat it too. Which would be perfectly acceptable, of course.

[redgunamo]

than against them.

1. FC Nuremberg have won nine Bundesliga titles and they are second on the list behind Bayern who are currently on 23. Are you going to argue that that's all down to honest officiating and no financial chicanery whatsoever?

Surely what that league needs is more oil money, not less. Oh, but they can't have it because they made a rule whereby foreign ownership is restricted. One wonders who was in charge of framing that one then .. :rubchin:

It's football and either we want to play this game or we don't, in my view.

[Ashberto]

As for the clubs at the wrong end of the ladder, if you're Carlisle United you have the gravity of Manchester to hold you back, and if you're Workington Town you have the main local city of Carlisle to contend with. If you're Conniston FC then your catchment area of a few hundred is certainly going to make things difficult. That's the North-West, arguably the home of football.

Down here, Charlton are not much bigger than Brentford, and they got to a PL mid-table position and then some the impatient element of their fans hounded Curbishley out. Ultimately, big city clubs are privileged, as are decent-sized single-club towns (so wd Notts Forest), but when a club hires a great manager who hires great players to bring that club forward without infinite bankrolling, I think they are entitled to enjoy whatever success they have without being told they should allow every other club the chance to crush them with free money.

[redgunamo]

despite being from the wrong side of the tracks; matching our own luck in being from the right side. If you follow me.

Perhaps we should all just be grateful that Liverpool and Manchester United haven't been bought by Dubai yet? And Spurs too, of course.

Ultimately, reducing the beautiful game to tedious discussions about money diminishes us all*.


*He says, RtBGtTDAM :homer: