Don't think we can complain about Spurs there. THey didn't stop running, especially

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter

That is the first time I have seen City put under any real pressure in months. Forest had a go for a while but didn't look terribly convincing.

Really shows you how poor the league is overall. The gap between the top sides and the majority of the rest is enormous.

---

They were there for the taking that 1st half, they looked like we did against Villa, not at the races.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PSRB

They were there for the taking that 1st half, they looked like we did against Villa, not at the races.

---

I only watched the last half an hour. For a second I got Michael Thomas.vibes when Son went through. Only briefly 😞

We've done all we could do. It just isn't enough. They're unstoppable

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter

I only watched the last half an hour. For a second I got Michael Thomas.vibes when Son went through. Only briefly 😞

We've done all we could do. It just isn't enough. They're unstoppable

---

1st half, they could barely string a pass together.

Still amazed they didn't even have a look at KdB's position for the 1st goal, looked mighty close to offside.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter

I only watched the last half an hour. For a second I got Michael Thomas.vibes when Son went through. Only briefly 😞

---

I had the first part of my original Michael Thomas vibes in that I was out of my chair in expectation. Unfortunately the second part where I jump up and smash my head against the ceiling didn't happen. Sad scenes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter

United had a gigantic financial advantage over everyone in the 90s. OK, it's not cheating, but it provides the same advantage.

I believe we spent a few Bob in the 30s as well.

---

But it was legal. There were a big five in the late 80s, but when stadiums had to become all-seater, arsenal, Liverpool, Spurs and Everton all saw their capacities decline from c.60k to 40k or less while Old Trafford was able to expand to 75k because it's built-in Mancunian slumland. that gave them a major advantage, as did the fact that their golden generation of kids coincided with Premier League and Champions League money.

So yes, they had a major advantage but they didn't cheat. It's not the same as getting paid varsity over market rate for a sponsorship deal with a company connected to the clubs owners that is nothing more than a brass name plaque in a Mayfair office, a company that does nothing and has no income or turnover. That's just simply cheating.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ganpati's Goonerz--AFC's Aboriginal Fertility Cult

But it was legal. There were a big five in the late 80s, but when stadiums had to become all-seater, arsenal, Liverpool, Spurs and Everton all saw their capacities decline from c.60k to 40k or less while Old Trafford was able to expand to 75k because it's built-in Mancunian slumland. that gave them a major advantage, as did the fact that their golden generation of kids coincided with Premier League and Champions League money.

So yes, they had a major advantage but they didn't cheat. It's not the same as getting paid varsity over market rate for a sponsorship deal with a company connected to the clubs owners that is nothing more than a brass name plaque in a Mayfair office, a company that does nothing and has no income or turnover. That's just simply cheating.

---

I agree. I think the point I was trying to make is that the legality (or otherwise) shouldn't actually make any difference to how you view the achievements of the coach and the team.

Pep has had a huge illegal advantage, Fergie had a huge legal one. On the pitch, the financial advantage amounts to the same thing so to deride one achievement and celebrate the other doesn't make sense.

I think you can acknowledge the quality of Pep's work, and the brilliance of his sides, while at the same time calling the club a bunch of cheating ****s :-)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter

The gap between Man City and Arsenal and the rest is enormous.

---

Fixed that for you, p :thumbup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IUFG

Fixed that for you, p :thumbup:

---

I'll allow it 😁

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter

I agree. I think the point I was trying to make is that the legality (or otherwise) shouldn't actually make any difference to how you view the achievements of the coach and the team.

Pep has had a huge illegal advantage, Fergie had a huge legal one. On the pitch, the financial advantage amounts to the same thing so to deride one achievement and celebrate the other doesn't make sense.

I think you can acknowledge the quality of Pep's work, and the brilliance of his sides, while at the same time calling the club a bunch of cheating ****s :-)

---

No, I'm afraid. For years it was argued that AW (for instance) simply couldn't AFFORD to play better football.

In a word, **** Pep. And his clubs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redgunamo

No, I'm afraid. For years it was argued that AW (for instance) simply couldn't AFFORD to play better football.

In a word, **** Pep. And his clubs.

---

Well.... I can admire a good side, even if I hate them.

And, just for the record, I would choose City cheating off the pitch over United who spent a decade cheating on it.