Spike

A lot of English people are typically impressed by players that run a lot.

@LFCMadLad love u even though we both have no idea what the other is talking about. Probably just like in real life with the accents n all xoxo ps: danny is ghey

Don't hit your head on thebedside table when you lie down.

What goalposts have I moved!? First people talk about success, than stadium sell outs! I'm just talking about perception, you are the one that keeps bringing in random tidbits

You haven't argued against any point I've made mate! In fact I agree with the points you have made ffs. If you go ask nearly any American the fundamental differences between Chelsea and Liverpool are they will probably reply 'one is red and one is blue' and nothing else. I'm not saying that is the case but due to cultural differences perception isn't the same and Arsenal, Chelsea, United, Liverpool, etc are all lumped together without much difference. Trust me! I know this, I've lived in these countries and I know these people and how they think. To me and you of course there is a difference, but we are fans of the sport not some fairweather wih a passing interest

It is like people read what they want to read, then tell me I was trying to say something else.

You still have no idea! I'm not talking about popularity, I'm talking about perception.

I never said there wasn't a difference and I never said I didn't know the difference. I asked you a question; are you okay with Manchester United buying success in a post-Fergie world? I know you aren't okay with Chelsea doing it, and that is fine.

Athletic are playing fast and loose by what is 'Basque' these days as well. To be consodered Basque all it takes it to play in the youth team of any Basque based club, Or in Laporte's case have Basque great grandparents. Your son could play for Athletic if he played for Alaves' youth team...('Ive been reading up) Back to the other debate, you essentially back up what I said in the 'Mourinho' thread when I said to Madlad that 'to foreighers there is no difference to Liverpool, Chelsea, etc' because the context of what makes them special to you doesn't exist. I'm not saying the clubs are the same but the perception outside is usually so. People have an idyllic view of what their club is and they dont want it to be another marketing brand.

You miss the point again. I'm arguing against all spending to win in sports. It is like you have an idea of what you think I'm trying to say and then argue against it. Maybe it is a European thing. I'm not saying one of the other is better I'm saying both are unethical and it is hypocritical to allow one and condemn the other.

Then what are you saying? It is wholesome and okay to financially buy success as long as their was prior success?

They'd wouldn't be anything currently without the money. Fergie also had quite a pretty penny to spend, one of the best of all time but he could dish out a hefty fee when he wanted. Prying away players from direct rivals like Cantona. And because of Fergie's success United can bully other teams. Living off the past. Of course money got Liverpool that modern success! Xabi Alonso, Fernando Torres, Javier Mascherano, Morientes, etc didn't grow up playing street football on Merseyside. I can concede all the pre-Premier League success but even then winning gets you money, money gets you better scouts, better staff, better facilities, better players, and all that get you winning, and winning get you money, and money gets you better scouts, better staff, better facilities, better players, and all that get you winning, and winning get you money, and money ad nuaseum. The players still have to play, the manager still has to manager, any win is a deserved win. Don't act like any modern team is made up of grassroots locals that have been with the club their entire lives and through blood, sweat, and tears win it all. It's the ultimate hypocrisy. If Liverpool had won the league with a bunch of local lads the Club had nurtured from youth into winners, then I'd say it was deserved in the manner you are describing.

Why is it okay for Man United to buy and financially bully the league because of what people no longer at the club did 30 years ago when the club got big at the right time? They are still buying the league just like Chelsea do. How many times did they break the fee record? Every time they did they just weakened their rivals so they couod keep winning, and everytime they won they could keep financially bullying other teams. The system has been broke from the start and has never been set up to give clubs a fair chance of winning, ever. Buying players is the wound of european football. @Danny At least if my hockey team goes bad it is from bad management, and if they win its from great manangment and I know their is always a chance they will come good. They don't get bullied by other teams and they have all the same chances of other teams.

Liverpool!? They never won and they have outside investment as well... United, Arsenal, Liverpool, all their success is based off money earned from the past success. It's a snowball running down a hill, it only gets larger. That is the problem with European sports once a team gets on top they rarely fall. It would just be United with another 8 titles. Winning begets winning. That is why Juve, Bayern, Real, Barcelona, United, Liverpool, Celtic, Rangers, etc are all the dominat trophies hauls of their respective nations, once a club starts winning they usually set themmselves up for a future of winning.

It is only going to be worse; but the point is since that technology has evolved and Brian Clough paid for the first million dollar footballer; it's naive to think this wouldn't have happened regardless of oil or state clubs. Pick your poison, Manchester United dominating for eternity or oil disrupting the process. At the end of the day it is fucked, one is great because it had the luck to dominate at the start if the PL and the other is foreign money. Unless of course you can wait for the occasional Jack Walker but that is steel money... Or is it different when Berlusconi and Morratti, do it?

I bet people have been saying that since the 60s.

An academies purpose is to make money.

You say that but fail to take into consideration that the youngsters are sold at a premium to purchase players for the first team.

The bad: I did dishes for 30 minutes. Most of them weren't mine. The good: I went to my first game at Wrigley Field last night!

It leaked in the corner of the unit. I'm guessing that the water leaked up through the corner because it's the only thing damaged out of everything. and the stuff on top of it is fine. Ahhhhhh, the discs are probably fine and usable but that's not the point. I collect music and I've always had pride in having a nice shelf full of my albums that friends and family can see and put music on when they visit. What's the point in having them all in a stupid disc folder?! There are even some old/rare local Chicago albums that probably didn't even get pressed more than once.

I'd punch you in the jaw without a second fucking thought. I'm not even kidding, that is how angry I am right now.

I'm about to fucking cry, I'm so angry and upset. My dearly beloved record collection which was in storage has been water damaged. A collection upwards of $500, with albums from my childhood that I did chores to afford have effectively been destroyed. CDs! The water damage is so severe the jewel cases themselves and the discs are growing fucking mold. FUCKING MOLD ON THE DISCS. I've loved and taken care of these things since I was a child, and there are albums that my wife feels the same way about. Some are second generation handy downs from family members, gifts. I feel like a chunk of childhood has been spat on. If the motherfucks don't pay out compensation for this, I'm going mental.

He is also a wife beater

You should ask that question to PSG first. He left for free!