Happy Blue Posted July 27, 2017 Share Posted July 27, 2017 Standard reaction to City beating Real Madrid 4-1 ...it was the same nonsense when we beat Barcalona, Munich, PSG and Monaco Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirBalon Posted July 27, 2017 Author Share Posted July 27, 2017 37 minutes ago, Cicero said: Are you kidding? Considering they tipped him to win the league last year. Failed to do so let alone win anything, and the media created the concept that "Pep needs his own players", making out he is the greatest manager of all time or some bollocks whilst ignoring the fact he failed to adapt with the players at his disposal and ruled out how other clubs would fair if Klopp, Conte, Poch, and Mourinho "Got their own players". Praised for implementing youth yet on the verge of completely a 300 million transfer window. Has 'His players', so most undoubtedly will be tipped to 'walk the league'. It would be glorious if he failed just as last season. Mate... I'm criticising him (Guardiola) more than the next man. That's why I posted the thread I did and in my social life I'm no fan of his apart from the work he done at Barcelona which for those that don't understand absolutely anything about FC Barcelona, their situation at the time and his work in the youth setups... They know nothing! What he done will go down in history because not only did he do the obvious which is what everyone saw and coupled with trademark football... He dominated the scene! Anyhow... From there on inwards he's become a pain in the backside like Mourinho is. A person that thinks more of himself than is necessary... Someone that's searching for adulation of which I'm always dubious about. But all the same... Anyone WISHING for someone else to fail... !!! Hey! Do you get where I'm going? Anyone else wishing him to fail... Then I'm gonna question him! I'm gonna question him even more if that person and his or her support is from a club that has absolutely NOTHING whatsoever to do with what he's achieved and the ridiculous bickering he may have been involved in. It seems to me as is mostly the case, that it's all down to some sort of envy or some sort of invented psychosis that needs attending to. That's why I asked why? If I go all fairy on Pochettino or Zidane (I actually have reasons to), they're gonna ask me why! Not that I'd do that because I've applauded both... But they're gonna ask me what the reason is. If you're in a position where you've been alien to football for the past 10 years, then I apologise for the remark. If you're a football fan that's ventured outside the bubble of your club and are just in your criticism, then you're not going to make a ridiculous statement like that. Anyhow... Anyone is allowed to say what they want and I'm going to add my own. I hope Klopp fails miserably because lets be clear and honest about it all... He isn't half a clown with all of his antics and isn't half overrated for having done very little in the grand scheme of things. (I don't feel this, but I'm sure if this was a real statement, I'd be pulled up on it). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LFCMadLad Posted July 27, 2017 Share Posted July 27, 2017 I'd much rather see Mourinho fail. His meltdowns really are hilarious 😂 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inverted Posted July 27, 2017 Share Posted July 27, 2017 Yeah 20 minutes ago, LFCMadLad said: I'd much rather see Mourinho fail. His meltdowns really are hilarious 😂 Same, if somebody's gonna spend a shitload of money, I'd rather they did it by buying as much technical ability and pace as they can and then playing attacking football. As opposed to buying a bunch of 6'2 monsters and elbowing your way to silverware. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cicero Posted July 27, 2017 Share Posted July 27, 2017 Fuck sake SirBalon can you not just make a brief reply for once? Literally everything you've written could have been summarised in a paragraph at most. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spike Posted July 27, 2017 Share Posted July 27, 2017 It'd be pretty bloody hilarious if United and City play shite next season. You'd think the clubs would learn after being so trigger happy with transfers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spike Posted July 27, 2017 Share Posted July 27, 2017 I love how no one gives two fucks about City, it is all about the manager! Says a lot about the club when it is just a blank slate for the manager to be projected onto. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Artful Dodger Posted July 27, 2017 Share Posted July 27, 2017 Like Chelsea then, two clubs clamouring for validation but will never be considered great clubs. Shame, Manchester City especially have a wonderful history and loyal fanbase. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spike Posted July 27, 2017 Share Posted July 27, 2017 1 minute ago, The Artful Dodger said: Like Chelsea then, two clubs clamouring for validation but will never be considered great clubs. Shame, Manchester City especially have a wonderful history and loyal fanbase. Not really, you seem inparticular quite hateful of Chelsea, that is quite different to the indifference I mentioned earlier. ManCity are just kind of there, I really don't think it is anywhere near as disliked as Chelsea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Artful Dodger Posted July 27, 2017 Share Posted July 27, 2017 I like all the kings of the kings road stories, me old man was Chelsea so I've got a more meaningful relationship with them I suppose and Man City as antagonists to Manchester United will always have some of my sympathy. Modern Chelsea to me is stuck with the Mourinho image. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LFCMadLad Posted July 27, 2017 Share Posted July 27, 2017 I don't particularly like either club but I prefer City over Chelsea every time. I must admit though that I've never really met a Chelsea fan in real life but the Chelsea fans on here (barring one who I won't mention by name) are by and large a pretty decent bunch if I'm honest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spike Posted July 27, 2017 Share Posted July 27, 2017 3 minutes ago, The Artful Dodger said: I like all the kings of the kings road stories, me old man was Chelsea so I've got a more meaningful relationship with them I suppose and Man City as antagonists to Manchester United will always have some of my sympathy. Modern Chelsea to me is stuck with the Mourinho image. I'd say nearly every club has an interesting history. For instance, I don't know much about Hull or Brentford but I reckon if I asked you or Danny about them, there'd definitely be some crazy instances, matches, and players. Just because there aren't trophies doesn't mean there isn't a wonderful story to be told. I think it is interesting that some of Chelsea's biggest stars came during the clubs worst years: Platt, Speedie, Nevin, Dixon for instance. Yeah, Mourinho is a sour old note, especially the last time he was at the helm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cicero Posted July 27, 2017 Share Posted July 27, 2017 8 minutes ago, LFCMadLad said: I don't particularly like either club but I prefer City over Chelsea every time. I must admit though that I've never really met a Chelsea fan in real life but the Chelsea fans on here (barring one who I won't mention by name) are by and large a pretty decent bunch if I'm honest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Blue Posted July 27, 2017 Share Posted July 27, 2017 57 minutes ago, Spike said: It'd be pretty bloody hilarious if United and City play shite next season. You'd think the clubs would learn after being so trigger happy with transfers. United will fall short of the top 4 again Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 27, 2017 Share Posted July 27, 2017 4 hours ago, Happy Blue said: Standard reaction to City beating Real Madrid 4-1 ...it was the same nonsense when we beat Barcalona, Munich, PSG and Monaco What about when Barcelona Munich monaco and real madrid beat you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Blue Posted July 27, 2017 Share Posted July 27, 2017 28 minutes ago, Gunnersauraus said: What about when Barcelona Munich monaco, PSG and real madrid beat you? What about when you lost to Bradford City? ...and PSG have never beaten us Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Gonzo Posted July 27, 2017 Share Posted July 27, 2017 4 hours ago, LFCMadLad said: I don't particularly like either club but I prefer City over Chelsea every time. I must admit though that I've never really met a Chelsea fan in real life but the Chelsea fans on here (barring one who I won't mention by name) are by and large a pretty decent bunch if I'm honest. Oh me too for sure. Also for everything that people say Citeh is... Chelsea did it first. They were the blueprint for being a billionaires plaything and probably did more than any other club to fuck up football with money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spike Posted July 28, 2017 Share Posted July 28, 2017 2 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said: Oh me too for sure. Also for everything that people say Citeh is... Chelsea did it first. They were the blueprint for being a billionaires plaything and probably did more than any other club to fuck up football with money. I think the wheels were set in motion during the 90s. Italy was insane during those years and experienced their own little bubble akin to the PL's. Even Spain had some crazy transfers during that time. It is a slippery slope. I think the Bale transfer is what set the world over the edge. Up until then mega transfers were few and far apart. Nobody came close to Ronaldo fir years and the all of a sudden records were smashed every window. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cicero Posted July 28, 2017 Share Posted July 28, 2017 13 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said: Oh me too for sure. Also for everything that people say Citeh is... Chelsea did it first. They were the blueprint for being a billionaires plaything and probably did more than any other club to fuck up football with money. But how were we the cause for the market to inflate when it did? Clubs around the country as well as Europe were spending the same amount on individual players. And since the Torres transfer, we haven't spent more than 35 million on a player before Morata, and even with Morata the funds were directly from club profits rather than Roman's money. Man City are now setting the standard of what the cost of a half decent full back will be. We were regular contenders in Europe as well as won European and domestic titles the years prior to Roman, not to mention being a CL club. We owe a lot to Roman for the obvious reasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Gonzo Posted July 28, 2017 Share Posted July 28, 2017 3 hours ago, Cicero said: But how were we the cause for the market to inflate when it did? Clubs around the country as well as Europe were spending the same amount on individual players. And since the Torres transfer, we haven't spent more than 35 million on a player before Morata, and even with Morata the funds were directly from club profits rather than Roman's money. Man City are now setting the standard of what the cost of a half decent full back will be. We were regular contenders in Europe as well as won European and domestic titles the years prior to Roman, not to mention being a CL club. We owe a lot to Roman for the obvious reasons. Roman came in and started throwing money at players on the regular. After years of that, sure, you're more sustainable and not as wasteful with the money. You were still the blueprint for the model of being a billionaire plaything, no matter how you slice it. Sure there may be others worse than Abramovich now, but that is his greatest legacy in English football. The injection of oil money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cicero Posted July 28, 2017 Share Posted July 28, 2017 2 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said: Roman came in and started throwing money at players on the regular. After years of that, sure, you're more sustainable and not as wasteful with the money. You were still the blueprint for the model of being a billionaire plaything, no matter how you slice it. Sure there may be others worse than Abramovich now, but that is his greatest legacy in English football. The injection of oil money. But my point is that we weren't the only club that inflated the market? Clubs around Europe were paying the same amounts we were, even before Roman came about. Apologies if I perceived it wrong, but it sounded like you made it out to be that we are worse than City because we first inflated the market, which is complete bollocks as I mentioned above. City have now set the standard of what half decent wing backs and an decent English centreback should cost. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Gonzo Posted July 28, 2017 Share Posted July 28, 2017 1 minute ago, Cicero said: But my point is that we weren't the only club that inflated the market? Clubs around Europe were paying the same amounts we were, even before Roman came about. Apologies if I perceived it wrong, but it sounded like you made it out to be that we are worse than City because we first inflated the market, which is complete bollocks as I mentioned above. City have now set the standard of what half decent wing backs and an decent English centreback should cost. Chelsea didn't do much to inflate the market, but they did spend significant amounts of money compared to the rest of the league. In Ranieri's last season and the first two Mourinho seasons there was such a massive overhaul in bringing in lots of players for big fees. So it wasn't that you were ruining the market by paying crazy amounts, just that you could outspend your competitors by a shitload and make widespread and sweeping changes. Citeh came in and took grotesque spending to a new level. And the increased TV money has let a lot more people compete for players with fucking absolutely extravagant fees. This market is fucking mental, it's great for selling clubs... unless they want to buy a replacement that's good enough to replace someone good enough with a crazy fee. The prices are fucking mental. On the other hand... the money in football right now may be helping clubs fight off player power when the traditional vultures come circling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subscriber RandoEFC+ Posted July 28, 2017 Subscriber Share Posted July 28, 2017 I think Chelsea were "guilty" of spending a lot of money on a lot of players, but they were pretty much all fees that were in line with the rest of the market with the exception of Torres of course. Where Man City differ is that they willingly pay way over the odds for players with such regularity that they've played a key role in the inflation we're seeing now. It's open to debate which team is "worse" for what they've done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danny Posted July 29, 2017 Share Posted July 29, 2017 Chelsea weren't the reason football is as it is, they're just a branch from the root cause. All that money available and the potential from it, it really was only a matter of time before a billionaire came in and fincanced them, if you look at the global reach say Man Utd had for example and the power of marketing campaigns in Asia etc, they helped lay the foundations for clubs like Chelsea, PSG etc to turn football clubs into a billionaires marketing tool. But United were just taking advantage of a system much the same as the oil clubs have, the real prize in football is not silverware, the FA Cup is testament to that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.