Manchester City thread


#943

https://twitter.com/City_Watch/status/934030701137223681


#944

Always sad to hear this kind of shit…
A kid’s dream shattered…

A very generous gesture by City.


#945

So sad! :frowning:


#946

23795866_10156005442684662_8964818756843147161_n


#947

City taking our kit supplier on a big money deal aswell now!


#948

Suprised Nike wouldn’t at least equal what they pay chelsea


#949

It would suprise me if Manchester City are already such a big brand like Chelsea has become over the years outside the UK and Europe.


#950

manchester city are a joke club, cant even fill their stadium. They are just the lottery winners that spend like money is water like psg and chavski…fucking shitcunt clubs i hate them they dont grow organically they fuck over other clubs by fucking the transfer market etc. Really hate clubs which use dodgy measures to get what they want like the neymar deal and mancity self sponsoring.


#951

Agree. Not sure why these seem seem to get a free ride in the cunt stakes myself.


#952

Sad thing is football has accepted this behaviour and there is no criticism to such approach.


#953

Defo getting to that stage but Chelsea had plenty of comments over it but city really have not.


#954

I find such domination very dull and boring. The reason why the PL is such an exciting league is because it’s so hard to win.

It really is the kind of thing that will put me off football altogether.


#955

There have been multiple seasons where one team won the League comfortably.The last two championships of Chelsea come to mind. Manchester United won the League in 12/13 without much of a threat. We didn’t give Leicester that much of a run for their money in the second half of the 15/16 season. Chelsea in Mourinho’s first term was quite dominant. It’s nothing new really.


#956

There always been some fight in these seasons, tbh. There is nothing atm, instead.


#957

And when that happens the bubble will finally burst


#958

To be fair to Guardola, although he has spent, it’s not the same as Chelsea have done, or Mourinho at Man U.
He has a first team where the best players were already there and some of the first team regulars like Sterling,Stones and Delph are not exactly world class.

If you go through their first team there are only a few that could be described as world class like Aguero, Silva, De Bruyne, who were already there, and Sane, who he bought.

In fact most of those players, when they first went there, were players we could have had, if we had been a bit more proactive.

If you look at their dominance this season, it has very little to do with individual world class players winning them matches, it’s more to do with having the best manager in football, organising very good players, into a system that clearly works.

A lot of the players he has bought were well within our reach when he bought them but we lack the ambition to do so.

You could also argue that if our board had any ambition, we could have had Guardiola as well.

I know they have spent money but considering they had a lot of catching up to do with Chelsea and Man U and haven’t broken any transfer records by buying world class players, they have done a pretty good job.


#959

I wasn’t referencing the money spent, just the domination.


#960

There is a difference between a club playing like champions, leaving everyone behind in dust; and a club who gain a massive advantage by acquiring a team built by hogging expensive talents.

Chelsea & City winning the league this way is just boring.
It serves the purpose for the fans I suppose but I don’t think it gives them the same amount of pride Arsenal fans received by deserving titles at Old Trafford. There is a clear absence of that niggling feeling somewhere in the mind questioning the credibility of the title.

I know it is same old ethical emotional non sense but the pride of owning something earned by my salary made anything more enjoyable than getting it gifted to me by parents.


#961

It was inevitable this would happen when City signed Guardiola. A truly top manager managing a top club in this league was only going to result in this. Not unlike Chelsea last season with Conte. People who-- allo @Trion cito!–naively continue with the belief that the Premier League is better than La Liga or significantly better than the Bundesliga or Serie A should take note.

In the long-run it should be good for the league. Clubs like ours will be forced to wise up eventually and bring in better tacticians and managers who can consistently produce higher level football.

We already see the benefits in Europe where it seems English clubs can actually compete for once-- you wouldn’t rule City out for the CL this season or any of the English clubs, really (minus Liverpool perhaps), given it’s a down year for Bayern, Madrid, and Barça.

The state of the league circa 15/16 was a joke, so for me a club like City forcing the level of the league to rise via a sort of arms race is the lesser evil. That product was an awful one and had been for a numbers of years, so change–even if coming from unfortunate means and producing boring side effects like Chelsea’s domination last season and City’s this–is welcome.


#962

Thats a cute answer really. They have had shed loads of money to throw at this since they where giving a free stadium.
Its the money they spent since day one that gets me and 150 million on full backs without any real bargaining tells you the class of the club. Sure they have a top manager whose bringing talent on. But end of the day you cant give full appreciation to set ups like this.
Hiding behind Chelsea and Man utd dislike is avoiding the truth of the matter. Utter plastic fabrication of a club.