-
Website
http://www.epltalk.com -
Original page
http://www.epltalk.com/hypocrisy-typifies-the-reaction-of-opposing-fans-to-city-takeover/3123 -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
Top Commenters
-
jm1
5 comments · 1 points
-
PorkRomeo
4 comments · 1 points
-
eplnfl
43 comments · 3 points
-
ChrissMari
18 comments · 3 points
-
AtlantaPompey
69 comments · 3 points
-
-
Popular Threads
As a Liverpool supporter, I say that today.
And if DIC or the Sultan of Brunei bought LFC tomorrow, I'd keep saying it.
What irritates me is teams thinking they're entitled to something because of who they are, what they've done in the past or how much money they have. Prove it on the pitch.
a) they will say reckless things about other players less than a week into ownership, which has already muddied the waters for future transfer deals.
and
b) they don't care about the club; they're in it for the glory of Abu Dhabi and Abu Dhabi alone. If I were a City fan, I might be a little perturbed about my club being used as a pawn in a tale of two cities.
Read David Conn's piece on this in the Guardian -- http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2008/sep/03/...
Kartik, as a lifelong United supporter, I have absolutely no problem with the takeover- I'm happy for City and it's fans, and welcome the competition.
I probably feel a little less strongly about it because I am an American, and I don't have any deep-rooted local or tribal ties to any of the clubs... I simply love to watch the game. To me, another big club means more quality in the league, cutthroat competition for CL play (5 big clubs and only 4 spots), and 8 additional "big" ties every year (2 games against the 4 other "top" clubs).
We're also getting WAY ahead of ourselves -
an influx of cash doesn't necessarily mean that City will be world-beaters anytime soon. It takes time to scout and acquire talent, get the players used to playing together, and find a tactics that work best for your lineup.
I also don't think that these guys will be the last great billionaire investors to join the league.
In the major US sports, we are plagued by owners who have no concern for anything but the bottom line. CHampoinship rosters are decimated in the name of generating obscene profits (my local Florida Marlins experienced that TWICE).
Now, in the EPL, we're seeing an influx of owners that have such a passion for the game that they're willing to spend any amount of money in order to make their teams better - is that really such a bad thing?
I think MLS struggles for other reasons as well.
Make it about who best can evaluate talent, not who has the deepest pockets to buy it.
Imagine a club like Wigan, on a level financial playing field, making the Champions' League because, in a given year, they evaluated talent more shredly than the so-called "Big Four."
Better yet, imagine four different clubs in the Champions' League every year.
The same thing could happen between the PL and Championship with a cap. American sports that use a cap exist in a vacuum whereas MLS does not as the second division, USL now essentially competes with the first division for players. So caps do not work in football is the bottom line.
this is not mine, but still quality:
Has anyone ever witnessed a more rapid abandonment of principles than that shown by City fans this week?
For years they have banged on about being the people's club; a football club that is still a football club as opposed to an organisation obsessed with money; supporters who were in it for the love of the club, the love of the game; 30 years and we're still here; the true Manchester club; 'This is our city' and all that nonsense. An entire generation of fans who have built their identity purely on being whatever United are not.
And what were United? A greedy, rich club that bought success with its vast wealth. Wealth which came before all else, acquired through disgraceful commercialism and a soulless disregard for the beautiful game. Fans who cared only about trophies and expensive signings, and who understood nothing of what it meant to be a true football fan - a City fan for example.
But this is the United whose fans at least cared about retaining its identity as a Mancunian football club. When foreign owners with the wrong motives came sniffing round Manchester United, we fought and fought and fought to keep them away. We used every means legal, and some illegal ones too. We mobilised, we collected, we protested, we campaigned, we lobbied, we vandalised, we wrote, we phoned, we emailed, we rallied, we marched, we flash-mobbed, we rioted. We made it impossible for them to visit Manchester peacefully. And the loss of our club to people who didn't give a toss about its identity and traditions meant so much that some of us walked away altogether. Home and awayers with decades of fanaticism to their names had decided that forming a new club, with the incredible effort that entailed, was the only alternative to seeing their club used as some egotistical bastard's plaything.
Contrast this with 1st September 2008. The only sound you could hear that day was that of 100,000 zips being simultaneously lowered as the blue quarter of Manchester collectively dropped its trousers and bent over, willing to be shamelessly violated by some slimy rich man's c**k. Not a shred of pride, not a moment's defence of their supposedly salt of the earth club; just a panting mass, all ready to be anybody's Bi*ch in exchange for money with which they can buy success.
There really is only one true football club in Manchester, and it's not Manchester City.
Think of all the players that would have been purchased.
Hicks and Gillette are going to run this club into the ground.