Raheem Sterling nearest the pin.

[Bojan KantKick]

I'm me and I'm from here

I wasn't directing my comment at any specific person but I get great amusement from some Man City and Chelsea fans who bang their chests and say how great a club they are

When the reality is they are not great clubs they simply are owned by people with endless cash. Does anyone think Sterling Toure or Aquero went to a city to play for the great history of the club? Nope they went there purely for cash and the rewards that cash brings.

So for those that jump on at least have the sense to understand that your a "great" club now but hope to god the cash don't run out because the rats will run from the sinking ship if and when that happens.

I actually don't mind City and wild rather anyone win other than United but City are not in the same hemisphere as Liverpool and united in worldwide fans and never will be

If you look through the history of the English First Division and other European leagues, the wealthiest clubs tend to be at the top. Liverpool used to be at the top and players went to Pool for $$$. Same with United.

If Roman was going to leave Chelsea, he would have done it by now imo and the Sheikh could probably every premier league club if he wanted to (net worth 17 billion pounds). The Sheikh has put over around a billion pounds of his own coin into City. If you do some research into City since the Sheikh took over, he has contributed significantly to jobs and the local economy in Manchester. I'd much rather have a Roman/Mansour in charge of my club than Glazer or Hicks/Gillette.

From what i've seen, City & Chelsea fans don't go around lauding the fact that they are a 'big' club, they merely respond to those that try and put them down.

History is a pretty subjective thing. What is history? City were founded in 1880 and Chelsea in 1905. United were founded in 1878 and Liverpool in 1892. That's a fair bit of history for mine. Sure City have spent some time outside the top division but so have Liverpool and United.

If history is domination of the league through winning trophies, both clubs are building on there history now. BTW, both clubs had won first division titles prior to their recent ownership.

Chelsea have a large offshore fanbase and are extremely well run off the pitch. They are self sufficient at the this point. I know less about City off the pitch but their revenue growth has been remarkable over the last few years and they seem to be run annoyingly well.

 

[moomba]

£1.5m per champions league trophy and £1m per premier league trophy to a maximum of £3m.

£500k on his 30th, 60th, 90th and 120th appearances (champions league or premier league)

Thats the bonuses according to the local paper. Our global support has just increased by all those Liverpool supporters hoping we'll win something this season. And QPR who get 20% of those bonuses.

 

[Zidane98]

Plenty of City fans desperate to claim they were not extorted on the Sterling deal for some reason.

They clearly were. Nearly any club I the world would sell at the price offered and it took a wage package of nearly 200k / week all up to get the player to sign on. At that price you're welcome to him.

 

[Mattdougie]

£1.5m per champions league trophy and £1m per premier league trophy to a maximum of £3m.

£500k on his 30th, 60th, 90th and 120th appearances (champions league or premier league)

Thats the bonuses according to the local paper. Our global support has just increased by all those Liverpool supporters hoping we'll win something this season. And QPR who get 20% of those bonuses.

You actually think Liverpool fans hope City win something so they get another 2.5 million?

Ummmmmmm no

 

[Mattdougie]

If you look through the history of the English First Division and other European leagues, the wealthiest clubs tend to be at the top. Liverpool used to be at the top and players went to Pool for $$$. Same with United.

If Roman was going to leave Chelsea, he would have done it by now imo and the Sheikh could probably every premier league club if he wanted to (net worth 17 billion pounds). The Sheikh has put over around a billion pounds of his own coin into City. If you do some research into City since the Sheikh took over, he has contributed significantly to jobs and the local economy in Manchester. I'd much rather have a Roman/Mansour in charge of my club than Glazer or Hicks/Gillette.

From what i've seen, City & Chelsea fans don't go around lauding the fact that they are a 'big' club, they merely respond to those that try and put them down.

History is a pretty subjective thing. What is history? City were founded in 1880 and Chelsea in 1905. United were founded in 1878 and Liverpool in 1892. That's a fair bit of history for mine. Sure City have spent some time outside the top division but so have Liverpool and United.

If history is domination of the league through winning trophies, both clubs are building on there history now. BTW, both clubs had won first division titles prior to their recent ownership.

Chelsea have a large offshore fanbase and are extremely well run off the pitch. They are self sufficient at the this point. I know less about City off the pitch but their revenue growth has been remarkable over the last few years and they seem to be run annoyingly well.

I made no reference to their business model or daily workings

The fact is I didn't know any city or Chelsea fans ten years ago and the majority I know now are blow ins who will drop off the minute those teams start going poorly.

And the reality is no matter how well they are run if Roman and/or the Arabs walked both clubs would not be capable of running the same way and will be effected greatly.

They both must capitilise on their success NOW to garner worldwide support and growth. City have a bigger job with the United monster in the same city already absorbing most of that market

 

[moomba]

Plenty of City fans desperate to claim they were not extorted on the Sterling deal for some reason.

They clearly were. Nearly any club I the world would sell at the price offered and it took a wage package of nearly 200k / week all up to get the player to sign on. At that price you're welcome to him.

You can celebrate your transfer championship if you like, I'm not too fussed.

Proof of the pudding for me will be how he performs over the next five years and beyond. Then I'll judge whether it was a good deal for us or not.

Others, I guess, like to celebrate a bit earlier.

 

[moomba]

You actually think Liverpool fans hope City win something so they get another 2.5 million?

Ummmmmmm no

Come on, join in with me.

City, City, City.

You know you want to.

 

[Bojan KantKick]

I made no reference to their business model or daily workings

The fact is I didn't know any city or Chelsea fans ten years ago and the majority I know now are blow ins who will drop off the minute those teams start going poorly.

And the reality is no matter how well they are run if Roman and/or the Arabs walked both clubs would not be capable of running the same way and will be effected greatly.

They both must capitilise on their success NOW to garner worldwide support and growth. City have a bigger job with the United monster in the same city already absorbing most of that market

You said they would be stuffed if their owners left, i told you they wouldn't be as they are self sufficient now.

Liverpool fans haven't dropped off, why would city and chelsea fans drop off?

Chelsea and Man City generate more revenue now than Liverpool. The Sheikh only puts his hand in his pocket to pay for infra (academy and facilities) but not for transfers. Roman doesn't put any cash into Chelsea these days.

 

[Bojan KantKick]

You can celebrate your transfer championship if you like, I'm not too fussed.

Proof of the pudding for me will be how he performs over the next five years and beyond. Then I'll judge whether it was a good deal for us or not.

Others, I guess, like to celebrate a bit earlier.

Ahem

 

[moomba]

That picture is quite disturbing.

 

[Cruyff14]

well we're back to our ruining football peak

glory days are here again

 

[chef]

I made no reference to their business model or daily workings

The fact is I didn't know any city or Chelsea fans ten years ago and the majority I know now are blow ins who will drop off the minute those teams start going poorly.

And the reality is no matter how well they are run if Roman and/or the Arabs walked both clubs would not be capable of running the same way and will be effected greatly.

They both must capitilise on their success NOW to garner worldwide support and growth. City have a bigger job with the United monster in the same city already absorbing most of that market

10 years ago we were finishing top 4 in the UCL spot, without the help of Roman(we're comfortably top 6 every season for about a decade before that). We weren't some small club like people try to convince themselves(not saying we were a huge club either back then), Roman allowed us to take that next step to become a top tier club though. How lucky are we.

If Roman did go I'm pretty confident he's set us up to keep travelling on the same course(profits in 4 of the last 5 seasons). But he's not going anywhere so thats not really something to worry about, looking forward to the new stadium he's building and his son learning the ropes as he will be our future owner.

 

[glenferry23]

Yay, yet another money fight.

 

[WealstoneRaider]

It's quite simple, Chelsea and especially City were mid ranking top flight clubs before the big bucks arrived. Both had some periods of relative success, but Chelsea had suffered because of a particularly bad hooligan element and City went broke in the early 80s through bad ownership and suffered multiple relegations over a 20 year period.

People who grew up or were around during this period just get the bigger picture and can clearly see how the money has made them leap frog the likes of Spurs and Liverpool. It's nothing more than that.

Quite why Bodja feels the need to continually defend the two clubs is anyone's guess though

 

[craigos]

Man City
40.5 mil
110k wages

So who actually got nearest to the pin? I was a little off.

 

[Bojan KantKick]

It's quite simple, Chelsea and especially City were mid ranking top flight clubs before the big bucks arrived. Both had some periods of relative success, but Chelsea had suffered because of a particularly bad hooligan element and City went broke in the early 80s through bad ownership and suffered multiple relegations over a 20 year period.

People who grew up or were around during this period just get the bigger picture and can clearly see how the money has made them leap frog the likes of Spurs and Liverpool. It's nothing more than that.

Quite why Bodja feels the need to continually defend the two clubs is anyone's guess though

Same could be said for Spurs minus the big bucks. History could have been so much different if Roman bought Spurs like he initially intended to instead of Chelsea. Yes, money has heavily contributed to both clubs success. That doesn't mean they weren't relevant previously.

Ignorance should not be encouraged. If it is, it spreads like wildfire. FWIW, i haven't met anyone in RL who gives a sh*t that City or Chelsea have plenty of $$$$$, it more seems to be angry or jelly people on the internet venting.

 

[Jatz]

Liverpool ended up collecting 40 mil for him (minus the QPR cut).

I think everybody wins out of this. Liverpool get what they thought he was worth, City get a 10 year player. QPR steal 10 mil from City.

Win, win, win.

 

[WealstoneRaider]

Same could be said for Spurs minus the big bucks. History could have been so much different if Roman bought Spurs like he initially intended to instead of Chelsea. Yes, money has heavily contributed to both clubs success. That doesn't mean they weren't relevant previously.

Ignorance should not be encouraged. If it is, it spreads like wildfire. FWIW, i haven't met anyone in RL who gives a sh*t that City or Chelsea have plenty of $$$$$, it more seems to be angry or jelly people on the internet venting.

Spurs have never had a benefactor the way City and Chelsea have.In fact the Wale family who owned us during our most successful eras took more out of the club than put in - as all chairman probably did back then.

I assume you don't know anyone who has followed football for more than 10 years if you say no one "cares" how City or Chelsea acquired their status. I think most accept it now, but people will always remind them of these facts - that's the way it is in the football world. We still remind Arsenal they are a south London club. A lot of it is banter - but said with an element of truth.

At the end if the day Chef and Moombs don't give a s**t as long as they win trophies. But people will always remind them their clubs are plastics - no use arguing the point to be honest!

 

[Thistle]

Question - Do you think Liverpool have accepted 49m if he didn't want out?

 

[Mattdougie]

Come on, join in with me.

City, City, City.

You know you want to.

Hey if your against Man U I will join in no problems

 

[chef]

At the end if the day Chef and Moombs don't give a s**t as long as they win trophies. But people will always remind them their clubs are plastics - no use arguing the point to be honest!

Yep, I really don't care that much. To me 'plastic' is such a chilidish insult and only gets brought out when someone is pissed or jealous of something we've done or achieved.

I only chip in when people are trying to rewrite history.

 

[WealstoneRaider]

Yep, I really don't care that much. To me 'plastic' is such a chilidish insult and only gets brought out when someone is pissed or jealous of something we've done or achieved.

I only chip in when people are trying to rewrite history.

Jealousy is an overused word. It's more like just to keep you in check - put you back in your box. It's a very English thing to do that, perhaps you Aussies don't get it.

Chelsea win the league - some people congratulate them, others will dismiss it as being bought. You can't change that.

 

[Bojan KantKick]

Spurs have never had a benefactor the way City and Chelsea have.In fact the Wale family who owned us during our most successful eras took more out of the club than put in - as all chairman probably did back then.

I assume you don't know anyone who has followed football for more than 10 years if you say no one "cares" how City or Chelsea acquired their status. I think most accept it now, but people will always remind them of these facts - that's the way it is in the football world. We still remind Arsenal they are a south London club. A lot of it is banter - but said with an element of truth.

At the end if the day Chef and Moombs don't give a s**t as long as they win trophies. But people will always remind them their clubs are plastics - no use arguing the point to be honest!

Only Jelly button mashers do this.

Anywho, i'm done.

 

[WealstoneRaider]

Only Jelly button mashers do this.

Anywho, i'm done.

Or people who value fair competition.

One or the other, depending on your view

 

[Bojan KantKick]

if you value fair competition so much, follow another sport chief.