Gary Neville

https://www.espn.com/soccer/manchester-united/story/4363759/sir-alex-ferguson-european-super-league-would-end-70-years-of-football-history

He is the ugly face of sky, both metaphorically and literally.

Anyone who receives millions from sky has no moral right to criticize clubs for chasing extra money.

Hypocrite

Imagine comparing money we generated to teams like Chelsea and Abu Dhabi Oil FC. Jesus wept.

If we had a Sheikh owning us you could more or less write the league off most seasons. The advantage we'd have would be ridiculous.

People have also spent loads of money and got nowhere near winning the title. The difference is that no matter what you spend and do, your success is determined by on pitch performances. In this new format you could lose every game and wouldn’t have any repercussions. You get back in to the biggest money earner next year

comment by Glazers_Out (SE85) (U21241)
posted 34 minutes ago
Imagine comparing money we generated to teams like Chelsea and Abu Dhabi Oil FC. Jesus wept.

If we had a Sheikh owning us you could more or less write the league off most seasons. The advantage we'd have would be ridiculous.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You have a financial advantage over pretty much every club in the league yet have still struggled to make top 4 in some recent seasons. What are you blabbering on about?

So it wasn't greed or gaining an advantage that put Man U on the stock exchange? This same club in the eighties spend fortunes to catch Liverpool and failed. They were also involved in the big 5 breakaway tv deal not giving a toss about other clubs. Your moral high horse bit the bullet years ago when you dropped the words football club from your club badge and here you are again at the forefront of another deal without a thought for other clubs. Once the grounds are reopened I'll only renew my local non league teams season ticket if my own club go through with this.

comment by Ron (U1646)
posted 1 hour, 19 minutes ago
He is the ugly face of sky, both metaphorically and literally.

Anyone who receives millions from sky has no moral right to criticize clubs for chasing extra money.

Hypocrite
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So pretty much any club that's ever played in the PL then?

The OP and other critics of Neville are writing either from a position of cynicism (football has been commercialised for a long time, so why bother complaining now?) or deciding they're more interested in replaying historic tribal grievances than uniting against something that will kill football as a sport.

Football has always been run as a private business. It has always relied on revenue to invest in training facilities and player recruitment, and therefore teams with higher gate income or owners willing to invest their own money have always had an edge. Manchester United have never had particularly generous owners but through a combination of random circumstances and sporting achievements grew to a position of attracting large gates, and were in a position to further monetise their popularity as opportunities opened up. United didn't invent merchandising or shirt advertising, but were certainly the most prominent exponent and beneficiary of treating football as big business in the 1990s.

We can all mourn the commercialisation of the support if we like. But the fact we're still on forums like this, talking about it, suggests we still care about it, imperfect though it is. Removing the principle of competition and the jeopardy of relegation from the top level of sport, effectively excluding other clubs from competing on that level, would break a principle that has always stood until now. If you're okay with losing that principle, that's up to you. But if you're more interested in highlighting perceived hypocrisies, I'd question your priorities.

comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 31 minutes ago
The OP and other critics of Neville are writing either from a position of cynicism (football has been commercialised for a long time, so why bother complaining now?) or deciding they're more interested in replaying historic tribal grievances than uniting against something that will kill football as a sport.

Football has always been run as a private business. It has always relied on revenue to invest in training facilities and player recruitment, and therefore teams with higher gate income or owners willing to invest their own money have always had an edge. Manchester United have never had particularly generous owners but through a combination of random circumstances and sporting achievements grew to a position of attracting large gates, and were in a position to further monetise their popularity as opportunities opened up. United didn't invent merchandising or shirt advertising, but were certainly the most prominent exponent and beneficiary of treating football as big business in the 1990s.

We can all mourn the commercialisation of the support if we like. But the fact we're still on forums like this, talking about it, suggests we still care about it, imperfect though it is. Removing the principle of competition and the jeopardy of relegation from the top level of sport, effectively excluding other clubs from competing on that level, would break a principle that has always stood until now. If you're okay with losing that principle, that's up to you. But if you're more interested in highlighting perceived hypocrisies, I'd question your priorities.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Absolutely this. Well said, RR.

Gary Neville suddenly very keen on fair competition. Didn't seem to bother him when Man United could spend whatever was needed to bring in premier players. Still doesn't seem to bother him when he financially dopes Salford FC to help them jump up the leagues.

His hatred of unlevel playing fields appears to be very patchy.