people crying about how they 'won the lottery'- yeah they did. So what?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
They are ruining football?
Loyalty in football is gone. No player is loyal to a club. FACT
What does constitute a big club?
Winning leagues? Well by that token, if City are small then so are Spurs - after all, both clubs have two titles each.
Attendances? Well by that token, if City are a small club then Spurs are miniscule.
Revenue? Well by that token, Spurs are smaller than City seeing as City earn more in revenue than they do.
All facts my friends. Undisputed facts at that.
--------------
the fact that your cleaning lady can polish your trophies inside ten seconds makes you a small club.
that and getting relegated to the third tier of english football in the recent past. in this day and age, that would never happen to a big club. simple as that.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
They are ruining football
------------------------------------
Really? How?
"Loyalty in football is gone. No player is loyal to a club. FACT"
There are how many professional footballers in the world? 10,000? 20,000? 100,000? City have what? 50, 60? If No player (that's NO PLAYER) is loyal to a club (your words), then how exactly are City responsible for the other x-thousand amount of others who have no loyalty to their club whatsoever?
Think about what you're actually proposing here. And I mean really think about it. Then, and only then, you might actually realise that all that is wrong with football isn't as a result of what City are doing. It's as a result of the game OVERALL today. That applies to your club, my club, and every single other club.
Ruining football? You're another one who needs to learn the history of the game.
As a neutral (Southampton fan) I would just like to say that it is possible for a big club to get relegated to the 3rd division (leeds) its how you climb up that defines you. Look at Southampton. Plus to you Tottenham and Arsenal fans, I forgot of course your whole teams were from your youth academy.... oh wait bale, he was pretty pricey for a youth player wasnt he, walcott, oxdale chamberlain? Sometimes football fans forget that theyre first 11 was bought when they abuse other teams....
"the fact that your cleaning lady can polish your trophies inside ten seconds makes you a small club."
We have mirrors - makes the task twice as hard
"that and getting relegated to the third tier of english football in the recent past"
And? By that very token, being a premier league club would mean that it's big? Don't think it quite works like that does it? One season in the third tier in the club's entire history doesn't make a club small, in much the same way one season in the top flight makes a club big.
You do know that City have spent more years in the top flight than Spurs have I take it? In fact, only United, Liverpool Everton, Arsenal, and Villa have spent more years in the top flight than City.
Sunderland have spent more time in the top flight than Spurs. Ergo, by your very own logic, Sunderland are a bigger club than Spurs.
Then again, Sunderland do get higher attendances than Spurs. Go figure.
no. what i said was that in this day and age, no big club would get relegated to the THIRD tier of english football. it simply wouldnt happen. leeds were in absolute turmoil, so were newcastle, but they didnt go down again.
Tottenham Hotspur are a big club because their name has 16 letters in it, whereas Manchester City only has 14. By that reckoning, the maris pipers are as big as United, who also have 16 letters in their name. All of which means we've got a long way to go before we're as big as Borussia Monchengladbach.
you could equally argue that citys quick rise from the 3rd tier shows that they were at the wrong level? it was only a short stint they spent down there. Tbh I had the "big club" argument, football is decided on a pitch, results are what counts and when I check the PL City (like my southampton) are top of the league above so called "bigger clubs"
And in this day and age (i.e. now) City won't get relegated to the third tier either.
You make excuses for Leeds and Newcastle being relegated. The same reasons for them can be said towards City when we fell away.
"but they didn't go down again"
And? City went from spending one season in the third tier to never getting relegated from the Premier League in the space of 3 years. Name one other club who has done that. Just one.
"what i said was that in this day and age, no big club would get relegated to the THIRD tier of english football. it simply wouldnt happen. leeds were in absolute turmoil, so were newcastle, but they didnt go down again. "
Leeds haven't been back to the PL yet, so your argument is false. Also, you forgot to mention Nottingham Forest, who have had great success in Europe, but haven't been back yet either.
this is not an argument over which is the bigger club , spurs or man city, because quite frankly there is no argument to be had.
spurs are clearly much bigger, for the time being anyway, citys billions may see to that over time.
my article is about city gettin shown up in the CL because they simply dont belong there. for details of why i refer you to the article and to the comments made on the thread.
have fun debating it out ladies.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
my article is about city gettin shown up in the CL because they simply dont belong there. for details of why i refer you to the article and to the comments made on the thread.
--------------------
and has been pointed out, City have as many points after three games as Spurs did. How about you wait and see how the group pans out before you state that. You'll look a bit dumb if City pick up 7-9 points from their last three games.
----------------
moneybags city should pick up all 9, my guess is that they pick up 3
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
"this is not an argument over which is the bigger club , spurs or man city, because quite frankly there is no argument to be had."
So why are you going on about it then? It's all very well saying this now, but you have perpetuated the argument for the last 7 or 8 pages. Or are you ditching because your argument has fallen apart?
As for us not belonging in the CL, that argument is absolute garbage. We finished third in the league last season, on equal points with Chelsea. By UEFA rules, this means we qualify for the CL straight into the group stages. Ergo, we belong there because we qualified outright.
Seriously, did your mum not loot you a brain?
what are you talking about leopold?
at what point has this been about who is bigger, spurs or city?
my only reference to such thing would be if someone brought it up as a point.... and i have responded.
some clubs just have european pedigree, and take to the cl like a duck to water (spurs)
some clubs just dont have a european pedigree, and get found out in it ( money city)
spurs have spent quite a lot as well to get there..... yes not the same scale as city but for you to hark on about money city you may want to look at yourself. And also be a bit thankful to them for them allowing you to borrow their reserve players for your first team (Im not a massive fan of city but your basis for arguments are winding me up)
my article is about city gettin shown up in the CL because they simply dont belong there
-------------------------
And to echo Greatesttimes' point - at this point the CL, Spurs last season had done no better than City have done this season.
Let me spell it out in the most very simplistic of terms so that idiots like you will understand. City belong in the CL this season just as much as Spurs (or any other club) belonged in the CL last season (and that is based on the very simple fact that they are there because they qualified for it (which is exactly the same reason why every other team in the history of the competition has been in it).
Now, I may be mistaken, but Spurs, for all their adventures last season, didn't actually win it. Forgive me for pointing out that very simple fact. But it is a fact. So one season in the CL (in which Spurs failed) has somehow given Spurs fans the disillusionment that they are some kind of benchmark when it comes to English clubs?
Get over yourselves. That is arrogance personified, and arrogance that can't even be justified. You failed in last year's CL. It may well be the case (in fact probably will be the case) that City will probably fail in this year's CL.
But I will say one thing. The chances are a lot higher that City will at least do the one thing that proved to be beyond Spurs. And that is qualify at the second time of asking. And for such a "small club" to achieve that over such a "big club" such as Spurs? Well, put it this way, all of sudden, it's becoming clear why Spurs fans have such a bee in their bonnet when it comes to City.
Spurs fans = . You lot can't even spell the names of your greatest players correctly.
look at ourselves?? yes we really splash the cash dont we !!
what signings are you talking about exactly? and what wages do we back these signings up with?
and take to the cl like a duck to water (spurs)
-----------------------
Spurs failed last season in the CL. Ducks to water tend not to go under. Spurs did.
Spurs failed last season in the CL. Ducks to water tend not to go under. Spurs did.
--------------
ah yes and city are flying arent they? how many millions have you spent per champions league point earned???
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
ah yes and city are flying arent they? how many millions have you spent per champions league point earned???
-------------------
I don't understand your fixation with the money they have spent? They have the cash, every club in their position would spend it to achieve what their fans want. Success.
------
yes. i actually didnt mind city when they first had the money, but gradually their fans started to turn into the most irritating s in football.
these cant really be disputed as look how spoiled they now are. getting on their teams back at 1-1 last night and throwing things at opposition players when it wasnt going their own way in a game they no doubt felt they had a right to win.
http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/premier-league/tottenham-spending-eclipses-big-four-1817972.html
2009 in preparation for your push into the CL
Sign in if you want to comment
Man city - not built for the CL
Page 11 of 14
10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14
posted on 19/10/11
people crying about how they 'won the lottery'- yeah they did. So what?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
They are ruining football?
Loyalty in football is gone. No player is loyal to a club. FACT
posted on 19/10/11
What does constitute a big club?
Winning leagues? Well by that token, if City are small then so are Spurs - after all, both clubs have two titles each.
Attendances? Well by that token, if City are a small club then Spurs are miniscule.
Revenue? Well by that token, Spurs are smaller than City seeing as City earn more in revenue than they do.
All facts my friends. Undisputed facts at that.
--------------
the fact that your cleaning lady can polish your trophies inside ten seconds makes you a small club.
that and getting relegated to the third tier of english football in the recent past. in this day and age, that would never happen to a big club. simple as that.
posted on 19/10/11
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 19/10/11
They are ruining football
------------------------------------
Really? How?
"Loyalty in football is gone. No player is loyal to a club. FACT"
There are how many professional footballers in the world? 10,000? 20,000? 100,000? City have what? 50, 60? If No player (that's NO PLAYER) is loyal to a club (your words), then how exactly are City responsible for the other x-thousand amount of others who have no loyalty to their club whatsoever?
Think about what you're actually proposing here. And I mean really think about it. Then, and only then, you might actually realise that all that is wrong with football isn't as a result of what City are doing. It's as a result of the game OVERALL today. That applies to your club, my club, and every single other club.
Ruining football? You're another one who needs to learn the history of the game.
posted on 19/10/11
As a neutral (Southampton fan) I would just like to say that it is possible for a big club to get relegated to the 3rd division (leeds) its how you climb up that defines you. Look at Southampton. Plus to you Tottenham and Arsenal fans, I forgot of course your whole teams were from your youth academy.... oh wait bale, he was pretty pricey for a youth player wasnt he, walcott, oxdale chamberlain? Sometimes football fans forget that theyre first 11 was bought when they abuse other teams....
posted on 19/10/11
"the fact that your cleaning lady can polish your trophies inside ten seconds makes you a small club."
We have mirrors - makes the task twice as hard
"that and getting relegated to the third tier of english football in the recent past"
And? By that very token, being a premier league club would mean that it's big? Don't think it quite works like that does it? One season in the third tier in the club's entire history doesn't make a club small, in much the same way one season in the top flight makes a club big.
You do know that City have spent more years in the top flight than Spurs have I take it? In fact, only United, Liverpool Everton, Arsenal, and Villa have spent more years in the top flight than City.
Sunderland have spent more time in the top flight than Spurs. Ergo, by your very own logic, Sunderland are a bigger club than Spurs.
Then again, Sunderland do get higher attendances than Spurs. Go figure.
posted on 19/10/11
no. what i said was that in this day and age, no big club would get relegated to the THIRD tier of english football. it simply wouldnt happen. leeds were in absolute turmoil, so were newcastle, but they didnt go down again.
posted on 19/10/11
Tottenham Hotspur are a big club because their name has 16 letters in it, whereas Manchester City only has 14. By that reckoning, the maris pipers are as big as United, who also have 16 letters in their name. All of which means we've got a long way to go before we're as big as Borussia Monchengladbach.
posted on 19/10/11
you could equally argue that citys quick rise from the 3rd tier shows that they were at the wrong level? it was only a short stint they spent down there. Tbh I had the "big club" argument, football is decided on a pitch, results are what counts and when I check the PL City (like my southampton) are top of the league above so called "bigger clubs"
posted on 19/10/11
And in this day and age (i.e. now) City won't get relegated to the third tier either.
You make excuses for Leeds and Newcastle being relegated. The same reasons for them can be said towards City when we fell away.
"but they didn't go down again"
And? City went from spending one season in the third tier to never getting relegated from the Premier League in the space of 3 years. Name one other club who has done that. Just one.
posted on 19/10/11
"what i said was that in this day and age, no big club would get relegated to the THIRD tier of english football. it simply wouldnt happen. leeds were in absolute turmoil, so were newcastle, but they didnt go down again. "
Leeds haven't been back to the PL yet, so your argument is false. Also, you forgot to mention Nottingham Forest, who have had great success in Europe, but haven't been back yet either.
posted on 19/10/11
this is not an argument over which is the bigger club , spurs or man city, because quite frankly there is no argument to be had.
spurs are clearly much bigger, for the time being anyway, citys billions may see to that over time.
my article is about city gettin shown up in the CL because they simply dont belong there. for details of why i refer you to the article and to the comments made on the thread.
have fun debating it out ladies.
posted on 19/10/11
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 19/10/11
my article is about city gettin shown up in the CL because they simply dont belong there. for details of why i refer you to the article and to the comments made on the thread.
--------------------
and has been pointed out, City have as many points after three games as Spurs did. How about you wait and see how the group pans out before you state that. You'll look a bit dumb if City pick up 7-9 points from their last three games.
----------------
moneybags city should pick up all 9, my guess is that they pick up 3
posted on 19/10/11
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 19/10/11
"this is not an argument over which is the bigger club , spurs or man city, because quite frankly there is no argument to be had."
So why are you going on about it then? It's all very well saying this now, but you have perpetuated the argument for the last 7 or 8 pages. Or are you ditching because your argument has fallen apart?
As for us not belonging in the CL, that argument is absolute garbage. We finished third in the league last season, on equal points with Chelsea. By UEFA rules, this means we qualify for the CL straight into the group stages. Ergo, we belong there because we qualified outright.
Seriously, did your mum not loot you a brain?
posted on 19/10/11
what are you talking about leopold?
at what point has this been about who is bigger, spurs or city?
my only reference to such thing would be if someone brought it up as a point.... and i have responded.
some clubs just have european pedigree, and take to the cl like a duck to water (spurs)
some clubs just dont have a european pedigree, and get found out in it ( money city)
posted on 19/10/11
spurs have spent quite a lot as well to get there..... yes not the same scale as city but for you to hark on about money city you may want to look at yourself. And also be a bit thankful to them for them allowing you to borrow their reserve players for your first team (Im not a massive fan of city but your basis for arguments are winding me up)
posted on 19/10/11
my article is about city gettin shown up in the CL because they simply dont belong there
-------------------------
And to echo Greatesttimes' point - at this point the CL, Spurs last season had done no better than City have done this season.
Let me spell it out in the most very simplistic of terms so that idiots like you will understand. City belong in the CL this season just as much as Spurs (or any other club) belonged in the CL last season (and that is based on the very simple fact that they are there because they qualified for it (which is exactly the same reason why every other team in the history of the competition has been in it).
Now, I may be mistaken, but Spurs, for all their adventures last season, didn't actually win it. Forgive me for pointing out that very simple fact. But it is a fact. So one season in the CL (in which Spurs failed) has somehow given Spurs fans the disillusionment that they are some kind of benchmark when it comes to English clubs?
Get over yourselves. That is arrogance personified, and arrogance that can't even be justified. You failed in last year's CL. It may well be the case (in fact probably will be the case) that City will probably fail in this year's CL.
But I will say one thing. The chances are a lot higher that City will at least do the one thing that proved to be beyond Spurs. And that is qualify at the second time of asking. And for such a "small club" to achieve that over such a "big club" such as Spurs? Well, put it this way, all of sudden, it's becoming clear why Spurs fans have such a bee in their bonnet when it comes to City.
Spurs fans = . You lot can't even spell the names of your greatest players correctly.
posted on 19/10/11
look at ourselves?? yes we really splash the cash dont we !!
what signings are you talking about exactly? and what wages do we back these signings up with?
posted on 19/10/11
and take to the cl like a duck to water (spurs)
-----------------------
Spurs failed last season in the CL. Ducks to water tend not to go under. Spurs did.
posted on 19/10/11
Spurs failed last season in the CL. Ducks to water tend not to go under. Spurs did.
--------------
ah yes and city are flying arent they? how many millions have you spent per champions league point earned???
posted on 19/10/11
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 19/10/11
ah yes and city are flying arent they? how many millions have you spent per champions league point earned???
-------------------
I don't understand your fixation with the money they have spent? They have the cash, every club in their position would spend it to achieve what their fans want. Success.
------
yes. i actually didnt mind city when they first had the money, but gradually their fans started to turn into the most irritating s in football.
these cant really be disputed as look how spoiled they now are. getting on their teams back at 1-1 last night and throwing things at opposition players when it wasnt going their own way in a game they no doubt felt they had a right to win.
posted on 19/10/11
http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/premier-league/tottenham-spending-eclipses-big-four-1817972.html
2009 in preparation for your push into the CL
Page 11 of 14
10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14