Rafalove

Robert but For finesse and beauty I’d have VIana

Can’t believe we’ve sunk as low as wanting Red Bull to take us over.

Don’t disagree with changing formation only problem being whatever formation we choose we’ll be implementing Bruce’s version of it, which we have already tried earlier in the season.

sections of the fanbase are starting to question him. Lose to West Brom and the pressure will really start to build.

Messi now has contributed to more than 1000 goals in his career directly

Not a bad idea. Can somebody lend me some absolutely vile donnay/Lonsdale/Slazenger socks? Giant Sports Direct mug may also be useful.

Lad I know who thinks we should “ give Bruce a chance”, and that Pardew is our “best manager of the Ashley era”,because he “finished fifth”, and that “Rafa is overrated”, and played “ the most boring football ever”. And also considered not going last season because it was that bad, but definitely was going to be there this season, says Dubravka is average and makes too many mistakes.

Team BANTER. Set pieces maybe?

Ashley must be shaking in his boots. Better than nothing

The problem being Bruce doesn’t know how to deviate from Rafa’s framework

A come and get me plea to real from Sterling? https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/51584080

Would be great if RAfa could coach me for 5-a-side

They’re not really saying that are they?

Wasn’t it rumoured they decided not to publish a story that would have looked bad so they could get that exclusive too?

No wonder so many former players hated playing for us

But don’t the elite exist precisely because of the ridiculous financial situation? It’s barely a sport if the only way to compete is to get a Sheik to put £400m a year in. But the only reason Man City could compete consistently was doing it they way they did. Tough s***. What Man CIty have done is make it even harder for anyone else to get in. It’s also not guaranteed they wouldn’t have been able to do it without Sheikh Mansour. Don’t get me wrong they wouldn’t have dominated in the way they have, but they have always been a big club, with good owners they’d have been capable of challenging For Champions league spots. I mean Leicester have done it with fewer means at their disposal. With average /forward thinking owners we would have too. Without the sheikh cash what would have happened is the moment city even got close to cl places the rich clubs pick apart the team like vultures. The rich get richer and everyone else is there to make up the numbers. f*** modern football and everything it stands for I mean there are three elite clubs in this country. Manchester United, Liverpool, Arsenal. You could add Chelsea but they’re just the same as Manchester City, in that without a mega rich owner they’d be in that group of about 10 clubs below the elite. It’s absolutely possible Man City could break in to the top 4 and occasionally compete similar to how we did, all those years ago, or how Leicester and Tottenham have today. Maybe big clubs would come in for players, if they were well run they could gradually improve their club and become even more competitive. all it takes is one f*** up of a season/transfer window to send a team crashing down to where they started undoing years of work, see us appointing graham souness as an example of that there is no margin for error. All the while man utd liverpool etc are too big to fail since they can afford to correct mistakes by throwing more money at it until something works. Until very strict spending rules along the lines of american sports then there is nothing fair about financial fair play We made more mistakes than just Souness tbf. Plus I don’t see how adding Chelsea and Man City in to the mix has made anything better, all that’s happened is we have another 2 clubs inflating fees and pushing the likes of ourselves further away. I don’t like what Manchester United in particular have done with commercialisation but at least they along with Arsenal and Liverpool are where they are based on some kind of meritocracy. Theyve built their clubs organically over decades. But because of the UEFA Champions League, those three in particular were only ever going to pull further away. You’d get the odd exception, you’d get the likes of Spurs who’d flirt with them but fall short and ultimately have their best players taken away, but without Man City and Chelsea doing what they did, the top 3 most seasons would be those 3 clubs. Don’t disagree with your point about champions league. You’re correct when you say the top theee clubs would be those clubs most seasons, but at least those clubs are there based on some sort of meritocracy.

He isn’t that old is he? Fuck he looks fantastic for someone that age

But don’t the elite exist precisely because of the ridiculous financial situation? It’s barely a sport if the only way to compete is to get a Sheik to put £400m a year in. But the only reason Man City could compete consistently was doing it they way they did. Tough s***. What Man CIty have done is make it even harder for anyone else to get in. It’s also not guaranteed they wouldn’t have been able to do it without Sheikh Mansour. Don’t get me wrong they wouldn’t have dominated in the way they have, but they have always been a big club, with good owners they’d have been capable of challenging For Champions league spots. I mean Leicester have done it with fewer means at their disposal. With average /forward thinking owners we would have too. Without the sheikh cash what would have happened is the moment city even got close to cl places the rich clubs pick apart the team like vultures. The rich get richer and everyone else is there to make up the numbers. f*** modern football and everything it stands for I mean there are three elite clubs in this country. Manchester United, Liverpool, Arsenal. You could add Chelsea but they’re just the same as Manchester City, in that without a mega rich owner they’d be in that group of about 10 clubs below the elite. It’s absolutely possible Man City could break in to the top 4 and occasionally compete similar to how we did, all those years ago, or how Leicester and Tottenham have today. Maybe big clubs would come in for players, if they were well run they could gradually improve their club and become even more competitive. all it takes is one f*** up of a season/transfer window to send a team crashing down to where they started undoing years of work, see us appointing graham souness as an example of that there is no margin for error. All the while man utd liverpool etc are too big to fail since they can afford to correct mistakes by throwing more money at it until something works. Until very strict spending rules along the lines of american sports then there is nothing fair about financial fair play We made more mistakes than just Souness tbf. Plus I don’t see how adding Chelsea and Man City in to the mix has made anything better, all that’s happened is we have another 2 clubs inflating fees and pushing the likes of ourselves further away. I don’t like what Manchester United in particular have done with commercialisation but at least they along with Arsenal and Liverpool are where they are based on some kind of meritocracy. Theyve built their clubs organically over decades.

But don’t the elite exist precisely because of the ridiculous financial situation? It’s barely a sport if the only way to compete is to get a Sheik to put £400m a year in. But the only reason Man City could compete consistently was doing it they way they did. Tough s***. What Man CIty have done is make it even harder for anyone else to get in. It’s also not guaranteed they wouldn’t have been able to do it without Sheikh Mansour. Don’t get me wrong they wouldn’t have dominated in the way they have, but they have always been a big club, with good owners they’d have been capable of challenging For Champions league spots. I mean Leicester have done it with fewer means at their disposal. With average /forward thinking owners we would have too. Without the sheikh cash what would have happened is the moment city even got close to cl places the rich clubs pick apart the team like vultures. The rich get richer and everyone else is there to make up the numbers. f*** modern football and everything it stands for I mean there are three elite clubs in this country. Manchester United, Liverpool, Arsenal. You could add Chelsea but they’re just the same as Manchester City, in that without a mega rich owner they’d be in that group of about 10 clubs below the elite. It’s absolutely possible Man City could break in to the top 4 and occasionally compete similar to how we did, all those years ago, or how Leicester and Tottenham have today. Maybe big clubs would come in for players, if they were well run they could gradually improve their club and become even more competitive.

But don’t the elite exist precisely because of the ridiculous financial situation? It’s barely a sport if the only way to compete is to get a Sheik to put £400m a year in. But the only reason Man City could compete consistently was doing it they way they did. Tough shit. What Man CIty have done is make it even harder for anyone else to get in. It’s also not guaranteed they wouldn’t have been able to do it without Sheikh Mansour. Don’t get me wrong they wouldn’t have dominated in the way they have, but they have always been a big club, with good owners they’d have been capable of challenging For Champions league spots. I mean Leicester have done it with fewer means at their disposal. With average /forward thinking owners we would have too.

There are plenty of clubs in England that would have “ran him out of town”, nevermind anywhere else

Saudis.

Some info on Saudi Arabia, Aramco and MBS