Tsunami Posted November 20, 2011 Share Posted November 20, 2011 The question should be: How can they have no chips? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cp40 Posted November 20, 2011 Share Posted November 20, 2011 The question should be: How can they have no chips? Balotelli hoyed a firework in the kitchen Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Si Posted November 20, 2011 Share Posted November 20, 2011 The question should be: How can they have no chips? Balotelli hoyed a firework in the kitchen Plenty of bangers then just no chips. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ritchie Posted November 20, 2011 Share Posted November 20, 2011 The question should be: How can they have no chips? Kevin Nolan came back as the Toon mascot. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Incognito Posted November 20, 2011 Share Posted November 20, 2011 The question should be: How can they have no chips? Balotelli hoyed a firework in the kitchen More like they're all on Balotelli's shoulder. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ben-nufc Posted November 20, 2011 Share Posted November 20, 2011 Is what they have done/doing really any different to what the likes of manchester united, chelsea, blackburn and others before them have done over the years? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cp40 Posted November 20, 2011 Share Posted November 20, 2011 Is what they have done/doing really any different to what the likes of manchester united, chelsea, blackburn and others before them have done over the years? not different, but they have taken it to a ridiculous degree imo. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzzieMandias Posted November 20, 2011 Share Posted November 20, 2011 Is what they have done/doing really any different to what the likes of manchester united, chelsea, blackburn and others before them have done over the years? Not that different from Chelsea, except even more staggeringly large sums of money involved. Very little in common with Blackburn. Fuck all in common with Man U. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ben-nufc Posted November 20, 2011 Share Posted November 20, 2011 Is what they have done/doing really any different to what the likes of manchester united, chelsea, blackburn and others before them have done over the years? Not that different from Chelsea, except even more staggeringly large sums of money involved. Very little in common with Blackburn. f*** all in common with Man U. Do you not think Blackburn bought the title in 95 then?, yes the sums were much smaller, but compared to everybody else they were spending a lot more. As for Man U, they have just spent hundreds of millions over a much larger scale of time than anyone else. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest gggg Posted November 20, 2011 Share Posted November 20, 2011 Is what they have done/doing really any different to what the likes of manchester united, chelsea, blackburn and others before them have done over the years? No, rich owners have always been part of the game, only now it's inevitable that if anyone is going to get to the top it can only be through this way thanks to the likes of Man U at the forefront of the PL and CL pulling the rug from under those behind them and removing competition through fair means and good management. The sums needed to get there are bigger because the league is a lot less even and the top clubs have players on 200k a week and 30m players on the bench, but it's nothing new and won't be the last one. Man U is a different case, they had a great team when it was possible for a manager to build a club to the top and kept their fanbase through to the Ferguson era, which meant they could build the most expensive team in the country to win the league. Then came the PL and CL and the extra revenue it gives to the top teams and the extra revenue from being at the forefront of the games commercialism that cemented their position. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sifu Posted November 20, 2011 Share Posted November 20, 2011 Is what they have done/doing really any different to what the likes of manchester united, chelsea, blackburn and others before them have done over the years? not different, but they have taken it to a ridiculous degree imo. Yep. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzzieMandias Posted November 20, 2011 Share Posted November 20, 2011 Is what they have done/doing really any different to what the likes of manchester united, chelsea, blackburn and others before them have done over the years? Not that different from Chelsea, except even more staggeringly large sums of money involved. Very little in common with Blackburn. f*** all in common with Man U. Do you not think Blackburn bought the title in 95 then?, yes the sums were much smaller, but compared to everybody else they were spending a lot more. As for Man U, they have just spent hundreds of millions over a much larger scale of time than anyone else. Jack Walker was a local businessman and Blackburn fan. As different from Abu fucking Dhabi as the sums currently involved. As for Man U, they earned the money they spent. They weren't just given it by some obscenely rich plutocrat in search of global good publicity. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted November 20, 2011 Share Posted November 20, 2011 Is what they have done/doing really any different to what the likes of manchester united, chelsea, blackburn and others before them have done over the years? Not that different from Chelsea, except even more staggeringly large sums of money involved. Very little in common with Blackburn. f*** all in common with Man U. Do you not think Blackburn bought the title in 95 then?, yes the sums were much smaller, but compared to everybody else they were spending a lot more. As for Man U, they have just spent hundreds of millions over a much larger scale of time than anyone else. Jack Walker was a local businessman and Blackburn fan. As different from Abu fucking Dhabi as the sums currently involved. As for Man U, they earned the money they spent. They weren't just given it by some obscenely rich plutocrat in search of global good publicity. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BooBoo Posted November 20, 2011 Share Posted November 20, 2011 Joe Hart is arguably my most disliked player in the league. Arrogant prick. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Chubby Jason Posted November 20, 2011 Share Posted November 20, 2011 Joe Hart is arguably my most disliked player in the league. Arrogant prick. eh?? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sifu Posted November 20, 2011 Share Posted November 20, 2011 Is what they have done/doing really any different to what the likes of manchester united, chelsea, blackburn and others before them have done over the years? Not that different from Chelsea, except even more staggeringly large sums of money involved. Very little in common with Blackburn. f*** all in common with Man U. Do you not think Blackburn bought the title in 95 then?, yes the sums were much smaller, but compared to everybody else they were spending a lot more. As for Man U, they have just spent hundreds of millions over a much larger scale of time than anyone else. Jack Walker was a local businessman and Blackburn fan. As different from Abu f***ing Dhabi as the sums currently involved. As for Man U, they earned the money they spent. They weren't just given it by some obscenely rich plutocrat in search of global good publicity. Spot on. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BooBoo Posted November 20, 2011 Share Posted November 20, 2011 Joe Hart is arguably my most disliked player in the league. Arrogant prick. eh?? I think he's an absolute bell end. His on pitch interview after they won the cup showed an insight into what a tosser he is. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NG32 Posted November 20, 2011 Share Posted November 20, 2011 Joe Hart is arguably my most disliked player in the league. Arrogant prick. eh?? I think he's an absolute bell end. His on pitch interview after they won the cup showed an insight into what a tosser he is. He looks like russ abbot. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Chubby Jason Posted November 20, 2011 Share Posted November 20, 2011 Joe Hart is arguably my most disliked player in the league. Arrogant prick. eh?? I think he's an absolute bell end. His on pitch interview after they won the cup showed an insight into what a tosser he is. Do you mean he's the most disliked player in the league by his fellow players or by fans? I always thought he seemed a decent fella. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BooBoo Posted November 20, 2011 Share Posted November 20, 2011 What? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronaldo Posted November 20, 2011 Share Posted November 20, 2011 Jason's been on the sauce all day today, like. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Chubby Jason Posted November 20, 2011 Share Posted November 20, 2011 Ah. I've actually read your post properly now. This has worried me actually, I may have to reread my uni assignment now. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dinho lad Posted November 20, 2011 Share Posted November 20, 2011 I can see where Otter is coming from. In fact, Mancini in the past criticised his cocky attitude in training. (Not that I like Mancini....) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cp40 Posted November 20, 2011 Share Posted November 20, 2011 Man Citys current standing has been laid on quickly set foundations. im not saying unstable- just not long dug in foundations. they are like an expensive house of cards. It will be great for a time- but as soon as it starts to wobble.......the in fighting, egos, big time charlies, it will all turn ugly Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Interpolic Posted November 20, 2011 Share Posted November 20, 2011 Man Citys current standing has been laid on quickly set foundations. im not saying unstable- just not long dug in foundations. they are like an expensive house of cards. It will be great for a time- but as soon as it starts to wobble.......the in fighting, egos, big time charlies, it will all turn ugly They have made efforts to look at the longer term though, not least with the plans for those unbelievable training facilities for developing their own players. I don't think that expense will count against them with the new rules, correct me if I'm wrong, so that's a way to re-direct the crazy money available and build for the long term. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now