Other games (2024/25)

[Ace]

6 hours ago, Likelylad said:

I think that’s just the modern fan tbf. People were leaving on Sunday and if outside of winning something. If that game isn’t one to stay behind an applaud the lads off. I don’t know what is. 

Im sure a good portion of our fans think games end at 85 minutes the way they fuck off regardless of what’s happening in the game 

[Ace]

5 hours ago, duo said:

I still hope Arsenal win the league - City will get away with it but reading those emails they cheated their way to building that squad.

FFP is the biggest cheat going 

 

By the rich to benefit the rich.

 

Dont believe the propaganda 

[Ace]

5 hours ago, AyeDubbleYoo said:

I don’t think that Thiago one was a handball. He just falls down, it looks bad that his arm traps the ball but there’s nothing unnatural or making himself bigger about it. 
 

As far as I understand the rules. 

 

 

 

His arm is well away from his body how is he not making himself bigger ?‍♂️
 

Blatant cheating towards Liverpool again and it will get swept under the rug by the cartel media 

[Ace]

5 hours ago, Yorkie said:

 

It's absolutely rubbish. It's basically Man City's league to lose every single year and only a Herculean effort is enough to result in something otherwise. Yeah I hate Liverpool and ManU but at least they're 'real.' Man City are just nothingness. Just this boring entity that keeps winning basically no matter what. 

They’re real? Have you been drinking the cool aid from those 2?

 

Nobody seems to remember they both got ahead by getting major outside investment and both had long periods of dominating the league where a Herculean effort was required to beat them.

 

Liverpool and Man U have comparable amounts of money they just don’t spend it as well.

[Ace]

5 hours ago, Willow said:

Definitely not a handball and in no way deliberate any way you look at it, so the correct decision in my opinion.

?‍♂️?‍♂️?‍♂️?‍♂️

 

Arm is away from the body and stops the ball going through. Totally stonewall 

[Nucasol]

8 hours ago, The College Dropout said:

Get bored and do what?

Can see Pep going after a World Cup at some stage. Spain boss.

[Cronky]

3 hours ago, Ace said:

They’re real? Have you been drinking the cool aid from those 2?

 

Nobody seems to remember they both got ahead by getting major outside investment and both had long periods of dominating the league where a Herculean effort was required to beat them.

 

Liverpool and Man U have comparable amounts of money they just don’t spend it as well.

 

Man U had their period of domination because they had the best manager of all time, and they have a big income stream due to their large support base. It wasn't down to huge outside investment. Likewise Liverpool were well managed over a long period of time, and once success is achieved, it can generate its own momentum.

 

In the modern era, with meg-rich owners with bottomless pits of money, there needs to be some form of financial regulation to ensure that we don't end up with one club in a dominant position. What we're seeing now with Man City has no previous parallels. In recent weeks, they haven't just beaten their rivals like Liverpool and Arsenal, they've completely dominated them.

 

And really, whatever you might think of FFP, those are the established rules which clubs (including City) have agreed to adhere to. If City have not been doing that, then they are guilty of cheating and there is no game if competitors are allowed to get away with cheating.

[Froggy]

2 minutes ago, Cronky said:

 

Man U had their period of domination because they had the best manager of all time, and they have a big income stream due to their large support base. It wasn't down to huge outside investment. Likewise Liverpool were well managed over a long period of time, and once success is achieved, it can generate its own momentum.

 

In the modern era, with meg-rich owners with bottomless pits of money, there needs to be some form of financial regulation to ensure that we don't end up with one club in a dominant position. What we're seeing now with Man City has no previous parallels. In recent weeks, they haven't just beaten their rivals like Liverpool and Arsenal, they've completely dominated them.

 

And really, whatever you might think of FFP, those are the established rules which clubs (including City) have agreed to adhere to. If City have not been doing that, then they are guilty of cheating and there is no game if competitors are allowed to get away with cheating.

 

Unless he's going way, way back to when we almost went bust a couple of times and required outside investment. 

[RodneyCisse]

When did Lampard last win a game?

[Cronky]

8 minutes ago, Froggy said:

 

Unless he's going way, way back to when we almost went bust a couple of times and required outside investment. 

 

When was that?

[Froggy]

1 minute ago, Cronky said:

 

When was that?

 

The early 1900's.

 

[Cronky]

10 hours ago, 80 said:

I've only seen that one reverse angle of the handball, but by my own personal, non legal interpretation of the rule, it wasn't a handball. I'm a ball to hand doesn't count guy, unless the silhouette is silly.

 

By the actual rules, I've got no real clue if it was or wasn't and it seems like that's the intention.

 

 

 

 

There is certainly no rule which says that if the ball makes contact with the hand then it's a penalty, regardless of the circumstances. There is definitely such a thing as accidental handball, so it really is down to subjective interpretation.

 

What I find annoying is the almost wilful ignorance shown by pundits and managers about the way in which VAR is supposed to operate. VAR is only supposed to intervene when the monitor considers that there is a clear and obvious error. You could say the decision was an error, but it wasn't clear and obvious. After the game, Moyes said that VAR should have asked the ref to have another look because the decision was 'close'. Well as I understand it, VAR is not supposed to operate like that.

[gbandit]

VAR has ruled on a ton of pathetic handball decisions and asked the ref to review them often throughout the season. Last night was one of the more blatant ones and they ignored it. Yes, his body was falling but so what? They’ve been giving them for slamming a ball off someone’s hand from three yards. The rule is a mess but the issue last night was the total lack of consistency. Was a disgraceful decision in the context of what’s been given all season 

[dorty]

Haaland last night with his hair down looked like a cross between Miss Piggy and Dolph Lundgren.

 

 

Edited April 27, 2023 by dorty

[brummie]

I still can't believe we're 5th. What an insane job Emery is doing.

 

Scored in all 20 games since he joined. That alone is a pretty remarkable statistic.

 

Great seeing Brighton fuck up last night, too.

[KDT]

I can see Arsenal struggling next season in response to how this title race is going now, they'll be back to contending 4th/5th rather than where they are currently.

[jackyboy]

All I've heard is about how brilliant City were, and they were, but nothing about how poor Arsenal were.

In total contrast to the reporting on our match against Spurs 

[dorty]

16 minutes ago, jackyboy said:

All I've heard is about how brilliant City were, and they were, but nothing about how poor Arsenal were.

In total contrast to the reporting on our match against Spurs 

Arsenal were awful, on the back foot from the word go. 

[TomYam]

2 hours ago, Cronky said:

 

When was that?

The first time was back in the Edwardian era when they were still called Newton Heath. It was a marketing ploy to try to emulate the much more popular and successful Uniteds of Sheffield and Newcastle. The reason for their huge (remote) fanbase today is as much to do with marketing as Busby/Ferguson.

As far as I'm concerned, they are still and always will be Newton Heath. 

 

[brummie]

18 minutes ago, TomYam said:

The first time was back in the Edwardian era when they were still called Newton Heath. It was a marketing ploy to try to emulate the much more popular and successful Uniteds of Sheffield and Newcastle. The reason for their huge (remote) fanbase today is as much to do with marketing as Busby/Ferguson.

As far as I'm concerned, they are still and always will be Newton Heath. 

 

 

The first boost they had was without a doubt the Munich air disaster. That's in no way a snarky comment about Munich, either, it was terrible, but it brought them huge international coverage and sympathy. 

 

When I was growing up (till i was 24 in fact) they had gone a marvellous 25 years without winning a title. Glory days.

 

Anyway, fortunately for them, those years ending coincided with the advent of the Premier League's first season, beating us into second, the cunts - our challenge was ended by them getting two very late goals at Sheffield Wednesday, both scored by a certain potato headed defender who years later would inflict even more misery on us, but that's by the by. 

 

They've got huge support abroad, yes, but I reckon Liverpool have way more.

 

My overall take on Man United is that they were, are, and always will be cunts.

 

 

 

 

Edited April 27, 2023 by brummie

[Ace]

2 hours ago, Cronky said:

 

Man U had their period of domination because they had the best manager of all time, and they have a big income stream due to their large support base. It wasn't down to huge outside investment. Likewise Liverpool were well managed over a long period of time, and once success is achieved, it can generate its own momentum.

 

In the modern era, with meg-rich owners with bottomless pits of money, there needs to be some form of financial regulation to ensure that we don't end up with one club in a dominant position. What we're seeing now with Man City has no previous parallels. In recent weeks, they haven't just beaten their rivals like Liverpool and Arsenal, they've completely dominated them.

 

And really, whatever you might think of FFP, those are the established rules which clubs (including City) have agreed to adhere to. If City have not been doing that, then they are guilty of cheating and there is no game if competitors are allowed to get away with cheating.

Id suggest you educate yourself towards James W Gibson and Eric Sawyer and what they did for each club. 
 

You have a bias towards modern investment I see (or maybe none English). Not all big investment works but in both their cases the juggernauts don’t get going without initially being ‘saved’.
 

You use ‘previous parallels’ it does not mean what you think it means. If City win this year that will be 7 titles in 12 years both Liverpool and Man U have won 8 in 12 year periods 

 

You may say but City won it by 19pts a few years back as a sign of dominance but don’t forget Man U won it by 18 in 2000 so it’s not like it’s some huge anomaly.

 

You make out its all about money but Man U/ Chelsea and Liverpool have all spent an absolute fortune and they are nowhere near. City are having the benefit Man U did with Busby or Liverpool did with Shankly of having the financial backing alongside a great manager.

 

Always remember anything written or said on those 2 is amplified and biased due to their large fanbases (particularly online) and preferential media treatment.

 

They (along with Spurs) led the charge against our takeover because they want less competition, they let the super league push, they politic behind the scenes to damage other clubs, to paraphrase from the hunger games ‘remember who the real enemy is’

[Froggy]

43 minutes ago, brummie said:

 

The first boost they had was without a doubt the Munich air disaster. That's in no way a snarky comment about Munich, either, it was terrible, but it brought them huge international coverage and sympathy. 

 

When I was growing up (till i was 24 in fact) they had gone a marvellous 25 years without winning a title. Glory days.

 

Anyway, fortunately for them, those years ending coincided with the advent of the Premier League's first season, beating us into second, the cunts - our challenge was ended by them getting two very late goals at Sheffield Wednesday, both scored by a certain potato headed defender who years later would inflict even more misery on us, but that's by the by. 

 

They've got huge support abroad, yes, but I reckon Liverpool have way more.

 

My overall take on Man United is that they were, are, and always will be cunts.

 

Maxnst, Kid Icarus, bigfella like this. 

[Big River]

52 minutes ago, brummie said:

The first boost they had was without a doubt the Munich air disaster. That's in no way a snarky comment about Munich, either, it was terrible, but it brought them huge international coverage and sympathy. 

 

When I was growing up (till i was 24 in fact) they had gone a marvellous 25 years without winning a title. Glory days.

 

Anyway, fortunately for them, those years ending coincided with the advent of the Premier League's first season, beating us into second, the cunts - our challenge was ended by them getting two very late goals at Sheffield Wednesday, both scored by a certain potato headed defender who years later would inflict even more misery on us, but that's by the by. 

 

They've got huge support abroad, yes, but I reckon Liverpool have way more.

 

My overall take on Man United is that they were, are, and always will be cunts.

 

[Deuce]

I really can’t stand the “who’s a proper ‘big’ club” debate. It’s weirdly classist, in a footballing sense anyway.

 

 

Edited April 27, 2023 by Deuce

[Cronky]

1 hour ago, Ace said:

Id suggest you educate yourself towards James W Gibson and Eric Sawyer and what they did for each club. 
 

You have a bias towards modern investment I see (or maybe none English). Not all big investment works but in both their cases the juggernauts don’t get going without initially being ‘saved’.
 

You use ‘previous parallels’ it does not mean what you think it means. If City win this year that will be 7 titles in 12 years both Liverpool and Man U have won 8 in 12 year periods 

 

You may say but City won it by 19pts a few years back as a sign of dominance but don’t forget Man U won it by 18 in 2000 so it’s not like it’s some huge anomaly.

 

You make out its all about money but Man U/ Chelsea and Liverpool have all spent an absolute fortune and they are nowhere near. City are having the benefit Man U did with Busby or Liverpool did with Shankly of having the financial backing alongside a great manager.

 

Always remember anything written or said on those 2 is amplified and biased due to their large fanbases (particularly online) and preferential media treatment.

 

They (along with Spurs) led the charge against our takeover because they want less competition, they let the super league push, they politic behind the scenes to damage other clubs, to paraphrase from the hunger games ‘remember who the real enemy is’

Argument by analogy is often a dangerous route. You’d be hard put to find any club that hasn’t at some stage been financially supported by its owners. 
 

The fact is that rules have been laid down to prevent clubs from spending unlimited amounts on transfer fees and players wages. If a club is ignoring those rules whilst other clubs are adhering to them then that is cheating, an unfair advantage and it should be stopped. That consideration was not around when the two gentlemen you have named were operating.

 

I’m familiar with the line of argument that FFP is anti competitive because it prevents clubs from challenging those who are already wealthy. The inevitable problem is that we now have a club whose objective has been to destroy the competition through almost limitless spending. And gradually and remorselessly they are succeeding. 
 

Ffp is not perfect- no system in a commercial world can be. But the alternative looks far worse to me.