Jump to content

Recommended Posts

26 minutes ago, 500bhp said:

You clearly need to go and spend £115m on a new defender. Squad is too small and lacking quality after £2bn net spend! Incidentally, when is the final ruling to be made on those 115 charges. It must be close to being time barred and then thrown out like those UEFA charges were. 

 

Haha why are you on strings because of City. Didn't have yous down for being sheep. Most of you don't seem to be and understand how corrupt the Premier League is, but there's always going to be a few dopes. 

 

Just to help you though, our net spend over the last 5 years is -€396m compared with a whopping -€772m for Arsenal, Chelsea with -€757m and -€782m for Man United.

 

Good luck to you mate. 

 

 

Edited by Mase

Link to post
Share on other sites

Love the way Adam Summerton casually drops into his commentary that uses Transfermarkt for research or talks about his panini stickers. 

 

Needs to replace "Fletch" on the big games at TNT. 

Can tell he just loves football and everything he says is sheer enthusiasm and off the cuff. No pre-written bullshit that you get from the likes of Drury. 

 

 

Edited by Fak

Link to post
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Mase said:

 

Haha why are you on strings because of City. Didn't have yous down for being sheep. Most of you don't seem to be and understand how corrupt the Premier League is, but there's always going to be a few dopes. 

 

Just to help you though, our net spend over the last 5 years is -€396m compared with a whopping -€772m for Arsenal, Chelsea with -€757m and -€782m for Man United.

 

Good luck to you mate. 

 

 

 

Apologies its £1.59bn net spend since the UAE takeover. Funded predominantly by related party transactions which would not be allowed now 😀

 

Thanks, we need the good luck this season, especially in the LC semis! 

Link to post
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, 500bhp said:

Apologies its £1.59bn net spend since the UAE takeover. Funded predominantly by related party transactions which would not be allowed now 😀

 

Thanks, we need the good luck this season, especially in the LC semis! 

 

£1.59bn net spend and watched my team win absolutely everything when I thought the most I'd see was Andy Morrison lifting the Division 2 playoff final trophy - I'll take that. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Mase said:

 

£1.59bn net spend and watched my team win absolutely everything when I thought the most I'd see was Andy Morrison lifting the Division 2 playoff final trophy - I'll take that. 

Well that's financial doping for you. The fourth biggest club in the North West becomes the most successful club in Europe. You weren't the first, the fourth biggest club in London did the same with the money from the Russian. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, 500bhp said:

Apologies its £1.59bn net spend since the UAE takeover. Funded predominantly by related party transactions which would not be allowed now 😀

 

Thanks, we need the good luck this season, especially in the LC semis! 

The laws an ass though. Should have been able to spend whatever they could afford like everyone else before them did. 

 

 

Edited by Wolfcastle

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, 500bhp said:

Well that's financial doping for you. The fourth biggest club in the North West becomes the most successful club in Europe. You weren't the first, the fourth biggest club in London did the same with the money from the Russian. 

Interested to know which 3 clubs you think are bigger than Chelsea in London?

 

Arsenal, Tottenham and who else?

Link to post
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Mase said:

 

£1.59bn net spend and watched my team win absolutely everything when I thought the most I'd see was Andy Morrison lifting the Division 2 playoff final trophy - I'll take that. 

 

Will never begrudge Man City fans enjoying their success. A lot of parallels between the clubs before the takeovers in the 2000s. You just hit your jackpot one takeover before us and when you could spend without consequence. 

 

 

Edited by Optimistic Nut

Link to post
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Jewel said:

Interested to know which 3 clubs you think are bigger than Chelsea in London?

 

Arsenal, Tottenham and who else?

West Ham. Historically bigger than Chelsea, until last 30 years. 

 

 

Edited by 500bhp
30 years not 20

Link to post
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Mase said:

 

Haha why are you on strings because of City. Didn't have yous down for being sheep. Most of you don't seem to be and understand how corrupt the Premier League is, but there's always going to be a few dopes. 

 

Just to help you though, our net spend over the last 5 years is -€396m compared with a whopping -€772m for Arsenal, Chelsea with -€757m and -€782m for Man United.

 

Good luck to you mate. 

 

 

 


:lol: :lol: in general. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, 500bhp said:

West Ham. Historically bigger than Chelsea, until last 20 years. 

West Ham haven't been bigger than Chelsea since the 70s, and even then it was debatable.

 

I know we like to hate on Chelsea, and rightly so, for all the detestable things they represent about modern football, but most people like to ignore the fact they were regularly winning trophies even before Abramovic rocked up. They were also qualifying for the Champions League, whereas West Ham spent the entirety of the 80s and 90s as a yoyo club.

 

West Ham have been relegation fodder for most of their existence. Never won a single league championship in their entire history.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jewel said:

West Ham haven't been bigger than Chelsea since the 70s, and even then it was debatable.

 

I know we like to hate on Chelsea, and rightly so, for all the detestable things they represent about modern football, but most people like to ignore the fact they were regularly winning trophies even before Abramovic rocked up. They were also qualifying for the Champions League, whereas West Ham spent the entirety of the 80s and 90s as a yoyo club.

 

West Ham have been relegation fodder for most of their existence. Never won a single league championship in their entire history.

Chelsea were in the second division with us in the 80s mind 

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 03/01/2026 at 15:27, Big Geordie said:

Hearts in front v Livingston. Will go 6 points clear if they win. 

 

We should have been 4 or 5 ahead by HT.

 

However, I'm happy with the 1-0 FT.

 

It's all about getting the points.

 

Good weekend for Newcastle.

 

A sound win and within a point of Sun'land now. 👍 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I love how open Slot is about his shit coaching. 

 

Pointing out the reason Fulham had so much space for that strike was the fact they set up to defend a long throw and instead they took it short. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, martoon said:

 

We should have been 4 or 5 ahead by HT.

 

However, I'm happy with the 1-0 FT.

 

It's all about getting the points.

 

Good weekend for Newcastle.

 

A sound win and within a point of Sun'land now. 👍 

 

'Mon the Jambos!

 

Always keep an eye out for yous and sincerely hope you can do it

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, 500bhp said:

West Ham. Historically bigger than Chelsea, until last 30 years. 

 

 

 

West Ham weren't at the races until the 1960s. Few would have considered them one of the the 'biggest' 20-25 clubs in the country. Chelsea were a marginally bigger club (with one major trophy and intermittently big crowds) prior to the '60s. After that, he two clubs were of similar size until the advent of the PL. The geography of Chelsea has long worked in their favour.

Arsenal were the first 'big' London club, having been the first financially supercharged club. Tottenham really broke through after WWII (as did ManU).

You could certainly argue that Charlton Athletic were bigger than either Chelsea or West Ham in 1950, say.

Link to post
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Optimistic Nut said:

 

Will never begrudge Man City fans enjoying their success. A lot of parallels between the clubs before the takeovers in the 2000s. You just hit your jackpot one takeover before us and when you could spend without consequence. 

 

 

 

 

Good post.

FFP and the rest of the nonsense rules were brought in to stop teams that's don't play in red from competing and essentially doing a City. We were lucky that we got chosen, I believe you were also being looked at in 2008. If your owner has the money, why shouldn't they be able to spend it?

 

For me personally, I'd love to see another team do what we've done, which is why I was buzzing when you got taken over. Every set of loyal fans deserve to see their team win.

Link to post
Share on other sites

City picked up a few defensive injuries yesterday I see. With other knocks and AFCON maybe still meaning they have players missing. It should help us next week. They could look light (by their standards) for our game. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Lush Vlad said:

City picked up a few defensive injuries yesterday I see. With other knocks and AFCON maybe still meaning they have players missing. It should help us next week. They could look light (by their standards) for our game. 

I'm hoping they don't get ideas and look at Hall or Tino. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, r0cafella said:

I'm hoping they don't get ideas and look at Hall or Tino. 

£70 million for Tino, bid accepted by Wednesday, then we replace him for 50 mil with Premier proven Neco Williams. Get it done Ross you Ryan Fraser looking creep.

Link to post
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, 500bhp said:

Well that's financial doping for you. The fourth biggest club in the North West becomes the most successful club in Europe. You weren't the first, the fourth biggest club in London did the same with the money from the Russian. 

 

But that's how it should be, isn't it?

You want United and Liverpool to just keep winning everything and City and Everton to win nothing? Why? City and Everton should have the same opportunities and if that means they're pumped with money to get there, just like United and Liverpool have been over the years, then so be it.

 

If someone took over Fulham and wanted them to get to where Chelsea are by pumping their own money into the club then it should be allowed. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...