Manchester United

[mikeyp102]

On 23/04/2017 at 17:38, VillaChris said:

 

It's just a foreign thing really, overseas teams do this when a player gets serious injury.

I'd said it's a very 'Liverpool esque' thing to do..

Edited April 26, 2017 by mikeyp102

[VillaChris]

3 minutes ago, mikeyp102 said:

I'd said it's a very 'Liverpool esque' thing to do..

Good shout. Didn't Liverpool do that when Suarez got banned for racial abuse. If ever a club misjudged a situation it was them.

[villa89]

8 hours ago, VillaChris said:

Good shout. Didn't Liverpool do that when Suarez got banned for racial abuse. If ever a club misjudged a situation it was them.

Yep, I'm just suprised they didn't have the black armbands on too.

[TrentVilla]

 

Despite their faux pas with the t-shirts I hope they win tonight, I'd rather they get top 4 than City.

[villa89]

2 hours ago, TrentVilla said:

Despite their faux pas with the t-shirts I hope they win tonight, I'd rather they get top 4 than City.

I can't stand Mourinho so I hope they miss out on top four and lose the europa league final.

[bobzy]

1 hour ago, villa89 said:

I can't stand Mourinho so I hope they miss out on top four and lose the europa league final.

...plus just Man Utd on the whole.  They've had success and their fans absolutely cannot cope with not challenging for honours.

Nothing likeable about the club at all, for me.

[BOF]

@bobzyin response to this

1 minute ago, bobzy said:

How can you be fine with Man Utd?!  

I suppose first and foremost I'm a traditionalist in football, so ye olde worlde clubs will automatically get more respect from me than the nouveau riche shite like Chelsea and City.  Yes I know they have the Glazers now, but they've always been a 'big club'.  They didn't buy that.  Plus I've a few mates who support them so I just have more time for them than most of the other lot up there.  Similarly I'd have Liverpool over the likes of Chelsea and City, although the non-stop embarrassing behaviour from their fans and that club as a whole make it much more difficult to sympathise with them, so I generally stick to mocking them, whereas I hate the aforementioned shades of blue shit.

[bobzy]

4 minutes ago, BOF said:

@bobzyin response to this

I suppose first and foremost I'm a traditionalist in football, so ye olde worlde clubs will automatically get more respect from me than the nouveau riche shite like Chelsea and City.  Yes I know they have the Glazers now, but they've always been a 'big club'.  They didn't buy that.  Plus I've a few mates who support them so I just have more time for them than most of the other lot up there.  Similarly I'd have Liverpool over the likes of Chelsea and City, although the non-stop embarrassing behaviour from their fans and that club as a whole make it much more difficult to sympathise with them, so I generally stick to mocking them, whereas I hate the aforementioned shades of blue shit.

That's fair... but weren't Man Utd basically the first "nouveau riche" club relating to their benefitting from Sky dolla?  They smashed transfer records for fun to (to an extent) buy their way to titles.  Rio Ferdinand?  £30m.  Wayne Rooney age 16?  £30m.  A fan base, of my age group, populated from seemingly nowhere.  Villa, Blues, Man Utd - the 3 most supported clubs around me when I grew up.

Plus - with no disrespect to your mates, of course - their fans are incredibly arrogant.  It's down to their success and more success is, therefore, expected.  But still...  

 

Edit:  Not to mention Fergie-time, the amount of crazy decisions that went in their favour etc.!

Edited April 27, 2017 by bobzy

[rodders0223]

10 minutes ago, bobzy said:

...plus just Man Utd on the whole.  They've had success and their fans absolutely cannot cope with not challenging for honours.

Nothing likeable about the club at all, for me.

Some of them have only ever known success. They have had 25 years or reletive non stop success, it must be difficult to come to terms with the fact that no matter how much revenue they generate, who they buy and who manages them that they have peaked and will very likely never see success like that again.

Still, **** them. The reaction only a few months into Moyes reign was pretty disgusting.

[BOF]

They benefitted no more or less than anyone else fromm Sky.  That they maximised their money is only to Fergie's credit.  As for breaking transfer records.  The point I'm making is that it was their money to spend as one of the big sides.  They didn't inherit it from some sheikh.  They became a big club the right way.  Organically.  Over time, the way we did and the way Liverpool did etc.  That status is what resulted in them being rich, not some sugar daddy.  I don't begrudge rich if it's done right.

[bobzy]

15 minutes ago, BOF said:

They benefitted no more or less than anyone else fromm Sky.  That they maximised their money is only to Fergie's credit.  As for breaking transfer records.  The point I'm making is that it was their money to spend as one of the big sides.  They didn't inherit it from some sheikh.  They became a big club the right way.  Organically.  Over time, the way we did and the way Liverpool did etc.  That status is what resulted in them being rich, not some sugar daddy.  I don't begrudge rich if it's done right.

No, that's wrong - they did benefit more.  More TV money went to the winners of the Premier League, which they (of course; how can we forget?! ) were in the first season.  The clever move was to float on the stock exchange the year before the PL.  That first year success lead to loads of investment.

I don't wrong what the "right" or "wrong" way is in terms of becoming rich.  I mean, Man Utd plunged themselves into massive debts in order to keep pumping money into their global arm.  I can't remember the figure reported when the Glazers took over, but it was staggering.  Something like £700m?  Maybe there's nothing wrong with this but in, say, Germany, clubs can't operate like that.  Obviously, it all worked out to their benefit as they remaining successful for what seemed like forever at the time.

Arsenal, on the face of it, seem to have done it "organically".

[Xela]

Man Utd were one of the biggest before the Sky money, they formed the traditional big 6 with Liverpool, Arsenal, Everton, Spurs and ourselves. (sometimes it was classed as the big 5 with us missing as we struggled during the mid/late 80's). Grand old clubs with the biggest stadiums, the richest histories and the fullest trophy cabinets. Those clubs grew organically over the years to become what they were. 

Man Utd were skint in the late 80's, like a fallen giant. Big old stadium but looking tired. Yes, they have benefitted from the TV money massively, but most clubs have. Man Utd just happened to get to the top at exactly the right time to maximise and they got their by having arguably the greatest manager of all time. 

I get what @BOF is saying. I'm a traditionalist as well and would rather have United over City.

[villa89]

Embarrassing for them tonight. Playing like a team fighting the drop. Hoping to hold on for a point. Classic mourinho, no ambition, no positivity, just murder the game and turn it into dour rubbish. 

[theboyangel]

Oh dear fellaini! 

What a dick! Sure, aguerro made a meal of it but stupid stupid fellaini for dropping the but. 

 

[PaulC]

Boring 

[VillaChris]

Serious question but why 4 years after signing for them does Fellani still start regularly?

If Man. United want to know why they don't win the league title anymore I'd suggest that's a pretty good reason right there. He's a proper mug player.

[Zatman]

2 hours ago, villa89 said:

Embarrassing for them tonight. Playing like a team fighting the drop. Hoping to hold on for a point. Classic mourinho, no ambition, no positivity, just murder the game and turn it into dour rubbish. 

Ferguson would have played the same way, its up to the home team to break them down

[PaulC]

10 hours ago, Zatman said:

Ferguson would have played the same way, its up to the home team to break them down

I dont agree with that. Jose sole purpose is to stop other teams playing. Give me a Real Madrid v Barcelona game anyday over a Manchester derby as there is only one man trying to play football. Jose is anti-football. The game would be better off without him.

[PaulC]

11 hours ago, VillaChris said:

Serious question but why 4 years after signing for them does Fellani still start regularly?

If Man. United want to know why they don't win the league title anymore I'd suggest that's a pretty good reason right there. He's a proper mug player.

I cant stand Fellnai and the reason he picks him sums Jose up. 

Edited April 28, 2017 by PaulC

[BOF]

I'm seeing a lot more criticism of Mourinho than I am of Pep this morning.  This despite United going away from home and getting a good result against a very dangerous team, where a defeat would have been extremely damaging to their top 4 ambitions, where the other manager was at home with a glorious chance to put a nail in a coffin and failed to beat a direct rival.

I genuinely think people hold Mourinho to some ridiculous standard while letting almost everyone else, including the second coming over at Eastlands, away with murder.

Ultimately I think it comes down to personality.  People don't like Mourinho.  So people will give him very little leeway and will look for the negatives.  The reaction to last night's game and to the result is a small but fairly typical example of that.