Man Utd Thread:

[Milltown Row2]

In the past United had more money and better players than City - Hence why United won most of the time. The tide has turned.

(Not in my life time)

They'd plenty money in the 80's but never won because there were better teams.. stupid post

[Syferus]

In the past United had more money and better players than City - Hence why United won most of the time. The tide has turned.

(Not in my life time)

They'd plenty money in the 80's but never won because there were better teams.. stupid post

Money wins titles, in all sports.

[Milltown Row2]

In the past United had more money and better players than City - Hence why United won most of the time. The tide has turned.

(Not in my life time)

They'd plenty money in the 80's but never won because there were better teams.. stupid post

Money wins titles, in all sports.

So why didn't they win in the 80's?

[imtommygunn]

Big Ron was in charge and they were all on the beer every day...

[Syferus]

In the past United had more money and better players than City - Hence why United won most of the time. The tide has turned.

(Not in my life time)

They'd plenty money in the 80's but never won because there were better teams.. stupid post

Money wins titles, in all sports.

So why didn't they win in the 80's?

Note the absence of the word all in the previous post. Empirical v anecdotal evidence is something a lot of people here seem to confuse. Fin.

[Cunny Funt]

Lukaku has been a serious waste of money for Utd

Ah I f**king hate these comments.

Here's how United play against the rest of the top 6. They absolutely isolate Lukaku and provide no service to his feet, no through balls for him to chase into, no support for his knockdowns,  and no crosses for him to attack.

I don't care how much they paid for him. Today and all the other top 6 matches are not on him. It's simply not possible to be a matchwinner in these circumstances.

Try, just try to be rational about what you're watching.

I'll disagree with the both of yis

Lukaku's not been useless BUT the difference between really really good players and the rest is that they'll score from that one chance that comes their way in a tight game and from memory in both the Liverpool game and today he's had the chance to be the hero and if he takes them no one remembers anything else...

A bit unlucky today though, an auld dribbly one off his shin would probably have gone in but he caught it absolutely flush 

I'm not suggesting he's Gerd Muller. But it's truly unfair on a striker completely starved of service to then escalate any half chance he gets, into a gimme.

It's like blaming a woman when she gets raped.

Bit of ridiculous comment to make.

Boycey is right, what makes the best forwards the best is that they'll score from that one chance that comes their way in a tight game. Anyway it was Lukakus poor defending on both goals that cost his side more.

[Milltown Row2]

In the past United had more money and better players than City - Hence why United won most of the time. The tide has turned.

(Not in my life time)

They'd plenty money in the 80's but never won because there were better teams.. stupid post

Money wins titles, in all sports.

So why didn't they win in the 80's?

Note the absence of the word all in the previous post. Empirical v anecdotal evidence is something a lot of people here seem to confuse. Fin.

Nope, when you say money wins titles in all sports I'd say you mean all sports including football, Utd were the big spenders, but as tommy has alluded to, shit managers

[Bord na Mona man]

Up until recently I would have considered Guardiola to be a tad overrated, but he's absolutely tearing it up this season.
Unless his players take it upon themselves to pull the handbrake, City should be the earliest title clinchers of the Premier League era.

[Syferus]

In the past United had more money and better players than City - Hence why United won most of the time. The tide has turned.

(Not in my life time)

They'd plenty money in the 80's but never won because there were better teams.. stupid post

Money wins *hint* titles, in all sports.

So why didn't they win in the 80's?

Note the absence of the word all in the previous post. Empirical v anecdotal evidence is something a lot of people here seem to confuse. Fin.

Nope, when you say money wins titles in all sports I'd say you mean all sports including football, Utd were the big spenders, but as tommy has alluded to, shit managers

Think about where all is missing in that sentence, because you totally missed the point.

[seafoid]

In the past United had more money and better players than City - Hence why United won most of the time. The tide has turned.

(Not in my life time)

They'd plenty money in the 80's but never won because there were better teams.. stupid post

Money wins titles, in all sports.

except most GAA and other amateur sports

Clann had better players back in the day.  Money would not have beaten the McManuses.

[bennydorano]

Jesus Seafoid that's some statement in the era of the pro Dubs

[screenexile]

United's midfield couldn't pass the salt!

[BennyCake]

De Gea was very very poor with those two goals. He needs to be spreading himself, making the target smaller. That boy is so overrated.

[screenexile]

I hate Utd but De Gea is the only genuine World Class player they had on the pitch today!

[Syferus]

De Gea was very very poor with those two goals. He needs to be spreading himself, making the target smaller. That boy is so overrated.

Stop trying so hard.