Man Utd Thread:

[imtommygunn]

Referees, players childish defensive errors, clubs won't spend enough money. No end to jose's excuses. I would be with seanie. To be honest united aren't doing that bad but everything has to be an excuse as to why it's not jose's fault. This will surely grind the players confidence down eventually. A truly classless man.

[seafoid]

Man U generate £680 m per annum. The Glazers get most of that. Apparently they have spent £600m net  since Fergie left. Even if it is double that the Glazers get a lot of the revenues. 

[DuffleKing]

Jose running out of excuses now.

Third season syndrome seems about right.

Except it's his second season...

[stiffler]

Jose running out of excuses now.

Third season syndrome seems about right.

Except it's his second season...

Exactly.

[AZOffaly]

He normally wins the league in his second season though? I'm not sure the narrative will be the same this time around.

[Geoff Tipps]

Pathetic comments tonight from the cheque book manager.

[bennydorano]

Man City might be heading into a Fergie decade. That will hurt down the Stretford End.

Citi are heading into an era where arab owners with simply bottomless wealth can buy clubs like Citi and PSG and manipulate fair-play rules to buy whoever they want and pay whatever wages are required to get them to come to the club. The  Qataris tried to buy United from the Glazers before buying PSG and personally I am glad it didn't happen.  As bad as the Glazers are viewed, at least the money buying players is coming from the club's legitimate revenue streams and not from oil wealth off the back of human rights abuses in the Gulf.

You may get used to moral victories then. 2nd to City will be ethically first.

[thewobbler]

Always I find it odd when a Man Utd fan complains about the spending of other clubs.

As a club, United have spent the premier league era breaking transfer records and higherinh wages.

In past two seasons alone, £100m for Pogba, £75m for Lukaku. I don't care how you to try to justify this as a revenue spend, it's absolutely disgusting.

[Boycey]

Always I find it odd when a Man Utd fan complains about the spending of other clubs.

As a club, United have spent the premier league era breaking transfer records and higherinh wages.

In past two seasons alone, £100m for Pogba, £75m for Lukaku. I don't care how you to try to justify this as a revenue spend, it's absolutely disgusting.

I wouldn't be complaining about it merely pointing out that City have spent £450m odd more than Utd in the last 10 years plus had a £1billion pumped into their club while United have had the same stripped out of the club in the same period. Is it that big a shock that they currently find themselves in the halfpenny place to City? I'd be reasonable happy we're going in the right direction and are getting closer to being able to challenge them but if we don't c'est la vie I'll still get a kick out of watching Utd the current negativity on here and in the media etc makes me a bit sad..

[thewobbler]

From my perspective the emergence of City is a good thing. Throughout the noughties, United and Chelsea had a carve up for the best players in enhland or willing to come to England. Anyone joining either club was guaranteed silverware.  Adding City to mega money group has reduced that likelihood of guaranteed silverware and have actually made a move away from Liverpool, Arsenal or Spurs less tempting; or at least solely about money. So all told the gap closed between the top six clubs.

I'm well surprised that City have had it so easy this year, but I wouldn't be worried about it unles it continues for another 2+ seasons. I'd expect They've got too many outrageously rich players to keep up these performance levels once a few trophies are landed.

[From the Bunker]

The difference between the two Manchesters clubs is that One owner is putting bucket loads of money into their Club and the other owner is taking Bucket loads of money out of their club!

Man City are inflating the cost of purchasing Great players. An inflation that makes United pay more. And when your owners cut at the end of the year is reduced from such a transaction. There will be a reluctance to do so!


The ''Not in my lifetime'' line from Ferguson must make him close his eyes and shudder!

[Boycey]

From my perspective the emergence of City is a good thing. Throughout the noughties, United and Chelsea had a carve up for the best players in enhland or willing to come to England. Anyone joining either club was guaranteed silverware.  Adding City to mega money group has reduced that likelihood of guaranteed silverware and have actually made a move away from Liverpool, Arsenal or Spurs less tempting; or at least solely about money. So all told the gap closed between the top six clubs.

I'm well surprised that City have had it so easy this year, but I wouldn't be worried about it unles it continues for another 2+ seasons. I'd expect They've got too many outrageously rich players to keep up these performance levels once a few trophies are landed.

Yeah competition is great it makes things sweeter when you do win things but taking my United hat off for a minute it'd probably have been better had the oilmen taken over someone like Liverpool rather than City cause let's be honest nobody gives a bollix about City, even United fans cheered there last title cause it meant Liverpool didn't win it. They could conceivably win the quadruple this year but they'll never catch the publics imagination good or bad like Liverpool, Utd or the likes of Arsenal. They are about 17/18? Wins in a row at this stage but Jose and the fab4 command many more column inches..

[Captain Obvious]

Always I find it odd when a Man Utd fan complains about the spending of other clubs.

As a club, United have spent the premier league era breaking transfer records and higherinh wages.

In past two seasons alone, £100m for Pogba, £75m for Lukaku. I don't care how you to try to justify this as a revenue spend, it's absolutely disgusting.

When Manchester United came calling for Lukaku and Pogba their clubs upped their prices probably because they knew they were dealing with a weak individual on transfers like Ed Woodward.

It was the success of the last two decades under Ferguson 1993 to 2013 and not finishing outside the top 3 in that time that has allowed the club to spend as they do, they have become a global brand a money making machine.

Before Manchester City were lucky to get a wealthy owner a Premier league season with 55 points in total would be considered a good season for them. And we shouldn't forget in the late 90s they played their league football in the 3rd tier. Some emergence this has been....

[Syferus]

Always I find it odd when a Man Utd fan complains about the spending of other clubs.

As a club, United have spent the premier league era breaking transfer records and higherinh wages.

In past two seasons alone, £100m for Pogba, £75m for Lukaku. I don't care how you to try to justify this as a revenue spend, it's absolutely disgusting.

When Manchester United came calling for Lukaku and Pogba their clubs upped their prices probably because they knew they were dealing with a weak individual on transfers like Ed Woodward.

It was the success of the last two decades under Ferguson 1993 to 2013 and not finishing outside the top 3 in that time that has allowed the club to spend as they do, they have become a global brand a money making machine.

Before Manchester City were lucky to get a wealthy owner a Premier league season with 55 points in total would be considered a good season for them. And we shouldn't forget in the late 90s they played their league football in the 3rd tier. Some emergence this has been....

Both very much appear to be either at market value, if not below it.

[Captain Obvious]

Both very much appear to be either at market value, if not below it.

Good lad Syferus, always good for laugh whatever the time of year.