"Spurs play primitive football and are extremely naive"
Tuesday, November 30, 2010 at 12:57PM We beat Liverpool 2-1, cue 40+ page thread over at Man City forum Bluemoon about Spurs. Started off innocently enough with one of the locals suggesting Spurs are a better team. Which arguably we've proven to be. Perhaps that will change in the course of this season. We'll have to wait and see. The whole billionaire playboy buys a football club scenario is obviously not the same thing as spending untold millions within your own means. Although both methods can be open to criticism - especially if there is a distinct lack of silverware in the trophy cabinet or no tangible progression.
Not to suggest there is anything wrong with supporting your club no matter the transfer philosophy. And if you happen to see a consortium or the uber-rich take over, you're going to be happy. However, grace and class is hardly something you can pay for. And success is never deserved, it's earned.
Because of the manner of their rags to riches story and their massively over paid 'superstar' signings they (granted it's a fraction of their support that frequent Bluemoon so I'm not tainting all City fans with this paintbrush of ridiculousness) seem to think its a given this will equate to success because how dare success not become them if they've spent millions in such a short space of time with the main objective to dominate. There's a couple of them that have been posting on the forum for several years. You'd think they'd appreciate their humble beginnings and respect their competition and have patience in terms of what goes into the fundamental building blocks of success and a winning mentality. But alas no.
Welcome to Madchester. We spent a few hundred million so book that open bus parade.
That's the problem with this type of 'project'. The expectancy is that glory must be a given. It only worked at Chelsea because of one special reason. And arguably Chelsea were already knocking on the door of the United and Arsenal party.
That's my opinion. Bluemoon's opinion of Tottenham?
"They are on steroids. EPL is a joke if they dont do better doping tests"
"Spurs play primitive football and are extremely naive"
"We are leagues ahead of them, they have a couple of players and a lot of luck. They have no depth and should we want to we could buy ANY of their players to weaken them"
The above are some of the more level-headed statements made. Apparently Lennon only scored the winner in the 93rd minute because he had help, possibly from a doctor who gave him magic energy juice, because its nigh impossible to believe he's an athlete and capable of a burst and run onto goal late on. Hate to think how much of the stuff Tevez is drinking. Perhaps Ricky Villa was on the juice too back in 1981.
Would like to think not all City fans are this backwards. Anyone? Answers on a postcard. Granted in my time I was deluded enough to think Johnnie Jackson was a decent player and Adel Taarabt would be the new Glenn Hoddle. But some of the quoted statements sound like it's come from Davspurs demented northern cousin.
I know, I know, why should we even bother with it. It's a minority, much like any forum or blog following. It's a bunch of people sharing their opinions. And yes, we too have similar ilks of nutters on various message boards preaching in the fickle art of knee-jerk. But I hardly think any of them would venture into this David Lynchesque delusional madness.
Throw enough **** at the wall and some of it will stick. City will get there in the end. But it's hardly endearing. This template has worked before although one or two have hardly managed to sustain it. Someone pointed out how Liverpool - one of the richest clubs in the world in terms of history - have struggled to take hold of the domestic bread and butter like they did in the 70's and 80's. Their cycle might have ended but they've endeavoured. It's naive to think anyone can become someone just because of their fat wallet.
Welcome to Fadchester.
Cheeky bid for Walter Mitty any day now.
Reader Comments (159)
I think they are targeting the wrong team.
None of the teams at the top of the table have performed that well this season, and the points total of those teams is low.
It isn't a case of Manc v Spurs for that 4th spot. We both need to be targeting Manu, Chelsea, and Arsenal. And more importantly we both need to be aiming at least equalling, if not beating, the sort of points totals we had last season.
If only we had some official method for evaluating the relative strength of individual teams. For example if all teams played on a home and away basis over a period of say nine months, with points allocated to teams dependent on the outcome of each game. We could then rank the teams in order of total points accumulated. This ranking, which I will call a 'table', could then be used to determine which teams enter European competitions and the team placed at the top of the 'table' could be awarded some sort of accolade....Wait a minute...
As I recall over the course of the last official evaluation period, Spurs finished higher than Man City and qualified for the Champions League. We are where City want to be and therefore anything that City's supporters say about being a better team is irrelevant and doesn't merit any response from Spurs fans (I recognise the irony of my actions). It may be that at the end of the current evaluation process that City have proven to be a better team than Spurs. With approximately one third the evaluation process complete it appears that the two teams are quite evenly matched, but until this process is complete all we can say is that Spurs are officially the better of the two sides.
Yidtastic, nice post but there's a flaw in your logic. WE are currently 4th, YOU 5th. Ergo, City are the better team, not Spurs if you want to be picky and pedantic.
If, say, we were currently 1st and you were 20th, according to your reasoning you'd still be the better team?Surely not. It's all a bit specious until the season ends.
Anyhow, based on last season you couldn't say Spurs were 'the better team". We were about the same - only difference being we cocked up one significant match.Had the result been reversed would you have said "City are the better team"? I think not.
But so f*ck*ng what? There's been a lot of good sense talked on this thread. Among which (to paraphrase) was "it's not about cock sizes" and "why not concentrate on the real enemy" (The Arse and Manure). Amen to that.
bluevalentthis let me ask you what would give you more pleasure having a partner who loved you with or without money or one who married you because you won Millions. We have had Lennon Bale Hudds Dawson King since they was pups and they are Tops in there field like a good wine maturing with every game . This was shown at the start of the season when Spurs showed City how growing up together makes you play like a team City have bypassed this method for speed with greed with Oil money. This would be like our Queen spending our north sea oil money on Spurs . Every time i put petrol in my car it pisses me off to think up the road they are giving legs 250 grand a week to kick a ball . I swear if i could keep our squad with our present owners without City Utd or any other team Pinching our players. I would defiantly have our method because the ordinary people have no say in Abu Dhabi how much City spend of there wealth Joe Lewis has and thank god for that City fans can have there method and good luck to them .Me i have all the luck watching Bale Lennon Dawson King Huddlestone turn from youths into stars and i cant wait for the next batch Caulker Townsend Bostock Walker Rose Parrett Mason Kane Obika Oyengu Mpoku just to see if we have another Bale and co amongst them is better than buying ready made overpaid mercenary's
"Me i have all the luck watching Bale Lennon Dawson King Huddlestone turn from youths into stars and i cant wait for the next batch Caulker Townsend Bostock Walker Rose Parrett Mason Kane Obika Oyengu Mpoku just to see if we have another Bale and co amongst them is better than buying ready made overpaid mercenary's"
Dec 1, 2010 at 9:06 PM | Davspurs
Another Bale and co? Trust me, you don't, and Arry wouldn't play them to find out. he'll be dipping into the transfer market to try and sign some overpaid mercenaries, like Adebayor, Bellamy, Shaun Wright-Phillips etc..
Your confusing logic and illustrations just plain make my head hurt.
Remind me again who of your first team regulars apart from Ledley King is a product of your famous academy?
For all your hot air and moral blustering, Spuds are the same as City, except poorer. Arry would spend the petro dollars much faster than Mancini and Hughes, and deep down you know it.
In fact, he's always complaining when City are in for a player he likes, he can't compete, so he's totally prepared to spend, spend, spend if he could.
So can you finally lay off this classless, City are destroying football crap, as if Spuds aren't doing the same only on a smaller scale and slower (for purely financial reasons).
By your reasoning, Blackpool are like the Queen, and you're a bunch of lotto winning Chavs from the local council flats, because they've taken fifty-odd years to build a team from a pittance, and probably need another fifty years to get into the top four places - patently ridiculous.
Davespurs, I find your argument in all honesty very confusing.
I've loved City for 56 years, unreservedly, rich or poor, makes no difference. As far as owners go, we've had everything from honest men with little money and no clue, through men who spent what they hadn't got, a corrupt politician trying to use the club for his own ends and, finally one of the world's richest men who, to give Sheikh Mansoor his due, is doing a great deal for the club, the fans, the local environment and ultimately for Manchester, the town where I grew up. Personally, I don't mind how Sheikh M. spends his money but I'm glad he's spending some on City. It doesn't seem to have occurred to you that the 'ordinary people' of Britain don't have any say in what HM Queen does with her money either.
Yes, it would have been very nice to have got into Europe with a homegrown team - and don't forget the City academy has given approx 3 times as many young players their premiership opportunity as any other team, 28, I think at the last count. But it was never going to happen. We had to get into Europe and get in fast, before Platini's new rules - designed not to level the playing field but to protect the status quo - came into effect. Hence the original spending spree. And yes, we did buy some bad players and paid top whack for some moderate ones. Pretty much the same as a lot of clubs did even back in the days when you could get a striker for 2 million.
When the Sheikh took over the club was in rag order. All we had going for us was a decent ground and committed fans. The training and medical facilities were poor and, staff wise, a lot of dead wood had to be cut out. Traditionally a poor communicator, the club had yet to learn to present themselves to the public at large in a professional manner. All that has changed or is changing. Tell me, honestly, Davespurs. What's not to love?
If you read any of the statements that have come from the club - not the bloggers'/tabloids interpretation - it becomes clear that the ultimate plan is not to buy every glactico that comes on the market. It's to become self-sustainable which includes having an academy Elite Development Squad as effective as Barca's.
City fans had a mantra in the dark days of Div 2 - midweek trips to Lincoln and Gillingham. It was and still is 'Keep the Faith'. Money hasn't and shouldn't change this.
To change the subject, I think a little humility from Spurs fans might be in order. You have had, what, one and a half good seasons and this season could yet go tits up on you. And before you jump down my throat I'm not saying it will or that I want it to.
Finally, I think to hold Appy Arry up as a model of financial prudence is a bit rich. Isn't he the guy who's largely responsible for the ad plight of Pompey?
Sorry, should have read 'sad plight of Pompey'. And the number of City academy players to have made their Premiership or FA Cup debut in the First XI is 32, not 28. And that doesn't include post academy but largely home developed young players like Hart and Boyata.
Hart; Richards, Onouha, Boyata, Mears; Wright-Phillips, Ireland, Barton, Etuhu; Weiss, Sturridge. Not a bad young team but I don't think they'd get us into Europe.
You ALL miss the point: MC are simply doing what Liverpool, MU & Chelsea have done for decades: spend loads of money to try to buy the best players & managers. RM have done this for 60 years as have AC Milan, Inter, Juventus
Bayern Munich & recently Lyon & now the Russian & Ukrainian clubs.
The problem with RM, MC & Chelsea is that they have access to TOO much cash and are thus capable of making outrageous bids with unbelievable wages which totally ruins the whole system. You cannot castigate MC without shooting at the other two worst offenders RM & Chelsea as all three have make a serious attempt to ruin football totally.
I am happy for MC fans but the overall effect is that it screws football totally & it does DESTROY careers as players on stupendous wages who cannot get a place in the team just stagnate and cannot go elsewhere unless they have some sort of moral backbone which allows lesser wages. Although this does not include Gallas, his actions have shown him to be a REAL footballer and not some greedy b*stard unlike so many on the books of RM/Ch & City.
An interesting post, AntiOnan but fundamentally flawed. Football in England became skewed in favour of the rich clubs the day the Football League abolished the maximum wage. An individual club can't change the rules, it can only apply the resources it has to the purpose of winning titles.
It applies at lower levels too. I'm sure fans of other championship and Div 1 sides must hate QPR and Leeds.
There are several things that football could do to change the situation but it would need the goodwill of the whole footballing community.
Off the top of my head:
1. Bring back a maximum wage.
2. Prevent any one individual, company or his/their associates from owning more than a 10 per cent stake in a club
3. Create a 'starred player' system. Allow no more than, say, 3 starred players at any one club. Etc,etc.
The 'Platini Rule' won't do it. As I said in an earlier post, the rule seems designed to prevent newly wealthy clubs upsetting the status quo.
I'd be interested to hear your views on who are 'the greedy bastards' at MCFC and why.