What's new
By:
Advanced search…
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Glory Glory - The Manchester United Thread II

W

WireMan

Bench
Messages
4,479
Tonearm Terrorwrist said:
When's the last time Man U won the champions league??????
Click to expand...

Oh dear, the glory hunter is back.

For the record, 2008. We beat Chelsea on pens in Moscow. Not bottled it against Chelsea in our own stadium. ;-)




Anyways ignoring Mr Butt Hurt.

Youngsters did look good tonight. Glad Welbeck scored a few and Adnan is going to be a very fine player.

We still need to buy a midfielder so we will see what happens there.
 
the_flight_of_the_magpie

the_flight_of_the_magpie

First Grade
Messages
8,666
WireMan said:
Oh dear, the glory hunter is back.

For the record, 2008. We beat Chelsea on pens in Moscow. Not bottled it against Chelsea in our own stadium. ;-)




Anyways ignoring Mr Butt Hurt.

Youngsters did look good tonight. Glad Welbeck scored a few and Adnan is going to be a very fine player.

We still need to buy a midfielder so we will see what happens there.
Click to expand...

word has it that Barca are interested in Adnan
 
boxhead

boxhead

First Grade
Messages
5,958
CliffyIsGod said:
But they're happy to bid on players and miss out anyway...
Click to expand...

There's a difference between bidding 30 million for a player and then giving up, and buying a player for 60 million. But, as a City fan, I wouldn't expect you to know that.
 
boxhead

boxhead

First Grade
Messages
5,958
It was an example and general comment on sugar daddy clubs...
City aren't at Chelsea levels yet for sheer over-spending but they are certainly close.
 
boxhead

boxhead

First Grade
Messages
5,958
FMD you're stupid...
Here's a recent example; Spurs were set to sign Eden Hazard, he even said himself he wanted to play for us and we were the easy favourites. Along comes Chelsea, preparing to pay double the wages and a transfer fee that was probably at least 10 million pounds higher.

I would much rather miss out on a target when a club sets too high of a transfer fee, or a player has ridiculous wage demands, than over-pay just because I have the money. Hence why you responding to Twiz's "don't buy trophies" comment with "they bid on players and miss out" made me genuinely laugh. Ask yourself; would ManU have ever went for Torres at 50 million pounds, even if they had the financial capabilities to do it? Think about it for a moment. The answer? No, because unlike City or Chelsea, they won't over-pay either on transfer fees or wages just to get the player they want.

If you still don't get it, compare how much you payed for a 28 year old Fernandinho to how much Spurs payed for a 24 year old Paulinho. The former has only 5 senior appearances for Brazil, the latter has 17 despite being four years younger. Despite all that, City payed 13 million pounds more (reportedly) than what Spurs paid for Paulinho. Why is that?
 
Last edited:
CliffyIsGod

CliffyIsGod

First Grade
Messages
6,454
boxhead said:
FMD you're stupid...
Here's a recent example; Spurs were set to sign Eden Hazard, he even said himself he wanted to play for us and we were the easy favourites. Along comes Chelsea, preparing to pay double the wages and a transfer fee that was probably at least 10 million pounds higher.

I would much rather miss out on a target when a club sets too high of a transfer fee than over-pay just because I have the money. Hence why you responding to Twiz's "don't buy trophies" comment with "they bid on players and miss out" made me genuinely laugh. Ask yourself; would ManU have ever went for Torres at 50 million pounds, even if they had the financial capabilities to do it? Think about it for a moment. The answer? No, because unlike City or Chelsea, they won't over-pay either on transfer fees or wages just to get the player they want.

If you still don't get it, compare how much you payed for a 28 year old Fernandinho to how much Spurs payed for a 24 year old Paulinho. The former has only 5 senior appearances for Brazil, the latter has 17 despite being four years younger. Despite all that, City payed 13 million pounds more (reportedly) than what Spurs paid for Paulinho.
Click to expand...

You said:
There's a difference between bidding 30 million for a player and then giving up, and buying a player for 60 million. But, as a City fan, I wouldn't expect you to know that.
Click to expand...

Show me this 60m player City has acquired?

Now, regarding Fernandinho/Paulinho; you use caps for Brazil as your deciding factor, what about Champions League appearances as a factor? Don't use one metric to suit your argument, and discount all others.
 
boxhead

boxhead

First Grade
Messages
5,958
CliffyIsGod said:
You said:


Show me this 60m player City has acquired?

Now, regarding Fernandinho/Paulinho; you use caps for Brazil as your deciding factor, what about Champions League appearances as a factor? Don't use one metric to suit your argument, and discount all others.
Click to expand...

Oh FFS, do you not understand what hypothetical examples are? :lol: The only difference between your club and Chelsea is that instead of paying an extra 20 million on the transfer fee over what anyone else would do, you instead offer double the wages of what a club like Spurs would offer, simply to lock those players up because you have limitless cash.

30 Champions League appearances for Shaktar I see. And yet, he's not first choice for his national team over Paulinho. He has twelve less appearances for them than a 24 year old Sandro. Hmmm, must be a reason for that. And you still paid 13 million pounds more for a player that is four years older.....
Go on.
 
Last edited:
CliffyIsGod

CliffyIsGod

First Grade
Messages
6,454
boxhead said:
Oh FFS, do you not understand what hypothetical examples are? :lol: The only difference between your club and Chelsea is that instead of paying an extra 20 million on the transfer fee over what anyone else would do, you instead offer double the wages of what a club like Spurs would offer, simply to lock those players up because you have limitless cash.

30 Champions League appearances for Shaktar I see. And yet, he's not first choice for his national team over Paulinho. He has twelve less appearances for them than a 24 year old Sandro. Hmmm, must be a reason for that. And you still paid 13 million pounds more for a player that is four years older.....
Go on.
Click to expand...

The old high and mighty "United earned their right to spend this much -- all other teams artificially spend" philosophy. PSG and Monaco must give you a heart-attack.



Let's just see how Fernandinho goes first, because again, your very concerned with Brazilian caps being the be all and end all.
 
ggmu

ggmu

Juniors
Messages
1,263
CliffyIsGod said:
The old high and mighty "United earned their right to spend this much -- all other teams artificially spend" philosophy. PSG and Monaco must give you a heart-attack.



Let's just see how Fernandinho goes first, because again, your very concerned with Brazilian caps being the be all and end all.
Click to expand...

Ur getting owned in this argument lol
 
boxhead

boxhead

First Grade
Messages
5,958
CliffyIsGod said:
The old high and mighty "United earned their right to spend this much -- all other teams artificially spend" philosophy. PSG and Monaco must give you a heart-attack.



Let's just see how Fernandinho goes first, because again, your very concerned with Brazilian caps being the be all and end all.
Click to expand...

The difference between City/Chelsea and United is that one of them actually generates their own funding to pay those high sums.....thus why being bought out by a billionaire and having them buy all those top players that then win titles is nowhere near as significant as Arsenal or Spurs winning trophies.

:lol: I'm sorry, what part of Fernandinho is not selected over Paulinho and Sandrodo you not understand? Why don't they select him over those two less experienced players? Think about it. You might actually learn something. Brazil are one of if not the top national teams going around, and this player that City spent 30 million on isn't selected in that team ahead of a younger player that Spurs spent 17 million on. Given the teams - like Spain and Argentina - they play against, you would expect them to select their strongest team as often as possible, right? So why isn't Fernandinho there, but Paulinho is? Here's a hint if it wasn't obvious; the team selectors think Paulinho/Sandro are better players. :lol:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Top