Jump to content
  • Sign Up
Joey source profile cover photo

Joey

Members
  • Content Count

    594
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    9
  • Sales Feedback

    N/A

Joey last won the day on May 2

Joey had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

867

2 Followers

About Joey

  • Birthday November 10

Profile Information

  • Public Real Name
    Joe
  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Kirkcaldy, by way of Oldham and other points north, south, east and west.
  • Top Soul Sound
    Moses smith. Girl across the street, Jackie Lee, Oh my Darlin', Duke Browner, Crying over you. And about 347 others.

Recent Profile Visitors

7,858 profile views
  1. No, my argument is still valid. Initially it was most certainly not a supply and demand issue. The big five were actually first known as the big SKY five. Picked by television executives. Fans perhaps? It matters not where the cash comes from. It allows a club to progress. The argument slating City about the Sheiks involvement is disingenuous. United did not get all their cash from the turnstiles and number of tickets sold. The popularity only came later, especially the worldwide "fan base" created, once again, by Murdoch and the Premier League selling the TV rights on. That in itself provided United with untold riches, once they'd travelled the entire world opening merchandise shops selling replica shirts by the million to their "loyal fans". 99% of whom couldn't find Manchester on a sodding map, much less ever attend a match. It was even the real reason they opted to snub the FA cup that particular season. Not, as explained, to play that world club match supposedly insisted upon by UEFA/FIFA, but to explore and profit from the South American market. Martin Edwards was even overheard speaking about the opportunity for a MUFC megastore in Rio. It was done for marketing purposes, certainly not footballing ones. And, in my opinion, was to Uniteds everlasting shame. As for the Sky money not doing Liverpool much good, I agree. But, there was so much cash that the winners of the league, if they stayed at the top for a season or two as United did, could build a massive gap between themselves and the rest. Liverpool tried playing catch-up, but the sale of the club to the Gillette/Hicks consortium was flawed, and served only to set them back even further, thus leaving the field wide open for United to move even further and further away from them. Again, this all goes to illustrate how incredibly bitter and jealous many United fans have suddenly become. The "noisy neighbours" are here, and seemingly here to stay. Just sit back, enjoy what we're serving up, and remember.......Ole's at the wheel, and has everything under control Oh, and twenty titles as opposed to six? That was then, this is now. Anything else is just history, or so you keep telling the scousers! Enough. Sorry, but I'm old, I'm tired and I'm too happy with what I saw at Wembley earlier today to be bothered debating the finer points of football finance and history any further, even though I'm enjoying it far more than an OVO argument! Time for bed! ️️
    • 211 comments
  2. Principled indeed. Mistaken also! As you say, any honest football fan would have been overjoyed had the Sheik taken their club over. But all we seem to get is abuse about it, borne, no doubt, from stomach churning envy. I agree that most cities have been regenerated, to at least some degree or other. But, that particular part of east Manchester was awful. Nothing had been done since the war ended, and it was so rundown you wouldn't believe it. The council should have been ashamed of themselves. The Sheik, through the club, has made an enormous difference. Not just with the cash injection, but it's also given hope to the locals. Something that was sadly missing. And again, all this seems to be overlooked, by people yelling about "hooman rites" abuses, who don't know the first thing about societal and financial conditions in middle eastern countries. (I do by the way!). Once upon a time, fans of all clubs would have enjoyed the type of football City play, and also Liverpools under Klopp. Not so today, sadly. Funny old game, eh?
    • 211 comments
      • 1
      • Up vote
  3. Nope, I marvelled at them alright, and also spent plenty of seasons green with envy at the quality of players they could put on the pitch. You may remember the level of player we had at Maine Rd during that period. United fans rubbed our noses in it enough! Plus, as with many Mancunians, I have (oh the shame!) a few United fans in the family, and can even count a few as very firm and old friends, Credit where credit is due, United have had some good teams. My real issue, like most blues, is with the club, and how it has conducted itself over the years, certainly not its players. My main point, again, is that Uniteds all-conquering team of the nineties and naughties couldn't have happened had it not been for the financial windfall provided by first the Edwards family business, then the Murdoch cash, and then the stock market flotation. Same with Liverpool and the Moores plus Sky. Once a club has a flying start on things like that, it's nigh on impossible to catch them, or even come close to matching them on the pitch once or twice a season. They had the cash to continually outbid anyone else for the best players, thus restricting all their rivals as to what or who they could buy. To continually moan about where City's windfall came from is disingenuous at best, and historically bereft of understanding at worst. Since football was invented and codified, there have always been clubs who have benefitted from having more money than others, and from other places than football itself. Once upon a time Arsenal were even known as "The Bank of England club", they were so wealthy. Trust me, that money didn't come from shirt sales in darkest Indonesia, or prize and TV money. The game today was a perfect demonstration of what City are, and what they can do. It's pure poetry at times, and unlike anything we've seen previously. Will it last? Who knows? Will City fans really care that much if tomorrow we're playing the likes of Scunthorpe and Macclesfield again? No, we won't. We're on an incredible rollercoaster of excitement, and will enjoy every bloody minute of it, deep in the knowledge that all rides come to an end one day. That, apparently, is something younger United fans are having major trouble coming to terms with, it would appear! Mind the gap!
    • 211 comments
      • 2
      • Up vote
  4. Wrong. The first few years the money was handed out as per how many times you were the featured team on Sky. That was mostly United and Liverpool, who therefore benefitted most from the Sky deal. Arsenal didn't do too bad, Tottenham were run by a miser, so didn't invest the windfall, and Everton fell by the wayside completely. That reduced the so-called Big Five to two. Plus Arsenal. It was only later, after much lobbying, that a more even distribution system was introduced. But, by then, the damage was done. Liverpool, and especially United, were now so far in front of the rest financially, that it was impossible to catch up. It was a level playing field BEFORE Sky and the premier league screwed everything up. Over the intervening years, it became more and more skewed, until it got to the point where only a sustained and massive injection of cash from a fairy godmother would allow any other club to challenge. What would you prefer, complete dominance by one or two teams for all time, much as in Spain, Germany, Italy etc., or what we have now? More money will be pumped into ever more clubs in England, and such dominance as seen in the past will not be repeated. Sure, one team will go a few years beating everyone, but twenty or more years of it? No, it ain't gonna happen. And it still doesn't change what City are showing on the pitch. The most exciting, beautiful, technically brilliant football that this country has ever seen. Who's to say that one day, possibly even in the near future, some other team won't come along and put on even greater displays. Just wont be United, that's all.
    • 211 comments
  5. Never knew about the regeneration around Anfield. Been a few years since I went there. My point was about the club owners putting money into the local area, outside of the football club. I have plenty of 'Pool supporters in my extended family and circle of friends, so I have no beef with Liverpool at all. What they achieved under Shankly and the boot room boys was unbelievable, and richly deserved. Liverpool also have to, in a warped sense, take much of the credit for what we achieved this year. Would we have been able to sustain that incredible league form without your lot breathing down our necks? I don't believe we would. My main gripe with all this is the revisionist history being quoted by people up and down the country who haven't a clue as to how the bigger clubs got their money to begin with, and how it helped change the face of English football. I remember when the city of Liverpool only had one real team, and they played in blue. All that changed in about '64, and I see no signs of the situation ever reverting. United? A diddy club, until a City legend started managing them. Even then, the people of Manchester, mostly blues, would go to OT to watch "our Matts" young lads. Some folks seem to think football is only fifty or sixty years old. Some even believe it only began with the advent of the premier league. But, as I mentioned, in the great scheme of things it doesn't matter where or when a club got it's first injection of wealth. It's what they do with it that counts. City have provided me with a level of football I could never have imagined in my wildest dreams. I marvel at them in the same way I marvelled at the Liverpool team who won everything in the eighties and nineties, that Brazil team of '70, the Arsenal invincibles, and Cruyffs Ajax. Football is football, and beautiful football should be enjoyed, not sniped at.
    • 211 comments
      • 1
      • Up vote
  6. So, as long as your initial wealth comes from unprincipled crooks or megalomaniac Aussie media tycoons, all your achievements have merit? OK, silly me, I'll stand corrected.
    • 211 comments
  7. FFS. United and Liverpool only became self sustaining clubs AFTER their own windfalls, as previously mentioned, plus being in pole position when Murdoch started handing money out willy nilly to the big five on the basis of TV appearances. Once that happened no one had a cat in hells chance of catching up, until Abramovitch punted squillions into those perennial under achievers Chelsea. Sound management? Lol. The Edwards family? Knighton? That pair of idiot yanks who used to own Liverpool? Prior to the mid fifties, neither club was ANYTHING. FFP? It's bollocks, and anyone who knows anything about it would agree. Initially, FFP was designed for one reason, and one alone. To prevent clubs operating with massive debt. Until of course the established footballing "elite" of Europe screamed blue murder, seeing as the bloody lot of them were completely debt ridden. FFP Mk11 is designed purely to keep the "top" clubs feasting at the top table, whilst preventing any "upstarts" from crashing the party. Fans? City lost two generations of fans when we were utter pish. Little kids want to support successful teams, regardless of who their dads and grandads support after all. City fans are also generally known to be from the less affluent areas of Manchester, and struggle to go to every match, as most blokes probably would. I live two hundred miles away now, and can spend upwards of £200 to £300 for a home game when tickets, travel, hotel and expenses are taken into account. So guess what, no, I don't attend every bloody game either! Won the lottery? Of course we did! And guess what? We're so f***ing chuffed it hurts! The Sheik? In addition to bankrolling City, his even greater achieviement is what he's done to that part of Manchester. It was a derelict sh&thole, completely ignored by the city council for decades. It still had WW11 bomb damage for crissakes. Now, its thriving, with loads of locals in employment for the first time in generations. If he hadn't come along, trust me, the commonwealth games facilities would have been left to rot. Now, it's a different world there. Tell me again what improvements have been made to Trafford and the surrounding area by the Edwards and Glazer families. Or Liverpool outside of Anfield park. BTW, footballing "history" didn't start with Shankly and Busby either. It began a century or so earlier, with the likes of poor old Notts County. Back to today's offerings. One sided yes. But also the most complete cup final performance in living memory.
    • 211 comments
      • 3
      • Up vote
  8. Tripe. Total tripe. Arse water of the highest order. I suppose that if the Sheik had pitched up at Stoke or WBA then any achievements of theirs would have had no merit? Liverpool bankrolled throughout their glory years by the Moores pools empire. No merit there either? uniteds foundations laid by a wealthy crook, who's fortune was partly made by selling rotten condemned meat to the city's schools? No merit in what they achieved? Sky dosh bankrolling the big five. No merit in what those teams achieve either I suppose. its what's on the pitch that counts. Beautiful football is beautiful football, end of. Lots of jealousy from fans of those clubs who previously dominated football, and now have to look up the league table at another club, whilst crying over past glories, and mumbling about so-called history. That was then, this is now. Watch, marvel, and just enjoy it for what it is. The best football you've ever seen. Try humility, you may enjoy it. We had to be humble for forty odd years. Now it's our time. In another decade, who knows, it could be bloody Rochdale for all anybody knows.
    • 211 comments
      • 1
      • Up vote
  9. Unprecedented is right. Number of points, number of goals, number of wins, never done before domestic treble. And all in what is the toughest league in the world. They are playing the finest football this island has ever witnessed. I've seen and watched some tremendous sides over the past sixty odd years, including your lot on at least one occasion, but this City team are streets ahead of what we've seen previously. Mind the gap!
    • 211 comments
      • 1
      • Up vote
  10. Yep, definitely gotta be mega-rare. I can't ever recall seeing one before...........even at the Torch! Or anywhere else in 72-73 for that matter!
    • 1 comment
  11. City fan all my life, so yeah, I obviously watched it. Have to agree about it being completely one sided, at least after the fifteen minute mark. But, this City team have the capacity to do this to almost any team on earth when they're in the mood, so I wouldn't throw any muck at Watford. Records continue to tumble, and even though accusations of bias could be levelled at me, I really do think that this is the very finest football team England has ever seen. What they're doing is unprecedented. And it's probably also going to continue for quite some time.
    • 211 comments
  12. Under the old rules Pool 67 points City 66 points. Just saying... Under even older rules, there weren't even any crossbars, and no substitutes were allowed. You play the game according to the CURRENT rules. Credit to Liverpool, but City are deserved champions. Just saying......
    • 211 comments
      • 2
      • Up vote
  13. Yeah, congrats to a Man City on the title win and Liverpool have been absolutely magnificent all season. Meanwhile,Man Utd lose at home in the last match of the campaign to the relegated team which sacked their manager.. I watched the game yesterday through my fingers at times. In the end we showed true champion quality and prevailed. Then I looked at the other scores. I didn't think winning back to back titles could get any better, but superOle and his bunch of misfiring misfits went and proved me wrong. Again. As before, if Carlsberg did football seasons............ CTID.
    • 211 comments
      • 2
      • Up vote
  14. And there's still something quite important to be decided on Sunday! If Carlsberg did football seasons..............
    • 211 comments
      • 1
      • Up vote
  15. This is getting f***ing silly now. Who's writing this?
    • 211 comments

Source Adverts



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.