Forums
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
sofaking
29 Dec 21 21:06
Joined:
Date Joined: 08 Nov 07
| Topic/replies: 41,083 | Blogger: sofaking's blog
Sterile and robotic are words I'd use to describe them.  Give Wigan, Norwich, Burnley, West Ham unlimited funds to spend and they'll do the exact same as City have.

Post your reply

Text Format: Table: Smilies:
Forum does not support HTML
Insert Photo
Cancel
Page 1 of 3  •  Previous 1 | 2 | 3 | Next
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 101
By:
deliris
When: 29 Dec 21 21:13
no, they are high level no doubt.
By:
sofaking
When: 29 Dec 21 21:47

Dec 29, 2021 -- 9:13PM, deliris wrote:


no, they are high level no doubt.


A high level but this is not entertaining to watch.

By:
sofaking
When: 29 Dec 21 21:54
Brentford fans are singing about how boring Man City are. This second half has been horrible to watch.
By:
Giuseppe
When: 29 Dec 21 22:01
1.20 away from home?

you wouldn't expect that even in Scotland

how short have City been in other games?
By:
sofaking
When: 29 Dec 21 22:03

Dec 29, 2021 -- 10:01PM, Giuseppe wrote:


1.20 away from home? you wouldn't expect that even in Scotlandhow short have City been in other games?


Not sure but they're probably 1.1-1.2 at home to most of the bottom half teams.

By:
sofaking
When: 29 Dec 21 22:03
At home to Norwich they'd be 1.07 or something. Shocked
By:
TOP3MAN
When: 29 Dec 21 22:16
Really is boring to watch when one team sucks the life out of it by having 90% of the ball. Yawn with 70 side way 5yrd passes per 5 minutes
By:
sofaking
When: 29 Dec 21 22:21
They didn't even have a shot on target in the second half.  If they were playing in my back garden I'd close the curtains.
By:
TOP3MAN
When: 29 Dec 21 22:29
Barca under guardiola was the same, xavi, inniesta and busquets would make 300 passes in small triangle as a drill to bore the life out of an opponent. City are the same, it's ball retention at its best. U can't concede if u have the football for 81 minutes of the 90
By:
lurka
When: 29 Dec 21 22:36
No contest games are always boring for me. Nearly all the top teams in Europe play these games more often than not. Watching the likes of Spurs, Arsenal, Man U is much more entertaining the last few years. You genuinely don't know who's going to win most of the time. Chelsea under Roman have nearly always been a boring watch for me, whether they are good or bad, just something very boring about them.
By:
Giuseppe
When: 29 Dec 21 22:40
i still prefer City winning to Utd or Liverpool no matter how boring they are
By:
SontaranStratagem
When: 29 Dec 21 23:51
City over utd but City have technically become Utd

The prem is boring with the runaway leaders every season
By:
Giuseppe
When: 29 Dec 21 23:54
i'm actually staring to like utd

it's so much more interesting when they are just an upper midtable team

you never know waht they are going to do, like in the 80s
By:
SontaranStratagem
When: 30 Dec 21 01:45
To be fair I dont gate them anymore, Ive never liked Ferguson he always irritated me with his overrated “mind games”

Keegan and Newcastle lost the title because they couldnt defend not because they had their “minds taken” buy a dour Scotsman

City are just tedious now and I loved it when they pipped united to the title under Mancini
By:
Giuseppe
When: 30 Dec 21 02:09
Bobby Manc
By:
SontaranStratagem
When: 30 Dec 21 02:13
Top manager won things at pretty much every club Cool
By:
sofaking
When: 30 Dec 21 02:25

Dec 30, 2021 -- 2:13AM, SontaranStratagem wrote:


Top manager won things at pretty much every club


Lost an FA Cup final to Wigan.  Wigan.

By:
loui
When: 30 Dec 21 08:03
To compete with city you have to be in their face from the off, too many teams stand off them, and let them do the passing routine. Basically got to work your arses off. Too many accept defeat before the ko.
By:
sparrow
When: 30 Dec 21 09:45
This discussion shows what the money has done to the game here.
By:
FATTIEWHITEYSLOVEADRINK
When: 30 Dec 21 10:15
You try have ago at them you can get results
Stand off park the bus all game you get wracked
Beat you up if you let them
Far from boring I just want to see them Liverpool man get kick up the air a bit
By:
mecca
When: 30 Dec 21 10:50
Spain... Barca... now City.... this tica taca type football does eventually draw the boos from the opposing and neutral fans.

Yep... City are now very boring and their recent success has a very hollow ring to it. I'm guessing that true die hard City fans would agree
By:
rothko
When: 30 Dec 21 11:32
i suppose thats what you get when  you spend over £700m on players and bring a manager like Pep in
in a few years it will be Abu Dhabi versus Suadi Arabia as they try to out spend each other
By:
FATTIEWHITEYSLOVEADRINK
When: 30 Dec 21 11:41
1-0 to the Arsenal where boring 30 years ago
This type football in another league
People must miss neck brace football of the past !
If there calling this boring ,
By:
howard
When: 30 Dec 21 11:58
Get the ball off them then. And then start passing to someone in your team instead of making a poor pass and showing you shouldn't be on anything like the money you are.
By:
howard
When: 30 Dec 21 12:01
Having their two quickest players on the bench and the other unavailable was a problem last night.  ( Sterling , Mahrez , Walker )
By:
rommel
When: 30 Dec 21 13:37
city may well win at a canter but a league thats over before the turn of the year doesnt look good
By:
Giuseppe
When: 30 Dec 21 13:57
Guardiola

champions league titles won without Messi: 0
By:
Giuseppe
When: 30 Dec 21 13:58
he had an extraodrinary array of talent at Barca, half the Spanish national for **** sake, and he was responsible for signing very few of them
By:
sparrow
When: 30 Dec 21 13:59
rommel is correct and really bad for the game in this country.
By:
sixtwosix
When: 30 Dec 21 15:45
I find them very boring to watch.....however the opposition sitting off them instead of getting 'athletics level' fit and shutting them down instead of having the best view of their passing skills is truly baffling and idiotic.
By:
lurka
When: 30 Dec 21 15:48
It's all the more remarkable what Liverpool and Klopp have done on the net spend they did. Would be utter dominance under Pep if it wasn't for that. But once Pep goes it won't continue. He is the main reason for the level of dominance, not the money. United have spent more than him since he joined if you include wages.

For all the money he has spent a good chunk of it was on players that didn't really improve City at all. Guys like Mendy, Bravo, Torres, Ake, Nolito, Douglas Luiz, Danilo, Angelino cost about £200m. If you add Stones who has started less than half the league games since he joined and hasn't been great until quite recently and Grealish who hasn't had any impact yet really it's about £350m. I suppose at any other club bar PSG and United he might have had to spend better and not waste as much but it's his tactics that gets them 90+ points more than the quaity of players they have starting.
By:
DOUBLED
When: 30 Dec 21 15:55
Klopp has spent 480 million Laugh
By:
sparrow
When: 30 Dec 21 16:44
Most of those mentioned just buy up players to stop them going elsewhere. Those teams could field two sides in the premiership comfortably.
By:
lovegod
When: 30 Dec 21 17:03
Don't give them ideas about entering 'B' teams into the competition.
By:
spyker
When: 30 Dec 21 17:23
Klopp has spent 480 million Laugh


genuine question  - what is the net spend?
By:
rothko
When: 30 Dec 21 17:52
2016/17
Liverpool: spend £71.91m;income £76.84m;net spend £+4.93m.
Manchester United: spend £166.50m;income £42.53m;net spend £-123.98m.

2017/18
spend £156.49m;income £175.05m;net spend £+18.56m
Manchester United: spend £178.56m;income £40.95m;net spend £-137.61m.

2018/19
Liverpool: spend £163.98m;income £37.19m;net spend £-126.79m
Manchester United: spend £74.43m;income £27.50m;net spend £-46.94m.

2019/20
Liverpool: spend £9.36m;income £37.44m;net spend £+28.08m
Manchester United: spend £204.10m;income £73.06m;net spend £-131.04m

2020/21
spend £74.39m;income £38.88m;net spend £-35.51m.
Manchester United: spend £75.15m;income £16.56m;net spend £-58.59m.

much less than man u and obviously 2021/22 was the same. Man City and Chelski obviously are the big net spenders

what is more impressive about Klopp is that Pep inherited a very strong squad who had already won the EPL and the likes of Aquerro were at their peak
By:
Giuseppe
When: 30 Dec 21 17:56
God forbid that Newcastle might be able to spend these sums now

it isn't fair AngryAngryAngry

they are buying success AngryAngryAngry
By:
rothko
When: 30 Dec 21 17:56
Pep Guardiola's net spend heading into his fifth season at Manchester City is negative £533m - that was not including the last transfer window
By:
sofaking
When: 30 Dec 21 17:57

Dec 30, 2021 -- 5:56PM, rothko wrote:


Pep Guardiola's net spend heading into his fifth season at Manchester City is negative £533m - that was not including the last transfer window


Maybe you can show us how you arrived at this figure. Confused

Page 1 of 3  •  Previous 1 | 2 | 3 | Next
sort by:
Show
per page

Post your reply

Text Format: Table: Smilies:
Forum does not support HTML
Insert Photo
Cancel
‹ back to topics
www.betfair.com