Manchester City v Aston Villa Post-Match Thread

[Greg N'Ash]

Although the Man City fan makes a good case, the fact is that someone with unlimited wealth has turned up and is literally buying all the top prizes in football like it was some casual purchase. How can that be good for the game? Whatever Man City win now, it won't mean anything. No managerial genius, no team building, no real achievement. Just throw the cash on the table and collect the trophies.

Nice thought, but people only remember the trophies and not how they did it. Take Ferguson's first title, spent a fortune in those days on the likes of pallister, bruce, Ince, Keane as well as all the big money purchases that failed to make the grade - probably would top Citeh's spending if you tried to buy the same type of players now.. Does anyone say ManU bought the league?

[taylorsworkrate]

Although the Man City fan makes a good case, the fact is that someone with unlimited wealth has turned up and is literally buying all the top prizes in football like it was some casual purchase. How can that be good for the game? Whatever Man City win now, it won't mean anything. No managerial genius, no team building, no real achievement. Just throw the cash on the table and collect the trophies.

Nice thought, but people only remember the trophies and not how they did it. Take Ferguson's first title, spent a fortune in those days on the likes of pallister, bruce, Ince, Keane as well as all the big money purchases that failed to make the grade - probably would top Citeh's spending if you tried to buy the same type of players now.. Does anyone say ManU bought the league?

I think that most would attribute ManU's success to a combination of having the money to buy top quality players, and being lucky enough to have an outstanding set of youngsters coming through at the same time.

The outstanding youngsters part will almost certainly never happen again to any club in the current climate.

[Greg N'Ash]

Although the Man City fan makes a good case, the fact is that someone with unlimited wealth has turned up and is literally buying all the top prizes in football like it was some casual purchase. How can that be good for the game? Whatever Man City win now, it won't mean anything. No managerial genius, no team building, no real achievement. Just throw the cash on the table and collect the trophies.

Nice thought, but people only remember the trophies and not how they did it. Take Ferguson's first title, spent a fortune in those days on the likes of pallister, bruce, Ince, Keane as well as all the big money purchases that failed to make the grade - probably would top Citeh's spending if you tried to buy the same type of players now.. Does anyone say ManU bought the league?

I think that most would attribute ManU's success to a combination of having the money to buy top quality players, and being lucky enough to have an outstanding set of youngsters coming through at the same time.

their first title was done with no youngsters - they basically bought a PL winning team - no different from Citeh,

[olaftab]

WellSWell first proper test and we were well short.
I am astonished by Ecks post match comments. He accepted the defeat the thrashing as inevitable. This is poor  piss poor  attitude. The man needs to realise he is now managing Aston Villa and for us to lose a game 4-1 any where is a disgrace.

Where did you read anything like that?

All I've seen is him saying our defending was shambolic and that he's disappointed to lose.

WellSWell first proper test and we were well short.
I am astonished by Ecks post match comments. He accepted the defeat the thrashing as inevitable. This is poor  piss poor  attitude. The man needs to realise he is now managing Aston Villa and for us to lose a game 4-1 any where is a disgrace.

I'm not sure where you read that but it's not what i read. He's said in a couple of papers i've read this morning that the defending was shambolic and they'll be working on it on the training ground next week. He was'nt happy with the 2nd half perfomance either.

It's always disapointing to lose, especially 4-1 but it's our first defeat against a very good side so i'm not going to cry over it. It's how we react next week that's the important thing.

If you listen to his post match interview ob SSN that is the message that comes across. Words  may not be exact.

[taylorsworkrate]

Although the Man City fan makes a good case, the fact is that someone with unlimited wealth has turned up and is literally buying all the top prizes in football like it was some casual purchase. How can that be good for the game? Whatever Man City win now, it won't mean anything. No managerial genius, no team building, no real achievement. Just throw the cash on the table and collect the trophies.

Nice thought, but people only remember the trophies and not how they did it. Take Ferguson's first title, spent a fortune in those days on the likes of pallister, bruce, Ince, Keane as well as all the big money purchases that failed to make the grade - probably would top Citeh's spending if you tried to buy the same type of players now.. Does anyone say ManU bought the league?

I think that most would attribute ManU's success to a combination of having the money to buy top quality players, and being lucky enough to have an outstanding set of youngsters coming through at the same time.

their first title was done with no youngsters - they basically bought a PL winning team - no different from Citeh,

Giggs was definitely a major part of their team in 92/93, although I take your overall point. 

[Greg N'Ash]

Although the Man City fan makes a good case, the fact is that someone with unlimited wealth has turned up and is literally buying all the top prizes in football like it was some casual purchase. How can that be good for the game? Whatever Man City win now, it won't mean anything. No managerial genius, no team building, no real achievement. Just throw the cash on the table and collect the trophies.

Nice thought, but people only remember the trophies and not how they did it. Take Ferguson's first title, spent a fortune in those days on the likes of pallister, bruce, Ince, Keane as well as all the big money purchases that failed to make the grade - probably would top Citeh's spending if you tried to buy the same type of players now.. Does anyone say ManU bought the league?

I think that most would attribute ManU's success to a combination of having the money to buy top quality players, and being lucky enough to have an outstanding set of youngsters coming through at the same time.

their first title was done with no youngsters - they basically bought a PL winning team - no different from Citeh,

Giggs was definitely a major part of their team in 92/93, although I take your overall point. 

schmeical
steve bruce
Irwin
pallister
parker
ferguson
giggs
Ince
kancleskis
phelan
sharpe
cantona
dublin
Hughes
mclair
wallace
webb

yep. always forget giggs was a bit older than the likes of Beckham

Still that squad taking out giggs, sharpe and ferguson, what it would cost in 2011 doesn't bear thinking about.
For instance Pallister world or british record fee for a defender... whats the record currently?

[olaftab]

I'll say one thing that is an indictment of modern football. When a team with 9 internationals in its starting line up gets beaten 4-1 and its fans largely just expected it, it means there is something wrong.

There are two things wrong. One is  the  financial disparity that is eradicating fair and honest competition out of our football. This will inevitably  make the game in this country unsustainable for  majority of the clubs and will  probably lead to our top 4/6 clubs joining a combined European League.
The second is  that attitude of players and supporters.
I can not understand  fans on here  and else where who have this "it's not a disgrace to lose heavily to xxxx" attitude. Obviously we have all been brow beaten
What's more worrying is that all other team's players including ours are actually OK with getting beaten at  City, manu  and Chelsea. This may be that these teams  have mentally destroyed the opposition before the  match starts or modern players  just look up to the mega rich superstars and all they care about is swapping , well not swapping, but getting their shirt at the end of the match.

[Billy Walker]

Although the Man City fan makes a good case, the fact is that someone with unlimited wealth has turned up and is literally buying all the top prizes in football like it was some casual purchase. How can that be good for the game? Whatever Man City win now, it won't mean anything. No managerial genius, no team building, no real achievement. Just throw the cash on the table and collect the trophies.

Nice thought, but people only remember the trophies and not how they did it. Take Ferguson's first title, spent a fortune in those days on the likes of pallister, bruce, Ince, Keane as well as all the big money purchases that failed to make the grade - probably would top Citeh's spending if you tried to buy the same type of players now.. Does anyone say ManU bought the league?

I do! And Blackburn and  Chelsea.  With the notable exception of Wenger using his links with France to cream off their best young talent, every Premier League title winning team has been bought.  Go back to the days of Liverpool being a force  and they were buying it too by paying out wages the rest of us couldn't match.

The game, in my opinion, needs huge reform and a levelling of the playing field.  Every club should have the same financial budget and wage limit for starters - that would bring an element of genuine skill and judgement back into the game.  If a rule was added that fifty per-cent of a squad had to be local players that would restore a whole lot more local pride and support in clubs, too.  It might even go some way to putting an end to glory-hunting.

Judging by the empty seats at Man City yesterday it would seem that buying trophies doesn't necessarily fire the imagination of all City supporters either.  Deep down I'm sure many of them know all too well that it's a farce.

[Dave]

I'll say one thing that is an indictment of modern football. When a team with 9 internationals in its starting line up gets beaten 4-1 and its fans largely just expected it, it means there is something wrong.

There are two things wrong. One is  the  financial disparity that is eradicating fair and honest competition out of our football

When was there a time when there wasn't 'financial disparity' between some clubs and other clubs?

When we were spending millions and millions of pounds a couple of years ago, were we ruining things for the likes of Wigan and Bolton?

If not, it seems a bit unreasonable for us to be whinging just because there's now someone much richer out there.

[Stu]

As a City fan, I'm interested in the comments on here particularly as regards the death of the game etc etc. I was saying exactly the same before we won the lottery in 2008. How is it different now that City have money except that there are now 5 or 6 teams that can compete rather than the previous 3 ?

Yep, we've spent £*** [insert your own made-up figure here] billions of pounds but you have to to join the Sky 4. It has always been a cartel for goodness sake and no-one, but no-one, is going to join that self-interested club  from a standing start without spending that sort of money. Having spent our way into the reckoning you'll see that we no longer have to spend more each year than say, United, to stay there.

City players are "mercenaries" ? well knock me down with a feather, who'd have suspected that professional footballers were motivated by money ? As for the salaries, we, and any other club lucky enough to find itself in our position, have to pay high basic salaries because we simply can't compete yet (and possibly never will)  with the worldwide personal sponsorship and image rights deals that Sky4 players get as soon as they sign on the dotted line.

Sure the Premier League is all about money, it has been for 19 years which is why only rich clubs have won it (and, in the two exceptional cases, nearly bankrupted themselves in the process) but we didn't light that particular fire.   

As far as Villa are concerned. It's difficult to say anything encouraging from yesterday's performance without sounding patronising but you have stood by them in worse times than these, and with worse teams than this, by a long way and I know for certain that the majority of you will continue to do so because that's what you do. The day before our investors took over, we survived only on hope and had no idea what was around the corner for us. Neither do you. Just hang in there and do what we did for 35 years, take what enjoyment you can, where you can. Things change, something will turn up.

Agree with all of that.

City aren't killing football anymore than Chelsea did eight years ago or Blackburn did sixteen years ago.

No, but it's magnified it to a large degree. I don't have anything against City having the cash, but what it's shown us is how far behind everyone else is from Man U/Chelsea. City have had to spend hundreds of millions of pounds to regularly crack the top four, no one else is in that position and it just further highlights what it takes to become contenders. We had a good side a couple of seasons ago, but had our best players plucked from us by sides that could throw money at them. Look at the England midfield the other night; Young, Milner, Barry and Downing at one point. You're unable to build a team anymore, the chance to compete is being nullified by the money being spunked at players. The inability to compete at the top is making football a boring expense for fans of clubs like us and Everton, say. Our gates are down this season for a few reasons and I think that the realisation that the league is a closed shop is one of them.
 

I blame Jimmy Hill

[Stu]

I do wish people would stop hiding behind the money angle. we were piss poor as we've been a few times this season - so they've got the personnel to capitalise on our mistakes and bad play but when we were rolling in it not so long ago, i'm not sure the clubs with a fraction of our spend were claiming it was pointless turning up and we were killing football. Heart, discipline and concentation cost nowt.

And putting a side together that can contend costs £400,000,000, as seen today.

so that's the best we can play? I'm sorry Citeh may be a good side but we were complete arse. Bloody side assembled for 40 quid would would have caused us trouble today.

Hyperbole cranked up to 11, Greg? I agree that the football is shite, but I'd be more concerned if we played like that against Albion next week than against Man City. It was an expected result, just move on from it.

If its hyperbole to say we played shit then its something i share with the manager who says people would be "appalled" by the goals we gave away. I prefer that to the complacent attitude of yourself that "we would have lost to Citeh anyway"

Saying that a side put together for £40 would have competed with City more than the Villa did? That's hyperbole I reckon. I'm pissed off with a couple of the goals, but this is a fixture we shouldn't be looking at to test ourselves in, it's daft. We're not on a level playing field, we should be looking at performances against Newcastle and Everton for instance.

[Greg N'Ash]

Although the Man City fan makes a good case, the fact is that someone with unlimited wealth has turned up and is literally buying all the top prizes in football like it was some casual purchase. How can that be good for the game? Whatever Man City win now, it won't mean anything. No managerial genius, no team building, no real achievement. Just throw the cash on the table and collect the trophies.

Nice thought, but people only remember the trophies and not how they did it. Take Ferguson's first title, spent a fortune in those days on the likes of pallister, bruce, Ince, Keane as well as all the big money purchases that failed to make the grade - probably would top Citeh's spending if you tried to buy the same type of players now.. Does anyone say ManU bought the league?

I do! And Blackburn and  Chelsea.  With the notable exception of Wenger using his links with France to cream off their best young talent, every Premier League title winning team has been bought.  Go back to the days of Liverpool being a force  and they were buying it too by paying out wages the rest of us couldn't match.

The game, in my opinion, needs huge reform and a levelling of the playing field.  Every club should have the same financial budget and wage limit for starters - that would bring an element of genuine skill and judgement back into the game.  If a rule was added that fifty per-cent of a squad had to be local players that would restore a whole lot more local pride and support in clubs, too.  It might even go some way to putting an end to glory-hunting.

Judging by the empty seats at Man City yesterday it would seem that buying trophies doesn't necessarily fire the imagination of all City supporters either.  Deep down I'm sure many of them know all too well that it's a farce.

Well i do too, but whenever journalists or tv talk about ferguson's reign they tend to skim over 5 years it took to buy the league and the large collection of expensive duffers he bought before find the winning combination. just how it is...

Not sure how a local players rule would work, apart from lowering the standard of the league as a whole - there's just not that many great local based players around to support 20 odd teams - if there was Citeh would have saved their money, as would Manu, chelsea etc...

[Dan England]

Although the Man City fan makes a good case, the fact is that someone with unlimited wealth has turned up and is literally buying all the top prizes in football like it was some casual purchase. How can that be good for the game? Whatever Man City win now, it won't mean anything. No managerial genius, no team building, no real achievement. Just throw the cash on the table and collect the trophies.

Nice thought, but people only remember the trophies and not how they did it. Take Ferguson's first title, spent a fortune in those days on the likes of pallister, bruce, Ince, Keane as well as all the big money purchases that failed to make the grade - probably would top Citeh's spending if you tried to buy the same type of players now.. Does anyone say ManU bought the league?

I think that most would attribute ManU's success to a combination of having the money to buy top quality players, and being lucky enough to have an outstanding set of youngsters coming through at the same time.

their first title was done with no youngsters - they basically bought a PL winning team - no different from Citeh,

Giggs was definitely a major part of their team in 92/93, although I take your overall point. 

schmeical
steve bruce
Irwin
pallister
parker
ferguson
giggs
Ince
kancleskis
phelan
sharpe
cantona
dublin
Hughes
mclair
wallace
webb

yep. always forget giggs was a bit older than the likes of Beckham

Still that squad taking out giggs, sharpe and ferguson, what it would cost in 2011 doesn't bear thinking about.
For instance Pallister world or british record fee for a defender... whats the record currently?

But weren't Utd able to spend that money having built the club to that position with previous successes, a large fan base, a great manager and spending money they had earnt through that. Not because a super rich businessman showed up and spent the equivilent of a small country's GDP on, at best, a historical also ran.

[Greg N'Ash]

I do wish people would stop hiding behind the money angle. we were piss poor as we've been a few times this season - so they've got the personnel to capitalise on our mistakes and bad play but when we were rolling in it not so long ago, i'm not sure the clubs with a fraction of our spend were claiming it was pointless turning up and we were killing football. Heart, discipline and concentation cost nowt.

And putting a side together that can contend costs £400,000,000, as seen today.

so that's the best we can play? I'm sorry Citeh may be a good side but we were complete arse. Bloody side assembled for 40 quid would would have caused us trouble today.

Hyperbole cranked up to 11, Greg? I agree that the football is shite, but I'd be more concerned if we played like that against Albion next week than against Man City. It was an expected result, just move on from it.

If its hyperbole to say we played shit then its something i share with the manager who says people would be "appalled" by the goals we gave away. I prefer that to the complacent attitude of yourself that "we would have lost to Citeh anyway"

Saying that a side put together for £40 would have competed with City more than the Villa did? That's hyperbole I reckon. I'm pissed off with a couple of the goals, but this is a fixture we shouldn't be looking at to test ourselves in, it's daft. We're not on a level playing field, we should be looking at performances against Newcastle and Everton for instance.

my point stands, that the majority of the goals yesterday could have been scored by the likes of Newcastle and everton. If you defend like that you'll lose 4-1 to them as well however many millions worth of players they have on the pitch.

[Dave]

No, but it's magnified it to a large degree. I don't have anything against City having the cash, but what it's shown us is how far behind everyone else is from Man U/Chelsea. City have had to spend hundreds of millions of pounds to regularly crack the top four, no one else is in that position and it just further highlights what it takes to become contenders. We had a good side a couple of seasons ago, but had our best players plucked from us by sides that could throw money at them. Look at the England midfield the other night; Young, Milner, Barry and Downing at one point. You're unable to build a team anymore, the chance to compete is being nullified by the money being spunked at players

I daresay that fans of Wigan and Sunderland would agree that it's annoying when someone else with more money and better prospects comes in and signs your best player.