• Participation within this 'World Football' is only available to members who have had 5+ posts approved elsewhere.

ECHO Comment: "Fears of Witch-hunt Against Liverpool FC" part 3

duncs pigeon said:
So what if they do. You lot used to cherry pick players years ago ie Rooney. The amount of money paid for players today is only relevant to the amount of money in the game. Clubs like yours, Liverpool, the Real Madrid’s, Barcelonas don’t like it when other clubs are doing what they did years ago- buy success. To me there is not much difference to what City are doing as to what Salford are doing at a much lower level, again buying success.
Click to expand...

United didn’t outright buy success though did they, it was far more natural and organic, they had already tasted success before spending mega money and nearly half their starting eleven was academy players. It’s a false equivalency.
 
Last edited:

longers said:
United didn’t outright buy success though did they, it was far more natural and organic and they had already become successful before spending mega money and nearly half their starting eleven was academy players. It’s a false equivalency.
Click to expand...
When Utd won the prem in 1993, I would hazard a guess that about 80% of their first 11 were bought. It was a couple years later when the youth team came to fruition.
 
duncs pigeon said:
When Utd won the prem in 1993, I would hazard a guess that about 80% of their first 11 were bought. It was a couple years later when the youth team came to fruition.
Click to expand...

By that logic just about every team ever who has won something has bought success. Uniteds spending in the early 90s is not comparable to what City have done since their takeover even when you take into account the increased cost of players today etc

On top of this United earned their wealth over time, they didn’t magically become the richest club in the world overnight having done absolute nothing to deserve such wealth.
 
Last edited:
anxiouswarrior said:
You say a squad of 25 is a level playing field so have Sheffield United or West Brom got a level playing field in quality of player , that is a ridiculous thing to say , yes we did spend a lot when we were winning most of it self generated , the thing about city and their abu dhabi wealth is they can spend 400 milion on defenders in 3 season , no club i Europe can do that , so its not about whingeing its about the reality
Click to expand...
Yes, every team has a squad of 25. That is a level playing field in terms of numbers, which is not a ridiculous thing to say. I did NOT say there was a level playing field in terms of ability.

You only have to look at this season and see the certain parts of the media saying the RS have been badly done to in terms of injuries, ignoring the 25-man squad they have. It is THEIR problem that beyond the main 11 they wish to have on the pitch, their backup (the rest of the squad) is not up to the same standard - that is down to recruitment/development, nothing else.
 
Old Blue 2 said:
Yes, every team has a squad of 25. That is a level playing field in terms of numbers, which is not a ridiculous thing to say. I did NOT say there was a level playing field in terms of ability.

You only have to look at this season and see the certain parts of the media saying the RS have been badly done to in terms of injuries, ignoring the 25-man squad they have. It is THEIR problem that beyond the main 11 they wish to have on the pitch, their backup (the rest of the squad) is not up to the same standard - that is down to recruitment/development, nothing else.
Click to expand...
Ok fair enough thats the point i was making about abilty , as for Liverpool yes they should have strengthened after winning the title , their squad was not able to cope with long term injuries , i agree that is their own fault , although to lose 3 centre halves for nearly a full season is a bit unfortunate for any club
 

longers said:
By that logic just about every team ever who has won something has bought success. Uniteds spending in the early 90s is not comparable to what City have done since their takeover even when you take into account the increased cost of players today etc

On top of this United earned their wealth over time, they didn’t magically become the richest club in the world overnight having done absolute nothing to deserve such wealth.
Click to expand...
Over time, all clubs have bought success. We broke the record for Alan Ball in the 60s, The RS did it in the 70s and 80s. I do agree with you that these clubs did it over time. But the likes of Utd and rs stopped other clubs getting a percentage of their home gates(rightly or wrongly) in the 80s I think, thus creating a gap and making them bigger and stronger with no thought of other clubs except for themselves. Being honest, it doesn’t bother me with City’s luck because it stops the clubs said creating a cartel.
 
anxiouswarrior said:
You say a squad of 25 is a level playing field so have Sheffield United or West Brom got a level playing field in quality of player , that is a ridiculous thing to say , yes we did spend a lot when we were winning most of it self generated , the thing about city and their abu dhabi wealth is they can spend 400 milion on defenders in 3 season , no club i Europe can do that , so its not about whingeing its about the reality
Click to expand...
Pogba & Maguire cost £170m between them - not a bad start...
 

Apart from the spending of city on their squad what is this about city football group CFG , they have stakes in 10 clubs all over the world , what is that all about they cannot be so called feeder clubs because they hardly send or buy players from theses clubs
 

Welcome

Join Grand Old Team to get involved in the Everton discussion. Signing up is quick, easy, and completely free.

Register

Shop

Back
Top