WED, 2:45PM ET
LIV
REAL
WED, 2:45PM ET
AND
ARS
WED, 2:45PM ET
OLY
JUV
WED, 2:45PM ET
GAL
BVB
WED, 2:45PM ET
ATL
MAL
WED, 2:45PM ET
LEV
ZEN

Philosophy Over New Money Sees Bayern Munich Rule Manchester City

joe hart Philosophy Over New Money Sees Bayern Munich Rule Manchester City

Crushed. Obliterated. Decimated. There were so many superlatives that came to mind as Sheikh Mansour’s millions of petrodollars seemed to evaporate in front of his very eyes Wednesday night on the home field of Etihad Stadium.

On the pitch, his expensive assortment of foreign players crumbled right in front of the Manchester City supporters. Bayern schooled the Citizens in emphatic fashion. City’s expensively assembled squad were left chasing shadows as die Roten ran circles and reduced City’s midfield to pieces with their vicious off-the-ball pressing game high up the pitch. For 80 minutes, the Bavarians played what was a near perfect display of total football. A philosophy of flawless ball retention combined with a ferocious pressing game triumphed over what was nothing more than a rather static assembly of stars signed by City’s Abu Dhabi benefactors. Bayern’s triumph showcased the victory of club ethos over extravagance. The game was a victory not just for Bayern but one for the football purists as well.

But on second thought, are Bayern really a team for the purists? A few Bayern detractors and casual observers of the game oppose this view. Many believe that the Bavarians hold some sort of a monopoly over the Bundesliga; the Big Bad Bayern who are able to sign any player from their nearest domestic rivals at their will. This illusion was largely created by the intense English media scrutiny surrounding Mario Gotze’s controversial transfer to Bayern Munich and the eventual transfer of Robert Lewandowski to the Allianz in 2014.

While the non-German audience may buy into this tripe, a keen observer of German football will tell you that, aside from these two transfers that were largely induced by the arrival of highly-rated Pep Guardiola himself, Bayern have often struggled to get players from their domestic rivals. In 2011 Bayern had a verbal agreement with midfield star Arturo Vidal, but Leverkusen refused to sell. Die Workself rejected Bayern’s lucrative offer and instead accepted a lower offer from Juventus. Bayern also failed in their attempts to sign Lars Bender and Marco Reus. Leverkusen resolutely refused any advances from Bayern over Bender while Reus snubbed Bayern and opted to sign for Dortmund instead. Dortmund themselves have signed their fare share of players from fellow domestic sides while Wolfsburg, Frankfurt, Bremen and Gladbach’s successful transfer raids collectively decimated Freiburg’s team that finished in a Europa League spot last season. Teams signing players from weaker teams in the Bundesliga, as in any other league, is nothing new and is not exclusive to the Bavarians.

Bayern’s victory over City was without doubt a win for the purists. The very best teams in Europe, the legendary teams, tend to have at least 3 or 4 world class home grown players. Bayern Munich have had their fair share of spending in recent years. But the key contrast to City’s spending is that it is far lesser and that there is an ultimate emphasis on relying primarily on their own youth system. Despite boasting foreign superstars such as Ribery and Robben, the core of Bayern’s team consists of Bayern’s very own youth products in the form of Toni Kroos, Thomas Muller, Schweinsteiger, Philip Lahm, David Alaba and Holger Badstuber. Bayern possess a strong identity and ethos to their side and style of play. Their possession oriented philosophy was what attracted Guardiola to Bayern in the first place. Similarly, Barcelona, despite spending when necessary on world class talent like Neymar, rely heavily on their own homegrown La Masia products.

The nouveau riche English side, in contrast, are hardly cut from the same cloth. With Joe Hart in goal and James Milner on the bench, the team on the pitch seems to be nothing more than a random assortment of expensive foreigners. There is no real ethos, no particular football philosophy. What makes matters worse is that the team is artificially propped up by the backing of the Abu Dhabi Group. The club simply lacks an identity.

Detractors of Financial Fair Play wrongly claim that stringent financial rules, advocated by clubs like Bayern, prevent other sides of mediocre stature like City from ever joining the elite due to the prevention of sugar daddies pumping cash into clubs that never earned it. These same critics seem to forget that Bayern Munich themselves started off as a small club that played under strict financial rules created in Germany since the inception of the Bundesliga. The club rose to be the stable giant that it is today due to the flawless manner in which it was structured, shrewd management and emphasis on youth development. Every Euro that the Bavarians spent on a big money transfer today is their own hard-earned cash. Borussia Dortmund now follow the same path. The team that has fought back from being on the verge of bankruptcy and mid-table obscurity are now embarking on a meteoric rise into the upper echelons of European football. They continue to make new and better signings despite the odd sale of a player. As a result, both Bayern Munich and Borussia Dortmund remain top sides and also retain their identity instead of resorting to becoming a billionaire’s plaything in order to compete at the highest level.

The 3-1 scoreline on Wednesday night flattered City. The manner in which that they were so thoroughly outclassed on the pitch made it extremely satisfying for football purists around the world. Manchester City’s owners might be tempted to pump in another billion to compete with the likes of Bayern and hopefully hit the European jackpot sometime within the next decade. But for now, football romantics can rejoice.

82 Responses to Philosophy Over New Money Sees Bayern Munich Rule Manchester City

  1. Flyvanescence says:

    Bullcrap dude grow up get a life. No one liked ur last article and this one is just as misinformed and awful.

    You’ve got to be a rag.

  2. Evan says:

    Wow.. you’re back with another article?

    Not even going to waste my time reading it.

    • Arjun Niranjan says:

      Then why did you waste your time Commenting? Strange…

      • John says:

        Because I wanted you to know I’m not going to read your pile of s.hit article.

        • Arjun Niranjan says:

          wait. you have two names now? Thats funny. Also, did you know that I couldn’t give two sh*ts about what you think about my article?

          • Clampdown says:

            So, this is what it has come to, Gaffer? Arjun writes a piece specifically intended to provoke City fans (and others who disagree with his absolute view of football), and he tells them he doesn’t give a sh*t what they think when they respond in the manner that is expected. Is this the future, and present of WST? It’s your site and you have the right to exercise editorial control. More Matt Jones, less Arjun, please.

        • John says:

          oops, meant “he” instead of I. My point remains though.

    • Frill Artist says:

      Is it because of sour grapes or the low IQ of the average Sh!tty fan? Perhaps a combination of both.

  3. John says:

    The way you’re obsessed with City’s money is slightly alarming. Get a life and stop writing crap articles.

    • Arjun Niranjan says:

      Get a life and don’t read them instead of whining about it. And yes, where City’s money comes from matters quite a bit. It comes comes through the serious misuse of sovereign wealth, oil, and the exploitation of migrant labor.

  4. Adam Heap says:

    Sad that the Gaffer saw fit to publish this at all, let alone after the last one received such tremendous criticism.

    Author: You have a problem with the established order being threatened, making you an elitist. I’m always willing to listen to new viewpoints and if their arguments are stronger than my own then I will happily change my position. This, however, is a case of you shutting out your eyes and ears to the actual story around Munich v City, which is that one team simply played far better football on the night. You’ve also shut yourself off from seeing what’s actually going on at Bayern and yeah, we get it, you enjoyed seeing City get beaten. But people like you are what’s wrong with football supporters – encouraging the rich to get richer and those who aren’t at the top to stay forever rooted to the lower places in the table.

    Disgusting.

    • Manjuleap says:

      Yeah. Look at poor DOrtmund. Not able to challenge the elite because a sugar daddy didn’t pump in Billions of cash. Oh wait! They won the League twice and went to the Champions League final last season! Mind blown!

      • Adam Heap says:

        Transfer spends over last 1.5 seasons of Champions League 2012/13 semi-final clubs:

        Borussia Dortmund: 76.6 million euros
        Barcelona: 103 million euros
        Bayern Munich: 132.3 million euros
        Real Madrid: 204 million euros

        And of the clubs eliminated in the quarter finals, excluding Malaga who were under an embargo:

        Galatasaray: 52.9 million euros
        Juventus: 100.5 million euros
        Paris St Germain: 258 million euros

        You’re right – I guess successful clubs don’t need to spend much money after all!

        • Arjun Niranjan says:

          But where do Dortmund and Bayern get their money from? Its not the fact that teams spend money. Its where they get their money from. Dortmund hardly had anything in the mid 2000s, yet due to smart management, youth developement and subsequent youth development they have earned quite a bit and can now spend it. City is different because they spend money that isn’t theirs. They need a sugar daddy to prop them up.

        • Ben says:

          If you’re gonna look at the capital expenditures of these clubs, you’d be better off looking at their net spend. I think that’ll paint a more accurate picture than what you’re showing above. And why don’t you juxtapose Man City in there too, just to give us some perspective rather than simply trashing his opinion?

    • Arjun Niranjan says:

      I’m an elitist? Hahaha… Dortmund are one of the most successful sides in Germany, went to the final and tore through the ‘ELite’ last season in Europe. I praised them in this article due to the success of their sound financial policy and the fact they succeeded such a tiny budget without the use of any financial doping like City. But if you think that makes me an ‘Elitist’, than go ahead. Lol City are nothing but a fake club who spend someone else’s money and me calling them out for what they are does not make me an Elitist

      • Adam Heap says:

        I guess if you ignore the 76 million euros they spent over the last season and a half then yeah, they did it with no money! Hoorah for the minnows!

        • Arjun Niranjan says:

          76 million Euros following the riches they EARNED themselves through sound management and Champions League success. Before that they had nothing. City on the other hand need someone else to give them BILLIONS in order for them to compete. Pathetic!!!

          • Adam Heap says:

            Alright. Suppose we go with your preposition, which is that clubs should achieve success through earning money solely through success on the pitch and player transfers, merchandising etc. If you remove City from the equation, and Chelsea as well, who are no different, the English league would remain a Big Three competition – Manchester United, Arsenal and Liverpool, all of whom marketed themselves well at the outset of the Premier League and are global brands. Spain would remain a duopoly, as would Germany (because as much as I would love to see it happen, Leverkusen can not sustain a serious title challenge). There is less money in Italy and France but the biggest three competitions in the world RUN ON MONEY. That is a fact of the modern game, and to ignore it is to ignore how football has developed as a commercial entity over the last two decades.

            If you want to see the same three teams winning the title in the major European leagues every year then go ahead. Call that ‘football purism’ and ‘romanticism’, but I cannot buy into that. The English league has been improved thanks to Chelsea, Manchester City and Tottenham helping to break up the established pecking order. There are six teams this year challenging for four Champions League places, and that’s entertaining. The argument of ‘City got funded by billionaires so their wins are illegitimate’ is bogus.

            I suspect that I’m not going to convince you and neither will you convince me, but I strongly disagree with your view on football, and I’m unhappy that people still buy into this kind of football philosophy, where only the elite can remain the elite.

      • Stim says:

        Fake club? Is that so? Well, here’s me thinking that the club I have supported for 40 years through thick and thin are nothing more than a “sham”.

        Thanks for pointing this out with your fantastic football knowledge. I shall go back to my native Manchester and inform the locals that Colin Bell, Billy Meredith, Bert Trautmann, Don Revie, Dennis Tueart etc etc were all figments of our imaginations.

        Seriously, how do guys like this get gigs writing this stuff?

        By the way, that paragon of virtue – Dortmund – nearly went bust some years aqo due to poor financial management.

        You probably chose not to remember that though…

        • Arjun Niranjan says:

          I’m sorry. While they do have history the club certainly sold its soul to the Sheikh in exchange for riches. City as a club sold out. The money that they spend is because of their Sheikh, and really has nothing to do with the club when you think about it. The whole point of the article is that clubs like Bayern and Dortmund are at the level where they are because of their own efforts, sound management and reliance on their own youth. They never sold majority share to a outsider like City and spent money that they didn’t earn. I have no problems with clubs that spend money. I only have a problem with clubs that spend money that isn’t their’s. City, PSG and Monaco represent everything that is wrong with modern football today.

          • Adam Heap says:

            You do realise that almost every club – EVERY club – in Europe receives outside investment? If clubs were asked to survive on ticket sales, merchandising and player sales alone they would ALL be bankrupt.

  5. tb says:

    I’ve read a few of this author’s articles on this site. Interesting how he always seems to understand the tactics of Bayern and Dortmund, yet conveniently forgets to analyze the tactics of any the opposition. All we get is “oil money” and “the team that spent all that money lost.”

    Sure sign of bias. Typical bandwagon attitude. If one actually understands the game, they can understand the tactics of not just their team, but the opposition as well while offering insightful analysis of both. None of that here. Try discussing why Pelligrini’s 4-4-2 approach isn’t working in Europe, as opposed to jumping all over how great Pep and Bayern are because they “press” and play “tiki-taka.” People will take your points more seriously then if you stop repeating catch phrases and start analyzing the actual match played.

  6. Manjuleap says:

    There are some really stupid people on this site. This article is bang on. City are spending money that isn’t their’s. Its essentially cheating. And Dortmund have the same budget as Everton, and they are among the elite. They made it to the CL final on a shoestring budget for christs sake!!!

    You don’t need to be a Sheikh or Oligarch to pump you with cash like City in order to compete, and the article clearly says why. Yet there are so many City fanboys here who complain about this article without even reading it thoroughly. Some really knuckle-headed people on this site.

    • Adam Heap says:

      DEAR LORD. They spent 76 million euros over the last 18 months! Why are people so ignorant to the fact that they, too, have spent a LOT of money to achieve success?

      Can you, or Arjun, name me five sides who have come from nothing to title contenders over the last decade in Europe’s top five leagues (England, Germany, France, Italy, Spain) without spending hundreds of millions of euros? I would be STUNNED if that was the case.

      • Arjun Niranjan says:

        Again, if you read the article, and the other comments ive posted, its not about the spending. Its about where the money comes from. Bayern and Dortmund EARN their money due to their sound management. They never had a sugar daddy like City do that gives them cash that they never earned. That’s the key difference. And that’s why City are a fake club.

        • Adam Heap says:

          You’re disgusting to call a club that has been around for over a century ‘fake’. At least if you’re going to criticise them, you should make better use of your words.

          Until you answer my question – which is asking how clubs have come from mid-table or lower to sustain serious, multiple-season title challenges, then I can’t take you seriously. Everyone’s money comes from somewhere – everyone was funded initially, every one of the big European clubs has a marketing department designed to improve their standing as a global brand.

          • Arjun Niranjan says:

            There is a difference between having a strong marketing department and selling out majority share to an outsider in order to be artifically propped up through billions. I just want to reiterate that Bayern and Dortmund were once ‘small clubs’ when they started. Years of hard work and great structure to the clubs have enabled them to become the clubs that they are today. And I will answer you question about how a mid table side can mount multiple title challenges every season. You need to look no further than Dortmund. They were consistently a midtable side throughout the 2000s untill Klopp came along and galvanized the youth system. Dortmund are an example that a ‘mid-table team’ can challenge consistently by putting together a sound long term plan instead of chasing short term success by becoming a billionaire’s play thing like City did.

          • Adam Heap says:

            I said I wanted FIVE examples across Europe’s top FIVE leagues. You can’t just keep shouting ‘Dortmund, Dortmund’ – one outlier is not sufficient evidence for your claim.

        • Arjun Niranjan says:

          you want another example apart from Dortmund?

          Bayern. They were small when they started out. Schalke and Leverkusen will be up their within the next 10 years as well. I’ve proved enough to you

          • Adam Heap says:

            Dear lord. You do know there are football teams outside Bayern and Dortmund, right? You’re not doing your argument any favours. I asked for sufficient evidence and you have comprehensively FAILED to deliver any.

            Give me:
            -FIVE examples
            -of teams ACROSS EUROPE (not just Germany)
            -who have come from MID TABLE
            -and have already proved they could sustain MULTIPLE TITLE CHALLENGES.

            NOT:
            -Dortmund (your one outlier)
            -Bayern Munich (who have been consistently successful since the 70s and do NOT count as a team who have beaten the money issue in the modern game)
            -teams who have NOT YET proved they can beat the money issue.

            Is there any part of that which you don’t get? You’re repeated attempts to shout ‘Bayern! Dortmund! Bayern! Dortmund’ as evidence are NOT an adequate response to the problem you believe they are solving.

      • eltricolor2014 says:

        It’s not what a club spends but what a club SELLS and then SPENDS. Dortmund spent $76M but also SOLD players like Goetze. City on the other hand do sell some players but not at the level of Dortmund so when they $100M, they are by far using more Abu Dhabi money than money gained from a sale of one their quality players.

    • Frill Artist says:

      It’s funny how quick Sh!tty fans are quick to pull the trigger on any dissenting article towards their team. Big sign of insecurity if you ask me.

  7. christian says:

    Total troll effort here. Last article got a lot of clicks so I knew this was coming with the result the other day. Hope this isn’t the future of this site.

    • John says:

      Gaffer just wants click for the site now. It’s a depressing that it’s come at the cost of quality.

      • Christopher Harris says:

        The writer has an opinion, which isn’t popular among fans of Premier League teams, and he has every right to make his case. If you don’t like his opinion, share your opinion why. Or skip his articles.

        I’ve always said this… no one is always going to agree on everything on this site. And if they did, it’d be extremely boring.

        If I wanted clicks, I’d be running slideshows in all of my posts like other sites do. World Soccer Talk is focused on news, opinions and analysis.

        • christian says:

          By all means, run slideshows then. I’d gain more information and intelligence (which is what I expect here) than this hatchet job.

        • Adam Heap says:

          We can’t skip his articles until we’ve clicked on them because the author is not visible on the main page. You have to click through to find out who the author is – I’m sure it can’t be that hard to include a byline in the front page spiel.

    • Frill Artist says:

      It is not praising the glorious efforts of Sh!tty, therefore, it must be a troll. Your deduction skills are impeccable.

      • Adam Heap says:

        Your Manchester United icon makes your own argument difficult to believe.

        Have City played bad? Yes, and so readers would like to see an article based on what let them down, whether it was their tactics or their goalkeeper or whether Munich are unstoppable. Readers can acknowledge that City are underperforming just fine.

        What we don’t want to read it ‘Bayern are a small-time club who did it all themselves so when they beat a team who have a lot of money it’s good for football’. That’s garbage.

        • Frill Artist says:

          Well, it’s an opinion piece and look around the site. It is mostly opinion pieces. Just because it doesn’t paint your club in a good light, doesn’t mean it is garbage.

          • Adam Heap says:

            I’ve pointed out both above and below (below specifically) why this article leaves a lot to be desired. There’s not enough evidence, it’s presumptuous, and it’s disrespectful (the full list is in a comment below).

            As for me? I’m a Burnley fan. My club sits a full division below City and ain’t no-one ever gonna write about them, don’t worry about that.

  8. Cody (#2) says:

    Ok, I defended this guys right to state his opinion in his first article, but to write a follow up article of pure brow beating after the match was over is just childish.

    And shame on EPL Talk for publishing it. There is plenty of good content on this site & no need to flood it with every fanboy article. I really hope this isn’t the way this site is going to be ran in the future.

    • Frill Artist says:

      The only thing childish here is the disgusting responses and schoolyard replies by the Sh!tty lot. They tend to cry too much.

      • Canadian Bacon says:

        I’m no City fan but you seem to have a fixation on them. This have anything to do with that 4-1 beat down of the inept Devils haha.

  9. john says:

    Several people here said that Dortmund spent 70 million but fail to mention that they just took the money they got from transfers and got new players for it. Looking back over the past 5 years they have actually gained more transfer money than they spent.

  10. Milhouse says:

    I wrote an article bashing City last time and I got a lot of comments. I’ll just do it again.

    I’m popular.

    Hooray for the status quo. Let the establishment reign. Hooray for ManU, Hooray for the New York Yankees, Hooray for the Casino while playing Blackjack!!!!

  11. Jason says:

    Bayern Munich & Dortmund are two of the most unique clubs in the world and even they have what they call “partners” which are investors made of various different corporations. While I despise city I think it’s unfair to make a comparison of two outliers such as Munich & Dortmund.
    The fact of the matter, is that in most clubs history, there has been money that was invested into the club to achieve success. If you look at a football club like a business (which interestingly enough is how Dortmund is run) then any company that see’s success and growth is going to have investment in the company. In Dortmunds case it came from partners and being publicly traded. So, unless you’re saying that every club should be publicly traded than there is no point to compare the two.

  12. Kartik Krishnaiyer says:

    FFP is in my opinion the most elitist thing ever. It would lock in the established order, discriminate against big clubs in lower economic areas (like Sunderland and Aston Villa)and stifle investment in football allowing those would put money in our sport to look elsewhere for opportunities to spend.

    I would point out Manchester City has the LOWEST ticket prices in the Premier League leaving the club accessible to supporters and to common working class people, those who make City the club it is. The City brass has worked hard to keep ticket prices low, no small feat considering FFP.

    Bayern have been the greatest advocates of FFP, trying to prevent investment in the sport and lock in their permanent hegemony. Uli Hoeness, himself charged with tax evasion by German authorities has been the chief cheerleader among Bayern’s brass for this scheme that would destroy the competitiveness of European football. For me Chelsea’s victory over Bayern in 2012 was a victory for football supporters over the entrenched order Bayern represents. That was a great victory for all of us, one that should be romanticized and lauded not this victory of an arrogant elitist side that is so obsessive about City, Chelsea and PSGs money they advocate and concoct rules and media narrative to protect their position.

    • Arjun Niranjan says:

      Kartik, you want to compare City’s ticket prices to Bayern’s prices? The EPL stadium ticket prices are a total rip off and are a joke compared to ticket prices of the Bundesliga.

      Aside from that, I like how you just assume that Bayern started off as rich club. All this ‘hegemony’ that Bayern have is just a figment of your imagination. Bayern started small and built themselves under the strinct financial regulations in the Bundesliga. It took years for them to develop over time and never relied on outside help. Chelsea and City in contrast are pure plastic clubs. They are only where they are because of sugar daddies, and they spend the money of Oligarchs and Rich Sheikhs in order to be successful. Chelsea and City are jokes. The term ‘Investment’ in football is just a code word for mooching of a rich billionaire.

      Chelsea are run by a Russian Oligarach. City are run by a Sheikh. Bayern are run by former players.

      I rest my case.

    • Arjun Niranjan says:

      The big spending and ticket prices of the EPL have killed of the working class aspect of the game.

      That’s why Old Trafford and the Etihard are as quiet as a library compared to German stadiums. Expensive ticket prices mean that the working class fans are excluded.

      The Bayern fans were the ones making all the noise at the Etihard stadium while the City fans were as quiet as ever. You never hear such pin-drop scilence at German stadiums. That’s because the ticket prices are far more affordable.

      The BUndesliga’s 50+1 rule (financial fairplay) means that football in Germany truly is a working class game. The clubs are for the fans, and are owned by the fans (instead of sugar daddies). Season ticket comes with free transportation.

      And you call the EPL a working class game? I had to laugh out loud to that, no offense

    • CTID says:

      Case closed. Krishnaiyer annoys the #%@# out of me sometimes with his attacks on City’s new style and defense of Mancini. But he has said it all here. Well said, well put.

      • Tom says:

        yeah right. “For me Chelsea’s victory over Bayern in 2012 was a victory for football supporters over the entrenched order Bayern represents. That was a great victory for all of us, one that should be romanticized and lauded not this victory of an arrogant elitist side that is so obsessive about City, Chelsea and PSGs money they advocate and concoct rules and media narrative to protect their position.”

        ahhh… the romance of plastic clubs. Total Bullsh*t from Kartik here

  13. christian says:

    I think you seriously fail when you call clubs ‘a joke’. You’re just trolling and we’re all taking the bait. I’m going to ignore your further ‘work’.

    • Arjun Niranjan says:

      I never called any club a joke. I only called some the ticket prices as being a joke. The price of a ticket at the Emirates certainly is

    • Arjun Niranjan says:

      looking back I certainly did call City and Chelsea as ‘jokes’. In hindsight I should have used the term ‘disingenuous’ instead. Maybe that would have been more suitable. Apologies!

    • Frill Artist says:

      You’re going to ignore his further work?

      Funny. You said the same thing in his last article.

  14. Matt says:

    This man is entitled to his opinion, sure. It’s the type of opinion I expect to find in the comments section of a youtube video, not at the top of a soccer site that I have loved for years. Opinion pieces have made this site great, but those pieces are always informed, measured and well written. This garbage piece shares none of these qualities.

    I’m not sure if you green-light everything that gets published on this site Gaffer, so this criticism may be misdirected. But you need to keep “writing” like this off the site if you mean to retain the sterling reputation you built from nothing…

    • Christopher Harris says:

      Thanks for the input, Matt. I’ll take it into consideration.

    • Datpiff says:

      Why don’t you offer some real constructive criticism instead of whinging about it?

      If its garbage, then please say why it is.

      I happen to think that it reveals the truth to City fans. Their club is run by billionaire, and they would be nowhere without him. There is nothing wrong with this article. Your post along with the other posts made by the City fanboys on this site are the ones that belong below a youtube Video.

      Get real!

      • Adam Heap says:

        You really can’t see anything wrong with this article?

        The criticism for it has been provided by many people above this comment, including myself. All of it constructive. The author’s argument is ‘Man City were provided a lot of money, therefore they are ruining the sport by providing competition to the established clubs who (supposedly) came from nothing’.

        Here’s constructive criticism:
        -The author has not set out how he expects clubs to achieve what Dortmund have in the modern age without serious outside financial investment;
        -The author has not provided more examples to back up his premise nor has he proven willing to go and find more examples to prove that clubs can achieve what Dortmund have across the European leagues, thereby providing the basis of his article on an outlying statistic;
        -The author has, in this article and his previous, told people that this is a victory for football purists and romantics, which is an assumption that those of us who are football purists and/or romantics are obligated to feel that way;
        -The author has decided to revert to such disgusting language as calling Manchester City a ‘fake’ club, which is appallingly disrespectful to both the club and the fans.

        Without outside investment, Manchester City would still be floating around mid-table. City fans won’t deny that. But the argument that ‘big money is ruining the game’ would only be effective if the teams who have received large amounts of investment over a short space of time have made it impossible for the already-established elite teams to win anything, which is not the case. Rather, they have provided new energy and life into competitions which could previously only be won by two or three clubs.

    • Frill Artist says:

      “Keep writing like this off the site.”

      Ah, gotta love the good old bully censorship tactics. What we need to do is keep whiners like you off the site instead.

      • Matt says:

        Frill, I am, always have been, and always will be a rabid United supporter. Of course I enjoyed the way Munich shredded City (I would have enjoyed it more had we not given away a cheap equalizer that day too). Just because I’m a United supporter and desperately anti City doesn’t mean I’m suddenly blind to the progress city have (sadly) made since the cash infusion from the middle east. Additionally, I’m still capable of identify atrocious writing when I see it, even if it makes me chuckle.

  15. Taylor says:

    I understand where the author comes from: that certain clubs rely on their sugar daddies to buy titles. But things have happened in the past: Berlusconi rebuilt Milan in the 90s, Moratti spent tons of money with Inter, Abrahamovich with Chelsea, Sir Jack Walker with Blackburn Rovers. It’s nothing new.

    Also, I wouldn’t call Man City lacks an identity. And this comes from a United fan: I don’t like City, but I know it’s a club with history. And glorifying Bayern Munich, wow. Just wow, wow and wow.

    Bayern’s victory this week was not a victory for football purists. It was a victory for FC Bayern and their supporters.

    Oh, before anyone said that I’m a bandwagon fan, I’ve been United fan since 1989 – the first live coverage FA Cup I saw on telly was Coventry vs Spurs in 1987.

    • JamesDet says:

      I would argue that it was a win for the purist which had more to do with City losing, more than Bayern winning.

      City getting a Sheikh to give them a blank cheque is not an ‘investment’. Its cheating.

      Wednesday night was a victory for the purists due to the fact that ‘cheating’ did not win.

  16. Frill Artist says:

    Seems like he rustled the feathers of a few Sh!tty fans. Excellent write up. Keep it up.

  17. Smokey Bacon says:

    Amen brother. City fans are so sensitive!

  18. MoyesvMouvPelli says:

    Great Work Arjun. Its the truth.

  19. Kosh says:

    I liked the article. Great balanced analysis, offered the counter-argument of Bayern buying Germany’s best.

    “The very best teams in Europe, the legendary teams, tend to have at least 3 or 4 world class home grown players.” was a fantastic point. United in 99, Barcelona 09/11 are probably the 2 most memorable winners of recent times. Even the Galacticos had Casillas and Raul (not a youth product but joined the club at 17)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>