Connect with us


Should Manchester City Refocus Their Mega-Spending Efforts Domestically?

elano-blumer-manchester-city.jpgManchester City’s new ownership sent chairman Garry Cook, brimming with billions, to build a super-club capable of Champions League qualification.  The club’s £91m bid for Kaka was a noted fiasco, but, as details have emerged, that’s hardly been their only activity.

City reportedly made an equally irresponsible bid for Spain and Valencia star David Villa, in the range of £100m.  The club then cancelled the deal “on principle,” after Valencia countered with £135m.

Gigi Buffon was probably the target of another record bid, although Manchester City again withdrew when Juventus started asking for nearly £100m for Buffon.  They will hold firm for £6m for Shay Given, yet be willing to part with ten times that for Buffon?

Man City also tried to raid Barcelona’s bench, offering a combined £49m for Thierry Henry , who may be a possibility next summer, and midfielder Yaya Toure.   They had a £10m offer to Arsenal for Yaya’s brother Kolo as well.

The club also have offered £18m for Roque Santa Cruz.  They are so eager they’re willing to throw Tal Ben Haim into the deal, which surely has nothing to do with him being Israeli.

This excludes the £40m already spent on players in January, bringing in a competent left-back (Wayne Bridge), a diminutive striker who doesn’t score much (Craig Bellamy) and a midfielder good enough to be rumored but never to be bought by a big club (Nigel de Jong).

Tallying things up, City have put forth a ludicrous amount of money, with ludicrous ambition.  So, it seems only fitting they get ludicrous responses.

City have been content scouring the continent for spectacular Brazilians, but, if they want their spending to be effective, sound they consider throwing their money around closer to home?

Manchester City’s transfer budget dwarfs that of England’s big four combined.  There are reasons for that.

Manchester United sit on a mountain of debt.  They bought their two Serbians and they’re out.  Roman Abramovich, after losing a few billion wants Chelsea to run a tight ship, allowing only £12m in January.  Liverpool face an uncertain financial future, should the Americans not be able to find a buyer.  Even profitable Arsenal must repay their debt.  And these are the well off clubs…

If Garry Cook is willing to offer nearly £100m to continental giants, why not test the resolve of the domestic ones?

Would the Liverpool board allow Rafa Benitez to turn his nose at such a mega-offer for Mascherano or Fernando Torres?

If City offered £50m for Adebayor or Van Persie could Arsenal afford not to listen?

With players at Chelsea paying for their own lunches, could they entice one of Chelsea’s stars up north?

Even moving down the table, Villa may be able to reject a great transfer bid.  But, could cash-short Everton reject a gobsmacking offer for Arteta?

Perhaps, these transfers may be inconceivable for January.  But, if the economy begins to effect the boffo Premier League revenues – and that probably should be a when not an if– these speculations may be a crude reality.

200+ Channels With Sports & News
  • Starting price: $33/mo. for fubo Latino Package
  • Watch Premier League, World Cup, Euro 2024 & more
  • Includes NBC, USA, FOX, ESPN, CBSSN & more
Live & On Demand TV Streaming
  • Price: $69.99/mo. for Entertainment package
  • Watch World Cup, Euro 2024 & MLS
  • Includes ESPN, ESPN2, FS1 + local channels
Many Sports & ESPN Originals
  • Price: $6.99/mo. (or get ESPN+, Hulu & Disney+ for $13.99/mo.)
  • Features Bundesliga, LaLiga, Championship, & more
  • Also includes daily ESPN FC news & highlights show
2,000+ soccer games per year
  • Price: $4.99/mo
  • Features Champions League, Serie A, Europa League & NWSL
  • Includes CBS, Star Trek & CBS Sports HQ
175 Premier League Games & PL TV
  • Starting price: $4.99/mo. for Peacock Premium
  • Watch 175 exclusive EPL games per season
  • Includes Premier League TV channel plus movies, TV shows & more


  1. dioforce

    January 26, 2009 at 12:23 am

    So, if a player isn't bought by a big club, he must be viewed skeptically? As opposed to actually watching football and determining his worth, your system is much easier! Ugh

  2. kkfla737

    January 25, 2009 at 11:52 am

    Great piece!

    I've been saying the same on my mancityblog for weeks now.

    I'm personally not even sure Kaka would have been good at City. We've seen plenty of Brazilian busts in the PL. We've also seen plenty of players from Italy fail in the different styled English game.

    I believe when you are fighting relegation you acquire players who can settle in quickly. That means either from within England or in rare cases the Englishman abroad.

    Great piece. I'm going to link it from man city

  3. tyduffy

    January 25, 2009 at 11:10 am

    I believe in your rage that you meant “libelous.”

    A. It was a joke. Chill out.

    B. Manchester City is owned by the Abu Dhabi royal family. The UAE does not allow Israeli nationals to enter the country.

    And I'm the one who is being xenophobic for pointing that out? Don't expect any Ibrahimovic bids anytime soon.

    • Bluemoon

      April 26, 2011 at 12:59 pm

      ” and a midfielder good enough to be rumored but never to be bought by a big club (Nigel de Jong)”.
      One of the best buys for City and best midfielders in not only the Premier league but Europe
      EAT those words printed 24th January 2009!

  4. bluenoseisdumb

    January 25, 2009 at 1:40 am

    man ur soooo stupid…. bc what u but is all BS!

  5. Confused

    January 24, 2009 at 9:10 pm

    …. Wait, are you claiming that Ben Haim is not Israeli? Or that he does have any trade value?

  6. allblues

    January 24, 2009 at 8:59 pm

    I find your comments about Ben Haim extremely liableous and unfounded. I hope you have something to back up your allegations, how xenophobic of you.

  7. donjulius

    January 24, 2009 at 6:44 pm

    great article. and you ended it just right. teams in the same league doing a huge deal in janurary is almost unheard of. that it precisely why they are trying to lure international teams to make a deal

  8. mark from manchester

    January 24, 2009 at 6:40 pm

    What a poorly thought out piece, I can't believe the writer would look to racism as a reason for Ben-Haims possible departure and not his abysmal performances.

    Why is everyone acting like this is the first time they've heard a £100m price tag? Real Madrid have been saying it about Ronaldo all summer and no-one bats an eyelid.

  9. Flashman

    January 24, 2009 at 6:26 pm

    Totally agree with all the above comments. Seems to be let's take the p**s out of City time – how dare they try and compete with the so called “big four”. I suppose it's just easier not to do any research, go with the flow and end up with a crap article like this.

    A while ago I'd have been p****d off with reading this but I've read so much crap over the past couple of weeks I've gotten used to it. Tyduffy (who do you support?) surprise me – come up with a balanced, factual and thoughtful report without the current fashionable anti-City bias in it….

  10. Blueman

    January 24, 2009 at 6:01 pm

    I thought racism was illegal!

  11. Feed the Goat

    January 24, 2009 at 5:18 pm

    Typical badly written sly anti MCFC article by another bandwagon climbing self opiniated and pompous buffoon.
    Why should the middle eastern owners pump thier money into the premier for players that do not suit the profile they and Hughes want ?
    Wishfull thinking by the clown who wrote it ,what does he want foreign aid in cash to support the debt ridden top 4 through buying players we do not want?
    The nonsense on the Ka Ka approach is pure fiction there are two sides to every story as there are on the others.
    Suggest you apply to the Mirror for a job on thier sports pages the rag is about right for your decietfull and inventive style wishfull thinking and fiction

  12. NJ Blue

    January 24, 2009 at 5:04 pm

    There has been so much garbage, written by so many people who don't know anything about what's going on at City, it's a joke in itself. I'm sure if Arsenal fail with their bid for Arshavin, they will not be slammed the way City have – probably because they do not have unlimited funds so their failure is “defensible” and they are one of the media's cosy “Top Four” buddies. If you are not prepared to take a risk, then you will always wonder “what if”. City took a chance by going for Kaka…I can't begin to imagine what the media would have said if we had got him…which we very nearly did

  13. Bluenose

    January 24, 2009 at 4:52 pm

    There's so much wrong with all that I don't know where to start.

    Villa – Valencia asked for 60 million and we refused to pay that much – confirmed by club
    Buffon – No bid ever made
    Thiery Henry – No bid ever made
    Yaya Toure – Reported 25 million offer refused
    Kolo Toure – Reported 8 million offer accepted then Arsenal changed their minds.

    As for the comments on Bridge and Bellamy – your entire article is saying buy players close to home and then you ridicule the club for buying players close to home. You say it's ludicrous to go for Kaka, Villa et al but then say we should go for Torres, Gerrard et al – by your logic isn't that ludicrous? You're saying don't go abroad for the superstars stay at home – where they will cost more (historical fact) and the money will be going to a league rival who will be able to improve their squad with a vast wad of cash.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

More in General

Translate »