Martin Samuel Get's it Spot On Again

[Chinners]

Martin Samuel will always be judged as getting it right as he sucks Man City off every chance he gets ... in general

[Ted Hughes]

Martin Samuel will always be judged as getting it right as he sucks Man City off every chance he gets ... in general

Tbf he is generally supportive of City but only on stuff where we're actually in the right. We ARE actually doing a lot of stuff right & most of the media should be saying the same thing. If we do something shite, he takes the piss out of us the same as he does everyone else but the fact that his 'pro City' articles stand out like a sore thumb is the exception which proves the rule: we get loads of undeserved negative press & not anywhere near enough praise for what we are doing.

City's recent performance a a club, both on & off the field should have the media shouting praise from the rooftops, not making sly jibes; it's fucking fantastic for football in this country & setting a new level.

[Piccsnumberoneblue]

Martin Samuel will always be judged as getting it right as he sucks Man City off every chance he gets ... in general

Martin Samuel has written top class articles about the closed shop of Europe when we could only dream of owning a pot to piss in.

[Niall Quinns Discopants]

I've been saying the same eversince the rules were introduced. It would only make the game less and less competitive. Elite few having their own little party, stealing all the best youth players and sharing all the titles. In long term it will make less and less interesting. There will be maybe three or max four clubs in England left with any chance for title EVER. It's even worse elsewhere. Take German Bundesleague, probably the most competitive (top) league in Europe in past decade or so. It will be all Bayern from now on. Serie A has always been about Real and Barcelona but fair few clubs have had their time on the sun over the years. That will end in near future.

Spending now was our only chance to get into that group. I repeat, ONLY chance.

[Piccsnumberoneblue]

>>>>> Serie A has always been about Real and Barcelona but fair few clubs have had their time on the sun over the years

Now that's just not true is it?

[The Original Special One]

Agree massively with all said above and by Samuel. Had to post the following which is a letter from a united fan on f365 and a response yesterday from a lad who follows one of our other top 6 rivals (but not City)....funny (delusional) stuff from the former and just a good response from the latter.....


Some Wonderul Straw-Clutching About City
I do not quite understand why people are getting so carried away with Man City. Yes, they have looked phenomenal when attacking with the creative talent of Silva and Aguero's ability to finish from pretty much anywhere he likes (with Balotelli and Dzeko not exactly looking like a pair of cloggers either as they did at times last season), however I think that people are forgetting that City have so far gotten pretty lucky in terms of injuries and the fixture list.

If you take an average position of the teams that City have played and compare it to the teams that Man United have played, Man United's average opposition has been ranked 9.7 whereas City's has been ranked 11.8. City's average is artificially higher than it should be as they played Newcastle, a team who are in a position way higher than they deserve also because of a very kind run of fixtures. These figures show that City still haven't had a proper test yet (apart from games vs Tottenham and Man Utd which were freak results due to Tottenham's pre-transfer window slump and a combination of injuries and the uselessness of Jonny Evans).

In the next month City have got to play Liverpool and Chelsea away and Arsenal at home. If City get nine points from these games then I will happily roll out the red carpet for the City title celebrations myself, however I think that the maximum they will get from these games is four points. This would mean that if Man Utd won all their games (which isn't exactly a given at the moment with their current run of form) then the two teams would be separated by goal difference at the top.

The reason I am confident that City will only get around four points from those three games is (as well as being handy to make Man Utd level on points with City at the top) is that their attacking prowess has been masking the fact that have been slightly dodgy at the back, giving a two-goal lead away at Fulham and conceding two goals against teams like QPR and Bolton. Liverpool haven't conceded more than one goal in a game in the league this season when they've had 11 men on the field and if they actually manage to convert their shots on target into goals then they have got a great chance of nicking points off City. Arsenal and Chelsea, whilst being slightly more porous at the back than Liverpool have got attacking talent that will be more than capable of exposing City's defensive frailties.

Remember, at the start of last season Chelsea went goal-crazy and ended up fading. Whilst City's form has been more sustained, once they start to pick up a few injuries to key players (compare the injuries that City have had so far to the ones suffered by Man Utd or Arsenal for example) they too will fade and we will finally be able to see just how good City really are.
Alex (comparing City to Barcelona is just silly) Hunter


City Are Better. Full Stop.
I very much enjoyed Alex Hunter's analysis of how City have been lucky so far this season, and how they will only take four points from three games against Arsenal, Liverpool and Chelsea.

Um, not sure if you noticed Alex, but City are much, much better than all three of those teams. One of of which is my team. I'll be thrilled with a point at home to City. Because of how very much better than us they are. You see? The flaw in your analysis, is that City are much better than Liverpool, Chelsea and Arsenal. I assume you're a Man U fan. I don't know if you noticed, but they were five goals better than you when you played them.

I do recall Chelsea's great start last year, which tailed off. But, you see - City are much better than the 2010/2011 Chelsea team.

Maybe, just maybe injuries will halt their progress. I'm not sure which key players you are referring to though. Tevez was supposed to be their key player, but they seem to be struggling by without him. Their squad has a very, very strong player ready to step in for every position on the pitch. Perhaps if fuel tanker crashes into a fireworks lorry on the training pitch during the 1st team vs reserves training match they might drop some points until the next transfer window opens.

Otherwise, I'm afraid that what usually happens is that the strongest squad wins the league. United are a bit light in midfield. City, are much better than the rest of the teams in the league.

So yes, once City pick up a few injuries we will be able to see how good they are. The answer will by 'very'. Because they are much, much better than everyone else.

You see?
Jeremy (I'll leave biting at your patronising jibe about Newcastle to their fans) Aves

You gotta love Jeremy's sarcasm-soaked reply, don't you? lol
Lets make him an honorary City fan!

[Slim]

>>>>> Serie A has always been about Real and Barcelona but fair few clubs have had their time on the sun over the years

Now that's just not true is it?

Southerners all look the same to Eskimos....and EVERYONE is a southerner to them.

[Dameerto]

He mean't La Liga. The most annoying thing about that league is that there were already financial hurdles keeping clubs other than the 'big two' firmly in their place before Platini stuck his nose in. The fact that the bulk of the TV money goes to the big two while everyone else is left with scraps, coupled with home attendances for the big two which are more than double those of the third highest average in the league means that no one will have a chance of any sustained challenge too the old order.

[Ted Hughes]

>>>>> Serie A has always been about Real and Barcelona but fair few clubs have had their time on the sun over the years

Now that's just not true is it?

Southerners all look the same to Eskimos....and EVERYONE is a southerner to them.

And Barca/Real don't play in Italy but it's al the same looking from an igloo.

[Ted Hughes]

Barca, Real & Co are about to lose some income from their tv deals & it doesn't surprise me that the European League is getting more & more of a mention.

[Rag_hater]

Agree massively with all said above and by Samuel. Had to post the following which is a letter from a united fan on f365 and a response yesterday from a lad who follows one of our other top 6 rivals (but not City)....funny (delusional) stuff from the former and just a good response from the latter.....


Some Wonderul Straw-Clutching About City
I do not quite understand why people are getting so carried away with Man City. Yes, they have looked phenomenal when attacking with the creative talent of Silva and Aguero's ability to finish from pretty much anywhere he likes (with Balotelli and Dzeko not exactly looking like a pair of cloggers either as they did at times last season), however I think that people are forgetting that City have so far gotten pretty lucky in terms of injuries and the fixture list.

If you take an average position of the teams that City have played and compare it to the teams that Man United have played, Man United's average opposition has been ranked 9.7 whereas City's has been ranked 11.8. City's average is artificially higher than it should be as they played Newcastle, a team who are in a position way higher than they deserve also because of a very kind run of fixtures. These figures show that City still haven't had a proper test yet (apart from games vs Tottenham and Man Utd which were freak results due to Tottenham's pre-transfer window slump and a combination of injuries and the uselessness of Jonny Evans).

In the next month City have got to play Liverpool and Chelsea away and Arsenal at home. If City get nine points from these games then I will happily roll out the red carpet for the City title celebrations myself, however I think that the maximum they will get from these games is four points. This would mean that if Man Utd won all their games (which isn't exactly a given at the moment with their current run of form) then the two teams would be separated by goal difference at the top.

The reason I am confident that City will only get around four points from those three games is (as well as being handy to make Man Utd level on points with City at the top) is that their attacking prowess has been masking the fact that have been slightly dodgy at the back, giving a two-goal lead away at Fulham and conceding two goals against teams like QPR and Bolton. Liverpool haven't conceded more than one goal in a game in the league this season when they've had 11 men on the field and if they actually manage to convert their shots on target into goals then they have got a great chance of nicking points off City. Arsenal and Chelsea, whilst being slightly more porous at the back than Liverpool have got attacking talent that will be more than capable of exposing City's defensive frailties.

Remember, at the start of last season Chelsea went goal-crazy and ended up fading. Whilst City's form has been more sustained, once they start to pick up a few injuries to key players (compare the injuries that City have had so far to the ones suffered by Man Utd or Arsenal for example) they too will fade and we will finally be able to see just how good City really are.
Alex (comparing City to Barcelona is just silly) Hunter

I can't believe this wasn't written by Bridges Right Foot

The 1st half of that is actually classic 'Rag Hater' in posting style. (I'm not accusing him of being a rag btw, just meaning the style of posting). The bizarre logic, use of stats to prove the exact opposite of what they actually show & accidental comedy one liners are like a tribute to our resident space cadet. I was literally rolling around laughing reading that. Fantastic.

It may well do if you say so,but I think what he is saying is wrong.I feel confident we will do better than he suggests.So if you are inferring that I would agree with him you're wrong.
However you're right in suggesting that I use facts to make a case.
If someone argues a case on what is their opinion why is a source of ridicule?

[Ted Hughes]

Agree massively with all said above and by Samuel. Had to post the following which is a letter from a united fan on f365 and a response yesterday from a lad who follows one of our other top 6 rivals (but not City)....funny (delusional) stuff from the former and just a good response from the latter.....


Some Wonderul Straw-Clutching About City
I do not quite understand why people are getting so carried away with Man City. Yes, they have looked phenomenal when attacking with the creative talent of Silva and Aguero's ability to finish from pretty much anywhere he likes (with Balotelli and Dzeko not exactly looking like a pair of cloggers either as they did at times last season), however I think that people are forgetting that City have so far gotten pretty lucky in terms of injuries and the fixture list.

If you take an average position of the teams that City have played and compare it to the teams that Man United have played, Man United's average opposition has been ranked 9.7 whereas City's has been ranked 11.8. City's average is artificially higher than it should be as they played Newcastle, a team who are in a position way higher than they deserve also because of a very kind run of fixtures. These figures show that City still haven't had a proper test yet (apart from games vs Tottenham and Man Utd which were freak results due to Tottenham's pre-transfer window slump and a combination of injuries and the uselessness of Jonny Evans).

In the next month City have got to play Liverpool and Chelsea away and Arsenal at home. If City get nine points from these games then I will happily roll out the red carpet for the City title celebrations myself, however I think that the maximum they will get from these games is four points. This would mean that if Man Utd won all their games (which isn't exactly a given at the moment with their current run of form) then the two teams would be separated by goal difference at the top.

The reason I am confident that City will only get around four points from those three games is (as well as being handy to make Man Utd level on points with City at the top) is that their attacking prowess has been masking the fact that have been slightly dodgy at the back, giving a two-goal lead away at Fulham and conceding two goals against teams like QPR and Bolton. Liverpool haven't conceded more than one goal in a game in the league this season when they've had 11 men on the field and if they actually manage to convert their shots on target into goals then they have got a great chance of nicking points off City. Arsenal and Chelsea, whilst being slightly more porous at the back than Liverpool have got attacking talent that will be more than capable of exposing City's defensive frailties.

Remember, at the start of last season Chelsea went goal-crazy and ended up fading. Whilst City's form has been more sustained, once they start to pick up a few injuries to key players (compare the injuries that City have had so far to the ones suffered by Man Utd or Arsenal for example) they too will fade and we will finally be able to see just how good City really are.
Alex (comparing City to Barcelona is just silly) Hunter

I can't believe this wasn't written by Bridges Right Foot

The 1st half of that is actually classic 'Rag Hater' in posting style. (I'm not accusing him of being a rag btw, just meaning the style of posting). The bizarre logic, use of stats to prove the exact opposite of what they actually show & accidental comedy one liners are like a tribute to our resident space cadet. I was literally rolling around laughing reading that. Fantastic.

It may well do if you say so,but I think what he is saying is wrong.I feel confident we will do better than he suggests.So if you are inferring that I would agree with him you're wrong.
However you're right in suggesting that I use facts to make a case.
If someone argues a case on what is their opinion why is a source of ridicule?

See ?