The mancityfans.net football forum

... would you prefer to finish 2nd or 3rd?

Both have the same financial benefits (apart from the half million or so extra prize money for finishing a league place higher), and although finishing runners up is obviously better,the season would probably go down in history as 'the one where United pipped City', regardless of the real story behind it (like the 'Law Backheel relegated Them' story).

So which would you choose? And why?

For me, it's third. Our chance will come, and coming second to Them is worse than finishing a respectable third in my opinion.

Depends what's more important to you I suppose - supporting City or hating United?

Personally, I don't give a shit about United. If we finish 2nd, that represents an amazing season and great progression - as would 3rd. If they happen to win the league, so be it. Just means our aim is to go one better next season.

If we can beat United to a trophy, then obviously it is a lot sweeter. But at the end of the day, I'm only interested in what we achieve, and finishing 2nd is better than 3rd. No brainer.

Interesting point as I was thinking about something like this after the Arsenal game, but going even further.

A

1. Utd
2. City
3. Arsenal

B

1. Arsenal
2. Utd
3. City

I can see why people would opt for scenario B in this case, but why would you want City to finish in a lower position, if they'd win it anyway? Don't care what the media would make of it, in my memory it would go down as the season City finished runners-up. Wouldn't that be great? Ahead of Arsenal, Chelsea, Liverpool, Spurs.

aaron bond wrote:Depends what's more important to you I suppose - supporting City or hating United?

Personally, I don't give a shit about United. If we finish 2nd, that represents an amazing season and great progression - as would 3rd. If they happen to win the league, so be it. Just means our aim is to go one better next season.

If we can beat United to a trophy, then obviously it is a lot sweeter. But at the end of the day, I'm only interested in what we achieve, and finishing 2nd is better than 3rd. No brainer.

I don't reckon it's about that at all. Surely, by your logic losing to united would also be a lot worse than, say, Arsenal. I just don't think that finishing 2nd is that much greater than finishing third (in the modern game)- and the achievement therein is much less than the long-term historic effect of a 'the season united pipped City' story.

BlueinBosnia wrote:

aaron bond wrote:Depends what's more important to you I suppose - supporting City or hating United?

Personally, I don't give a shit about United. If we finish 2nd, that represents an amazing season and great progression - as would 3rd. If they happen to win the league, so be it. Just means our aim is to go one better next season.

If we can beat United to a trophy, then obviously it is a lot sweeter. But at the end of the day, I'm only interested in what we achieve, and finishing 2nd is better than 3rd. No brainer.

I don't reckon it's about that at all. Surely, by your logic losing to united would also be a lot worse than, say, Arsenal. I just don't think that finishing 2nd is that much greater than finishing third (in the modern game)- and the achievement therein is much less than the long-term historic effect of a 'the season united pipped City' story.

I'm going for second in this scenario. Never mind 'the season united pipped united', rather the season City showed real intent (aka. the season before the season when City won the league)

ABSOFUCKINLUTELY RICULOUS Andrew. Don't bother giving your head a wobble mate...you need to bang it against a wall a few times. The rags win the League, so you would rather we did worse...just to stop them taking the piss? I fucking give up hope.

We are in this game for us, not them. This is about how good City can be...That is the yop, middle and the fuckin bottom of the debate...in fact the only reason there is a debate is because you were daft enough to even post this...shite.

I'd rather City finished as high as possible regardless of any other team.

LookMumImOnMCF.net wrote:I'd rather City finished as high as possible regardless of any other team.

you want us to smoke a bong for the last fixture of the season? i'd support that if it helped us.

DoomMerchant wrote:

LookMumImOnMCF.net wrote:I'd rather City finished as high as possible regardless of any other team.

you want us to smoke a bong for the last fixture of the season? i'd support that if it helped us.

Very witty Mike.

DoomMerchant wrote:

LookMumImOnMCF.net wrote:I'd rather City finished as high as possible regardless of any other team.

you want us to smoke a bong for the last fixture of the season? i'd support that if it helped us.

Bongs can get you high, but nothing will get me close to the real thrill of cloud computing.

BlueinBosnia wrote:... would you prefer to finish 2nd or 3rd?

Both have the same financial benefits (apart from the half million or so extra prize money for finishing a league place higher), and although finishing runners up is obviously better,the season would probably go down in history as 'the one where United pipped City', regardless of the real story behind it (like the 'Law Backheel relegated Them' story).

So which would you choose? And why?

For me, it's third. Our chance will come, and coming second to Them is worse than finishing a respectable third in my opinion.

So, to sum up, you'd rather finish third than second. That's fucked up, if you'll pardon me for saying so.

I see it in quite simple terms. Where we finish matters. It needs to be as high as possible so we get more money, more chance of being seeded in Europe, more chance of signing better players, attracting top youth talent and many, many other reasons.

Where they finish doesn't.

LookMumImOnMCF.net wrote:

DoomMerchant wrote:

LookMumImOnMCF.net wrote:I'd rather City finished as high as possible regardless of any other team.

you want us to smoke a bong for the last fixture of the season? i'd support that if it helped us.

Bongs can get you high, but nothing will get me close to the real thrill of cloud computing.

I lol'd at that

1950 wrote:Interesting point as I was thinking about something like this after the Arsenal game, but going even further.

A

1. Utd
2. City
3. Arsenal

B

1. Arsenal
2. Utd
3. City

I can see why people would opt for scenario B in this case, but why would you want City to finish in a lower position, if they'd win it anyway? Don't care what the media would make of it, in my memory it would go down as the season City finished runners-up. Wouldn't that be great? Ahead of Arsenal, Chelsea, Liverpool, Spurs.

Dead right.

Finishing 2nd would be a bigger achievement that winning either of the cups imo. Our last trophy was the League cup of course but imo our last genuine top team performance over a season was the year after when we won fuck all & finished runners up in the league. That's the season I remember with most satisfaction from that period.

I'd much rather the rags win the league & we finish 2nd, than someone else win it & we finish 3rd.

If you finish 2nd you automatically qualify for the group stages of the chumps league. If you finish third you need to win a playoff game to qualify.

2nd for me.

dazby wrote:If you finish 2nd you automatically qualify for the group stages of the chumps league. If you finish third you need to win a playoff game to qualify.

2nd for me.

But aren't you worried about the history books saying that United pipped us to the title???

Are you?

I would rather they say "city spent £500,000,000,0000,0000000,00.01p and only finished 2nd" rather than 3rd. Which they will. It`s the auto qualification that matters. I can`t see them winning it next year if we did.

dazby wrote:If you finish 2nd you automatically qualify for the group stages of the chumps league. If you finish third you need to win a playoff game to qualify.

2nd for me.

No you don't. It's if you finish fourth that you need to win a playoff. That's why I've been concerned all season that everyone thinks we'll be playing Champs' League if we finish fourth- we have to win a playoff against some pretty hefty names, and I'm not convinced Mancini wouldn't bottle it.

Tokyo Blue wrote:I see it in quite simple terms. Where we finish matters. It needs to be as high as possible so we get more money, more chance of being seeded in Europe, more chance of signing better players, attracting top youth talent and many, many other reasons.

We get half a million more. Would that extra place mean signing better players? Also, there's no such thing as 'seeding according to league position in European competition'- it's all done on a UEFA Coefficient, which bears little-to-no relation to league position, and is rated over a five-season aggregate: winning our final group game against Santander in '08-09 would have had a bigger impact on this.

i've got loads of rag mates, and i'd love them to get 19 over the murdering cunts. then we win and they never get another look in!!!!

I don't care about other teams, I care about us... so I want us to finish as high as possible nomatter what. However I don't think we'll manage 2nd this season as Arsenal have way too many points on us and they have fairly easy games compared to other top 4 teams. To be honest I think we'll have a tough enough time getting 4th unless Chelsea and Tottenham drop atleast two games.