belleebee wrote:IanWright wrote:I dunno- I think it is a David and Goliath story personally.
Leicester's net spend in the last 5 years is 124mil. Chelsea have smashed that in one transfer window last summer alone.
They've been able to keep competitive in spite of the power spending of a number of clubs around them. The connection between the chairman, the manager, the players and the fans is tangible.
Yesterday reinvested my faith in the FA Cup.
Agree with this. If not exactly David beating Goliath, it was certainly a story of the underdog winning out and I usually have a soft spot for the underdog, particularly as City played that role for quite a long period. As far as the press hyping up the win is concerned, this is surely par for the course: if, say, City under Keegan had beaten Chelsea in an FA cup final I’m sure the plaudits would have been just as loud.
Definitely mate.
It's par for the course that Man City's achievements and wrongfully overlooked, too. Midweek was a bit of a damp squib (literally damp) but that maybe had more to do with the Muppets dropping points and therefore being mathematically unable to win the league. They did it 3 seasons ago when they lost at home to a woeful WBA side, too.
It is unreasonably unfair just how poor the coverage is when Man City win a trophy. 2 seasons ago you did a domestic treble. No one has EVER done that in England. Yet we heard more about the Dippers- the team that won the CL by barely winning away from home. They must hold a record for the most defeats en route to winning it. Bastards