I'm astonished and a bit disappointed by the number of Leeds United fans who are clearly upset that Man United didn't win the title. It's all very dubious indeed. Their most likely the types who chant " Stand up if you hate Man U" because they think about them more than Leeds. Well done City. And for all them people moaning about Man City spending big, have they forgotten Man U spent the best part of 30,000,000 on Ferdinand TEN years ago.
i couldnt care less, it affects leeds in no way shape or form
it's good for football no matter how they've done it. Having a billionaire owner has levelled the playing field in a league where man u are the only club bringing in that kind of money through their own means. And how did they do that? selling out the rest of the league to give themselves an advantage and eliminate the competition.
i couldnt care less, it affects leeds in no way shape or form
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Are you sure you are a LEEDS fans ?
I imagine you were gutted when Barca done the MUCS at Wembley in the final of the CL.
I agree with Mattyp.
All you anti Man United obsessives are no different from the chip on the shoulder Bradford City half-wits who have a good day when Leeds lose.
Yes I am a Leeds fan.
The first game I ever went to was when we did them 3-1.
However I am concerned more about Leeds now then teams in leagues we are not in.
I care for ONLY Leeds.
Benny then you should be critical if koppite who enjoys watching man utd.
Don't be hypocritical now.
Here come the sad gang members.....................
How predictable.
I like seeing the mucs do badly, because it gives me hope that the Premier League will be competitive in the future. Every time the mucs win the league, they strengthen their hold on the Premier League and weaken the competitive nature of the league. Regardless of how it's done, a team winning the league that's not mucs, is good.
hahahaha
Jonty and me as gang members, you do know that we have spent most of the season at each others throats pretty much arguing about everything under the sun.
However we disagree with you and suddenly we are bossum buddies.
Maybe you are right, and I just need to say it...
Jonty I love you.
I like seeing the mucs do badly
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marko - that's probably because you are a LEEDS fan.
Matty, Benny, Eric koppite etc just look for any angle they can.
Their hatred of anyone with a contrary opinion prevents them from ever engaging civilly in the future. You and I sometimes disagree bitterly but it doesn't stop us agreeing once in a blue moon
which is why they deserve to be called idiots, yet I get abuse for having the balls to do so.
which is why they deserve to be called idiots, yet I get abuse for having the balls to do so.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marko - just grow a pair ffs
comment by Jonty (U4614)
posted 15 minutes ago
Matty, Benny, Eric koppite etc just look for any angle they can.
Their hatred of anyone with a contrary opinion prevents them from ever engaging civilly in the future. You and I sometimes disagree bitterly but it doesn't stop us agreeing once in a blue moon
-----
wait, are you lumping me in with them as someone who does that or saying Matt - Benny, Eric koppite etc just look for any angle they can?
The latter, not lumping you with them at all.
comment by MarkoLUFC (U12978)
posted 1 hour, 19 minutes ago
it's good for football no matter how they've done it. Having a billionaire owner has levelled the playing field in a league where man u are the only club bringing in that kind of money through their own means. And how did they do that? selling out the rest of the league to give themselves an advantage and eliminate the competition.
----
Has it though?
We are now 20 years into the premiership and I cant think of many, if any, seasons where its not been a two horse race.
The two horses are now both from Manchester.
It would have leveled the playing field if in doing so they didnt just blow any hope of Arsenal or Chelsea competing with the pair of them.
It would have leveled the playing field if in doing so they didnt just blow any hope of Arsenal or Chelsea competing with the pair of them.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chelsea not competing with the Manchester teams ?
How thick are you ???
Yes - just had a bad season by their standards in the PL but ummm helloooo - they are in the Champions League final , have just won the FA Cup and have a ridiculously wealthy owner who will continue to invest and pay higher wages than the MUCS.
Get a grip.
Liverpool finished 5th and 4th the two seasons before they won the champions league and 5th the season they won it and then 3rd twice.
In that time they were a top club yet were never a real title contender.
Cup competitions dont mean you challenge for titles.
have a ridiculously wealthy owner who will continue to invest and pay higher wages than the MUCS.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
What bit of that do you not understand ?
Liverpool for ffs.
Deluded.
omment by BennyLovesMissDiane (U11483)
posted 3 minutes ago
have a ridiculously wealthy owner who will continue to invest and pay higher wages than the MUCS.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
What bit of that do you not understand ?
Liverpool for ffs.
Deluded.
-------
Man U will always be able to attract top players, Man City have the funds to do it, Chelsea are not in a pole position.
They are on a par with those teams and looking at their aging squad and the power those aged players have are going to go backwards before they ever move forwards to challenge those two clubs.
Its a two horse race, the fact that Chelsea have cash, like arsenal, liverpool, and the two manchester clubs does not mean they will be in the top two anytime soon.
Has it though?
We are now 20 years into the premiership and I cant think of many, if any, seasons where its not been a two horse race.
The two horses are now both from Manchester.
It would have leveled the playing field if in doing so they didnt just blow any hope of Arsenal or Chelsea competing with the pair of them.
--------------------
Context. If it weren't for sugar daddies it would have been a one horse race.
Did Arsenal have a sugar daddy in the early 00's when they were challenging for the league title?
Or maybe they had one in 2006 or 07 when they were leading till March or so.
Chelsea have a sugar daddy and didn't compete this year?
It can be argued that with these sugar daddies coming in, the team that can get the best players for the highest price will have the best chance of winning the title...at the expense of weakening their rivals...so you are still back at square one.
Page 1 of 1
First
Previous
1
Next
Latest
Sign in if you want to comment
MAGNIFICENT
Page 1 of 1
posted on 13/5/12
I'm astonished and a bit disappointed by the number of Leeds United fans who are clearly upset that Man United didn't win the title. It's all very dubious indeed. Their most likely the types who chant " Stand up if you hate Man U" because they think about them more than Leeds. Well done City. And for all them people moaning about Man City spending big, have they forgotten Man U spent the best part of 30,000,000 on Ferdinand TEN years ago.
posted on 13/5/12
i couldnt care less, it affects leeds in no way shape or form
posted on 13/5/12
it's good for football no matter how they've done it. Having a billionaire owner has levelled the playing field in a league where man u are the only club bringing in that kind of money through their own means. And how did they do that? selling out the rest of the league to give themselves an advantage and eliminate the competition.
posted on 13/5/12
i couldnt care less, it affects leeds in no way shape or form
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Are you sure you are a LEEDS fans ?
I imagine you were gutted when Barca done the MUCS at Wembley in the final of the CL.
posted on 13/5/12
I agree with Mattyp.
All you anti Man United obsessives are no different from the chip on the shoulder Bradford City half-wits who have a good day when Leeds lose.
posted on 13/5/12
Yes I am a Leeds fan.
The first game I ever went to was when we did them 3-1.
However I am concerned more about Leeds now then teams in leagues we are not in.
I care for ONLY Leeds.
posted on 13/5/12
Benny then you should be critical if koppite who enjoys watching man utd.
Don't be hypocritical now.
posted on 13/5/12
Here come the sad gang members.....................
How predictable.
posted on 13/5/12
I like seeing the mucs do badly, because it gives me hope that the Premier League will be competitive in the future. Every time the mucs win the league, they strengthen their hold on the Premier League and weaken the competitive nature of the league. Regardless of how it's done, a team winning the league that's not mucs, is good.
posted on 13/5/12
hahahaha
Jonty and me as gang members, you do know that we have spent most of the season at each others throats pretty much arguing about everything under the sun.
However we disagree with you and suddenly we are bossum buddies.
Maybe you are right, and I just need to say it...
Jonty I love you.
posted on 13/5/12
I like seeing the mucs do badly
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marko - that's probably because you are a LEEDS fan.
posted on 13/5/12
Matty, Benny, Eric koppite etc just look for any angle they can.
Their hatred of anyone with a contrary opinion prevents them from ever engaging civilly in the future. You and I sometimes disagree bitterly but it doesn't stop us agreeing once in a blue moon
posted on 13/5/12
which is why they deserve to be called idiots, yet I get abuse for having the balls to do so.
posted on 13/5/12
which is why they deserve to be called idiots, yet I get abuse for having the balls to do so.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marko - just grow a pair ffs
posted on 13/5/12
comment by Jonty (U4614)
posted 15 minutes ago
Matty, Benny, Eric koppite etc just look for any angle they can.
Their hatred of anyone with a contrary opinion prevents them from ever engaging civilly in the future. You and I sometimes disagree bitterly but it doesn't stop us agreeing once in a blue moon
-----
wait, are you lumping me in with them as someone who does that or saying Matt - Benny, Eric koppite etc just look for any angle they can?
posted on 13/5/12
The latter, not lumping you with them at all.
posted on 13/5/12
comment by MarkoLUFC (U12978)
posted 1 hour, 19 minutes ago
it's good for football no matter how they've done it. Having a billionaire owner has levelled the playing field in a league where man u are the only club bringing in that kind of money through their own means. And how did they do that? selling out the rest of the league to give themselves an advantage and eliminate the competition.
----
Has it though?
We are now 20 years into the premiership and I cant think of many, if any, seasons where its not been a two horse race.
The two horses are now both from Manchester.
It would have leveled the playing field if in doing so they didnt just blow any hope of Arsenal or Chelsea competing with the pair of them.
posted on 13/5/12
It would have leveled the playing field if in doing so they didnt just blow any hope of Arsenal or Chelsea competing with the pair of them.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chelsea not competing with the Manchester teams ?
How thick are you ???
Yes - just had a bad season by their standards in the PL but ummm helloooo - they are in the Champions League final , have just won the FA Cup and have a ridiculously wealthy owner who will continue to invest and pay higher wages than the MUCS.
Get a grip.
posted on 13/5/12
Liverpool finished 5th and 4th the two seasons before they won the champions league and 5th the season they won it and then 3rd twice.
In that time they were a top club yet were never a real title contender.
Cup competitions dont mean you challenge for titles.
posted on 13/5/12
have a ridiculously wealthy owner who will continue to invest and pay higher wages than the MUCS.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
What bit of that do you not understand ?
Liverpool for ffs.
Deluded.
posted on 13/5/12
omment by BennyLovesMissDiane (U11483)
posted 3 minutes ago
have a ridiculously wealthy owner who will continue to invest and pay higher wages than the MUCS.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
What bit of that do you not understand ?
Liverpool for ffs.
Deluded.
-------
Man U will always be able to attract top players, Man City have the funds to do it, Chelsea are not in a pole position.
They are on a par with those teams and looking at their aging squad and the power those aged players have are going to go backwards before they ever move forwards to challenge those two clubs.
Its a two horse race, the fact that Chelsea have cash, like arsenal, liverpool, and the two manchester clubs does not mean they will be in the top two anytime soon.
posted on 14/5/12
Has it though?
We are now 20 years into the premiership and I cant think of many, if any, seasons where its not been a two horse race.
The two horses are now both from Manchester.
It would have leveled the playing field if in doing so they didnt just blow any hope of Arsenal or Chelsea competing with the pair of them.
--------------------
Context. If it weren't for sugar daddies it would have been a one horse race.
posted on 14/5/12
Did Arsenal have a sugar daddy in the early 00's when they were challenging for the league title?
Or maybe they had one in 2006 or 07 when they were leading till March or so.
Chelsea have a sugar daddy and didn't compete this year?
It can be argued that with these sugar daddies coming in, the team that can get the best players for the highest price will have the best chance of winning the title...at the expense of weakening their rivals...so you are still back at square one.
Page 1 of 1