comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 4 hours, 48 minutes ago
comment by whodunnit (U22710)
posted 56 seconds ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by whodunnit (U22710)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 5 seconds ago
comment by whodunnit (U22710)
posted 1 minute ago
however that prob didnt include the Kane transfer
----------------------------------------------------------------------
May be think before typing
----------------------------------------------------------------------
however to include the kane transfer this current season would need to be finished.
Over the last 5 seasons Spurs net spend is 2nd highest in world football.
true or false
----------------------------------------------------------------------
false
----------------------------------------------------------------------
where are they then? higher or lower than city ?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You're the own making the claim. I personally don't give a shiiiit, so do your own research !
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Funny I didnt hear back from you on this one
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 4 hours, 48 minutes ago
comment by whodunnit (U22710)
posted 56 seconds ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by whodunnit (U22710)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 5 seconds ago
comment by whodunnit (U22710)
posted 1 minute ago
however that prob didnt include the Kane transfer
----------------------------------------------------------------------
May be think before typing
----------------------------------------------------------------------
however to include the kane transfer this current season would need to be finished.
Over the last 5 seasons Spurs net spend is 2nd highest in world football.
true or false
----------------------------------------------------------------------
false
----------------------------------------------------------------------
where are they then? higher or lower than city ?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You're the own making the claim. I personally don't give a shiiiit, so do your own research !
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Funny I didnt hear back from you on this one
----------------------------------------------------------------------
cos the point was very obv you were complaining about citys spending.....and how its the reason they have silverware .... is your net spend more or less than theirs over the last 5 seasons ?
comment by whodunnit (U22710)
posted 55 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 4 hours, 48 minutes ago
comment by whodunnit (U22710)
posted 56 seconds ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by whodunnit (U22710)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 5 seconds ago
comment by whodunnit (U22710)
posted 1 minute ago
however that prob didnt include the Kane transfer
----------------------------------------------------------------------
May be think before typing
----------------------------------------------------------------------
however to include the kane transfer this current season would need to be finished.
Over the last 5 seasons Spurs net spend is 2nd highest in world football.
true or false
----------------------------------------------------------------------
false
----------------------------------------------------------------------
where are they then? higher or lower than city ?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You're the own making the claim. I personally don't give a shiiiit, so do your own research !
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Funny I didnt hear back from you on this one
----------------------------------------------------------------------
cos the point was very obv you were complaining about citys spending.....and how its the reason they have silverware .... is your net spend more or less than theirs over the last 5 seasons ?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
sorry, where was i moaning about City's spending?
and yes, City's spending is the reason why they went from a yo yo club with no trophies in a life time to a world super power in about a decade. Are you contesting this
City have spent more years in the top flight than Spurs.
The yo yo years you like to mention were a speck in our history as a whole.Tottenham broke the #family owned' mould by becoming a PLC and most others followed suit.
You can't blame other clubs going a step further by setting themselves up to attract billionaire investors further down the line.
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 1 hour, 39 minutes ago
City have spent more years in the top flight than Spurs.
The yo yo years you like to mention were a speck in our history as a whole.Tottenham broke the #family owned' mould by becoming a PLC and most others followed suit.
You can't blame other clubs going a step further by setting themselves up to attract billionaire investors further down the line.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not blaming anyone for anything....Whodumwit seems to think that because city and spurs net spend in the last 5 years is similar we should be at the same level...but he is a simpleton.
Spurs have been an ever present in the top league since 76 and City have been relegated 5 times in than period of 47 years. So yes, a yo yo club. With no trophies and 5 relegations between 1976 and 2008 when you won the lottery. And that's what happened, you won the lottery, it could have been any club but it was you, like Chelsea before and Newcastle since, with the common theme of them being poorly run and poorly performing mid sized clubs making them good value to invest in.
By winning the lottery, I assume you mean being debt free with a new stadium made us more attractive to investors than other clubs.
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 11 hours, 10 minutes ago
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 1 hour, 39 minutes ago
City have spent more years in the top flight than Spurs.
The yo yo years you like to mention were a speck in our history as a whole.Tottenham broke the #family owned' mould by becoming a PLC and most others followed suit.
You can't blame other clubs going a step further by setting themselves up to attract billionaire investors further down the line.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not blaming anyone for anything....Whodumwit seems to think that because city and spurs net spend in the last 5 years is similar we should be at the same level...but he is a simpleton.
Spurs have been an ever present in the top league since 76 and City have been relegated 5 times in than period of 47 years. So yes, a yo yo club. With no trophies and 5 relegations between 1976 and 2008 when you won the lottery. And that's what happened, you won the lottery, it could have been any club but it was you, like Chelsea before and Newcastle since, with the common theme of them being poorly run and poorly performing mid sized clubs making them good value to invest in.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"we all know what it takes...about £3bn and circumventing of the rules"
No but when you moan about finances getting a team titles like you did then best make sure your team hasnt a higher net spend than them over the last decade, kinda of ruins that point !!
comment by whodunnit (U22710)
posted 48 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 11 hours, 10 minutes ago
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 1 hour, 39 minutes ago
City have spent more years in the top flight than Spurs.
The yo yo years you like to mention were a speck in our history as a whole.Tottenham broke the #family owned' mould by becoming a PLC and most others followed suit.
You can't blame other clubs going a step further by setting themselves up to attract billionaire investors further down the line.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not blaming anyone for anything....Whodumwit seems to think that because city and spurs net spend in the last 5 years is similar we should be at the same level...but he is a simpleton.
Spurs have been an ever present in the top league since 76 and City have been relegated 5 times in than period of 47 years. So yes, a yo yo club. With no trophies and 5 relegations between 1976 and 2008 when you won the lottery. And that's what happened, you won the lottery, it could have been any club but it was you, like Chelsea before and Newcastle since, with the common theme of them being poorly run and poorly performing mid sized clubs making them good value to invest in.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"we all know what it takes...about £3bn and circumventing of the rules"
No but when you moan about finances getting a team titles like you did then best make sure your team hasnt a higher net spend than them over the last decade, kinda of ruins that point !!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Again, its not a moan. It's a statement of fact!
I am not denying they are run well and spend well and have a great manager BUT all of that has been made possible through their massive levels of investment.
You seem to have some sort of weird obsession with Spurs. Really, if you were wanting to make a point about spending then United would be a more relevant comparison. They've probably spent more gross and net in 5 years, 10 years 15 years and yet havent won the title in 10 and don't dominate like City.
For a club run like Spurs, and you can add Liverpool (and several others big clubs top the list), it is very difficult to challenge and get where you want and need to be in the face of such spending by the opposition. Not a moan, a fact.
We all know City spend vast sums since 2008, we all know that they are being investigated for breaking the rules from 2009 to 2018, the very period that saw them build the foundations of the now dominance.
That spending and bending (or worse) the rules is what it has taken to get City where they are...not what they have spent in the last 5 years, where actually they are now very stable, and can be selective in transfers, attract the very best without having to over pay wildly to make it happen, offer the best wages, attract the best manager. These are just realities and there are many clubs who have to do thing differently and cannot afford the best of the best but still have to spend huge sums in an inflated market.
This may all be wasted on your blinkered simple mindset.
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by whodunnit (U22710)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Again, its not a moan. It's a statement of fact!
I am not denying they are run well and spend well and have a great manager BUT all of that has been made possible through their massive levels of investment.
You seem to have some sort of weird obsession with Spurs. Really, if you were wanting to make a point about spending then United would be a more relevant comparison. They've probably spent more gross and net in 5 years, 10 years 15 years and yet havent won the title in 10 and don't dominate like City.
For a club run like Spurs, and you can add Liverpool (and several others big clubs top the list), it is very difficult to challenge and get where you want and need to be in the face of such spending by the opposition. Not a moan, a fact.
We all know City spend vast sums since 2008, we all know that they are being investigated for breaking the rules from 2009 to 2018, the very period that saw them build the foundations of the now dominance.
That spending and bending (or worse) the rules is what it has taken to get City where they are...not what they have spent in the last 5 years, where actually they are now very stable, and can be selective in transfers, attract the very best without having to over pay wildly to make it happen, offer the best wages, attract the best manager. These are just realities and there are many clubs who have to do thing differently and cannot afford the best of the best but still have to spend huge sums in an inflated market.
This may all be wasted on your blinkered simple mindset.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You made the point about spending not me.... you claimed the money was the reason and dodginess.
But it turns out that Spurs have a higher net spend in the last decade!
So that argument holds no water.
You made a silly comment and are no backtracking to try and save face.
you could just say "i was wrong"
comment by whodunnit (U22710)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by whodunnit (U22710)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Again, its not a moan. It's a statement of fact!
I am not denying they are run well and spend well and have a great manager BUT all of that has been made possible through their massive levels of investment.
You seem to have some sort of weird obsession with Spurs. Really, if you were wanting to make a point about spending then United would be a more relevant comparison. They've probably spent more gross and net in 5 years, 10 years 15 years and yet havent won the title in 10 and don't dominate like City.
For a club run like Spurs, and you can add Liverpool (and several others big clubs top the list), it is very difficult to challenge and get where you want and need to be in the face of such spending by the opposition. Not a moan, a fact.
We all know City spend vast sums since 2008, we all know that they are being investigated for breaking the rules from 2009 to 2018, the very period that saw them build the foundations of the now dominance.
That spending and bending (or worse) the rules is what it has taken to get City where they are...not what they have spent in the last 5 years, where actually they are now very stable, and can be selective in transfers, attract the very best without having to over pay wildly to make it happen, offer the best wages, attract the best manager. These are just realities and there are many clubs who have to do thing differently and cannot afford the best of the best but still have to spend huge sums in an inflated market.
This may all be wasted on your blinkered simple mindset.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You made the point about spending not me.... you claimed the money was the reason and dodginess.
But it turns out that Spurs have a higher net spend in the last decade!
So that argument holds no water.
You made a silly comment and are no backtracking to try and save face.
you could just say "i was wrong"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes i did bring their spending into it....you are the one contesting it has anything to do with their sucess.
and Spurs dont have a higher spend or net spend in the last decade. You are just making shiiit up now.
This is from Jan 2022, so a bit older.
https://football-observatory.com/IMG/sites/b5wp/2021/wp367/en/
It shows City at about 650m greater net spent over 10 years from 2012 compared to Spurs. SInce then it has probably moved 100m in City's favour, so net spend of about 550m more than Spurs.
AND if you are making the case that we have net spent more than them in the last 5 years, then that 550m difference is done the 5 years up to 2018....the very period I described to you as when their massive investment laid the foundations for their now dominance, the same period they are being investigated.
You are just talking shiiiiit not backed up facts, and accuse me of back tracking Whodumwit by name....🤡
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by whodunnit (U22710)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by whodunnit (U22710)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Again, its not a moan. It's a statement of fact!
I am not denying they are run well and spend well and have a great manager BUT all of that has been made possible through their massive levels of investment.
You seem to have some sort of weird obsession with Spurs. Really, if you were wanting to make a point about spending then United would be a more relevant comparison. They've probably spent more gross and net in 5 years, 10 years 15 years and yet havent won the title in 10 and don't dominate like City.
For a club run like Spurs, and you can add Liverpool (and several others big clubs top the list), it is very difficult to challenge and get where you want and need to be in the face of such spending by the opposition. Not a moan, a fact.
We all know City spend vast sums since 2008, we all know that they are being investigated for breaking the rules from 2009 to 2018, the very period that saw them build the foundations of the now dominance.
That spending and bending (or worse) the rules is what it has taken to get City where they are...not what they have spent in the last 5 years, where actually they are now very stable, and can be selective in transfers, attract the very best without having to over pay wildly to make it happen, offer the best wages, attract the best manager. These are just realities and there are many clubs who have to do thing differently and cannot afford the best of the best but still have to spend huge sums in an inflated market.
This may all be wasted on your blinkered simple mindset.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You made the point about spending not me.... you claimed the money was the reason and dodginess.
But it turns out that Spurs have a higher net spend in the last decade!
So that argument holds no water.
You made a silly comment and are no backtracking to try and save face.
you could just say "i was wrong"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes i did bring their spending into it....you are the one contesting it has anything to do with their sucess.
and Spurs dont have a higher spend or net spend in the last decade. You are just making shiiit up now.
This is from Jan 2022, so a bit older.
https://football-observatory.com/IMG/sites/b5wp/2021/wp367/en/
It shows City at about 650m greater net spent over 10 years from 2012 compared to Spurs. SInce then it has probably moved 100m in City's favour, so net spend of about 550m more than Spurs.
AND if you are making the case that we have net spent more than them in the last 5 years, then that 550m difference is done the 5 years up to 2018....the very period I described to you as when their massive investment laid the foundations for their now dominance, the same period they are being investigated.
You are just talking shiiiiit not backed up facts, and accuse me of back trackingWhodumwit by name....🤡
----------------------------------------------------------------------
you made the comment on the back of winning titles. what else could you have meant with that?
You:
Whatever it takes to see a trophy raised........
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Me:
we all know what it takes...about £3bn and circumventing of the rules
-----------
it's pretty clear what i meant to most of those who can read.
You seem to think that spending in the last 5 years has anything to do with Spurs or anyone else's ability to challenge city. Credit to those clubs like Arsenal and Liverpool who have managed to challenge them without spending anything like City (net or gross) but that has been the exception not the rule with City winning 5 of last 6 titles and 11 of the last 18 domestic trophies available in the last 6 years.
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 1 minute ago
You:
Whatever it takes to see a trophy raised........
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Me:
we all know what it takes...about £3bn and circumventing of the rules
-----------
it's pretty clear what i meant to most of those who can read.
You seem to think that spending in the last 5 years has anything to do with Spurs or anyone else's ability to challenge city. Credit to those clubs like Arsenal and Liverpool who have managed to challenge them without spending anything like City (net or gross) but that has been the exception not the rule with City winning 5 of last 6 titles and 11 of the last 18 domestic trophies available in the last 6 years.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
yes its pretty clear what you said, I think everyone can see it also !!
comment by whodunnit (U22710)
posted 59 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 1 minute ago
You:
Whatever it takes to see a trophy raised........
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Me:
we all know what it takes...about £3bn and circumventing of the rules
-----------
it's pretty clear what i meant to most of those who can read.
You seem to think that spending in the last 5 years has anything to do with Spurs or anyone else's ability to challenge city. Credit to those clubs like Arsenal and Liverpool who have managed to challenge them without spending anything like City (net or gross) but that has been the exception not the rule with City winning 5 of last 6 titles and 11 of the last 18 domestic trophies available in the last 6 years.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
yes its pretty clear what you said, I think everyone can see it also !!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You've lost me dumwhit?
What are you saying that i am now denying?
Everyone can see what i said, does anyone disagree with me (expect City fans of course)?
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by whodunnit (U22710)
posted 59 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 1 minute ago
You:
Whatever it takes to see a trophy raised........
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Me:
we all know what it takes...about £3bn and circumventing of the rules
-----------
it's pretty clear what i meant to most of those who can read.
You seem to think that spending in the last 5 years has anything to do with Spurs or anyone else's ability to challenge city. Credit to those clubs like Arsenal and Liverpool who have managed to challenge them without spending anything like City (net or gross) but that has been the exception not the rule with City winning 5 of last 6 titles and 11 of the last 18 domestic trophies available in the last 6 years.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
yes its pretty clear what you said, I think everyone can see it also !!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You've lost me dumwhit?
What are you saying that i am now denying?
Everyone can see what i said, does anyone disagree with me (expect City fans of course)?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eBoM6MrKWwI
comment by whodunnit (U22710)
posted 24 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by whodunnit (U22710)
posted 59 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 1 minute ago
You:
Whatever it takes to see a trophy raised........
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Me:
we all know what it takes...about £3bn and circumventing of the rules
-----------
it's pretty clear what i meant to most of those who can read.
You seem to think that spending in the last 5 years has anything to do with Spurs or anyone else's ability to challenge city. Credit to those clubs like Arsenal and Liverpool who have managed to challenge them without spending anything like City (net or gross) but that has been the exception not the rule with City winning 5 of last 6 titles and 11 of the last 18 domestic trophies available in the last 6 years.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
yes its pretty clear what you said, I think everyone can see it also !!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You've lost me dumwhit?
What are you saying that i am now denying?
Everyone can see what i said, does anyone disagree with me (expect City fans of course)?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eBoM6MrKWwI
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Still not answering questions then!
http://tinyurl.com/ypnbp982
[unsubscribe]...[unsubscribe]
'STOP'
...nothing's working!
Sign in if you want to comment
Did i miss something yesterday
Page 3 of 3
posted on 4/9/23
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 4 hours, 48 minutes ago
comment by whodunnit (U22710)
posted 56 seconds ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by whodunnit (U22710)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 5 seconds ago
comment by whodunnit (U22710)
posted 1 minute ago
however that prob didnt include the Kane transfer
----------------------------------------------------------------------
May be think before typing
----------------------------------------------------------------------
however to include the kane transfer this current season would need to be finished.
Over the last 5 seasons Spurs net spend is 2nd highest in world football.
true or false
----------------------------------------------------------------------
false
----------------------------------------------------------------------
where are they then? higher or lower than city ?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You're the own making the claim. I personally don't give a shiiiit, so do your own research !
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Funny I didnt hear back from you on this one
posted on 4/9/23
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 4 hours, 48 minutes ago
comment by whodunnit (U22710)
posted 56 seconds ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by whodunnit (U22710)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 5 seconds ago
comment by whodunnit (U22710)
posted 1 minute ago
however that prob didnt include the Kane transfer
----------------------------------------------------------------------
May be think before typing
----------------------------------------------------------------------
however to include the kane transfer this current season would need to be finished.
Over the last 5 seasons Spurs net spend is 2nd highest in world football.
true or false
----------------------------------------------------------------------
false
----------------------------------------------------------------------
where are they then? higher or lower than city ?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You're the own making the claim. I personally don't give a shiiiit, so do your own research !
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Funny I didnt hear back from you on this one
----------------------------------------------------------------------
cos the point was very obv you were complaining about citys spending.....and how its the reason they have silverware .... is your net spend more or less than theirs over the last 5 seasons ?
posted on 4/9/23
comment by whodunnit (U22710)
posted 55 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 4 hours, 48 minutes ago
comment by whodunnit (U22710)
posted 56 seconds ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by whodunnit (U22710)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 5 seconds ago
comment by whodunnit (U22710)
posted 1 minute ago
however that prob didnt include the Kane transfer
----------------------------------------------------------------------
May be think before typing
----------------------------------------------------------------------
however to include the kane transfer this current season would need to be finished.
Over the last 5 seasons Spurs net spend is 2nd highest in world football.
true or false
----------------------------------------------------------------------
false
----------------------------------------------------------------------
where are they then? higher or lower than city ?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You're the own making the claim. I personally don't give a shiiiit, so do your own research !
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Funny I didnt hear back from you on this one
----------------------------------------------------------------------
cos the point was very obv you were complaining about citys spending.....and how its the reason they have silverware .... is your net spend more or less than theirs over the last 5 seasons ?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
sorry, where was i moaning about City's spending?
and yes, City's spending is the reason why they went from a yo yo club with no trophies in a life time to a world super power in about a decade. Are you contesting this
posted on 4/9/23
City have spent more years in the top flight than Spurs.
The yo yo years you like to mention were a speck in our history as a whole.Tottenham broke the #family owned' mould by becoming a PLC and most others followed suit.
You can't blame other clubs going a step further by setting themselves up to attract billionaire investors further down the line.
posted on 4/9/23
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 1 hour, 39 minutes ago
City have spent more years in the top flight than Spurs.
The yo yo years you like to mention were a speck in our history as a whole.Tottenham broke the #family owned' mould by becoming a PLC and most others followed suit.
You can't blame other clubs going a step further by setting themselves up to attract billionaire investors further down the line.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not blaming anyone for anything....Whodumwit seems to think that because city and spurs net spend in the last 5 years is similar we should be at the same level...but he is a simpleton.
Spurs have been an ever present in the top league since 76 and City have been relegated 5 times in than period of 47 years. So yes, a yo yo club. With no trophies and 5 relegations between 1976 and 2008 when you won the lottery. And that's what happened, you won the lottery, it could have been any club but it was you, like Chelsea before and Newcastle since, with the common theme of them being poorly run and poorly performing mid sized clubs making them good value to invest in.
posted on 4/9/23
By winning the lottery, I assume you mean being debt free with a new stadium made us more attractive to investors than other clubs.
posted on 5/9/23
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 11 hours, 10 minutes ago
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 1 hour, 39 minutes ago
City have spent more years in the top flight than Spurs.
The yo yo years you like to mention were a speck in our history as a whole.Tottenham broke the #family owned' mould by becoming a PLC and most others followed suit.
You can't blame other clubs going a step further by setting themselves up to attract billionaire investors further down the line.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not blaming anyone for anything....Whodumwit seems to think that because city and spurs net spend in the last 5 years is similar we should be at the same level...but he is a simpleton.
Spurs have been an ever present in the top league since 76 and City have been relegated 5 times in than period of 47 years. So yes, a yo yo club. With no trophies and 5 relegations between 1976 and 2008 when you won the lottery. And that's what happened, you won the lottery, it could have been any club but it was you, like Chelsea before and Newcastle since, with the common theme of them being poorly run and poorly performing mid sized clubs making them good value to invest in.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"we all know what it takes...about £3bn and circumventing of the rules"
No but when you moan about finances getting a team titles like you did then best make sure your team hasnt a higher net spend than them over the last decade, kinda of ruins that point !!
posted on 5/9/23
comment by whodunnit (U22710)
posted 48 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 11 hours, 10 minutes ago
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 1 hour, 39 minutes ago
City have spent more years in the top flight than Spurs.
The yo yo years you like to mention were a speck in our history as a whole.Tottenham broke the #family owned' mould by becoming a PLC and most others followed suit.
You can't blame other clubs going a step further by setting themselves up to attract billionaire investors further down the line.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not blaming anyone for anything....Whodumwit seems to think that because city and spurs net spend in the last 5 years is similar we should be at the same level...but he is a simpleton.
Spurs have been an ever present in the top league since 76 and City have been relegated 5 times in than period of 47 years. So yes, a yo yo club. With no trophies and 5 relegations between 1976 and 2008 when you won the lottery. And that's what happened, you won the lottery, it could have been any club but it was you, like Chelsea before and Newcastle since, with the common theme of them being poorly run and poorly performing mid sized clubs making them good value to invest in.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"we all know what it takes...about £3bn and circumventing of the rules"
No but when you moan about finances getting a team titles like you did then best make sure your team hasnt a higher net spend than them over the last decade, kinda of ruins that point !!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Again, its not a moan. It's a statement of fact!
I am not denying they are run well and spend well and have a great manager BUT all of that has been made possible through their massive levels of investment.
You seem to have some sort of weird obsession with Spurs. Really, if you were wanting to make a point about spending then United would be a more relevant comparison. They've probably spent more gross and net in 5 years, 10 years 15 years and yet havent won the title in 10 and don't dominate like City.
For a club run like Spurs, and you can add Liverpool (and several others big clubs top the list), it is very difficult to challenge and get where you want and need to be in the face of such spending by the opposition. Not a moan, a fact.
We all know City spend vast sums since 2008, we all know that they are being investigated for breaking the rules from 2009 to 2018, the very period that saw them build the foundations of the now dominance.
That spending and bending (or worse) the rules is what it has taken to get City where they are...not what they have spent in the last 5 years, where actually they are now very stable, and can be selective in transfers, attract the very best without having to over pay wildly to make it happen, offer the best wages, attract the best manager. These are just realities and there are many clubs who have to do thing differently and cannot afford the best of the best but still have to spend huge sums in an inflated market.
This may all be wasted on your blinkered simple mindset.
posted on 5/9/23
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by whodunnit (U22710)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Again, its not a moan. It's a statement of fact!
I am not denying they are run well and spend well and have a great manager BUT all of that has been made possible through their massive levels of investment.
You seem to have some sort of weird obsession with Spurs. Really, if you were wanting to make a point about spending then United would be a more relevant comparison. They've probably spent more gross and net in 5 years, 10 years 15 years and yet havent won the title in 10 and don't dominate like City.
For a club run like Spurs, and you can add Liverpool (and several others big clubs top the list), it is very difficult to challenge and get where you want and need to be in the face of such spending by the opposition. Not a moan, a fact.
We all know City spend vast sums since 2008, we all know that they are being investigated for breaking the rules from 2009 to 2018, the very period that saw them build the foundations of the now dominance.
That spending and bending (or worse) the rules is what it has taken to get City where they are...not what they have spent in the last 5 years, where actually they are now very stable, and can be selective in transfers, attract the very best without having to over pay wildly to make it happen, offer the best wages, attract the best manager. These are just realities and there are many clubs who have to do thing differently and cannot afford the best of the best but still have to spend huge sums in an inflated market.
This may all be wasted on your blinkered simple mindset.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You made the point about spending not me.... you claimed the money was the reason and dodginess.
But it turns out that Spurs have a higher net spend in the last decade!
So that argument holds no water.
You made a silly comment and are no backtracking to try and save face.
you could just say "i was wrong"
posted on 5/9/23
comment by whodunnit (U22710)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by whodunnit (U22710)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Again, its not a moan. It's a statement of fact!
I am not denying they are run well and spend well and have a great manager BUT all of that has been made possible through their massive levels of investment.
You seem to have some sort of weird obsession with Spurs. Really, if you were wanting to make a point about spending then United would be a more relevant comparison. They've probably spent more gross and net in 5 years, 10 years 15 years and yet havent won the title in 10 and don't dominate like City.
For a club run like Spurs, and you can add Liverpool (and several others big clubs top the list), it is very difficult to challenge and get where you want and need to be in the face of such spending by the opposition. Not a moan, a fact.
We all know City spend vast sums since 2008, we all know that they are being investigated for breaking the rules from 2009 to 2018, the very period that saw them build the foundations of the now dominance.
That spending and bending (or worse) the rules is what it has taken to get City where they are...not what they have spent in the last 5 years, where actually they are now very stable, and can be selective in transfers, attract the very best without having to over pay wildly to make it happen, offer the best wages, attract the best manager. These are just realities and there are many clubs who have to do thing differently and cannot afford the best of the best but still have to spend huge sums in an inflated market.
This may all be wasted on your blinkered simple mindset.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You made the point about spending not me.... you claimed the money was the reason and dodginess.
But it turns out that Spurs have a higher net spend in the last decade!
So that argument holds no water.
You made a silly comment and are no backtracking to try and save face.
you could just say "i was wrong"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes i did bring their spending into it....you are the one contesting it has anything to do with their sucess.
and Spurs dont have a higher spend or net spend in the last decade. You are just making shiiit up now.
This is from Jan 2022, so a bit older.
https://football-observatory.com/IMG/sites/b5wp/2021/wp367/en/
It shows City at about 650m greater net spent over 10 years from 2012 compared to Spurs. SInce then it has probably moved 100m in City's favour, so net spend of about 550m more than Spurs.
AND if you are making the case that we have net spent more than them in the last 5 years, then that 550m difference is done the 5 years up to 2018....the very period I described to you as when their massive investment laid the foundations for their now dominance, the same period they are being investigated.
You are just talking shiiiiit not backed up facts, and accuse me of back tracking Whodumwit by name....🤡
posted on 5/9/23
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by whodunnit (U22710)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by whodunnit (U22710)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Again, its not a moan. It's a statement of fact!
I am not denying they are run well and spend well and have a great manager BUT all of that has been made possible through their massive levels of investment.
You seem to have some sort of weird obsession with Spurs. Really, if you were wanting to make a point about spending then United would be a more relevant comparison. They've probably spent more gross and net in 5 years, 10 years 15 years and yet havent won the title in 10 and don't dominate like City.
For a club run like Spurs, and you can add Liverpool (and several others big clubs top the list), it is very difficult to challenge and get where you want and need to be in the face of such spending by the opposition. Not a moan, a fact.
We all know City spend vast sums since 2008, we all know that they are being investigated for breaking the rules from 2009 to 2018, the very period that saw them build the foundations of the now dominance.
That spending and bending (or worse) the rules is what it has taken to get City where they are...not what they have spent in the last 5 years, where actually they are now very stable, and can be selective in transfers, attract the very best without having to over pay wildly to make it happen, offer the best wages, attract the best manager. These are just realities and there are many clubs who have to do thing differently and cannot afford the best of the best but still have to spend huge sums in an inflated market.
This may all be wasted on your blinkered simple mindset.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You made the point about spending not me.... you claimed the money was the reason and dodginess.
But it turns out that Spurs have a higher net spend in the last decade!
So that argument holds no water.
You made a silly comment and are no backtracking to try and save face.
you could just say "i was wrong"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes i did bring their spending into it....you are the one contesting it has anything to do with their sucess.
and Spurs dont have a higher spend or net spend in the last decade. You are just making shiiit up now.
This is from Jan 2022, so a bit older.
https://football-observatory.com/IMG/sites/b5wp/2021/wp367/en/
It shows City at about 650m greater net spent over 10 years from 2012 compared to Spurs. SInce then it has probably moved 100m in City's favour, so net spend of about 550m more than Spurs.
AND if you are making the case that we have net spent more than them in the last 5 years, then that 550m difference is done the 5 years up to 2018....the very period I described to you as when their massive investment laid the foundations for their now dominance, the same period they are being investigated.
You are just talking shiiiiit not backed up facts, and accuse me of back trackingWhodumwit by name....🤡
----------------------------------------------------------------------
you made the comment on the back of winning titles. what else could you have meant with that?
posted on 5/9/23
You:
Whatever it takes to see a trophy raised........
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Me:
we all know what it takes...about £3bn and circumventing of the rules
-----------
it's pretty clear what i meant to most of those who can read.
You seem to think that spending in the last 5 years has anything to do with Spurs or anyone else's ability to challenge city. Credit to those clubs like Arsenal and Liverpool who have managed to challenge them without spending anything like City (net or gross) but that has been the exception not the rule with City winning 5 of last 6 titles and 11 of the last 18 domestic trophies available in the last 6 years.
posted on 5/9/23
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 1 minute ago
You:
Whatever it takes to see a trophy raised........
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Me:
we all know what it takes...about £3bn and circumventing of the rules
-----------
it's pretty clear what i meant to most of those who can read.
You seem to think that spending in the last 5 years has anything to do with Spurs or anyone else's ability to challenge city. Credit to those clubs like Arsenal and Liverpool who have managed to challenge them without spending anything like City (net or gross) but that has been the exception not the rule with City winning 5 of last 6 titles and 11 of the last 18 domestic trophies available in the last 6 years.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
yes its pretty clear what you said, I think everyone can see it also !!
posted on 5/9/23
comment by whodunnit (U22710)
posted 59 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 1 minute ago
You:
Whatever it takes to see a trophy raised........
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Me:
we all know what it takes...about £3bn and circumventing of the rules
-----------
it's pretty clear what i meant to most of those who can read.
You seem to think that spending in the last 5 years has anything to do with Spurs or anyone else's ability to challenge city. Credit to those clubs like Arsenal and Liverpool who have managed to challenge them without spending anything like City (net or gross) but that has been the exception not the rule with City winning 5 of last 6 titles and 11 of the last 18 domestic trophies available in the last 6 years.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
yes its pretty clear what you said, I think everyone can see it also !!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You've lost me dumwhit?
What are you saying that i am now denying?
Everyone can see what i said, does anyone disagree with me (expect City fans of course)?
posted on 5/9/23
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by whodunnit (U22710)
posted 59 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 1 minute ago
You:
Whatever it takes to see a trophy raised........
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Me:
we all know what it takes...about £3bn and circumventing of the rules
-----------
it's pretty clear what i meant to most of those who can read.
You seem to think that spending in the last 5 years has anything to do with Spurs or anyone else's ability to challenge city. Credit to those clubs like Arsenal and Liverpool who have managed to challenge them without spending anything like City (net or gross) but that has been the exception not the rule with City winning 5 of last 6 titles and 11 of the last 18 domestic trophies available in the last 6 years.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
yes its pretty clear what you said, I think everyone can see it also !!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You've lost me dumwhit?
What are you saying that i am now denying?
Everyone can see what i said, does anyone disagree with me (expect City fans of course)?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eBoM6MrKWwI
posted on 5/9/23
comment by whodunnit (U22710)
posted 24 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by whodunnit (U22710)
posted 59 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 1 minute ago
You:
Whatever it takes to see a trophy raised........
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Me:
we all know what it takes...about £3bn and circumventing of the rules
-----------
it's pretty clear what i meant to most of those who can read.
You seem to think that spending in the last 5 years has anything to do with Spurs or anyone else's ability to challenge city. Credit to those clubs like Arsenal and Liverpool who have managed to challenge them without spending anything like City (net or gross) but that has been the exception not the rule with City winning 5 of last 6 titles and 11 of the last 18 domestic trophies available in the last 6 years.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
yes its pretty clear what you said, I think everyone can see it also !!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You've lost me dumwhit?
What are you saying that i am now denying?
Everyone can see what i said, does anyone disagree with me (expect City fans of course)?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eBoM6MrKWwI
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Still not answering questions then!
http://tinyurl.com/ypnbp982
posted on 5/9/23
[unsubscribe]...[unsubscribe]
'STOP'
...nothing's working!
Page 3 of 3