Manchester City achieve historic Domestic Treble (Quadruple*)

Great Leader Sprucenuce wrote:Stop with this 5 year period nonsense.

Football is played over a season not over 5 fucking years.

5 years ago, neither manager of either team was in the league and majority of their key players weren't either.

I'm honestly getting sick and tired of people making excuses for a team who spent 70m on a defender, 60m on a keeper, 60m on a midfielder they don't even fucking play plus multiple 30-40m transfers.

Yet when Man City buys Kyle Walker and Danilo, people lose their damn mind and claim on the back of said transfers they've bought the league.

Sorry if i don't feel sorry for a team who spent more in one summer than the majority of teams in the league will in the next 5 years.

Cry me a fucking river.

Mole laying the smackdown ffs

City were already a title-winning team before baldy fraudy joined them.

Liverpool were a team hardly making CL spots before smiley kloppy joined.

Despite all of this, baldy fraudy spent more and more. His owners' pockets were all but a bottomless pit but he wanted more and more.

Spent so much and despite this hasn't delivered the CL he was primarily brought to give to the citizens.

A failure in every way, shape or form.

Half of City's team was over 30 and the team needed rebuilding. If you have the funds why tf wouldn't you sign the best players?

Even then, Mahrez aside (who I don't rate) they rarely sign ready-made WC players. It's more like a real life version of football manager. Most of their signings are U23 players.

I've just come back to emphasise on the last thing I said.

danyjr wrote:A failure in every way, shape or form.

Casciavit wrote:Half of City's team was over 30 and the team needed rebuilding. If you have the funds why tf wouldn't you sign the best players?

Even then, Mahrez aside (who I don't rate) they rarely sign ready-made WC players. It's more like a real life version of football manager. Most of their signings are U23 players.

Did Liverpool sign any ready-made WC players?

Great Leader Sprucenuce wrote:Stop with this 5 year period nonsense.

Football is played over a season not over 5 fucking years.

5 years ago, neither manager of either team was in the league and majority of their key players weren't either.

I'm honestly getting sick and tired of people making excuses for a team who spent 70m on a defender, 60m on a keeper, 60m on a midfielder they don't even fucking play plus multiple 30-40m transfers.

Yet when Man City buys Kyle Walker and Danilo, people lose their damn mind and claim on the back of said transfers they've bought the league.

Sorry if i don't feel sorry for a team who spent more in one summer than the majority of teams in the league will in the next 5 years.

Cry me a fucking river.

No one is asking you to be sorry lol. The difference is very very very VERY obvious, its just that this season we are attempting to compete and everything has already become grey for you but I can very much tell you its black and white.

Great Leader Sprucenuce wrote:Mane was there when Coutinho was but it didn't stop anything lol.

It's who he is, it wouldn't have mattered. The improvement of others is precisely because he isn't there anymore.

None of your sales would have helped anything if they stayed and you had the money to sign who you did, it's just an excuse that you cling to.

It is what it is, you want to think it is an excuse while the only explanation we have is that we think our Manager is stubborn and chooses not waste money when its obvious every Liverpool fan wants to spend MORE money while RETAINING players to compete with City.

Why are you getting so riled up lol, everyone even Unique has said a few posts above that we will spend 200m.

Great Leader Sprucenuce wrote:Stop with this 5 year period nonsense.

Football is played over a season not over 5 fucking years.

5 years ago, neither manager of either team was in the league and majority of their key players weren't either.

I'm honestly getting sick and tired of people making excuses for a team who spent 70m on a defender, 60m on a keeper, 60m on a midfielder they don't even fucking play plus multiple 30-40m transfers.

Yet when Man City buys Kyle Walker and Danilo, people lose their damn mind and claim on the back of said transfers they've bought the league.

Sorry if i don't feel sorry for a team who spent more in one summer than the majority of teams in the league will in the next 5 years.

Cry me a fucking river.

so are you saying if liverpool still had sterling. coutinho and suarez added to this squad we would not have got the 2 extra points needed to win the title. we lost the title when salah and firmino had a month of very bad form. now just think for one minute if we could have taken suarez coutinho and sterling off the bench in them games. sterling was the title winner for them ffs.

danyjr wrote:

Liverpool £18m net spend.
Manchester City £496m net spend.

Nuff said really.

United

if citys out spending of everyone else had nothing to do with winning why did they bother out spending everyone else. surly the £700mil pep has spent was a waste of money since it was not needed. yes/no

Winter is Coming wrote:

danyjr wrote:

Liverpool £18m net spend.
Manchester City £496m net spend.

Nuff said really.

United

i knew that was coming i just didnt know who would post it

Liverpool cant match City in spending but lets not act like they asses broke ffs. For example, I'm sure they could have given Sterling what he receives at City but they just didnt want to. Also completely agree with @mole.

Everton makes £44 million signings and you tryna tell me Liverpool has no money?

I mean just his example, Danilo and Walker vying for the same position costing 100m while we have yes, spent 120m on the keeper and defender but guess what put the entire Liverpool back 5 into that, the price still stays at 120m while for City you add another 200m to complete the back 5.

Again not taking anything away from City, amazing team and amazing players who deserve every bit of their achievements. All I want is Liverpool to spend more and keep so that we don't suffer drops again and Klopp is the man who has finally done that compared to when we finished 6th after losing Suarez and then 8th after losing Sterling.

We will get to a point where our finances will be so obvious it won't get questioned but this is clearly a case of premature ejaculation from mole imo

Myesyats wrote:Liverpool cant match City in spending but lets not act like they asses broke ffs. For example, I'm sure they could have given Sterling what he receives at City but they just didnt want to. Also completely agree with @mole.

Everton makes £44 million signings and you tryna tell me Liverpool has no money?

Everyone: Liverpool needs to spend more atleast 200m

Mole: Stop making excuses about money

Mystats: you tryna tell me Liverpool has no money?

Winter is Coming wrote:

danyjr wrote:

Liverpool £18m net spend.
Manchester City £496m net spend.

Nuff said really.

United

European trophies in that time:
United: 1
City/Pep: 0

also both got knocked out at the same stage of the tournament this season

facts are facts tbh

Stay mad

Myesyats wrote:Liverpool cant match City in spending but lets not act like they asses broke ffs. For example, I'm sure they could have given Sterling what he receives at City but they just didnt want to. Also completely agree with @mole.

Everton makes £44 million signings and you tryna tell me Liverpool has no money?

Money wouldn't have stopped him from going to a much better team with an exciting project and much better manager than Rodgers.

title winners this season.
holland=ajax
spain=barca
england=city
scotland=celtic
germany=bayern
france=psg
italy=juve
am i the only one that sees a patten here.

Unique wrote:title winners this season.
holland=ajax
spain=barca
england=city
scotland=celtic
germany=bayern
france=psg
italy=juve
am i the only one that sees a patten here.

No, I see it too. They are all European teams.

Nishankly wrote:

Myesyats wrote:Liverpool cant match City in spending but lets not act like they asses broke ffs. For example, I'm sure they could have given Sterling what he receives at City but they just didnt want to. Also completely agree with @mole.

Everton makes £44 million signings and you tryna tell me Liverpool has no money?

Money wouldn't have stopped him from going to a much better team with an exciting project and much better manager than Rodgers.

thats a good point. people talk about transfer fee but never look at wages paid. there is a very good reason city never have to worry about madrid and barca taking players from them. the reason is city pay the money to keep them.

Nishankly wrote:

Unique wrote:title winners this season.
holland=ajax
spain=barca
england=city
scotland=celtic
germany=bayern
france=psg
italy=juve
am i the only one that sees a patten here.

No, I see it too. They are all European teams.

they are also the teams that have the big buying power in each lge. you can count madrid too but they are rebuilding and when they do they will match barca in spending.

I think i can explain this situation properly:

Nasir, Nishankly and Mole walk into their local Mcdonalds.

Nasir orders a Big Mac for $8 and tells the cashier to keep the change while offering her a job at his firm, while Nishankly orders a McChicken for $6 and asks for the exact change back while scanning the counter for some coupons.

At the table, Nasir praises every bite of his Big Mac. Nishankly also says its good to finally eat a McChicken after all those days of McFish.

Mole being a vegetarian says 'Shut up you two! Its meat, they all taste the same regardless of how much you spend.'

More like:

- Nasir eats in a 5 star restaurant
- Unique and Nishankly eat together in a 4 star restaurant, complaining that can't afford to eat in the restaurant as Nasir, but in fact they can afford
- Between two bites of his McChicken Mole is being cynical about Unique and Nishankly's complaints

Great Leader Sprucenuce wrote:Stop with this 5 year period nonsense.

Football is played over a season not over 5 fucking years.

5 years ago, neither manager of either team was in the league and majority of their key players weren't either.

I'm honestly getting sick and tired of people making excuses for a team who spent 70m on a defender, 60m on a keeper, 60m on a midfielder they don't even fucking play plus multiple 30-40m transfers.

Yet when Man City buys Kyle Walker and Danilo, people lose their damn mind and claim on the back of said transfers they've bought the league.

Sorry if i don't feel sorry for a team who spent more in one summer than the majority of teams in the league will in the next 5 years.

Cry me a fucking river.

mole why are newcastle not a force in the champions lge.

The other thing is i don't really get this "BUT RETAIN PLAYERS " the only big player you've lost under Klopp is Coutinho and I've already said why that was a blessing.

You're acting like you've had a mass exodus and had to replace half a team of big name players.

The only premature ejaculation here is coming from Nishank tbh.

Great Leader Sprucenuce wrote:The other thing is i don't really get this "BUT RETAIN PLAYERS " the only big player you've lost under Klopp is Coutinho and I've already said why that was a blessing.

You're acting like you've had a mass exodus and had to replace half a team of big name players.

The only premature ejaculation here is coming from Nishank tbh.

you still didnt answer my question. why are newcastle not a force in the champions lge ?

nasir6371 wrote:Also congrats to Liverpool making it in the 2019 FA Community Shield

You do realize that by winning the CL Liverpool would be taking a huge dump on your " treble", right?