City Stranded With Over Paid & Over Priced Players

Who exactly is going to have any sympathy with Man Citeh? Behave lads, you've brought this on yourself. Just another soul less club who is hoping to buy success by throwing stupid money on average to poor players. If your players hang on to their large contracts fair play to them, you only have yourselves to blame!

Timmsy lets be honest mate, if your club had the money they had you wouldn't complain. Not their fault they got took over, they might pay big money for average players but teams over price them because of the money they have, thats the way it goes now but they will be succesfull.

I won't slate you because as supporters its not your fault and not many have had it harder than city fans over the years, although i will slate your board and the way the club has been run, we would have bought bellamy of you in a heart beat but instead you would rather pay him to play at cardiff, its not the fee's you pay for players thats my objection its your money and you may have inflated the market but thats your perogative but the wages you have paid are starting to make football unsustainable, the likes of barry are reported to be on over a 100grand a week and in my opinion you should be able to spend what you want but your rediculous wage paying should be capped immediately for the good of the game in general nothing personal i actually like city and good luck to you in the cl next season

Perhaps the answer could be a player salary cap. That way all the top clubs could buy on an level playing field. Thoughts?

No problem bluedub. At the end of the day every team HAS to pay big for players in order to be successful, teams are over pricing there players which means teams like city, chelsea, utd and even us have to pay big bucks for players who simply are worth half of it. All teams are guilty of it, look at utd and lpool the prices they have paid for jones and henderson is criminal. City aren't the only team throwing the cash about. And LA Villan what you on about we would love that kind of money at villa as long as we spent it the right way and had good owners backing the manager then cool.

Timmsy - who exactly is looking for sympathy?

LA, I'm surprised you contribute to football forums, let alone that you're a fan of the game if you hold them beliefs. If you bothered to look into what City actually do in terms of charity work and re investing back into the community you might be surprised by what you find but I'm not expecting you to do that given the tone of your comments. One more thing, City were voted number one this season in the PL for value for money for the FANS.

Personally, I hope they stay and City are penalised for their idiotic spending, sad thing is, even if they stay if wont affect the club financhially, which is disappointing, because if you buy a player for 17.5mil (RSC) then you SHOULD be penalised. Disgusting what football has become.

What sort of a utopian world are you living in LA Villain. Come down out of that ivory tower of yours, wake up and smell the coffee. I've never read such nonsense in my life. Rob, do you not think the Cityruiningfootball brigade is getting a bit old now? Would you not try and freshen things up a little bit, no? Bitter much, aiiiiiiiiiii...get off the page you numpty

LMFAO please don't stop Rob you're so entertaining I could read your bolloxology all day long. Go on give us some more, you know you want to.

English football has been money driven since the invention of the Premier League in the early 90s, long before we got a wealthy benefactor.

Rob why you so bitter towards every clubs supporters? The transfer market is ridiculous nowadays but it's not man city's doing, it was getting bad before they got all there money. It's up to them if they want to spend stupid money on players. It's kinda jealousy from your part, probably scares you that they can take any of your players from you. Peace out.

Tf7 is what I have said not true? Were U*d not the first club in England to whore themselves on the stock exchange? Did this not in turn lead to U*d creating massive revenue as a business and thus leading to others to try follow suit to compete financially? I know a lot of ex Rags that gave up on football the day U*d floated because they were disgusted by the club putting the business before the game. Btw I said England so I don't know why you're mentioning Barca and Madrid. I also didn't say anyone was angels, I was merely pointing out when money began to rip the soul out of the game.

XD Haha! Whatever floats your boat bluedub.

Tell you one thing - united were the first team to drop the words "Football Club" from their badge when they became a PLC. They also get mentions for their rapacious marketing all over the world, their pioneering of branded credit cards (yes, you can take out loans from MU finance LOL) and their pursuit of sponsorship deals that generate enough money to render their fans totally irrelevant when it comes to club finances - they don't care how many green and golders shun their season tickets as Nike pay them far more than the fans ever could. Can I also mention that the rags paid £30m for Ferdinand, a transfer record that stood for 6 seasons until City broke it by singing Robinho for a mere £2.5m more. Don't even get me on distorting the transfer market - remind me what the world record fee received for a player was? Oh yeah, £80m for the lady boy. In short, Famous, I do blame the rags for the state of the football economy these days - where they lead, otherrs follow.

In the nicest possible way :P

My counter argument is the original comment is bollox (taking a note from your book). Every transfer record set has to be broken and unless time began from 1990 onwards (which it doesn't) and we set and broke every transfer record (which we haven't) the influence doesn't come solely from us. As for England, we're not secluded, foreign influence like Madrid and Barca does exist and it's ridiculous to even ignore the effect their spending has had on the English market. You want to talk of setting trends, how about knocking up the price of the average players to 20 mil. No doubt that was us eh? Milner, Lescott, Bellamy and Barry for the short time frame they were bought in and the amounts they were bought for has set a trend made notable through the signings of Bent, Henderson, Young and Jones. Chelsea spending 50 mil on Torres, Liverpool 35 mil on Carroll, and on a European level (which influences the English market btw) Madrid 80 mil on Ronaldo alone not including their Galactico's project in general and Barca 60 mil on Ibrahimovic was influenced by us looking for gems in the dirt like Hernandez for 7 mil and Smalling for 7 mil at the time? Teams demanding 40+ mil for decent, but not world class players and prospect like Modric, Bale, Neymar, Pastore stemmed from us spending 17 mil on recognised prospects like Nani and Ronaldo whilst you forked out 24 mil for Balotelli, Liverpool 35 mil on Carroll, Madrid Reyes 17.5 mil, Benzema €41 mil and Di Maria at €36 mil. You're blinkered if you can't see that A) Foreign influence has an effect on the transfer market, not just dealings by us in the 1990's B) Time didn't begin in the 1990's, there was records being broken before us both in England and abroad C) If we have contributed, and I don't deny that we have, it hasn't been solely us nor has it stemmed from solely us.

Did I condemn? I don't actually recall criticising you for it. That said, I don't recall ever saying City were ruining football or anything of the sort, took the mick out of some of your transfers but never condemned. '"for the short time frame they were bought in and the amounts they were bought for has set a trend made notable through the signings of Bent, Henderson, Young and Jones" This is absolute tosh. These deals had absolutely nothing to do with City' Do you not see the hypocrisy in that? The fact that you're so quick to pass the verdict about our influence in the transfer market but ignore your own? The fact that you condemn us for something you're also guilty of? That's like me saying our transfer had no bearing on others, when it clearly has. Don't make me laugh. No seriously please, the original comment left me in fits and I still haven't quite recovered. As for my points about the foreign market, that originates from you so conveniently ignoring the foreign influence on the English market just to try and prove your point. Bit bias if you ask me. Don't try and use us as scapegoats to detract from the idea that you, Madrid, Chelsea and Barca have adopted and escalated a trend which has stemmed from a variety of clubs and there spending since football originated, not just one club in a single decade. I can acknowledge we've had some influence in the market but can't accept that we're the sole reason, with good reason also. I don't expect you to budge from your opinion, to be perfectly honest I gave up ages ago, but why is it you can't accept your involvement with the current distortion in the market? You're not even a sole culprit but even then you can't stand being labelled as being even remotely involved in the inflation. Does the truth hurt?

How could City's spending have anything to do with what U*d spent on Young? U*d were spending the same on Carrick Five years ago? U*d were spending the same for Van Nistlerooy about ten years ago that Villa paid for Bent. I don't see where City have done anything to set the trend for buying a kid like Jones at that price, I suppose you could argue Balotelli but he cost less than Rooney did 6 years later. So no I don't see the hypocrisy, U*d were setting this trend years before City were bought over, just because City were taken for mugs on some of their transfer dealings under Hughes doesn't mean they were distorting the market or in fact dictating the market like U*d had done in the nineties after they sold their soul. City have broken the British transfer record once, tell me how many times have U*d done that in the last 20 years? And that**** has the audacity to suggest City are distorting the market, give me a ******** break ffs.

Utopian world? No mate, I'm just a man who refuses to roll over and take it in the arse like most of the world. I stand up and do my best to change what I feel is "nonesense" in the world, and if you're surprised i'm on a football forum stating my beliefs then you really are daft.

LAV - sorry mate, but the horse has well and truly bolted. Unless you withdraw from the modern world and go and live in a cave somwhere with nowt but your own body hair to keep yourself warm, then there is no escaping the ludicrous world of modern football finance. Nobody on this message board is actually in approval with the silly wages, outrageous transfer fees and inlated ticket prices, not a bit of it. And whilst I admire your basic principles, WTF can be done about it? Not even mass boycotts by fans will stop the football juggernaut, so stop beating your head against the wall, join a local supporters group and help change the world that way. I'm all for sticking it to the man, but your one man campaign will get you no-where, nor will singling out my club as the one that has "Ruined" football! We got on the train a long time after it left the station in Salford.

on fire? If that's what you call being too stubborn to even admit being remotely wrong and completely blinkered to what 300 mil of spending in 3 years has done to the market then fire doesn't quite suffice. Perhaps supernova is a better description.