No, I just didn't realise you were (or have have been) trying to be funny, and personally think you often talk diversionary rubbish bordering on propaganda rather than discuss issues involving Manchester City properly. LGJM was quite capable of responding seriously.



Would that be because many simply don't know his name? I've not heard of Al Fayed being anonymised.

And how about people referring to Mike Ashley's 'Geordie Mafia', or does that not fit with your 'poor ickle rich Man City owner' theory?

Everton in the past five seasons have recorded four top six finishes. Have been fifth the past two seasons and sixth the year before that not to mention breaking the top four monopoly in 05. Hardly a mid-table groove Dip.

I'd rather have that than have a shît like Peter Swales, who left us pretty much high and dry, having ripped off the club for years (we had no control over merchandise – no copyright on the badge, for instance; the club shop wasn't even a franchise ...)

And to echo what EE has said: on the basis of statements from the current owners, they're in it for at least 10 years (they've stated that this is a 10-year project), they're investing more in the academy and they're not taking the pîss on ticket prices (as I said previously, season tickets have fallen in price for 2009/10). For the moment at least, I feel as though the current management is making more of an effort to make me feel part of my club than any of their predecessors. That might seem strange, but it's little things like the banners on the stadium last season with every season ticket holder's name on them; the project to record fans' memories of their first City match etc.

Yes, it could go pear-shaped. We're City, after all. But at present, I feel optimistic in a way I have not for years – and pleased that we seem to be increasingly behaving professionally on and off the pitch.

Cockney mafia. And it was the geordies who were complaining about that so it was different.



I think that is partly the case, but it's still fairly puzzling that his name isn't well known when he's spent nearly 500m(?).

:kuxr59yq









What a crock of , as Maca rightly points out below:

Blues v blues

nice to have abit of a change

That's one of the huge weaknesses when people try and argue for English ownership. It's alright having English ownership when they are the unknown billionaires like at Arsenal, or the famous pools billionaires at Liverpool, but they were few and far between.

I liked Ken Bates. Still do TBH. But there was far more question marks surrounding Ken Bates than there are over Abramovich.

Just a short list of some magnificent English owners - Swales, Bates, Ashley, Frannie Lee, that fool at Crystal Palace, Ridsdale. Of course anyone is going to be delighted when a Russian or Arab billionaire comes in when that's the level of English owners they've been used to.

Everton have had 5 years of solid achievement. They are the top team when discounting the top 4.

But TBH there is something boring about that. The prospect of you actually cracking the top 4 looks very slim. Even when you went a goal up in the first minute of the FA Cup final, it never looked likely that you'd actually win it.

Citeh are actually interesting. There's a huge question over whether they will be successful, at what cost, or whether they will crash and burn in a hilarious fashion. United, Liverpool and Chelsea will be looking at Citeh and thinking, "Come on then, show us what you can do" in a way that they simply won't with Everton.

Are you Mark's brother or something your love of scousers is about the same.

Good post, I wouldn't tend to disagree. I don't the "boring" aspect of being a top five side and a club that has the potential to finish in the top five each year and slowly develop. With big funds we could all challenge the top four, but we just don't have the cash.

When I disagreed with EE's post, it was because he simply chats when it comes to Everton because he doesn't like us, so matter what we we do he wouldn't see it as any kind of achievement but in comparison to what City have done in the last few years we have achieved so much more in terms of moving forward. It's laughable that a City fans claims that what we have done ovr the last few years in boring compared to them.

I also don't get how he can claim we have been stuck mid-table when we have gone from a side struggling to stay in the league to one finishing in the top few clubs for many seasons.

When the football starts it'll be back to how it always is, us v you.

If we're up there for 10 years, by then its no more likely to go tits up for City than for any major club.

What's going to happen if the owners lose interest? There seems to be this bizarre view with both City & Chelsea that the owners will pull out, demand all their money back and bust the club. That's crazy. If they lose interest and want to get out they will make more money (in reality they'll make a smaller loss) by writing off most of their investment and selling the club as a going concern. They're never going to be in the position that Leeds were of having to sell players to meet their immediate creditors.

If the owners do lose interest and sell up the new owners are unlikely to be able to be able to finance anything like the current level of spending. Reality will return. If that were to happen next week it would be a massive blow. If it were to happen in 10 years time the club should by then have established itself at a much higher level.

I agree. I don't know where the talk of the owners losing interest came from but DD said he would risk being up there for a number of years challenging for trophies and risking it all going wrong and City doing a leeds.

I'm rather enjoying it.

Calm down, scouse.

Four top six finishes. Well done. How exciting that must have been. I mean, finishing one place lower would have been extremely disappointing, and a complete failure.

Look at your points for those seasons, and you are as close to getting relegated as you are to winning the league. Well done. Truly brilliant.

Only a bit of banter at Gerrard's expense, fear not my sweet.

As I've bored people with on here before, I used to work in Liverpool, it's a great city. However as a United supporter it is my God given right to ridicule Liverpool Football Club at every available opportunity. However, again, as the poster formerly known as Keithcun once pointed out - there is respect there. For proper United & Liverpool fans, that goes both ways.

You were being intentionally provocative, regardless of your weak attempt at starting with some kind of disclaimer. I didn't bite. I responded with what is my opinion, after all that is what you requested, and then you get narky.

You ask the typical question of someone who supports a mid-table club or Leeds United. You came up with some rubbish that you were concerned with our spending and the future of our club. In fact, you were simply trying to hide your bitterness






Me? Peddle club propoganda? You must have the wriong person. I didn't know you were a visitor to this forum as I never knew you existed until you made your whiny post.





What?




Factually incorrect as pointed out by another poster. Could you imagine ewcastle fans waving a banner, stating "Geordie Mafia Out".



With your attitude towards racism, I can only assume you are one of those Little Ingerlunders from the Sin Bin.

Bitterness? I don't even follow a specific club, i just like the game. Hence why I do have an interest in the rich takeover culture that is developing, because I do think there is potential for some of these clubs to sink into obscurity should these people move on without looking after the club. I seem to be in a minority amongst neutrals that think there's actually a large element of sadness about a club of Leeds' size and history languishing in the lower divisions. And I didn't get narky, I just thought your response was stupid and that if you weren't going to answer properly you needn't have bothered.



That's probably because you don't seem to take much interest in who you are talking at from your soapbox.



Check LGJM's post, he agrees. People outside of Man City don't really seem to know his name.



No, I just think it's victim syndrome to say it's racially based. There are plenty of foreign owners/managers/players in english football who are well-received or in some cases even idolised. The fact that nobody seems interested enough to learn your new owners' name is closer to apathy. Racism is people running around in Man City shirts with towels on their head.

So you are a Leeds fan. Thought so.





It's probably more to do with the fact that you come across as someone who doesn't stand out. Maybe that is because you don't say anything interesting.




Your post was poorly constructed. I had no idea what your post was stating. Hobbes' work is far easier to comprehend than some of your ramblings.

Maybe you are right, but then being insular and 'not interested in outsiders' is a bit of a Yawkshire trait.




Reading between the lines, you come across as a little Ingerlunder.





Maybe you are right, to a degree, about apathy in relation to oppsoition fans. It's not a great excuse though because I would bet that most neutrals know who the owners of clubs like Everton, Villa and Spurs.

However, the press have no excuse at all. They always referred to our previous owner by his name. Maybe they don't show as much respect to our owner because he is a Muslim.

As for the towels on the head business. It was all very sad. However, it's not racist. Maybe when you know as much as I do about the Race Discrimination Act and Race Relations (Amendment) Act, and when you have spent as much time as I have with community groups representing different faiths and ethnic groups, then I will be prepared to discuss this issue with you.

He will start posting again when the season kicks off I hope.

If you like. But in actual fact, not at all.



That's because they are well known clubs who people take an interest in. Should Man City actually break into the top 8 and consistently compete, I reckon it will be the same for you then. Until your takeover, nobody really cared, as with the likes of Bolton, Blackburn, Stoke, Hull City, Portsmouth, and West Ham. That's not to be antagonistic, it's just how it was to the neutral.



The press don't have an excuse, you're right. But to say it's racially driven is an assumption on your part, and one I don't see any credible evidence for. As I said, Al Fayed has never had the same treatment that I've seen.

If anything, it is down to either a genuine lack of interest, or simply jealousy manifested in a disrespectful determination to portray an image of such apathy. I suggest with the press it's almost certainly the latter.

But Citeh are the biggest story in English football right now. It doesn't take them finishing high in the league for them to be interesting, what is happening is interesting wherever they finish.

My opinion is that the reason citeh's owner isn't well known is because 1)There are a few rich Sheik's who are on spending sprees throughout sport/city building. 2)Citeh's Sheik has made no (or few) public comments and most (or all) of the takeover and player purchases have been conducted by his employees.

Has Citeh's owner even been to the ground or a match? I honestly don't know if he has.

I'm interested in what's happening at citeh. I welcome the increased competition. I think it's good for football. But even I would have had to guess at the name of citeh's owner.


Completely different situation though. Al Fayed was already nationally known because of Harrod's.

Al Fayed's also been on the receiving end of some pretty nasty press speculation as well. Part of the reason he was denied a British passport was a media campaign against him.

Some of the press action against him might because of his shady character, but there's a strong possibility that it was generated by racism as well.

That's my point. I'm interested/curious in what happens, but I couldn't care less about the details of who the money-man behind it is. It's the same for all clubs, the only reason I know who any of them are is because they are either well-known for other reasons or their name is regularly in the news.



Partly different, yes. My point was that his name is known, so therefore used, and he also a Muslim, but I've not seen a fuss made of it.

Any negative stuff I've seen has indeed been about his alleged shady side, along with a hint of the Princess Diana death casting a shadow, almost as if some hold it against him personally.

The jealousy does not extend to the likes of Liverpool, Arsenal and probably even Chelsea fans who have taken our good fortune with good grace and have welcomed the challenge. The jealousy statement is aimed at the fans of those who were at the second tier of the Premier League, who wished it had been them receiving the billions instead of us. Fans of a particular blue shirted club two miles away from where I am at the moment spring to mind immediately here and, let me tell you, you are displaying the symptoms more than a leprosy victim carrying his own leg.

If you think that I said I would like to be up there for ten years and then that I want it to go tits up then you are obviously dimmer than a one watt bulb. What I quite clearly stated was that I would rather have that scenario than have another thirty years of achieving nothing, or virtually nothing. Obviously, we would all like us to reach the top and sustain that till the day we die, I was merely pointing out which of the other two options I would prefer.

Unless Everton get the financial backing, something not too far off the level we have got now, then you can carry on dreaming. You will never be ready to break the big four and sustain it. Without bucket loads of cash, you cannot hope to achieve anything. That's a simple fact. You've probably already reached a plateau and the only way for Everton now is downhill.

I agree, it was more tragic than racist.

As an aside, there is no such piece of legislation as the Race Discrimination Act. I assume you mean the Race Relations Act, unless you're talking about Australia, I think they have a Race Discrimination Act.