Let's make this horrible picture a thing of the past
United fans can make excuses, believe me I’ve got a degree in them, about Manchester City’s title win last season, Nemanja’s injury, ditto Cleverley, Scholes retirement, but the fact is as hard as it is to take, ‘the best team won’
City deserved the title, as I’ve told countless moaning Gooners, Chelsea fans and even the odd Liverpool fan following their brief flirtation with a Premier League title race, over the years, “the table doesn’t lie.”
United weren’t good enough, if we were, the Premier League trophy would be adorned with its usual red and black ribbons now and not its blue and white ones.
There’s plenty of reasons City lifted the trophy but the overriding factor that cannot be ignored is they we’re the better side over the course of the season- that’s exactly how leagues are won and lost.
Roberto Mancini recently noted in the Mirror:
“We were the best team last season because we played the best football, we scored the most goals and we conceded the fewest goals.
“We beat United twice and we dominated those two games against them. We are very proud of this because to beat United is a fantastic thing, because they are a great team.”
For once, I’m fully in agreement with the diminutive Italian, United had ample chances to win the league, Everton at home, City away being prime examples but we fell short and now is the time for cold admissions as we look to a new campaign.
Making excuses and acting as though we were simply ‘unlucky’ is exactly how you end up going backwards as a football club, we need to look forwards on how we can stop the ‘noisier than ever neighbours’ from crowing so loudly next May.
Of City’s dramatic title win the Belfast telegraph noted Paul Scholes stating:
“It’s always a motivating force when you lose the league,” he said.
“It’s not nice to see another team celebrate winning the title on the last day of the season. That picture stays with you.”
United as a club need to acknowledge we’re not the current title holders for a reason, and if we address that we’ll bounce back as we always have following the challenges of Leeds United, Blackburn, Arsenal and Chelsea.
The signings of Shinji Kagawa and Nick Powell are a step in the right direction, as is the alledged pursuit of other players to bolster the squad.
City are the title holders because they were the best. Let’s make ‘were’ the operative word.
Read more: http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/roberto-mancini-tells-manchester-united-1185059
Follow me on twitter for Red nonsense @RFFH
Ore Munich Red……
I couldn’t reply next to your post.
I find myself looking and wanting to find some common ground with you but its difficult.
I don’t think its fair to say our owner is a tyrant with no previous enthusiasm for the club or the sport.
Whilst his country is not a democracy (how many are and is the UK)its pretty modern for that part of the world with a reasonable human rights record and is generous with foreign aid etc. Also its not that long ago since we were the “tyrants” in his country.
City’s owner owns a club in Abu Dhabi so he has previous interest in football. I am sure he was not a City fan before buying the club just as many owners including your own are not these days or the players who play for the clubs. If the players and managers don’t have to be fans of the club when they join why should the owners have to be.
I have no problem saying that for most of our clubs history’s United has been the bigger better club with more supporters but United was not that much better. United was not out of reach of teams like City and of coarse United had their own catching up to do on Liverpool.
Sky changed all that with their money. How can the most successful club in English football, namely Liverpool ever catch up with United now? Circumstances skewed football finances far to much in United’s favour almost over night.
I cannot agree that United’s luck was based on football success. The luck was being successful when satellite tv money came into the sport by the bucket full.
Liverpool’s bad luck was being successful before satellite TV.
You say the City and Chelsea model is bad for football but why, bad for United and one or two other clubs may be.
I don’t think it is healthy for one club to dominate the league in the way United has for the last couple of decades. It’s boring for the neutral and reduces the rest of the league to bit part players, extras, in the Manchester United show.
I see the money coming into City and Chelsea and United’s debt problems as the natural rebalancing of the league and hope a few more clubs can get rich owners (after City have won a few more titles) The league will be the better for.
It’s true what you say that City’s success was based on none football wealth however TV money skewed football so much that this is the only way any club could catch up. The only reason the City and Chelsea models might not be sustainable is the FFP rules as clearly their owners have the wealth to sustain the spending.
I don’t think FFP will work and that it may well be illegal but lets say they do work. Do you think it will be right to take away the very slim chance any club outside the present top three or four have of winning the title? It will kill the game