The General Motors Domestic Football Thread. 21/22 (NO SHIT BANTER)

[Mr_Danger]

19 minutes ago, Keith Houchen said:

Unpopular opinion time. So called sugar daddy clubs are instrumental in keeping the premier league interesting. It was the only way to make it competitive. 

And the National League.

[PowerButchi]

29 minutes ago, Mr_Danger said:

And the National League.

There's nothing interesting about millionaire ownership in the National League. We get 9000 a match but we're still fucking shit other than Paul Mullin

 

[westlondonmist]

11 hours ago, Keith Houchen said:

Unpopular opinion time. So called sugar daddy clubs are instrumental in keeping the premier league interesting. It was the only way to make it competitive. 

It's true sadly, Manchester United became too dominant early on. Arsenal put up some fight and won leagues but Chelsea being owned by Abramovic helped stop Manchester United becoming more dominant. Although Chelsea were a good side before the buy out unlike Newcastle. I'd still rather it hadn't become like this. 

[tiger_rick]

11 hours ago, Keith Houchen said:

Unpopular opinion time. So called sugar daddy clubs are instrumental in keeping the premier league interesting. It was the only way to make it competitive. 

You're absolutely right. I got some stick for saying the same when it happened to Man City but it's right. Leicester are the anomaly. 

Just don't dress it up as anything else and it's fine. You'll take the blood money for a successful football team. 90% of other fans would too. No need to lie about it.

[Keith Houchen]

2 hours ago, tiger_rick said:

Leicester are the anomaly. 

The residents certainly are, what with their webbed feet and incest. 
Although they didn’t spend like fuck, they’re owned by billionaires as well. 

[SaitoRyo]

 

Can I just shock you? I actually like the Saudi Arabian government. Despite what I said earlier...

As a lifelong and long-suffering Newcastle United fan, I am chuffed to see Ashley out of the club. Of course, it is bittersweet, since he's being replaced by the Saudis. It's not ideal, is it? I think we're allowed to be happy that we've got new owners after almost 15 years of despair, while also feeling conflicted about where the new money is coming from. 

Pretty surreal knowing that the new owners have an endless supply of funds, but it's never been about Newcastle fans demanding we compete in the Champions League or sign really expensive players every year. We've only ever wanted a team that competes for something and whose objective isn't 'don't get relegated' every season. 

We're currently in the bottom three and winless in our first seven PL games this season, so the short-term has got to be steadying the ship and ensuring we actually stay in the league. Hopefully that means getting rid of Bruce and bringing in some new players in January. 

There's so much potential with Newcastle. It's a one-club city, the stadium is great, we have history and a big fanbase. I just hope the Sports Direct signs don't get replaced by Saudi Aramco ones...

[Keith Houchen]

8 minutes ago, SaitoRyo said:

we have history

Every single club has history. 

[SaitoRyo]

11 minutes ago, Keith Houchen said:

Every single club has history. 

I'm not saying they don't and I think you know what I mean.

[tiger_rick]

29 minutes ago, Keith Houchen said:

Although they didn’t spend like fuck, they’re owned by billionaires as well. 

That's right and they've spent more than most but their spending is something that I think 20 other clubs in the country could replicate, and many already have without the same success.

Be interesting to see if this Newcastle thing is now part of a trend. Will other clubs now be bought by other rich states? That was the thought/fear after Man City but it's not really worked out. No-one who has bought Pompey, Forest, etc has had the same money - or in Pompey's case, any money at all. It's taken 13 years, I think, for another owner of that ilk to come along.

I'm not counting the American owners because while they're wealthy, they're in it for completely different reasons and spunking their money isn't the plan.

[Keith Houchen]

8 minutes ago, SaitoRyo said:

I'm not saying they don't and I think you know what I mean.

I don’t. It’s a bullshit phrase seemingly trotted out exclusively by UK fans. Probably because we are a nation that always looks backwards and not forwards. When Bury went under, their history was something that was constantly referred to by their fans, how is theirs less valid than Newcastle’s?

[Frankie Crisp]

 

[SaitoRyo]

16 minutes ago, Keith Houchen said:

I don’t. It’s a bullshit phrase seemingly trotted out exclusively by UK fans. Probably because we are a nation that always looks backwards and not forwards. When Bury went under, their history was something that was constantly referred to by their fans, how is theirs less valid than Newcastle’s?

I think it's something fans of clubs over the world talk about, not just UK fans. I've certainly heard fans of Czech teams from big dogs like Sparta and Slavia to smaller teams like Dukla and Bohemians talk about their history. 

I'm also not saying that the history of other clubs like Bury aren't valid. Don't know where you would get that from or want to make that point. 

I was just talking about all the positives that Newcastle have, its history being one of them. I'm not exactly harping on about it or proclaiming it to be more valid than any other club's. 

Edited October 8, 2021 by SaitoRyo
more not less

[Keith Houchen]

Just now, SaitoRyo said:

I think it's something fans of clubs over the world talk about, not just UK fans. I've certainly heard fans of Czech teams from big dogs like Sparta and Slavia to smaller teams like Dukla and Bohemians talk about their history. 

Do Dulka fans play up the Half Man Half Biscuit connection? That would be sensational! I remember reading about German fans and how they don’t seem to care. They were interviewing a bunch of Dortmund fans and none of them could name the team that started when the won the Champions League  one of them said he had a video cassette of the match and he was the only one who did out of the group.  I thought that was fascinating as I, and many others my age, had videos of the 87 cup final and videos of the build up. And we could name the squad and the minutes we scored in!

I find it odd that fans of every single club reference their history as if it’s exclusive. They may as well say “We have kits”. 

[SuperBacon]

16 minutes ago, Keith Houchen said:

I thought that was fascinating as I, and many others my age, had videos of the 87 cup final and videos of the build up. And we could name the squad and the minutes we scored in!

Fucking hell. I hope BORIS DROPS a DOUBLE POST.

Chalk me up as another one who finds football fans referring to each others 'history'  as weird. Spurs fans constantly wind up Chelsea fans about having no history, when of course they do, and a rich one at that (like most clubs). Its almost as bad as taking the serious piss out of rivals attendances.

Also, there are no 'good' owners at the top level. Joe Lewis is just as bad as say, the City owners, just on a different level. The Leicester lads support coup's against governments and unethical practices. Everyone is shit at the top level and quite frankly the only way you can enjoy it is sadly if you just hold your nose and pretend it's not there.

@Keith Houchen on the German fan culture, I think you'd really enjoy the book And The Sun Shines Now. Whilst not exclusively about that, it touches quite heavily on them.

[Keith Houchen]

10 minutes ago, SuperBacon said:

@Keith Houchen on the German fan culture, I think you'd really enjoy the book And The Sun Shines Now. Whilst not exclusively about that, it touches quite heavily on them.

Cheers, I’ll add that to the list! And you were right about Soccernomics, it’s ace.