Printable View
http://www.skysports.com/share/11020098
Why didn't they make the same complaints when Real Madrid were the biggest spending club in the world?
Or when Barca were using Qatari money to fund the purchase of Neymar?
Talk about double standards!!!
Also, I don't see how they can say City and PSG have distorted European competition when they haven't come close to winning the CL and Spanish sides have dominated the CL for the last decade???
Speaking of transfers, I was looking at a list of the 100 highest transfers of all time- Man City defenders are at 26, 27, 28, 32 and 33. Only Mangala wasn't from 2016 or 2017.
Not sure how true this is but according to Pep they hadn't paid a transfer fee for a fullback since Zabaleta 9 years ago and then had to replace all their ageing fullbacks in one summer window.Quote:
Originally Posted by lardy
His argument was even though they had spent over 100m on 3 fullbacks, over the course of the 9 years since Zabaleta other clubs had spent more on those positions.
Clichy comes to mind, don't think he was on a free.
Perhaps it was since they signed Clichy 6 years ago then. 7m according to wiki.Quote:
Originally Posted by lardy
http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/footba...rence-10933278
Here Pep explains why a complete overhaul in the fullback department
La La land and Steve Grapes 🤔
Unbelievable, they're very worried Messi is joining Man City next season I think. Barcelona's halo has slipped further and further in recent years, now I think they're one of the worst clubs in terms of entitlement and sponsorship; plus they've completely abandonned the academy.Quote:
Originally Posted by J R Hartley
Good point didn't think of it like that but now you've said it makes perfect sense.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pedro de la Rosa
They've just lost one of its biggest stars and won't want to lose its biggest.
All last season he was bleating that his full backs were too old to do the job he needed them to do and promptly made Dani Alves his number one target :shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by J R Hartley
To be fair he is still a very special player regardless of his ageQuote:
Originally Posted by Rhiw-Blue
I agree with the main point they are making that the source of City's and PSG's income is state funded. It's completely hypocritical of course given the political backing that both clubs have long enjoyed, but it's still true.
Roman Abramovich throwing his pocket money at the wall is one thing, but when you've got the economy of an entire oil rich nation backing you - how can you compete with that?
Whatever happened to the EU investigation into illegal state subsidies football teams received?
Barca and Real were definitely involved ( state owned bank loans never being called in and council buying training ground then selling back at a loss respectively, from memory ) as indeed were Swansea due to the ownership structure of the Liberty.
Barca didn't mind taking Qatar's cash when it suited them? Barcelona are bitter and twisted in recent years. They're rivaling Real for the dirtiest football club going. Transfer bans, underhand deals, taking blood money, whining about others etc. They've been horribly mismanaged since Laporta left, and this is only the beginning.Quote:
Originally Posted by FormerlyJohnnyBreadhead
That's exactly the point I'm making - it's totally hypocritical coming from Barcelona and Real, but their argument is still totally valid and UEFA should indeed look at it (although everyone knows nothing will come of it).Quote:
Originally Posted by Pedro de la Rosa
I agree about the direction Barcelona have taken by the way. I remember when they refused to wear a shirt sponsor to preserve the sanctity of the shirt; now they are essentially a fully fledged marketing machine and the whole "More Than A Club" ethos has long been a misnomer. Signing a 30-year-old Paulinho for £36m is possibly the most un-Barcelona-like transfer I've ever seen.