MANCHESTER UTD FAVOURITES AGAIN!

ghimpheng SG

how about 2000 to 2003 ? and 07-08 why never add ?

if u add 2000 to 2003 Laughing

last time united use money the most in EPL

04-06 back to chelsea

07/08 - current back to man utd

please last time u all use so much money chelsea use like nothing and sometimes even profit from transfer market

lpx88 SG

Why say comments like that?

The season hasn even started and it's everybody's game.

Sometimes what we think can be a total contrast of what will take place

RaTtY8l SG

$30m on shev....haha
21m on swp....haha

Laughing

anhydrouscoppersulphate SG

you people better discuss the topic in a mature manner if not the log out button is always there for you to click.

iceFatboy SG

spurs to make a surprise..
they will be the best team from london.

Xtrider SG

seriously i think the london teams have it tougher because of the many derbies they have…good luck to all teams!

zocoss SG

Simple, because during those days no one mentioned anything about "use money buy title"... You spend what you earn, fair enough... It was not until RA came into the picture and spent excessively that this term "use money buy title" came about Obviously you dont even seem to have a clue about chelseas recent history and you go around shooting your mouth off (again) If I were to add 2000 to 2003 I will only be laughing at you

Cos from the summer of 2001, Chelsea signed Frank Lampard from West Ham United, Emmanuel Petit, Boudewijn Zenden from FC Barcelona, Jesper Gronkjær from Ajax Amsterdam, as well as William Gallas from Marseille for over £30millionRanieri spent a further £120 million on players in the summer of 2003. These signings included Irish winger Damien Duff for a then club record £17million, English youngsters Wayne Bridge, Joe Cole, Scott Parker and Glen Johnson, Argentine pair Juan Sebastian Veron and Hernán Crespo, Frenchman Claude Makelele and Romanian star Adrian Mutu

So you see, they spent in excessive of $150 million pounds from 2001 to 2003 I wonder where did you get your chelsea use like nothing and sometimes even profit from transfer market from?... Any how Pluck from the sky is it? What profit are you talking about? Still have to pay part of their salary while they play for other clubs... Veron, Crespo, Mutu, Duff got profit meh ?

Whereas in Man Us case Pity you... I give you one year extra lah 2000 to 2003 Total for 4 Years. $122.47m. And to think they were still making profits yearly whereas Chelsea were only losing yearly until they were in $80m debts

2000 : Fabien Barthez, Monaco (£ 7.8 Million)

2001 Total : $49.6m
Ruud Van Nistelrooy - PSV Eindhoven (£19 Million), Juan Sebastian Veron - Lazio (£28.1 Million) (Later sold to Chelsea for $15m), Roy Carroll - Wigan (£2.5 Million), Laurent Blanc (Free Transfer)

2002 - Total : $38.4m
Jan Diego Forlan - Independiente (£6.9 million), Rio Ferdinand - Leeds United (£30 million), Ricardo Lopez - Real Valladolid (£1.5 million)

2003 - Total: $26.67m
Jun David Bellion - Sunderland (£2 million), Eric Djemba-Djemba - Nantes (£4.2 million) Tim Howard - NJ/NY Metro Stars (£2.3 million), Cristiano Ronaldo - Sporting Lisbon (£12.24 million), Jose Pereira Kleberson - Athletico Paranaense (£5.93 million)

Next time, want to go shooting your mouth off (again) about chelsea and putting others down, go to the chelsea forum lah... At least over there bluff also people won't mind... You call yourself a chelsea fan and you don't even know such a simple thing from 2001 to 2003... Even i a non-chelsea fan know more than you about chelsea's recent history... Shame on you... Mr. Green

stellazio SG

On this topic of buying titles. So many clubs have been doing it, teams like Barca, Madrid etc. But not many complain at least not in singapore.

Only because its Chelsea, and its in the EPL where their favourites clubs are based do they then complain.

Actually in almost every other leagues, henever a rival team wins the league, the rivals fans will always have something to say. For example

Lyon - they have all the best players due to their monopoly trade and finances in french ligue
Porto - Diver team
Madrid - Use money, Galatico policy
Barcelona - Use money also
Juve - Bribe ref
Inter - Only because rivals kena deducted points
Man Utd - Dive/ Ref treatment
Arsenal - Foreign talent
Chelsea - Money

So its actually nothing new, and i duno why people get so anal over this comments.

Its all these stuffs added up together that makes football so fun for a supporter. The banters against opposing fans etc and not just the football match itself. Laughing

zocoss SG

I don't think there was much complains probably because all along there was always competition between the 2 in their respective league... Barca & Madrid spent roughly about the same... So when 2 clubs are spending about the same amount of money, this term cannot be use as it was still fair game between the 2. But if only one club is doing it... then i guess thats how it came about... Mr. Green

stellazio SG

I hardly believe that Barca spent close to what Madrid was spending during their galatico years.

At least from what it seems, maybe Barca buys like 5 players for the price that Madrid's sue to pay for 1 player.

Long gone are the days of relying on just your academy to provide your team with enough talented players to win titles. For example, if Spurs spends another 100mil or not, and they win the league, you can't put it down to money, because money always helps, but there're so many other variables left in the equation to win the league.

red_amoeba SG

lest all of us forget, Chelsea burnt millons of roubles and they are in the red. Man U spent millions but they are profitable. If you are making money as a PLC or entity, you can spend - its your revenues and profits anyways. The whole system exist because you use the profits to buy players and improve your team.

However, Chelsea's approach is different, banking on Abramovich's millions, they went to the market and bought all the "top" players, nevermind the price and wants instant success. And don't forget, before Mourinho was appointed manager, Mr Tinkerman failed miserably to land anything and was asked to leave. So, its a fact that Chelsea bought their success by money.

Man U's spending this time round, no doubt are great but players are bought to ensure futher & continued success. And its very clear to SAF that he wants the European crown. Mind you, Mourinho also wants the Champions League. You think he doesn't want to spend? he wants, its just that he has spent so much of Abramovich's money that he cannot spend some more.

Spending comes with expectations - and its not surprise that Man U, after their hefty outlay, will be expected to win trophies - its called return on investments - its not surprising. But if you look at the players they are buying, almost of all them are under 25 - he is building for future. thats not what Chelsea is doing when they buy Shevchenko or Ballack. Liverpool buys torres and he is only 23. This time round Chelsea is smarter - they realise they also need to buy young and talented players - thanks to the "show" by Ronaldo last season - hence come Malouda & Alex. Liverpool buys Babel and Torres, Arsenal for Eduardo. Totttenham buys Bent and so on.

Who started this trend? Its Man U with their 12m outlay for certain Ronaldo. But they did not buy success with Ronaldo, they bought future - and they reaped dividends in the last season.

stellazio SG

So its also a fact that money only helps to win, it doesn't guarantees titles right judging by Rianieri's record.

Actually it was Arsenal and Arsene Wenger who started this trend. Its just that recently more emphasis has been placed on youth due to inflation of prices for proven players. As well as those academies that aims to provide their clubs with future talent.

red_amoeba SG

yeah...splashing money does not equate to winning the trophy. You can buy the best team in the world but you will win probably most of the time but that does not mean you will win all the trophies.

Real Madrid has tried for many years and failed until this season, actually they din't win fair and outright - they win simply because of the system that counts for head-to-head results and not goals scored /against. Whatever it is, they are winners and should be congragulated. They won after spending millions fo years. Inter Milan won comfortably but their spending is nowhere near the level of EPL teams.

Spending on players is one thing, motivating them and gelling them into a lethal team is another. That calls for a great manager / motivator who can harness the talents. Thats why ppl like Mourinho and SAF stands out.

zocoss SG

I think you could be mistaken on some areas... The galatico policy isn't like they when out and buy all the star players within a year... It was stretch out to 3, 4 or maybe even 5 years... with 1 (one) star or galatico player you called it arriving each season... We over here may not be too familiar with the Spanish league but Barce the club didn't became famous overnight... They have a long history and a proud heritage... They have accomplish it by winning titles, playing good football and of course also having quality (star) players in their rank over the years... Great names like Gheorghe Hagi, Ronald Koeman, Hristo Stoitchkov, Gary Lineker, Luís Figo, Rivaldo, Romário, Diego Maradona, Ronaldinho, Samuel Eto'o just to name a few... have wore their famous shirt...

And if Spurs does win the EPL title, i think many will be proud of them... cos they have done it the hard way... They have build themselves up from small to what they are today just like Pool, Man u and also Arsenal... They didn't need "outside" help to win it. They manage their non-football affairs well which then enable them to channel its funds onto the pitch... If they manage it, I belief they will gain lots of respect from neutral fans cos like most big clubs today, They have done it the old fashion way, the hard way and not by mean of free handouts.

zocoss SG

Why Ah Pheng suddenly so quiet never reply one... Now i add 2000 to 2003 already what... and also statements like "chelsea use like nothing and sometimes even profit from transfer market" ... How come he got no figures to back up what he says one and anyhow shoot his mouth off (again)... This is a forum for information, not disinformation... So irresponsible one... Like i said, this fellow anyhow Pluck from the sky one... Rolling Eyes

Dead_Man_Inc SG

and Sidwell Laughing

stellazio SG

Hmm yeah you maybe right. But then again those players you mentioned, i think like 90%of em were bought with money. Laughing

But anyway, the world is based on money now. Don't spend and you lose out.

zocoss SG

Percisely, they were bought with great amount of money during their time... That is why i said Real alway had Barce to compete with them in the transfer market... It was never a one-sided thing... That is why Barce fans cannot accuse Real of "Buying the title" just like Real cannot say the same of Barce too.

ghimpheng SG

so if man utd never win epl or ucl next season = faliure

am i right to say that ? Wink

zocoss SG

Another one of your illogical reason i see... Laughing

Hey so how? 2000 to 2003 who spent more?... and "chelsea use like nothing and sometimes even profit from transfer market"... (quote from ghimpheng)

So where did you get your figures from? Tell me leh... I want a reply...

I already said this is a forum for information, not disinformation...

So don't anyhow Pluck from the sky lah... Mr. Green

« Previous Page Next Page »