Robin van Persie

Status
Not open for further replies.
MUFCgal said:
I'm sorry, and excuse me if I'm a tad biased here, but that Treble 1999 team simply cannot be matched IMO. Here's why:

To win the three primary trophies in English football in one season, it was never done before (and hasn't been done since).

We lost only five matches in all competitions.

We went on a 33 match unbeaten run from Boxing Day until the end of the season.

We played top sides throughout the season in the three trophies, and won them all.

That 1999 team went on to win the league the next few seasons (we weren't one season wonders like Arsenal).
Click to expand...

You forgot to mention that we were in the 'group of death' in the CL group stages too.
 
Simon Adebesi said:
I just cant get on board with this point of view at all. What is wrong about spending money to win the league? Where is the rule book that defines right and wrong? Where is this moral code football is supposed to abide by?

Football sold its soul a long time ago. To say Chelsea / City are "wrong" to buy titles now, or Arsenal are "right" to refuse to play that game, is absurd - as a line, demarking right from wrong, it is completely imaginary, and utterly pointless, in that City will be winning plenty of league titles from here on in, and Arsenal wont. If it serves to make Arsenal fans feel a little better about not winning anything then fair enough, but there is no more to it than that.

If politicians and regulators want to come in and make things a little more explicit, as they are trying to do with FFP, that is another thing. I support what they are trying to do there. And I do find it regrettable, despite what I have said above, that so much money has flooded into football, for all the inflation in wages and lunacy it has created - and for subtracting much of the unpredictability of the sport. But clubs should not be expected to behave morally in that respect, they should be doing what it takes to win - while ensuring their long term survival.

That is what is "wrong", for me: things like Leeds or Rangers or whoever else, spending way beyond their means, and it is hard because they feel they have to do that to compete. If Arsenal feel they are spending as much as they can while being prudent and making sure they do not get into financial trouble, that is a good thing. Only they can really know, I suspect Wenger could spend more than he does quite comfortably without overstretching Arsenal.

Ive said it in the IPO thread as well when this has been discussed, I just think United fans can be a little sanctimonious about other teams "buying trophies" when we have been outspending others for years, and winning plenty in no small part because of that. It doesnt detract anything from what SAF has done, but we have been the richest team in the land for a long time, and even though that money didnt come from a sugar daddy, that doesnt mean it is somehow pure, idealistic, winning it the right way.

Football in its purest form is not about making money out of your fan base by selling them credit cards or dressing gowns or cramming in more corporate boxes than anyone else. It isnt about having the best marketing ideas. Yes our money came from having more fans, but still. That is a distinction, but it doesnt seem like enough of a distinction to me to base a whole "Chelsea and City are bad for football, while Man United and Arsenal are good for football" argument on.

I guess to sum it all up: I see the City and Chelsea phenomenon as the next stage in a process that we helped lead football down. Not something that happened out of the blue, but something we share responsibility for.
Click to expand...

Lets not get into this. We'l totally derail the thread as our views are totally different. I blame City and Chelsea for the problems other clubs are facing now. Anyways, This has been done quite a lot, specially in a thread Cider created.
 
Can someone please explain to me why everyone thinks we are interested in Van Persie and why some are sure we will sign him?
 
syrian_scholes said:
Can someone please explain to me why everyone thinks we are interested in Van Persie and why some are sure we will sign him?
Click to expand...

Because SAF came out and said we are. Nobody's even close to being sure we'l sign him though, dont know where you got that from.
 
Sky Italia claims that sources close to Robin van Persie have
confirmed that he will choose between Man Utd & Juve. Man City
ruled out
 
ehsanul said:
Sky Italia claims that sources close to Robin van Persie haveco nfirmed that he will choose between Man Utd & Juve. Man City
ruled out
Click to expand...
Arsenal won't sell to Man Utd so if that's true he's Turin bound or staying put.
 
peterstorey said:
Arsenal won't sell to Man Utd so if that's true he's Turin bound or staying put.
Click to expand...

Why wouldn't they? They sell to City, who are currently ahead of us in the pile. Arsenal haven't been proper rivals to us for a good while now, and we did let you have Silvestre. Time to return the favour..
 
The fact is pete, if he wants to go to United, theres not much yous can do. Sure, you can hold him there for the year, but that would be unwise. If he wants to come to us, and we want him, it'll happen. Whether this summer, or next summer.
 
He's coming here, Pete, and there's not a damn thing you can do about it. It's the end for your lot. The end!

You can look forward to a season of defensive blunders, 5-10 quality performances, 10-15 mediocre ones, 35 rubbish ones, that French striker doing eff all, that Japanese guy doing the same, the African guy being absolute gash and Wenger disappearing further and further into that giant sleeping bag/jacket thing.
 
Orton said:
Why wouldn't they? They sell to City, who are currently ahead of us in the pile. Arsenal haven't been proper rivals to us for a good while now, and we did let you have Silvestre. Time to return the favour..
Click to expand...

Do we even know City are interested?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.