Which UNITED do YOU hate more?...

[Knotty]

Perhaps forced is the wrong word, but Man United started the trend didnt they? They sparked the money revolution by spending fortunes on players, ultimately meaning other clubs had to spend beyond their means to keep up. And they gave Sky (who are of course more to blame for the current state of the game) exactly what they wanted for their TV screens; feeding off everything they demanded.

Do you have the facts to back all that up? Exactly who started what and when?

And, regardless of those facts, if a business, be it a football club or TV company, wants to spend money on whatever they like to make themselves more successful, why shouldn't they?

If a football club is offered millions of pounds by a TV company why should they refuse it?

If a TV company is offered millions in subscriptions by customers, why should they refuse it?

If the Albion suddenly found a multi-billionaire investor (he'd have to be mad!) and were able to buy success, should we refuse it?

If that success got us into the Premier League where even more money was thrown at us, should we refuse it?

I don't blame any of them for spending how they choose to make themselves more successful, or taking the money that has been offered.

I DO blame the football authorities for allowing so much money to go to the top echelons of the game and not insisting that much more is filtered down to lower levels.

 

[chez]

The Manc Scum. Even looking at their badge makes me feel sick.

 

[Garage_Doors]

I like Leeds,
But hate Man U, so it was an easy poll for me.

 

[Paxton Dazo]

I like Leeds,

Any particular reason why you 'like' them?:thud:

Was you around in the Bremner days?

 

[Keeping The Dream Alive.]

Do you have the facts to back all that up? Exactly who started what and when?

And, regardless of those facts, if a business, be it a football club or TV company, wants to spend money on whatever they like to make themselves more successful, why shouldn't they?

If a football club is offered millions of pounds by a TV company why should they refuse it?

If a TV company is offered millions in subscriptions by customers, why should they refuse it?

If the Albion suddenly found a multi-billionaire investor (he'd have to be mad!) and were able to buy success, should we refuse it?

If that success got us into the Premier League where even more money was thrown at us, should we refuse it?

I don't blame any of them for spending how they choose to make themselves more successful, or taking the money that has been offered.

I DO blame the football authorities for allowing so much money to go to the top echelons of the game and not insisting that much more is filtered down to lower levels.

That's not my point. They sucked up to Sky before the Premier League realised the brand power it had. They encouraged Sky to put excess amount of money into the top flight. They were happy for clubs in the newly founded Premier League (hugely supported by them) to receive bucket loads of money while the rest of the divisions got next to nothing. The day they became a PLC was the day that football took a turn for the worse. They played a big part in turning football in England into a brand rather than a game. They also played an integral part in ensuring that the home team keeps all the gate receipts, and with their fellow G14 members, wanted a percentage cut of gate receipts/profits from international tournaments. Thus increasing the gulf between clubs in England further, without for one second thinking about the English league system as a whole; just Man United.

 

[Paxton Dazo]

I knew this would be a close one, but not this close!!!

14-14.

 

[Knotty]

That's not my point. They sucked up to Sky before the Premier League realised the brand power it had. They encouraged Sky to put excess amount of money into the top flight. They were happy for clubs in the newly founded Premier League (hugely supported by them) to receive bucket loads of money while the rest of the divisions got next to nothing. The day they became a PLC was the day that football took a turn for the worse. They played a big part in turning football in England into a brand rather than a game. They also played an integral part in ensuring that the home team keeps all the gate receipts, and with their fellow G14 members, wanted a percentage cut of gate receipts/profits from international tournaments. Thus increasing the gulf between clubs in England further, without for one second thinking about the English league system as a whole, rather than just Man United.

Most of what you say re-inforces what I said. United did what they thought was best for them and, as a business, why shouldn't they? Any business should do the best it can for it's shareholders, be they public or private, and for it's customers. I think you could say that United have succeeded in that.

You may not like it, and there's plenty I don't like about the distribution of money in football, but as far as the clubs are concerned I don't blame them. Don't you think that, in the same position as United or the other top clubs, the Albion would have done exactly the same? Of course they would.

 

[Bluejuice]

Er, HELLO

Two words:

Alex Ferguson

For as long as that miserable, moaning Scottish twat is at the helm Manchester United will always be THE most hated team in the WORLD. And rightly so.

Furthermore, the only Leeds fans I've ever met came from Leeds. Whereas I have still to this day NEVER met a Manchester United fan who has even the remotest connection to Manchester.

They epitomise the sickening glory hunter element of football fans more so than any other team.

I went to school in Surrey and the nearest club to our school was Palace so the thugs and hoolies would go round demanding to know your allegiance asking the question "United or Palace?" as if these were the ONLY logical options as to who kids would follow.

I hate Palace but I don't have any problem with their fans, after all they can't possibly be supporting the club for any other reason than that they love their team through thick and thin no matter what.

 

[Les Biehn]

Man Utd. Hate Ferguson, Keane, Ince, Ferdinand, their glory hunting supporters, their attitude, etc etc...

Leeds fans tend to be pretty horrible but at the end of the day they have got what they deserve playing in Lge 1. On the other hand if United went out of business I would be happy.

 

[Badger]

I've always had an extreme dislike for ManUre, probably because I've got a few friends that "support" them despite having absolutely no reason to do so. There were also a few of them in the pub on Saturday night for the spurs game and they really were a bunch of cocks along with a woman behind us that spent the entire match shouting "come on united"

 

[Keeping The Dream Alive.]

Most of what you say re-inforces what I said. United did what they thought was best for them and, as a business, why shouldn't they? Any business should do the best it can for it's shareholders, be they public or private, and for it's customers. I think you could say that United have succeeded in that.

You may not like it, and there's plenty I don't like about the distribution of money in football, but as far as the clubs are concerned I don't blame them. Don't you think that, in the same position as United or the other top clubs, the Albion would have done exactly the same? Of course they would.

Still, my point being United provoked Sky. Not Sky provoking United.

I'd like to think we wouldn't have done. I'd like to believe we'd make some decisions for our own well-being, but I'd also like to believe we'd make some for the well-being of English football and other football fans across the country who would like to watch their side in a competitive league system, rather than a commercialised brand.

 

[Paxton Dazo]

I've always had an extreme dislike for ManUre, probably because I've got a few friends that "support" them despite having absolutely no reason to do so. "

You mean the ones that haven't been North of Haywards Heath?

 

[Napper]

neither and I don't subscribe to any of this H block plastic rivalry with Leeds

 

[Paxton Dazo]

neither and I don't subscribe to any of this H block plastic rivalry with Leeds

Haven't heard about that yet. Do Tell..

 

[Knotty]

Still, my point being United provoked Sky. Not Sky provoking United.

I'd like to think we wouldn't have done. I'd like to believe we'd make some decisions for our own well-being, but I'd also like to believe we'd make some for the well-being of English football and other football fans across the country who would like to watch their side in a competitive league system, rather than a commercialised brand.

I have no idea if United provoked Sky or not, but would like to know what actually happened, then. And was it only United?

Your thoughts about what we might have done are the ideal but are, I fear, unrealistic. They are looking after number one as all businesses do and, being a commercialised brand makes money.

Every football chairman in the country would LOVE to be in the same position as United, Chelsea, Liverpool, Arsenal and, given that opportunity, they would spare no thought for lesser clubs.

I'm sure the chairman of Tesco couldn't care less about the local corner shop. Like it or not, it's business - if you don't grab every bit of the cake that you can, someone else will.

 

[chez]

I knew this would be a close one, but not this close!!!

14-14.

Did you? I would have thought about 98% would have voted Manc Scum.

I don't get why people hate Leeds really, apart from Ken Bates there's not much to hate.

 

[Paxton Dazo]

Did you? I would have thought about 98% would have voted Manc Scum.

I don't get why people hate Leeds really, apart from Ken Bates there's not much to hate.

Well, 5 years ago then yes 98% of people might have voted for 'Manc Scum' but since Leeds have been relagated i feel that there's been a 'mini' rivalry built up between BHAFC & LUFC.

 

[defrocked priest]

I loathe Manchester United.

 

[Keeping The Dream Alive.]

I have no idea if United provoked Sky or not, but would like to know what actually happened, then. And was it only United?

Your thoughts about what we might have done are the ideal but are, I fear, unrealistic. They are looking after number one as all businesses do and, being a commercialised brand makes money.

Every football chairman in the country would LOVE to be in the same position as United, Chelsea, Liverpool, Arsenal and, given that opportunity, they would spare no thought for lesser clubs.

I'm sure the chairman of Tesco couldn't care less about the local corner shop. Like it or not, it's business - if you don't grab every bit of the cake that you can, someone else will.

The United chairman at the time, Martin Edwards (I think) and several others on the board, knew that Sky and the men behind the Premiership had the potential for a big deal and thus encouraged proceedings between the two. Other sides were involved, but United, as usually were the catalysts.

Perhaps they would, but it's not as if the chairmen of each of those clubs are making profit for themselves are they? And you know as well as I do that the 'position' those four clubs are in should not exist if we want a competitive league.

I know where you're coming from there, but comparing football to supermarket chains is impractical.

I think we're going to just have to agree to disagree on this subject.

 

[Paxton Dazo]

BBC SPORT | Football | My Club | Man Utd | Ferguson condemns 39th game plan

Well Said Fergy.