OFFICIAL FOOTY THREAD ⚽️: Rodri wins 2024 Ballon d’Or

Who wins the 2024/25 Premier League?

  • Manchester City

    Votes: 14 50.0%
  • Arsenal

    Votes: 8 28.6%
  • Liverpool

    Votes: 2 7.1%
  • Aston Villa

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Tottenham

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Chelsea

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Newcastle

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Manchester United

    Votes: 4 14.3%
  • Other

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    28
  • This poll will close: .
What’s the timeframe for these allegations? These last few years we’ve lost the league to them by single digits on multiple occasions
The findings in the PL investivarion are for the 2009-2018 period

You guys would have 2 titles including the Suarez and Sturridge year if ever they got stripped
 
Last edited:
I don’t think you’ll see them lose any championships.. if that happened Liverpool and United could sue the league for lost revenues by not winning. Tothink at its worst the whole aguerrrrooooooooo last min win would be chalked off. Crazy considering it’s such a huge part of their history
 
Doesn't mean they would have flourished as much as they did on said teams like they did on city. City was financially able to field world class teams and continue to acquire more talent every year. You think Chelsea was going to be able to afford Aguero, Silva on top of the big name players they've had on their roster previously? The talent would have been spread out more evenly.
aside form City, Only Chelsea and United had that kind of money to spend
 
Liverpool broke a record for Andy Carrol etc I'm sure they could have gotten a player or two.
Thats the problem, before Klopp Liverpool kept making horrible signings that the managers didn't want. If you had Klopp then, yeah you guys would've faired better. Chelsea has been the most winning team in England in last 20 years and have always had money to spend since Roman took over. They would've gotten a lot of the big money signings City had
 
Thats the problem, before Klopp Liverpool kept making horrible signings that the managers didn't want. If you had Klopp then, yeah you guys would've faired better. Chelsea has been the most winning team in England in last 20 years and have always had money to spend since Roman took over. They would've gotten a lot of the big money signings City had
This is false. It's clear you don't know what you're talking about. Rogers had say so in terms of signings hence why Joe Allen etc were transfered into the club. Same for Daglish. Rogers is the reason why Son ended up at Tottenham along with Dempsey.
 

Mans tryin to save face cause UEFAs case was wack :lol: What obstruction can a lawyer do in the face of actual hard evidence he claims it was when presented. Thats not how **** works either it was or wasn’t and it clearly wasn’t
 
is it not weird to that your club and sponsors have the same owners? It’s like when Gazprom was a Chelsea sponsor. People aren’t stupid… you can argue it however you want..
These companies just so happen to wanna branch into premier league marketing and are willing to spend top dollar for it. Sure man
 
is it not weird to that your club and sponsors have the same owners? It’s like when Gazprom was a Chelsea sponsor. People aren’t stupid… you can argue it however you want..
Is it weird that Leicester’s shirt sponsor was king power stadium name is king power and that’s the company that was directly owned by their owner?

That’s not as uncommon as y’all think it is as long as it’s evaluated to be fair value
 


Armada is looking for anything right now from City Twitter Blue fans.

This is going to be fun. :lol:


8FF6605E-57B2-425D-BC85-971300DB35CE.jpeg


A34A509F-5456-4B30-9A48-7CDFFD670E0F.jpeg


BBD9383A-61F2-4A10-B663-6157AA8C1718.jpeg
 
Back
Top Bottom