I am a Manchester United fan ... but ...

[Jangle]

You are talking in circles. First you said all we need is two good players to be a top team then you go on to list about 3 or 4 other positions which we need to improve on - a creative midfielder, a hungry striker, a central defender.

I have said it before that a club of Manchester United financial clout should be the standard bearer. Right now the only player we have that can start in Real Madrid, Barcelona, Bayern Munich, PSG and now Mansh!tty, is DeGea. We should be buying players of higher quality, two for each positions. Gary Neville made a point the other day that in one of our most recent match, 7 players of the starting team was from the Fergie era. That's a startling revelation given that Fergie retired going on 5 years now. We need quality first team and reserves players for every position except the goalkeepers. A club of United's stature cannot go indefinitely without winning major trophies given its history and finances. Major trophies are not won with kids and Murinho was brought in to restore glory to United.

You keep talking about our attacks being predictable when we keep creating multitudes of scoring opportunities which are being missed by our forwards. That show that Murinho's tactics are correct. Despite the misconception that he sets up his teams to park the bus, if you look at his record, his winning teams and even his non-winning teams have always finished their seasons as the leading goal-scorers or second leading. That fact gets lost in all the noise about his style being boring.

'One coach whom I want to work with again? Jose Mourinho': Eden Hazard launches passionate defence of under-fire Manchester United boss and reveals he said 'sorry' after the Portuguese was sacked by Chelsea

He said: 'In 12 years I've only had one bad season, the last six months under Mourinho and it was partly my own fault. After the title, we asked Mourinho for extra holidays. I came back totally out of shape.

'Mourinho's image of an extremely defensive coach isn't completely right. He is far from adventurous like Guardiola, but the season in which we became champions, we made many goals and played good games.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/fo...-Mourinho.html

[Paul Marin]

Wow that’s your best comeback?

LOL!! that's because he is too daft to bring any sense to the discussion. A usual he can only blow fawt and try dress it up like him have sense.

[Jangle]

Wow that’s your best comeback?

[Sir X]

Ohh Claffy around the ring in circles you go , have fun.

[Paul Marin]

We went over this already liad, when LFC was the richest club in England,Man U got more with less consistently,when they got richer than us it was a mixed as per spending,they continued to get more,we continue yes to get less,with bouts of rejuvanation,The Holluier and Rafa years is proof of this and hopefully Klopp's

liad!

Ha ha...keep on spinning GIGS'y. Keep it up. First of all, you are the liad, it is well documented. Second, in the Premier League era, we have never been "richer" than Manu**. Their success almost 100% coincided with:

1. the renovation of their stadium from a 40K capacity to a 75K capacity over a number of years in the mid-nineties (ours was still a 45K capacity until recently and we're not even close to 75K all now)
2. them winning the first premier league title in 1992-93 (and consequently getting a major cash infusion to kick-start their ascendancy )
3. their flotation in 1991 which served at the time as a very innovative cash generating device and
4. their incredible ability to market their brand in a MUCH MORE effective way than any of their rivals - most particularly - with Asian markets when most Premier league managers didn't even know where Asia was.
5. massive spending in 1989 after years of a negative acquisition policy - this saw Pallister, Ince and a number of players shipped in with the heaviest spending in the club's history.

I will not go into Liverpool's side of it because it is requires more time than I have, but suffice to say, one cannot underestimate the impact that Heysel and Hillsborough had on the club and it's misfortunes in the years following those disasters, not to mention poor leadership in the Premier League era that is probably most punctuated by Moores and Parry BOTCHING the sale to DIC and going with Hicks & Gillette instead.

Anyway, in my ongoing quest to help make you into an educated man (I know - it's gonna be tough), I challenge you to find *facts* to support your (erroneous) argument that Manu** did more with less in the Premier League era. Simply put - that is a BULLSH!T argument devoid of any tie to reality. If you have proof, then bring it, remember now REEK'y, facts are facts, blowing fawt out your arse does not count as fact. Good luck! You are stupid, but I have faith you can do it.

[Assasin]

Lukaku also need to play better, he lost a good amount of balls and his runs are not always good. However the midfield needs to play closer to him.

[Sir X]

We went over this already liad, when LFC was the richest club in England,Man U got more with less consistently,when they got richer than us it was a mixed as per spending,they continued to get more,we continue yes to get less,with bouts of rejuvanation,The Holluier and Rafa years is proof of this and hopefully Klopp's

liad!

[Paul Marin]

Consistency comes from building from more with less,there was a time LFC was the richest club in England and Man U was not.

They got more with less,while LFC got less with more.

Keep spinning GIGS'Y. LOL!!!! Just for the record, and to correct your fake news, Manu** got "more" when they had "more", not when they had "less". Look it up. And remember when you're looking it up, make sure you compare the two teams' WAGE BILLs and SQUAD VALUEs, not NET SPEND. As you (may) remember from previous lessons, NET SPEND is only relevant as it pertains to gaining parity, e.g. (note it is "e.g." and not "cc") a POSITIVE NET SPEND is required for a team that is below a rival to bring it up to PAR. A NEGATIVE NET SPEND is acceptable as long as the negative does not cause the team to drop its SQUAD VALUE and WAGE BILL too far below that of its rivals. Comprende?

[Sir X]

Consistency comes from building from more with less,there was a time LFC was the richest club in England and Man U was not.

They got more with less,while LFC got less with more.

[Paul Marin]

Hahahahaha...woooooiiiiiiieeeee.......you are funny....this is the same jackass that bring bare tripe when me tell him dat to consistently challenge for the title you need money. Hahahaha...late as usual ...but hey, you finally making a likkle progress. Hahahaha....

[Sir X]

Idiot: The foundation of the thesis more with less is money.

Yuh caan get more outta less with nothing,as RAFA,Klopp and I have explained it,we will never have the big boys money,so we have to be astute in our scouting,purchases and development with little room for error.Cc: Salah!

Claffy 😏

[Paul Marin]

Who says it doesn't ? 😏Claffy!

Are you frigging kidding me? What happened to more with less? LOL!!!!. Dude, you are a frickin joka. Dyam klown.

[Sir X]

Who says it doesn't ? 😏Claffy!

[Paul Marin]

Nice try eedy boo with the crowd brain. I know it is hard for you to understand, but, the money has to be there. Give Pep West Brom and see how well he does.

[Sir X]

Paul's epiphany: It's not all about the money

Happy New year Sir,welcome home prodigal son?


https://youtu.be/mABIhea3lTw