Man City's treble is 'nowhere near as impressive' as Man Utd's - viral thread explains why | OneFootball

Manchester United were unable to stop Manchester City in their pursuit of a treble in the FA Cup final.

United, who achieved the feat in 1999, had the opportunity to end City's chances of winning the Premier League, FA Cup and Champions League.

However, thanks to an Ilkay Gundogan brace, City triumphed 2-1 at Wembley to win their second trophy of the campaign.

They're now heavy favourites to beat Inter Milan and claim their first ever Champions League title to complete the treble.

But who did it better: Man United in 1999 or City in 2023?

That has been the argument for weeks before Guardiola's men had even got their hands on their first trophy. And that debate will no doubt rumble on throughout the summer if City do beat Inter in Istanbul this weekend.

So, who did do it better?

Thread explains why Man Utd's treble is better than Man City's

Well, one Man Utd author, Wayne Barton, has produced a viral Twitter thread explaining what he thinks. And there's no doubt in his mind.

Barton starts off with: "Manchester United won the treble in 1999. It's very likely Manchester City will win it on Saturday. It's the same achievement but it will be nowhere near as impressive, for two important reasons, which I'll explain in this thread."

He then explains - in detail - why he thinks such a thing.

"*Disclaimer from the top, this is my opinion, I'm explaining it at length here. Many people will disagree (probably with both reasons), that's fine, I'm not entering into conversation about it, I won't change my opinion and I don't seek to change yours."

"English football reached an arguable peak in the late 90s and early 00s (or from 96-2010) : a combination of post-Bosman foreign influx seeing top talent come to UK, the growing wealth in the PL and slight expansion of Champions League from 1 to 3 places."

"The collapse of ITV Digital made many clubs financially vulnerable and the takeover of Chelsea started a chasm of disparity at the top and bottom of the game. Chelsea started to stockpile their squad taking many players from mid-PL teams and stunting their careers."

"City’s takeover accelerated that further still, and they were even able to stockpile their squads by financially outmuscling CL rivals Spurs and Arsenal to take their key players. The disparity became greater than ever and irreversibly damaged the competitiveness of domestic football."

"The switch of this can be traced to Leicester winning the league, which was a fairytale and mostly caused a) by their consistency and b) by all of the top clubs being in a state of transition. This was the landscape Guardiola arrived into."

"Eventually the result was always going to be one dominant team and a weak league. The nature of sport means there’s always a runner-up (and occasional). In recent years the runners up have tried to argue that their achievements mean the league is better or more competitive than ever. Liverpool’s fluctuation appears to disprove that theory."

"Before 2003 the wealth in the game stayed in the game for the benefit of everyone. There were traditionally perennially wealthy super-clubs, these were the consequence of a rich history and tradition of success over generations. The money benefitted everyone and stayed in the game."

"The wealth of Chelsea and City was always likely to have a ripple effect on European football. Some of the top-tier elite European clubs faced financial ruin trying to compete. They couldn’t because of the ££ power of the PL, or two clubs in particular."

"Eventually what has happened in the PL has happened in European football on a wider scale. English clubs appear dominant because of the money in the PL but it’s hardly a vintage era for English football like it was in earlier generations."

"The reason for that is the lack of genuine competitiveness, that is reflective in the lack of genuine interest. David Moyes has West Ham in a European final and might get the sack from West Ham win or lose."

"That’s the competitive (or lack of it) side of it. Now we’ll talk about the style and nature of the achievement, something money can’t buy or contrive."

"Pep Guardiola arrived in English football with a reputation for creating beautiful football. It’s using the best players to keep hold of the ball and wear down opponents. That’s engaging when it’s competitive. When it isn’t, even their own fans lose interest. It’s sad, but true."

"Guardiola’s true/actual legacy has been defined by chasing a CL after Barcelona. That will be realised on Saturday but only because they added a generational goalscoring monster (all for just £60m) to a squad that was already by far the strongest in Europe. It’s about time."

"People will be quick to say it’s better than 1999 and they’ll make combined teams dominated by City players but the truth of the matter is the two achievements share a name but little else."

"United’s treble was achieved at a sweet spot in time where all of Europe was benefiting from increased wealth and the post-Bosman migration of players. There had never been a better period (imo) in football, everything finely balanced before it went too far."

"Their domestic success came against the best Arsenal team of all time, a Chelsea team who’d won a European trophy, and strong Leeds/Liverpool/Newcastle sides. Most of those teams they faced in the League and Cup."

"In Europe they faced a fantastic Barcelona team, the greatest Juventus side, Inter with Ronaldo et al, and a Bayern team chasing their own treble. The tension of their run-in demanded a high level of consistency. Utd were unbeaten for over 30 games."

"Margins were tight. Games were close. United’s significant wins came by the odd goal in epic, seminal battles that have gone down in the ages. It was an indication of the strength of the landscape."

"You can’t manufacture results like beating Liverpool when losing on 87 mins, overcoming Arsenal in a semi-final with a last-minute penalty save and the best FA Cup goal ever. Like being 2-0 down in Juventus and winning."

"You can’t manufacture a moment in time like being a goal down in injury time of the CL final; then you win, to complete the treble, on the birthday of the legendary manager who gave you your identity. You can’t invent a storyline like that."

"Every United supporter fortunate enough to witness and remember those months will remember the anxiety and sheer jubilation of those moments on the journey which culminated in that ultimate moment on May 26th 1999."

"It was an achievement earned in the most dramatic fashion in a golden era of competition domestically and Europe. They’ll try to tell you otherwise - but a contemporary treble could not be the same in terms of sporting narrative or competition."

"**addition to earlier tweet in the thread, 'occasionally those runners up will win some of the trophies' (you’ll see where I meant to add it, lol.)"

"These days an English team is chasing a treble or even quadruple every season, it’s so predictable that by February we have long thinkpieces about why 8 individuals from any of these random teams are better than the United treble team. They are the standard, and they will forever be the standard. Because it’s not just about what you win, it’s about the way you win it."