Manchester United net spending has now out-stripped Man City in the last ten years

Manchester United are rapidly running out of sticks with which to beat old rivals Manchester City.

The Blues have not only made a mockery of Sir Alex Ferguson’s boast that they would never be top dogs in Manchester in his lifetime, they are also threatening to establish the kind of dynasty that saw the Reds rule English football for the best part of two decades.

Under Pep Guardiola, City have already chalked up three Premier League title triumphs in four years, and have daylight between themselves and Liverpool as they seek to make that four out of five.

And now new figures have emerged that knock down the United fans’ assertion that City have simply bought their way to success, that their glorious sequence of trophies has been the inevitable consequence of throwing “oil money” at the problem.

Research by the CIES Football Observatory has shown that not only have United got a greater net transfer spend than City over the past decade, they have the highest figure in Europe.

Net spend is a controversial way of assessing a club’s health in terms of transfers - it is calculated by subtracting the amount earned on selling players from the sum spent on bringing them in, and so shows which clubs are being smart in the market and which are just splurging.

Many people dismiss it, with justification, because it fails to acknowledge the value of holding on to your best players.

For example, Liverpool’s net spend is heavily influenced by the £142million sale of Philippe Coutinho. City could have matched that by selling a major star like Sergio Aguero or David Silva but have preferred continuity and the benefit of keeping your best players.

But in a direct comparison of City and United, net spend is valid, because City have NOT made