The big Liverpool history myth exposed as they prepare for Man City showdown

The narrative for Sunday’s showdown between arguably the two best teams on the planet is being set; good old organically-grown Liverpool against outrageous oil-fuelled Manchester City. It’s the traditionalists against the nouveau riche, the club that does things “the right way” against the cheats and mega-spenders, the club that “means more” against one that means less.

That narrative, however, is largely espoused by the cultish element of Liverpool’s varied support base, and cheered on by blinkered associates who serve as media pundits. And of course, there are serious elements of truth in there.

There is no doubt City would not be in the position they currently occupy without the capital investment they enjoyed once Sheikh Mansour took over the club in 2008. The owners pumped money into the club, and the regeneration of east Manchester, overhauling the infrastructure and commercial departments as well as the academy and first team squad, to make it the free-standing entity it is today; a club that rode the pandemic better than most because its owners do not demand dividends and paybacks and because they have elite teams, both on the pitch and in the business offices.

ALSO READ: The sheer hypocrisy behind Liverpool and United moaning about City

But the more fanatical sections of Liverpool’s fanbase — not all, it must be stressed — cannot accept that these Manchester upstarts should be allowed to compete with them. Rather than relishing the rivalry, they talk about asterisks being placed next to City’s trophy wins to denote that they were not won within the rules. Which they were, unless the ongoing Premier League investigation finds startling new evidence.

The idea that Liverpool grew naturally, fertilised by that