In January 2010, Roberto Mancini earnestly expressed his belief that Manchester City could depose bitter local rivals Manchester United to become the world's biggest club.
At the time his comments were met with outright ridicule by the "Red" half of the city, who dismissed City's riches and chose to indulge in a cherished extracurricular hobby (outside of celebrating their own success): commemorating City's snowballing failure to win a trophy.
How could a club that they had always warmly associated with misery, desperation and failure possibly usurp them, with or without the pipeline of oil-soaked cash coming from their owners in Abu Dhabi?
It seemed that even the average City fan's happiness could only ever be a teasing, temporary blip before some unimaginable humiliation was unloaded upon them by the wryly ironic football gods.
And then, to their disbelief, City won a trophy. The banner on United's hallowed Stretford End reading "35 years..." would have to come down.
Seasoned terrace chants would have to be retired. Their stock retort to "Blue" family members, colleagues and friends about 35 years of mounting torment evaporated as Yaya Toure slammed his shot past Stoke City to grab the FA Cup.
And in one swift, swipe of his Ivorian boot, the debate about the balance of power, not just within the city of Manchester but also within the context of the English Premier League and beyond, was re-opened.
The cup success acted as a catalyst as City went on a strong surge in the Premier League, culminating in a third place finish and subsequent qualification for the Champions League, which only served to further fuel the debate.
 
It would be churlish (not to mention pathologically myopic) for even the most passionate United fan to deny City's resurgence.Financially, the club are in a different league to the rest of football—although this advantage will inevitably be curtailed by the impending Financial Fair Play initiative.
City are now seen as credible contenders for next season's English title. They have a squad packed with a potent mixture of powerful and talented internationals and a young manager who, despite his detractors, has a proven track record of winning silverware.
They are well supported and have shed the size-able burden of those fallow years. City are no longer prepared to play the luckless local laughing stock prone to schizophrenic bouts of manic optimism and bottomless depression. The Blue Moon is rising.
But none of this means that the two club's fortunes will dovetail, with City in the ascendancy while United falter. True, City’s emergence is the likeliest challenge to United’s continued dominance of English football.
Similarly, in the mid 1990s a decent Blackburn Rovers team fuelled by Jack Walker’s millions and Alan Shearer’s goals were seen as the long-term threat to United's crown.
Although Rovers pipped United to the league title in 1995, success would prove fleeting, as they soon slipped into terminal decline before their eventual relegation from the top flight.
Likewise, Arsene Wenger’s Arsenal posed a significant threat over the best part of a decade with teams built around the likes of Bergkamp, Henry, Vieira and Petit.
However, it is now seven years since the Gunners won a league title—which equates to roughly half of Wenger’s overall tenure. To the average Arsenal fan, this barren run probably feels much, much longer.
In the meantime, their Mancunian rivals have won four titles and one Champions League trophy.

Will Manchester City Finish Above United in 2012?

Submit Vote vote to see results
Arsenal’s diminishing influence on the destination of the Premier League title coincided with the rise of Chelsea who, backed by Abramovich’s billions and Mourinho’s charismatic leadership, looked likeliest of all to permanently usurp Fergie's boys.They won successive titles in 2005 and 2006 before being derailed by a self-defeating battle of egos between owner and manager.
Therefore, if recent history teaches us anything about supposed shifts in the balance of power, it is that they are relatively short-lived and end with United reasserting their dominance.
If anything, the strength of the challenge seems to galvanise Ferguson, spurring the insatiable Scot onto further glory. One gets the impression that he is relishing the prospect of overpowering the "noisy neighbours."
If there is a threat to United, it comes from within. Ferguson’s remarkable era of success will surely end in the next three or four seasons, leaving a vacuum at the heart of the club.
Embittered by decades spent floundering in their rival's illustrious shadow, City fans are eagerly awaiting an Old Trafford apocalypse and are convinced that Ferguson’s retirement will herald the kind of freefall that saw them relegated from the top flight in the wake of the great Sir Matt Busby's departure.
There are, however, telling differences between the end of these two eras. Busby left behind an ageing, bickering squad in need of an overhaul. Ferguson looks set to leave behind his final great team, a young, vibrant group full of composure, class and ability.
And his successor will come to a club with a strong infrastructure, an excellent youth side, the best coaches and a prolific scouting network that stretches from Manchester to Mexico. Everything necessary will be in place for more success.
Football has an uncanny ability to make a mockery of predictions, the game is too unpredictable to allow any real prescience. Despite what seasoned experts might say, the favourites do lose, the star man doesn't always light up the World Cup and some clubs do win trophies with kids.
So rumours of United's demise, the same rumours that circulate every few seasons, are based on little more than conjecture. For now they remain the team to beat.
And you can rest assured that Roberto Mancini will be drilling the same message into his troops come August.