The women's world cup is the only footy the BBC can get hold of these days so it's got to be centre stage. What would they do with the hordes of presenters, pundits and reporters if they couldn't splurge a handful of tv licences on getting their arses over to Oz, when the studio at Salford is overrun with the local bandits.Apparently the quarter final of the woman's world cup is more important than the start of the Premier League!
Yeah, they have always done these meaningless 'Jose's shoes cost more than Burton Albions main stand' type comparisons. I thought the chat from the pundits after the caption was pretty fair last night. None of the 'unlimited funds' hyperbole, just how Pep values a good defence and isn't just a one trick 'tika-taka' manager.Did tv companies do similar when we didn't have any money?
Good luck mate.I’m not letting go about Stone’s latest jaunt to promote United in the USA and them not reporting the City game v Yokohama.
Thank you for your response. My point was about the bias in your reporting between City and United games. Yes you put a report up three hours after the game had ended. For the United tour you sent your journalist to the USA, as you have now for many years to promote their friendly games and report live from the half full stadium whilst City played in front of three sold out stadia.
So I want to know do you receive payment from MUFC for the endless promotion of their friendly games on your website?
Or do we, the licence payers, fund the disparity in reports and the travel for Stone follow his team to friendly games?
Would I need to submit a FOI request for this information?
Also you did not address my final question relating to why I should continue to fund the BBC if I cannot find information about my team on your website and can only find promotional content on United.
I wouldn’t give Sly the steam off my piss.Yearly Sky sports subscription €400
Man City season ticket for OAP + Dodgy box €380
Put that up yez cunts
I know. It’s fun though. :).Good luck mate.
From personal experience, the arrogant and corrupt, publically funded nonce protecting organisation will in all likelyhood continue to fob you off with bog standard patronising replies which don't address your questions.
Fair play to you for not letting it go.
It was Headline books in 1994 and my Mercer biography had come out and was doing well. I put a proposal together which was to document the story of City from after Mercer to the Lee takeover. Headline invited me down to London and I got on really well with the commissioning editor (a MUFC fan). He told me how much they loved my writing style and so on and I thought it was all going forward. Then he said ‘only trouble is it’s not going to attract non-City fans. It would be better if you could change the emphasis. Make it a comparison with United’s success. No matter how well City do they’re always in the shadow of big, successful United. Tell the reader how they’ve ruined your life.’@Gary James has posted on here before that, back in the mid-1990s, he was looking for a publisher for what was effectively a proposed City version of Fever Pitch, and received an offer conditional on him focusing the text on the hapless Blues forever flailing in the shadow of their mighty red neighbours. He refused but Shindler didn't, the resulting book being published a year or two later.
I believe that Shindler's book shifted well over 100,000 copies, making it comfortably the biggest selling City book (if you can class it as that) of the lot.
Yearly Sky sports subscription €400
Man City season ticket for OAP + Dodgy box €380
Put that up yez cunts
Wolves are skint, struggling to meet FFP and sold best players so I am looking forward to the stats showing money spent by the Rags v Wolves or a total 11 cost showing around a 500 million in difference in spend between the 2 clubs.Did tv companies do similar when we didn't have any money?
People working for City aren’t necessarily fans, in fact most probably are not. What pisses us off won’t bother them, if it doesn’t impact the bottom line or their specific role and objectives they won’t give a shit, in fact they probably think it’s funny.Wolves are skint, struggling to meet FFP and sold best players so I am looking forward to the stats showing money spent by the Rags v Wolves or a total 11 cost showing around a 500 million in difference in spend between the 2 clubs.
We all know this won’t happen nor will any stats when Arsenal/Rags etc play Burnley.
if our club had a decent media team they should be asking Sky etc why money stats are always shown for our games but never Utd who have spent more.
Seriously ask the question officially as a club and demand an answer