Are City the only club to have received ‘controversial’ finance?

[cleavers]

Same here; saw the name but can't remember why I know it

Did he used to post on MCIVTA many years ago ? Name rings a bell for me too.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Did he used to post on MCIVTA many years ago ?

Yes. Ernie was a fixture on the MEN Online forum and in MCIVTA.

 

[EricBrooksGhost]

Did he used to post on MCIVTA many years ago ? Name rings a bell for me too.

Cheers.

 

[Thomas Hearns]

I would question the premise of the opening post.

I disagree with the notion of 'morally questionable'. I think it's a meaningless concept. All that matters is whether the funding is legal or not.

All else is neither here nor there.

This hits the nail on the head. Everything is morally questionable today in the tiny hypocritical minds of the snowflakes who shout loudest on social media.

Fuck em.

 

[M18CTID]

I would question the premise of the opening post.

I disagree with the notion of 'morally questionable'. I think it's a meaningless concept. All that matters is whether the funding is legal or not.

All else is neither here nor there.

Sorry Jack - we can't have Arsenal fans posting sensible comments on here ;)

 

[mancity2012_eamo]

I would question the premise of the opening post.

I disagree with the notion of 'morally questionable'. I think it's a meaningless concept. All that matters is whether the funding is legal or not.

All else is neither here nor there.

This hits the nail on the head. Everything is morally questionable today in the tiny hypocritical minds of the snowflakes who shout loudest on social media.

UNfortunately yes. This is the case.
The governing bodies who run football domestically and internationally are themselves morally questionable if you think about it.
Said it pages back. The whole morality/human rights issue is tribal oneupmanship and totally cheapens the real issues of human rights.
That's my opinion anyway.

 

[Shirley]

Did he used to post on MCIVTA many years ago ? Name rings a bell for me too.

Yes I now recall his posts on MCIVTA which were a godsend for me in those days, Ernie if my memory serves me correct was exiled in the US, an ex merchant navy man?

 

[Deleted member 77198]

Tifo has done another video on City, with another bait-like Anti-City title(much like "Are City the dirtiest PL team?" which I pulled them up on and got them to change). Much like that video the actual video content is a lot more balanced than the title they gave it suggests. Shame really because they make good videos, with well researched data but they are clearly lowering themselves to click baiting and choosing subjects to pander to a certain demographic(City hating boneheads).



I've replied again(couldn't help myself, thank god I don't have a twitter account) and suggested some revisions such as UEFA's amendments to the rules after City had already submitted their accounts in accordance to the original rules. Also suggested they've overlooked that broadcasting views have a greater importance to a sponsor than shirt sales(that's what the kitmaker deal is all about, where City has been shafted the most and where the next revenue boost will hopefully come from) world class, record breaking, title winning players beamed to millions(and millions) of homes wearing the sponsors name vs porky united shirt wearing rags with their arses hanging out the back of their trousers? Which image do they think the shirt sponsors want? They could have offered a full breakdown of what sponsorship revenue other clubs are getting, which may suggest our current deal is possibly still undervalued. Do we even have confirmation how much the renegotiated deal is worth? We could do a United and invent new things to sponsor "short sponsor", "sock sponsor".

Worth a watch anyway, it even has some digs at UEFA in it but we know Rags and Dippers will cover their ears for those bits.

I think they’re the best kind of titles for the side of the argument we’re on. It’s he kind of title that would draw in the idiot side of the argument and when they watch it their whole argument falls down in front of them

 

[Metalartin]

I think they’re the best kind of titles for the side of the argument we’re on. It’s he kind of title that would draw in the idiot side of the argument and when they watch it their whole argument falls down in front of them

I think you are overestimating the attention span of some of these idiots, who will just read the title and use that to confirm their beliefs, ignoring the whole video.

Fair play to them for changing the dirtiest team one though, they even replied to me on that complaint so they do read the comments for feedback. I didn't like that because of the amount of potential leg breakers that were being ignored and that could have be used to alter perceptions and say that we bring it on ourselves for playing dirty. Tactical fouls are not dirty at all and that was definitely out of place and it looks like they agreed in the end.

I just made some suggestions for this one because "controversial" is not really anything to get too upset about, I understand that much and I doubt they do edits but it would have been nice to include the fast one UEFA pulled on the club after they submitted their accounts, would have been nice to talk about us being one of the most watched teams under Pep when talking about sponsorship worth.

Have you seen the Glazers tifo vid? Much more negative than ours in my book.

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

Have to say I'm not a fan of this thread title? Why does the poster assume we have received morally questionable finance? Sounds like the kind of stuff that a Liverpool keyboard warrior would post?

 

[SebastianBlue]

 

[blueballs84]

If any club is owned by a rich capitalist, the money is almost certainly from a morally questionable source. Since almost all clubs are owned by rich capitalists I don't really see our situation as being unique in that regard.

 

[Fame Monster]

Have to say I'm not a fan of this thread title? Why does the poster assume we have received morally questionable finance? Sounds like the kind of stuff that a Liverpool keyboard warrior would post?

I get what you’re saying and I’ve changed it now but if you read the title in the context of everything else I and others have written on this thread including the OP, you can see that the argument is, even if our money can be proven to be an Abu Dhabi state venture (which it can’t), the way that we’re financed is no worse than almost every other top club in the world who take money from states with a much worse human rights record than the UAE, namely Arsenal (Rwanda), Liverpool (Malaysia), United (Russia, Turkey etc) yet this is never once mentioned in the media. Not even by the MEN @stuart brennan . My point is not that it’s immoral: my point is that the journalists who do bring it up never mention it in relation to other clubs.

 

[berryblue]

Real Madrid were bankrolled by the Madrid Government for decades despite Barcelona's constant protestations. UEFA did bugger all about it.

 

[Gary James]

I hope this is the correct thread to post the following................. City were actually founded by a woman, Anna Connell, daughter of the Vicar of St.Mark’s church, West Gorton in 1880, as a social project for local youths. The club was originally named St.Mark’s West Gorton, then Ardwick AFC, changing its name to Manchrester City in 1894.

Sadly, I hate to do this but Anna Connell did not found the club. It's a myth that I've been trying to kill off since 2010 (after falling for the story myself until I did some detailed research). My latest book, Manchester City Folklore, talks of a founder (identified by someone who was there in 1880) and of the first ground while my Manchester The City Years (published 2012) explained more on the Anna myth. Those opening chapters can be read for free via the 'look inside' feature on Amazon: Amazon product ASIN 0955812771. The new Folklore book is: Amazon product ASIN 1999900820
Anna was working in Preston for much of the 1870s when the sporting activities of St Mark's grew.

 

[Bluep*ss]

Sadly, I hate to do this but Anna Connell did not found the club. It's a myth that I've been trying to kill off since 2010 (after falling for the story myself until I did some detailed research). My latest book, Manchester City Folklore, talks of a founder (identified by someone who was there in 1880) and of the first ground while my Manchester The City Years (published 2012) explained more on the Anna myth. Those opening chapters can be read for free via the 'look inside' feature on Amazon: Amazon product ASIN 0955812771. The new Folklore book is: Amazon product ASIN 1999900820
Anna was working in Preston for much of the 1870s when the sporting activities of St Mark's grew.

Thanks Gary...........you are a spoilsport !.
Will they have to change the name of Anna Connell College...........?

 

[Gary James]

Thanks Gary...........you are a spoilsport !.
Will they have to change the name of Anna Connell College...........?

I wish they'd asked me at the time.

 

[Bluep*ss]

I wish they'd asked me at the time.

slightly off topic but did john Maddock(prevoius historyan) pass away in 2001 or thereabouts.
The reason I ask is that I have a letter from him (undated) in answer to my query about my first game at Maine Road.
I always thought it was 1954 but John put me right - it was 1953.
I received his reply about 6 months later. I do believe he was ill at the time.
Thanks

 

[Gary James]

slightly off topic but did john Maddock(prevoius historyan) pass away in 2001 or thereabouts.
The reason I ask is that I have a letter from him (undated) in answer to my query about my first game at Maine Road.
I always thought it was 1954 but John put me right - it was 1953.
I received his reply about 6 months later. I do believe he was ill at the time.
Thanks

Yes, about 2001-02. I have the date somewhere. He was great guy but suffered a little with health problems c.1999 onwards. Always had time to help people.