Media Thread 2020/21

Status
Not open for further replies.
burning blue soul said:
I agree with every word you say, every last one.

But, what is right and what is true doesn't always transpose into what is accepted (or spun). Football is not racing.
Football was born in the working class suburbs of Northern England. Racing is most certainly not a working class sport, in fact racing has a very rich Arabian history (well, the animals do, anyway). Horses for courses (if you will excuse the pun).
Arabian interest in racing is encouraged and welcome, for those into their 'istry stables! ;)
Prem Football is, these days, held to a higher degree of inspection of owner identity than ever before. As usual the red pricks kicked all that off with celebrity wanker owners doing keepie-ups in the ctr circle in the 90s!!!
Then in roles Roman at Chelsea and you have a guy "in it for the love of Chelsea and Football. Just look at how much love-money he throws at Chelsea"
An owner who is absent is automatically perceived as suspect by other fans and media. It's bullshit, but to quote 3 guys from Queen's, NY "It's like that, and that's the way it is, huh!!!"
Click to expand...

Distinction without a difference.

The Queen owns a number of racehorses and has done for decades. Are they state owned?
 
Here is a story for you David Conn or any interested journalist:

The links between Vichai, King Power, Leicester City and the Thai Junta. Of course there's no commercial or political angle so they don't pursue stories like this. They ere more than interested when Thaksin took over City, and he was elected.

Bangkok Post (old story)
 
  • Like
Reactions: mat
Chris in London said:
No, that’s not right.

The main problem is security. Sheikh Mansour is a very high profile target. There would have to be extremely thorough security measures put in place for any prearranged visit. It’s a very big deal. Every indication we get is that he is emotionally as well as financially invested in City. Even his son’s birthday cake was City.

Of course, he can do it under the radar, like he did when we first played Barcelona. But again there are diplomatic issues that arise from a person very close to the head of government of one country making flying unannounced visits to another. City may be a private investment but Sheikh Mansour is not a private individual.
Click to expand...
Like I say, there is 'how it should be' and 'how it is'.

You are preferring the 'how it should be' route.

If the owner of the club is too important a person to travel to another country (modern, western, non-conflict country, btw) then there is a problem with the ownerships approach to a community based sporting entity.

You just can't have it both ways. Fuck me! Rent Boy Roman must have a line of folk out to get him on a regular basis, but he still managed to attend games, in fact use it as his own personal sales pitch to his customers!!

I don't see how this could not be used in the same fashion by our owner.

P.s. it's a very nice touch, but don't try and convince me his son only had 1 birthday cake, btw!!! He is invested in the club, no doubt, but he is also a business man.
 
Marvin said:
Here is a story for you David Conn or any interested journalist:

The links between Vichai, King Power, Leicester City and the Thai Junta. Of course there's no commercial or political angle so they don't pursue stories like this. They ere more than interested when Thaksin took over City, and he was elected.

Bangkok Post (old story)
Click to expand...
The Guardian were deleting every reference to this in their below the line comments over the weekend

Including my comment asking why they were deleting such references
 
Chris in London said:
No, that’s not right.

The main problem is security. Sheikh Mansour is a very high profile target. There would have to be extremely thorough security measures put in place for any prearranged visit. It’s a very big deal. Every indication we get is that he is emotionally as well as financially invested in City. Even his son’s birthday cake was City.

Of course, he can do it under the radar, like he did when we first played Barcelona. But again there are diplomatic issues that arise from a person very close to the head of government of one country making flying unannounced visits to another. City may be a private investment but Sheikh Mansour is not a private individual.
Click to expand...
Sorry but this is nonsense. IF Sheikh Mansour wanted to come to a game all he'd need to do is pick up the phone call 0161 676 7770 and he'd have a crack team of security experts on site within minutes
 
StillBluessinceHydeRoad said:
Sorry but this isn't the case because they are not concerned in the slightest in justifying anything or anybody. Their sole concern is to criticise City and anything connected with City. The truth isn't any concern of theirs either - if the truth won't provide any grounds for criticism lies will do just as well and they don't have to feel embarrassed at all about a good dose of hypocrisy. Liverpool go to Dubai for warm weather training? Arsenal get revenue from Dubai? United from a Saudi Bank, Aeroflot? Bugger that, they'll just keep quiet on that. The aim is to put the boot into City not to give a damn about human rights, fairness or any of that crap. Don't mention anything that shows the rags or dipperpool in a negative light: if they don't mention any of that, no-one else will ask any awkward questions.
Click to expand...
Good post as usual.

Keeping people employed who are paid to lie by rising to the click bait makes no sense to me.
Every lie has a double effect by getting encouraging replies from our enemies and unbelievably denial replies from blues.

Even the writers don't believe their fiction so laugh at their attempts to make a living by disguising fiction as journalism.
 
burning blue soul said:
In order to separate individual and state, the owner, Mansour himself, must be more visible at the stadium.
Maybe he will be at the chumps league final, but that should only be the start.
Regular visits to the games is what is needed.
Until that happens our ownership will be perceived as government state, by proxy. No matter what the reality is.
Click to expand...
Good idea, but he is a royal and as such is liable to all sorts of protocols. It's like Liz nipping down to Loftus Rd to watch QPR on a Tuesday night. It cant happen.
 
burning blue soul said:
As I say, different rules apply between a high class sport like horse racing, and a working class sport like football.
Click to expand...
Did you actually think about what you were posting?

In the real world, ownership of an asset is ownership of an asset. Your car doesn't stop being your car if you aren't posh enough.

You are seeking to justify the double standards of those hostile members of a media that treats the ownership in a personal capacity of an asset by one member of a royal family in one way, and another member of a different royal family in another way. There is no difference between the two cases, none at all.

The 'different rules' you mention don't actually exist outside your own head.
 
mrbelfry said:
Sorry but this is nonsense. IF Sheikh Mansour wanted to come to a game all he'd need to do is pick up the phone call 0161 676 7770 and he'd have a crack team of security experts on site within minutes
Click to expand...
Yes but unfortunately 4 years ago he made the mistake of ringing the ticket office, after he had been on hold for 25 minutes he sacked it off and hasn't renewed his Cityzens card since
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top