Media Discussion - 2023/24

Status
Not open for further replies.
Platt Lane 59 said:
A logical thought, everyone would imagine ?
However, since City started dominating English football (starting around 2016 ?), the media stated to realise that we could really dominate and "own" the Premier League. This was against the wishes of the Premier League under Scudamore.
Not sure when "sports washing" was generally adopted by the press, but this mysterious Arab-centric phrase seemed to transform City into the "enemy" which denied fair competition.
The "open and democratically" American-owned clubs obviously were seen as the correct type of owners by primarily, Sky and subsequently BT.
Individually, rival football fans generally admire City and their legends e.g. Aquero, Kompany, David Silva.
However, the current media do not want one dominant club. This is different to Liverpool's era as the top team, or even the initial Sky years when MUFC won many Premier League titles.
They cannot slag off Pep or (generally) the players performances and behaviour.
So the UAE owners are the evil enemy, which will be amplified if Newcastle really threaten the Red Shirts.
Ask the Red Shirt fans if they would accept a Qatari takeover ?
I would imagine most would no in public, but say yes, privately...
Click to expand...
Well the Paddy Power advert puts that in perspective
 
feedmpenzaandhewillscore said:
The City of Manchester stadium cost £115 million to construct for the Commonwealth Games in Manchester in 2002. We pay the City council £5.5 million in rent each year, 20 years in the stadium means that the council will have had £110 million from City.

The South stand extension cost £50 million in 2015 and the North stand extension plus hotel will cost £300 million. City have paid more than their fair share than what the initial outlay for the stadium was. What was Herbert expecting to happen with the City Of Manchester stadium? It gets built and used for athletics maybe once or twice a year and that’s it? That’s how venues like the Don Valley stadium now don’t exist.
Click to expand...
I think the deal also included that the council took a percentage of the takings above the final Maine rd capacity which I think was just over 35,000.
 
lastmanback said:
Someone watching blue moon forum.
Click to expand...
An interesting read but he references Delaney, Schindler, the Guardian and the Independent to support and underpin his findings. The academic article lacks balance and credibility as it fails to offer and present virtually any opposing, alternative viewpoint or argument. Which it should. Whoever wrote it will probably have received a B as a mark and he or she will be happy enough with that. However, it didn’t highlight or articulate anything that wasn’t already known and therefore doesn’t add to ‘the body of knowledge’.
I would have marked it a B minus at best.
 
lastmanback said:
Someone watching blue moon forum.
Click to expand...
In specific terms, individual journalists who have made frequent and/or prominent critiques of MCFC are often referred to by insulting nicknames by forum users. Their critiques are dismissed as ill-informed and the product of an obsessive vendetta against the club.

How do they equate calling a whole support base 'rats' an informed critique? Maybe they should offer their critiques to patrons in a City boozer, they'd have more than a critique in the form of hurtful words to worry about.
 
PPT said:
An interesting read but he references Delaney, Schindler, the Guardian and the Independent to support and underpin his findings. The academic article lacks balance and credibility as it fails to offer and present virtually any opposing, alternative viewpoint or argument. Which it should. Whoever wrote it will probably have received a B as a mark and he or she will be happy enough with that. However, it didn’t highlight or articulate anything that wasn’t already known and therefore doesn’t add to ‘the body of knowledge’.
I would have marked it a B minus at best.
Click to expand...
I’d give it a C+, as in more than a ****.
 
PPT said:
An interesting read but he references Delaney, Schindler, the Guardian and the Independent to support and underpin his findings. The academic article lacks balance and credibility as it fails to offer and present virtually any opposing, alternative viewpoint or argument. Which it should. Whoever wrote it will probably have received a B as a mark and he or she will be happy enough with that. However, it didn’t highlight or articulate anything that wasn’t already known and therefore doesn’t add to ‘the body of knowledge’.
I would have marked it a B minus at best.
Click to expand...
This chap and his article was discussed on radio this morning in Ireland.
 
PPT said:
An interesting read but he references Delaney, Schindler, the Guardian and the Independent to support and underpin his findings. The academic article lacks balance and credibility as it fails to offer and present virtually any opposing, alternative viewpoint or argument. Which it should. Whoever wrote it will probably have received a B as a mark and he or she will be happy enough with that. However, it didn’t highlight or articulate anything that wasn’t already known and therefore doesn’t add to ‘the body of knowledge’.
I would have marked it a B minus at best.
Click to expand...
Yes, quite a lob-sided article.
 
PPT said:
An interesting read but he references Delaney, Schindler, the Guardian and the Independent to support and underpin his findings. The academic article lacks balance and credibility as it fails to offer and present virtually any opposing, alternative viewpoint or argument. Which it should. Whoever wrote it will probably have received a B as a mark and he or she will be happy enough with that. However, it didn’t highlight or articulate anything that wasn’t already known and therefore doesn’t add to ‘the body of knowledge’.
I would have marked it a B minus at best.
Click to expand...
Its an excellent piece of scouse-washing.

*scouse-washing - the act of denigrating success by other clubs by any means necessary whilst ignoring their own historical misdeeds.
 
Last edited:
PPT said:
An interesting read but he references Delaney, Schindler, the Guardian and the Independent to support and underpin his findings. The academic article lacks balance and credibility as it fails to offer and present virtually any opposing, alternative viewpoint or argument. Which it should. Whoever wrote it will probably have received a B as a mark and he or she will be happy enough with that. However, it didn’t highlight or articulate anything that wasn’t already known and therefore doesn’t add to ‘the body of knowledge’.
I would have marked it a B minus at best.
Click to expand...

Gets an FO from me.
 
lastmanback said:
Someone watching blue moon forum.
Click to expand...

Very poor research with no academic merit whatsoever. Clearly researched and written with the authors' political and sporting bias embedded in order to reach pre-determined conclusion. You can tell that from words such as "concerning" which tells the reader that the researchers already have a view on the opinions expressed.

It surprises me that the authors have not disclosed any conflict of interest. That strikes me as intellectually dishonest and disqualifies it from serious consideration.
 
Maybe the dipps do have 1 person at uni then!

Mention Sprtwashing,MCFC and then find an event with 2 evil actors in the world and bingo Hatchet job done :
"It is therefore a prominent vehicle for attempts to exercise soft power on an international stage. Indeed, prominent examples of such attempts litter the pages of twentieth-century history, such as Mussolini and Hitler parading the strength of their fascist regimes through hosting the 1934 FIFA World Cup and the 1936 Summer Olympics respectively"
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top