PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

Every time I look at this thread, another 500 or more posts have gone under the bridge, and still no final answer. It is like waiting to see who the next Archbishop of Canterbury will be.
 
Brightwell Bros. said:
Without completely outing myself, I work in a close enough part of academia that I can say with absolute confidence that I'm surprised this cleared ethical review and that the research question/methods/analysis is as clearly designed to produce the narrative the author(s) wanted to produce as I've ever seen in social science research (which is saying something). Scraping an FA cup final thread and using the lack of discussion of financial ownership (?!) as evidence of your hypothesis is shocking really.
Click to expand...

Yes, like a lot of academic "research" these days, they seem to have decided what they want to report and then chosen the best way to get there.

I wrote a long critique of the paper and why there is much better content on the forum discussing ownership and "sportswashing", or rather the lack of it, than you would find in those three threads. In fact, I would say as good a discussion of the topic as you would find anywhere, and much, much better than most.

But then I thought what the fuck and deleted it. Too long.

I haven't seen one decent paper that properly discusses who owns City and why, and whether the term "sportswashing" should be applied to Mansour's motivation. They all start from the fact that City is a sportswashing project for Abu Dhabi and go from there. It's horrendously weak intellectually.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top