Bluemoon Under The Cartel's Irish Academic Microscope?

[Blue Til Death]

wouldn't give a fuck if Pol Pot owned the club this week as long as we smash those red fuckers

Our illustrious owners are far worse than Mr Pot, if you believe the morons who post complete and utter shit about our club on a daily basis ..!

 

[johnny crossan]

Looked at his history on Twitter, its becomes clearer and clearer.

what account did you search?

 

[Blue Til Death]

I would happily have a face to face interview with the **** to put him straight on a few million inconsistencies and utter fuckin lies he’s spouting …
It would be an interview he’d never forget, that’s for sure ..
Fed up with these clowns having a free reign to spin their web of bullshit about our club, without any comebacks ..!

 

[VOOMER]

what account did you search?

https://twitter.com/gcooney93?lang=en

 

[mcfcphil]

“…that led is (sic) to to (sic) the question, ‘How do fans legitimise this style of behaviour? How do they legitimise supporting an ownership connected to human rights abuses and activities widely seen as unethical?’”

That isn’t an academic basis for a study because it presumes that fans do legitimise supporting the ownership and that the ownership requires being legitimised.

A lot of people will say it’s obvious that City fans display the above behaviour but that’s not how academia works. You start off with a question and use evidence to answer it through an objective process.

This clown has started with the answer and worked backwards from there.

 

[kaz7]

If your studying this thread professors please go fuck yourselves and get a life

They need to get laid, he probably has never had a girlfriend in his life

 

[roubaixtuesday]

wouldn't give a fuck if Pol Pot owned the club this week as long as we smash those red fuckers

A very succinct summary of exactly what the research showed!

 

[johnny crossan]

https://twitter.com/gcooney93?lang=en

OK thanks, definitely a dipper but he's not the lead author of the article though who is Colum Kearns.

 

[domalino]

The idea that you can go into any thread on bluemoon and find a thorough debate about the ownership is pretty absurd. Those debates certainly do happen, but 16 years after the takeover all of us have made up our minds on the situation and once you've done that, it's not really relevant unless the ownership becomes a news story.

I don't prefix every comment in the Haaland performance thread with an update on my latest thinking about the Kafala system and theocratic hereditary monarchies.

I also think if you were specifically looking for the most outrageous comments you could find to justify a preconceived narrative, a reactive, we all know an emotional thread like the CAS verdict is where you'd find them or the post match thread where a journalist tried to overshadow a domestic treble by accusing Pep of taking under the table payments.

 

[Groke]

“…that led is (sic) to to (sic) the question, ‘How do fans legitimise this style of behaviour? How do they legitimise supporting an ownership connected to human rights abuses and activities widely seen as unethical?’”

That isn’t an academic basis for a study because it presumes that fans do legitimise supporting the ownership and that the ownership requires being legitimised.

A lot of people will say it’s obvious that City fans display the above behaviour but that’s not how academia works. You start off with a question and use evidence to answer it through an objective process.

This clown has started with the answer and worked backwards from there.

more a demidick than academic