I think a few people on this thread are trying to be a little bit too clever.
At no point in that 'explanation' does it state that this article was a joke or a parody.
It states it was written 'light hearted, a bit tongue in cheek, opening and welcoming'.
There is a clear difference between something being written in such a style and something being a joke, a parody, a pastiche or a piss take of similar articles or phenomenon.
It isn't a piss take, it is a shit article written with the sole intention hooking people who have no previous interest in the club and giving them some sort of knowledge with which to watch the cup final. All in the hope that it may lead to a small percentage of them becoming "fans of the brand".
The fact that it is written in a light hearted manner does not detract from that or suddenly transform it into a withering, ironic piss take.
If you think it is a piss of the rags then I suggest that you are hopelessly mistaken. Far from taking the piss out of the 'rag-esque' attitude that you think it is, it is actually evidence of such an attitude here - albeit disguised as light hearted.
Of course, all the publicity is a complete over reaction and slightly mad. In the scheme of things it is absolutely nothing and not worthy of note. But make no mistake that the intention behind the article was much more "promote the brand" than "take the piss out of rags." (Unless the writer is the worst comedy writer in history) And this sort of priority, desperation to attract people who have little interest in City - often at the expense of the long term fan - (which some on this thread seem to thing is very ragish) is more than alive and well at the higher levels within this club
