Bottom of the league

Does anyone give a shit what the rag infested media think?

They can shove their arbitrary table up their shitty arses. The only table that matters is the league at the end of the season.

Net spend, ethics, ball possession, etc all meaningless.
 
I can just imagine what these cretins were thinking in the office that day. It's getting quiet out there, the public are starting to forget about City. Let's create a table based on topics such as Fifa regulations and human rights. Of course we'll start with those Mancs Man City on the bottom, add the other top teams somewhere near the top with the eventual winners being that friendly, family, shoe string budget club Fulham.
 
Just read this. What a load of bollocks. First of all it's from one of those seemingly numerous Human Rights groups, (seemingly one that monitors FIFA), which is usually at least as interested in self-promotion as in genuinely solving a problem.

Second, it ignores the fact that our owners don't project any beliefs they may have onto the club. We've long supported LGBT causes as a club and have no issues with gender equality, with a well funded and supported women's team plus a number of women in senior positions at the club.

But it should be the club making these points, not us on a forum.
 
Last edited:
maybe we didn't have enough condoned hacking, maybe we didn't ensure sympathetic folks were in positions of power across football and lobby for rivals to be banned from Europe whilst ensuring the authorities running and refereeing were sympathetic and co-operative, whilst condoning "legal" (and other...) doping of their own players and ensuring opposition players helped them out when needed.
 
Who awarded the points Fenway Sports Group?
How many points do you get for your supporters thieving there way across the continent or murdering opposing fans?
Is the trophy a big yankee candle?
 
What a bunch of shite. Our ownership means we are unethical. Fuck sake, how pathetic.

from the guardian.

Languishing at the bottom of the table were Man City on just 20 points, with Wolves a place above them on 57 points. Man City lost points because of its “strong links to the regime and rulers of Abu Dhabi”. Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed al-Nahyan, a senior son in Abu Dhabi’s ruling dynasty, bought the club in 2008 and his investment company has a majority stake in the vehicle that owns the club.

The report judged that the club’s connections to the regime meant it scored low for women’s rights, LGBTQ+ issues, religious and political rights, as well as losing points in the environmental category for its sponsorship by the Etihad airline.

words fail me.
 
Saddleworth2 said:
What a bunch of shite. Our ownership means we are unethical. Fuck sake, how pathetic.

from the guardian.

Languishing at the bottom of the table were Man City on just 20 points, with Wolves a place above them on 57 points. Man City lost points because of its “strong links to the regime and rulers of Abu Dhabi”. Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed al-Nahyan, a senior son in Abu Dhabi’s ruling dynasty, bought the club in 2008 and his investment company has a majority stake in the vehicle that owns the club.

The report judged that the club’s connections to the regime meant it scored low for women’s rights, LGBTQ+ issues, religious and political rights, as well as losing points in the environmental category for its sponsorship by the Etihad airline.

words fail me.
Click to expand...

So, in essence, we were bottom before they even thought of putting it together and no matter what the club being judged do in all those areas, it was a fait accomplis
 
Saddleworth2 said:
What a bunch of shite. Our ownership means we are unethical. Fuck sake, how pathetic.

from the guardian.

Languishing at the bottom of the table were Man City on just 20 points, with Wolves a place above them on 57 points. Man City lost points because of its “strong links to the regime and rulers of Abu Dhabi”. Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed al-Nahyan, a senior son in Abu Dhabi’s ruling dynasty, bought the club in 2008 and his investment company has a majority stake in the vehicle that owns the club.

The report judged that the club’s connections to the regime meant it scored low for women’s rights, LGBTQ+ issues, religious and political rights, as well as losing points in the environmental category for its sponsorship by the Etihad airline.

words fail me.
Click to expand...
Good job Bernard Manning is dead or they'd have docked us another 5 points for having him as a fan.
 
knuckles said:
I try not to get wound up by what other clubs do, but this was particularly ruthless by arse, talk about ethics, these were real people, probably all living in the local area around the ground and probably all arse fans. The mascot did this as a part time job to add to the fun of match day (whether you like mascots or not). It can’t have saved all that much money for them, and certainly much less than some of the players annual wages that can’t even get on their bench, ethics mr arse!
Click to expand...
Don’t forget the arse as we know them today, the legendary ‘invincibles’ and the lovely stadium were all financed by the money made by Danny fiszman from his diamond mines in apartheid South Africa, where as we all know, the miners (almost exclusively black) were treated with utmost kindness and generosity and led cheerful happy lives, as was to be expected in such a fair and just society.
 
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