CAS judgement: UEFA ban overturned, City exonerated (report out p603)

[SilverFox2]

Read Alan Rusbridger's book 'Breaking News'. It's quite interesting and he seems to have been someone who wasn't afraid to take on powerful interests. He guided The Guardian to be one of the leading digital news sites but it's content has gone downhill since Kath Viner took over as Editor (and blocked his nomination to the trustees of the Scott Trust).

But in the book he talks about the Telegraph and how it's basically in hock to its major advertisers. It refused to run a story about wrongdoing by HSBC that every other paper ran, because HSBC spent a lot of money advertising with the Telegraph. He tells how the Telegraph ran other stories that had the Advertising Director screaming at the editorial staff, which were subsequently removed or significantly altered.

A few years ago, at a Manchester Football Writers Festival event, Oli Kay (then at The Times), David Mooney and Paul Lake were part of a panel talking about young players. Afterwards I got to have a chat to them. I think Dave Mooney was part of this conversation but Paul & Joanne Lake certainly were and we got talking about where journalism had gone. Kay said that he could write the piece of his life but if it didn't get enough clicks, his editor would kick his backside all round the newsroom. That's the state of our current, so-called "quality" media.

Thanks for that info Colin.
A few years ago I remember the FT sold out to the Nikkai despite being 75 percent along the road to being fully digital. They claimed the pace of digital change meant they would never catch up so must sell.

Yes, I will get the book you recommend, apologies if my thoughts are not original but as an older manufacturing guy I understand the need to be profitable or go out of business.
Whatever the sector of business the advice should be that if you are judged by accountants you had better think like an accountant.
The problem now of course, as Sam Lee is finding out, is that editors have a tool to measure performance so matching their articles to the the views of the researchers must be applied.

 

[slbsn]

Not sure if sarcastic @projectriver

I wasn't being sarcastic.

It's a decent, largely uncontroversial article (more or less). The one point that irks is the old City selected the Chairman which is nonsense and would have not been a significant issue - it is simply the case that UEFA also approved of Rui Santos as chair. In fairness Matt Slater did acknowledge the error in the comments "Peter, I’m on holiday and away from my notes & laptop, but the word “select” was an innocent mistake introduced at the editing stage as we tried to condense my 5,000+ words into something shorter. Not much point trying to turn a report that’s far too long for most people to bother reading into a story that’s too long to read, as well! Believe it or not, we do worry (a bit) about word counts. But that word should now be replaced with “nominate” as per my earlier response (when I thought we had published that). It’s a similar answer for your point about UEFA’s list of requested witnesses, except that was me who did the editing there."

If you want to see or hear partial, Castles on the Transfer pod is a work of astonishing bias.

 

[BringBackSwales]

@gordondaviesmoustache likes this post.

I get thrilled when I get a like from GDM, but this doesn’t count!

 

[M18CTID]

Well, it's been brewing ever since I observed the nauseating, hysterical, hyperbolic glee with which the football press responded to the original Der Spiegel stories based on the Football Leaks materials. I've been waiting ever since to have my say once the matter was properly disposed of, a moment that arrived with this week's publication of the full CAS report.

It probably also doesn't help that I'm currently in a Russian hospital undergoing treatment for Covid and associated pneumonia. I can't say I felt in much of a mood to soft-soap my views, to be honest. (I'm doing fine and am much improved compared with my rather pitiful state earlier in the week, thanks.)

I sensed there was something wrong when reading the start of your epic post yesterday but didn’t want to pry. Anyway, glad you’re on the mend Peter.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Winter is a dilletante. He ingratiates himself with whoever is most successful at the time.
Always thought there was an element of the “Toff ironically enjoying slumming it with the proles” about him. A bit like GDM on here...

Winter’s man of the people routine is nowhere near as well-developed as mine.

 

[Gorton_Tubster]

He repeatedly said that the club would be found guilty - which reveals his true disposition towards the club, and by extension, its supporters.

He was conspicuously wrong on that count of course, something which he’s been making a habit of for some time.

So he dislikes the club and is poor at reading and understanding situations; his writing style is a little insipid too. All of which makes him pitifully equipped to write and opine about Manchester City.

So yes, he’s a wankstain.

Have you got a link to any of them articles. Genuinely am interested because every now and then I catch his convo's with united fans and he isn't as city-friendly as we comes across to us... I might be wrong and I do like his stuff on city but I been thinking twice about him recently.

 

[1961_vintage]

The thing is, you've shown us what you are now, haven't you? We knew all along, of course, but you used to try and gaslight us. You reported on us fairly and we were too thin-skinned to see it, you used to say. That won't wash any longer, will it? Act as PR shills for our enemies in the way you seem to want to. Fine. Don't expect a reaction from us other than utterly fucking despising you for it, though.

Magnificent.

The duplicitous football governing bodies and their contemptible media cohorts all have something else in common - they are out in open ground. As are the obnoxious nine.

Wishing you a full and speedy recover Petrusha.

 

[M18CTID]

Hmmmmm.....some blues appear to be liking this tweet but is it a harmless attempt at a joke or is he being a snide twat?

 

[LongsightM13]

I wasn't being sarcastic.

It's a decent, largely uncontroversial article (more or less). The one point that irks is the old City selected the Chairman which is nonsense and would have not been a significant issue - it is simply the case that UEFA also approved of Rui Santos as chair. In fairness Matt Slater did acknowledge the error in the comments "Peter, I’m on holiday and away from my notes & laptop, but the word “select” was an innocent mistake introduced at the editing stage as we tried to condense my 5,000+ words into something shorter. Not much point trying to turn a report that’s far too long for most people to bother reading into a story that’s too long to read, as well! Believe it or not, we do worry (a bit) about word counts. But that word should now be replaced with “nominate” as per my earlier response (when I thought we had published that). It’s a similar answer for your point about UEFA’s list of requested witnesses, except that was me who did the editing there."

If you want to see or hear partial, Castles on the Transfer pod is a work of astonishing bias.

On the subject of the panel chair, I’ve seen a few people posting that they would only intervene where the other two judges were not in agreement. So that, effectively, all their findings and decisions are by majority rather than unanimous. Do you know if this is the case? Some of the usual suspects have been making much of the fact that the wording of the judgement makes repeated reference to a majority

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Have you got a link to any of them articles. Genuinely am interested because every now and then I catch his convo's with united fans and he isn't as city-friendly as we comes across to us... I might be wrong and I do like his stuff on city but I been thinking twice about him recently.

He actually said it in a number of podcasts so I can’t provide the link as such (although he may have reduced it to writing too tbf) but I’m sure what I’m saying will be corroborated by others.