City & FFP | 2020/21 Accounts released | Revenues of £569.8m, £2.4m profit (p 2395)

[Chippy_boy]

It's about time now'that city start banning these c**ts from the stadium.

And that would stop them writing shit how exactly?

No,it wouldn't mate,not one bit....I just think they should fuck them off.

After 20 years of bullying journalists, it doesn't seem to have done United or Ferguson any harm looking at the media output relating to them.

Perhaps we really should try a more "controlling" approach and start to selectively withdraw invitations to press conferences. They'd soon get the message.

 

[waspish]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

We don't need the media Pelegrini gives them fcuk all in press conferences anyway just ban the fucking lot and let Pelegrín do his press conference to 1 sky corespondent which we have to do

 

[BigOscar]

And that would stop them writing shit how exactly?

No,it wouldn't mate,not one bit....I just think they should fuck them off.

After 20 years of bullying journalists, it doesn't seem to have done United or Ferguson any harm looking at the media output relating to them.

Perhaps we really should try a more "controlling" approach and start to selectively withdraw invitations to press conferences. They'd soon get the message.

Difference is, the journos needed United news from press conferences to survive, reporting that is how they made their money. They make their money off bad mouthing City, and they don't need to go to our press conferences or games for that. Don't doubt for a second that us banning one of these cretins wouldn't run in that journo's paper every week for a few years either.

The only obvious pro-active thing we could do, is start to actually take legal action when they go too far and they genuinely overstep the boundaries of the law. There isn;t much doubt that some of the things written about us have being genuinely libelous and we would of been well within our rights to take action. Even that though would probably get us slaughtered. We're a bit damned if we do, damned if we don't tbh. Our softly, softly approach has worked well with every journalist who it is going to work with, the remaining rags are never going to come around.

 

[mad4city]

Just to add, we PASSED the last monitoring period. Non story, everyone knew the staff were put under the CFG payment system - even UEFA.

But, but... but... that's no fun, is it? Not when the Daily Mail really, really want us to fail.

 

[mad4city]

No,it wouldn't mate,not one bit....I just think they should fuck them off.

After 20 years of bullying journalists, it doesn't seem to have done United or Ferguson any harm looking at the media output relating to them.

Perhaps we really should try a more "controlling" approach and start to selectively withdraw invitations to press conferences. They'd soon get the message.

Difference is, the journos needed United news from press conferences to survive, reporting that is how they made their money. They make their money off bad mouthing City, and they don't need to go to our press conferences or games for that. Don't doubt for a second that us banning one of these cretins wouldn't run in that journo's paper every week for a few years either.

The only obvious pro-active thing we could do, is start to actually take legal action when they go too far and they genuinely overstep the boundaries of the law. There isn;t much doubt that some of the things written about us have being genuinely libelous and we would of been well within our rights to take action. Even that though would probably get us slaughtered. We're a bit damned if we do, damned if we don't tbh. Our softly, softly approach has worked well with every journalist who it is going to work with, the remaining rags are never going to come around.

I'm beginning to think that the time is nigh to sue one or two of the staff journalists of a national paper. Don't care whom we pick on and neither do I care if we're in the right in doing so. We can well afford to tie these spiteful fuckers up in court but can they afford to respond? Word would soon get out the City have turned temperamentally litigious and they'd think twice before publishing such slanted articles as today's, again.

 

[prestonibbo_mcfc]

once again they are looking in to city <a class="postlink" href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2904903/Manchester-City-face-new-cash-probe-network-global-companies-sharing-financial-losses.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/footba ... osses.html</a> how about looking in to the other clubs

Because they only look into club account if you failed ffp and is probably why chelsea made a profit for the very first time under the Russian! For me all clubs accounts who are in Uefa competitions should looked at failing ffp or not..

The fact that Chelski made a profit for the first time is sufficiently suspicious to warrant an investigation into their accounts by UEFA.

Surely thay have to look at all accounts, else how would they know if you fail or pass FFP ?

 

[BlueRockape]

It's about time now'that city start banning these c**ts from the stadium.

And that would stop them writing shit how exactly?

So nothing will change...........Except these fukin leaches won't get free entry free food and drink that WE pay for.
And can't wright a commentary on a game they don't see

 

[r.soleofsalford]

It's about time now'that city start banning these c**ts from the stadium.

And that would stop them writing shit how exactly?

So nothing will change...........Except these fukin leaches won't get free entry free food and drink that WE pay for.
And can't write a commentary on a game they don't see

 

[JoeMercer'sWay]

It's about time now'that city start banning these c**ts from the stadium.

And that would stop them writing shit how exactly?

So nothing will change...........Except these fukin leaches won't get free entry free food and drink that WE pay for.
And can't wright a commentary on a game they don't see

they tend to not have watched the game anyway, judging by the lack of credit we seem to get from some of them.

 

[Chippy_boy]

After 20 years of bullying journalists, it doesn't seem to have done United or Ferguson any harm looking at the media output relating to them.

Perhaps we really should try a more "controlling" approach and start to selectively withdraw invitations to press conferences. They'd soon get the message.

Difference is, the journos needed United news from press conferences to survive, reporting that is how they made their money. They make their money off bad mouthing City, and they don't need to go to our press conferences or games for that. Don't doubt for a second that us banning one of these cretins wouldn't run in that journo's paper every week for a few years either.

The only obvious pro-active thing we could do, is start to actually take legal action when they go too far and they genuinely overstep the boundaries of the law. There isn;t much doubt that some of the things written about us have being genuinely libelous and we would of been well within our rights to take action. Even that though would probably get us slaughtered. We're a bit damned if we do, damned if we don't tbh. Our softly, softly approach has worked well with every journalist who it is going to work with, the remaining rags are never going to come around.

I'm beginning to think that the time is nigh to sue one or two of the staff journalists of a national paper. Don't care whom we pick on and neither do I care if we're in the right in doing so. We can well afford to tie these spiteful fuckers up in court but can they afford to respond? Word would soon get out the City have turned temperamentally litigious and they'd think twice before publishing such slanted articles as today's, again.

Can't disagree with that mate.

They are like a pack of wolves on the trail of Christopher Jefferies before the Joanna Yates trial and we all know how that panned out.

Due to our passive, turn the other cheek, approach they have basically got used to printing what on earth they like without so much as the vaguest thought as to whether it might actually be even remotely true.

I think it's about time to give them a little reminder that what they print had better have some truth in it, or prepare to face the consequences. Like you, I am not advocating suing everything that moves; just pick a particularly bad example over the next couple of months and issue a writ. It would soon have them thinking twice.