Come on Phil, per game mate.Per season. :-)
Come on Phil, per game mate.Per season. :-)
Reminds me that when Wardle was chairman, Alistair Mackintosh was CEO and Paul Tyrrell was the Communications head. An insider told me that Tyrrell's job was to big-up Mackintosh.The media are clearly mandated to mention the 115 breaches by the PL, in order to keep Masters at the steps of the gallows for now, but in readiness for when his major task fails.
Now the weakling sheep should be complaining about that area of wasteful spending, on their behalf of course.
Funny if true.
Funny if true.
I skimmed it and got tone and aim of it within 2 secs. No wonder other teams' supporters don't know what the hell is going on with the APT and the charges, there is no true journalism there (i.e. research, facts etc..) its basically a hatchet jobThe entire article is framed in a manner hostile to City.
It reads like it was drafted by Masters himself.
It is client journalism in sport at its worst.
Funny if true.
Funny if true.
My neck of the woods
Never heard of a pub called the Vine
Within a few minutes walk of the brewery you have the Gardeners Arms, Radclyffe Arms and the Minders Arms. There was the Railway and Linnet and the Firwood Tavern that are now shut
What I don’t understand is how could you possibly judge the fairness of our new sponsorships.
No team has ever sustained this kind of success in the premier league before (6/7 titles). It’s unprecedented what we are doing right now, so there is nothing to compare it too.
Also The Premier League is watched by an unprecedented number of people around the world and the numbers are continually growing.
You can’t just compare the numbers against old sponsorship deals because nobody has ever been in this situation before.
Could just have easily turned it the other way round and said "the PL lawyers failed to convince the panel that the rules were lawful"...A despicable biased and dishonest article. The phrase: “City’s lawyers convinced a panel….” sums it up. The ruling that the PL acted unlawfully was made by three independent former High Court Judges who considered evidence for five weeks. This makes SKY look stupid.