Lord Blue
Well-Known Member
it is a load of rubbish, but i have to say it made me laugh.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
everyone complain now
- Thread starter mr bluesky
- Start date
BigG
Well-Known Member
Pam said:Dear Mr Bond
RE: Send in The Clowns
I have emailed the fucker, Bond.
I am writing to complain about the deranged, embittered article appearing in a recent issue of your newspaper. The article relates to MCFC and it is offensive and ugly, even by today's dreadful standards. I understand that it is difficult to sell newspapers in the wake of the arrival of 24/7 news channels and the all-pervasive internet, but allowing dumbed down, jaundiced and frankly squalid journalism to appear in your (allegedely) non-tabloid nespaper cannot really represent a healthy response. You may as well introduce some bingo and a topless model picture on page three. Clearly it is your newspaper and not my football club that has chosen to "send in the clowns".
If you enjoy a good circus, try reporting on the hysterical reactions of the self-ordained "Top Four" clubs and their allies in the press.
Yours Not Very Respectfully,
Billy Smart
Bloody brilliant Pam - could not have put it better myself.....
BigG said:Pam said:Dear Mr Bond
RE: Send in The Clowns
I have emailed the fucker, Bond.
I am writing to complain about the deranged, embittered article appearing in a recent issue of your newspaper. The article relates to MCFC and it is offensive and ugly, even by today's dreadful standards. I understand that it is difficult to sell newspapers in the wake of the arrival of 24/7 news channels and the all-pervasive internet, but allowing dumbed down, jaundiced and frankly squalid journalism to appear in your (allegedely) non-tabloid nespaper cannot really represent a healthy response. You may as well introduce some bingo and a topless model picture on page three. Clearly it is your newspaper and not my football club that has chosen to "send in the clowns".
If you enjoy a good circus, try reporting on the hysterical reactions of the self-ordained "Top Four" clubs and their allies in the press.
Yours Not Very Respectfully,
Billy Smart
Bloody brilliant Pam - could not have put it better myself.....
Thanks. They can fuck off. This will make us even more determined.
Dyed Petya
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 2 May 2007
- Messages
- 1,490
Prestwich_Blue said:A disgrace. Henderson is a freelance, having previously been an in-house journalist at the Telegraph. I have e-mailed David Bond, the Sports Editor to complain.
Henderson used to claim to be a City fan, though around 15 years ago he wrote one of two match reports that have been the only newspaper pieces on City about which I have ever complained (the other was a shockingly biased effort by Paul Wislon of The Observer after the Maine Road derby in November 2000). I believe he is, or at least was, mates with Colin Shindler and they sometimes used to go to games in London together. Anyway, after the Thaksin takeover, Henderson was one of those media Blues who produced a piece disowning his support for the club. He'd been drawn to MCFC in the late 60s and Franny as a player was his idol but it had become a different club.
He's basically a pompous windbag who likes to try to flaunt his supposed intellect with classical and literary references. A cynic would say that he does so to cover up a lack of knowledge of the games about which he writes. He was apparently widely disliked by the cricket press pack when he was the Telegraph's cricket correspondent and had a long-running feud with The Observer's Vic Marks in particular. Marks's nickname for him was 'Widow Twankey'.
Ignore him, he's a non-entity as a sports columnist.
bluemoonmatt
Well-Known Member
I notice in two of his articles he has referred to Stuart Hall and the theatre of base comedy, is he really not intelligent enough to slag us off without copy and pasting previous insults.
bluemoonmatt said:I notice in two of his articles he has referred to Stuart Hall and the theatre of base comedy, is he really not intelligent enough to slag us off without copy and pasting previous insults.
Particularly when you remember that to Stuart Hall, this is a term of self-deprecating endearments. He is, afer all, MASSIVE blue.
alibobs36 said:Just sent an e-mail to the pcc hope everyone else does
Already did it. Just having a look at this now.
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.pcc.org.uk/complaints/process.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.pcc.org.uk/complaints/process.html</a>
Paul Lake's Left Knee
Well-Known Member
This is what i sent the Sports editor:
David
I take it you, being the sports editor are the person to complain to regarding the article written in todays publication.
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/leagues/premierleague/mancity/4308353/Send-in-the-clowns---its-another-episode-in-the-sad-saga-of-Manchester-City.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/footba ... -City.html</a>
This is another unveiled attack on Manchester City that has little base or foundation.
"At a time of global uncertainty you can always rely on 'Cit-eh’ to don red noses in the noble cause of cheering us all up, and they have not disappointed."
What have City done to warrant this comment? dare to try and sign one of the world's greatest players, how dare they? Only the football establishment can do such a thing, after all when Real Madrid tried to by Ronaldo for £80m that was ok, how dare City try. This is football snobbery of the highest order. As for the Cit-eh comment that is the same puerile humour used by typical non-Manchester based man united fans, laughing at how people talk in Manchester, i thought jokes based on where people are from are racist, i certainly have taken offence.
"Being a laughing-stock in England was never enough for a club of such overwhelming ambition. Now, after a week of buffoonery unparalleled in the history of football, they have finally achieved the international recognition they craved for so long. Manchester’s little-regarded other team is now a laughing-stock throughout the world!"
How are Manchester City a laughing stock? For failing to sign Kaka? Were United a laughing stock when Shearer turned them down? Or Chelsea when Gerrard turned them down? We have moved into Midtable and have strengthened our squad with 3 international footballers in the last 2 weeks, things are moving in the right direction. Again it seems to be one rule for the 'big 4' and one rule for City.
There are various digs at Garry Cook, and whilst the jury is still out on him (and some of his proposals and suggestions - which is all they are) the jury (how apt i am talking about juries here) on Berlusconi has already sat, to take his side over anyone shows where the author of this article is coming from. The article doesn't take into consideration that Mr Berlusconi, is at best very media savvy and at worst a crook. While Cook was in the air flying back to Manchester, he did a job on him, getting his version of events out first, making Cook look childish and unprofessional the next day - regardless of what happened and whether Cook was telling the truth or not. The author makes no reference to the fact that PM Berlusconi also owns 2 TV companies and a newspaper, a bit like Gordon Brown, owning Chelsea, the BBC and the telegraph. This allowed the Milan version of events to be broadcast as gospel, a little journalistic integrity from the author may have resulted in a more balanced view or is that asking too much?
"Kaka did the football world a huge favour when he knocked back Cook and his associates. It is now time for Mark Hughes to do the game another good turn. If he stays at Eastlands Hughes will be forced to walk the plank sooner rather than later, so he may as well leave now, on his own terms."
I fail to see how 1 transfer could ruin world football, or how Kaka being in the Premiership would be bad for this country. Nobody has given a sensible argument to back this sensational statement up, just a lot of hyperbole and bile. It also clearly shows a lack of understanding in where we were in this deal - Man City never spoke to Kaka - how could he turn us down if we didn't make an offer? As for Hughes, he has been nothing but backed by the board and Cook. Does the author think Hughes should go back to Blackburn, where he will have financial handcuffs on (and where they treated his successor so well!!)??
I struggle to see why the article picked City (when Newcastle and Spurs are making a far better job of the cock up cup) other than the author has a predetermined agenda, built on race (he doesn't like our Arabs owners or Mancunians) or more likely he is a Manchester United fan who is so puerile and petty, he left all objectivity at home.
I don't expect you will answer this, but i needed my say, my father read the Telegraph for years (and after this they aren't anymore) and i always used to hold your publication with some regard. This is the biggest load of tripe i have read in last few weeks, and there has been some rubbish coming from all sort of angles. I just didn't expect this broadside from yourselves, maybe the Red tops, but you have out done them.
James Jackson (life long fan, season ticket holder and former shareholder)
David
I take it you, being the sports editor are the person to complain to regarding the article written in todays publication.
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/leagues/premierleague/mancity/4308353/Send-in-the-clowns---its-another-episode-in-the-sad-saga-of-Manchester-City.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/footba ... -City.html</a>
This is another unveiled attack on Manchester City that has little base or foundation.
"At a time of global uncertainty you can always rely on 'Cit-eh’ to don red noses in the noble cause of cheering us all up, and they have not disappointed."
What have City done to warrant this comment? dare to try and sign one of the world's greatest players, how dare they? Only the football establishment can do such a thing, after all when Real Madrid tried to by Ronaldo for £80m that was ok, how dare City try. This is football snobbery of the highest order. As for the Cit-eh comment that is the same puerile humour used by typical non-Manchester based man united fans, laughing at how people talk in Manchester, i thought jokes based on where people are from are racist, i certainly have taken offence.
"Being a laughing-stock in England was never enough for a club of such overwhelming ambition. Now, after a week of buffoonery unparalleled in the history of football, they have finally achieved the international recognition they craved for so long. Manchester’s little-regarded other team is now a laughing-stock throughout the world!"
How are Manchester City a laughing stock? For failing to sign Kaka? Were United a laughing stock when Shearer turned them down? Or Chelsea when Gerrard turned them down? We have moved into Midtable and have strengthened our squad with 3 international footballers in the last 2 weeks, things are moving in the right direction. Again it seems to be one rule for the 'big 4' and one rule for City.
There are various digs at Garry Cook, and whilst the jury is still out on him (and some of his proposals and suggestions - which is all they are) the jury (how apt i am talking about juries here) on Berlusconi has already sat, to take his side over anyone shows where the author of this article is coming from. The article doesn't take into consideration that Mr Berlusconi, is at best very media savvy and at worst a crook. While Cook was in the air flying back to Manchester, he did a job on him, getting his version of events out first, making Cook look childish and unprofessional the next day - regardless of what happened and whether Cook was telling the truth or not. The author makes no reference to the fact that PM Berlusconi also owns 2 TV companies and a newspaper, a bit like Gordon Brown, owning Chelsea, the BBC and the telegraph. This allowed the Milan version of events to be broadcast as gospel, a little journalistic integrity from the author may have resulted in a more balanced view or is that asking too much?
"Kaka did the football world a huge favour when he knocked back Cook and his associates. It is now time for Mark Hughes to do the game another good turn. If he stays at Eastlands Hughes will be forced to walk the plank sooner rather than later, so he may as well leave now, on his own terms."
I fail to see how 1 transfer could ruin world football, or how Kaka being in the Premiership would be bad for this country. Nobody has given a sensible argument to back this sensational statement up, just a lot of hyperbole and bile. It also clearly shows a lack of understanding in where we were in this deal - Man City never spoke to Kaka - how could he turn us down if we didn't make an offer? As for Hughes, he has been nothing but backed by the board and Cook. Does the author think Hughes should go back to Blackburn, where he will have financial handcuffs on (and where they treated his successor so well!!)??
I struggle to see why the article picked City (when Newcastle and Spurs are making a far better job of the cock up cup) other than the author has a predetermined agenda, built on race (he doesn't like our Arabs owners or Mancunians) or more likely he is a Manchester United fan who is so puerile and petty, he left all objectivity at home.
I don't expect you will answer this, but i needed my say, my father read the Telegraph for years (and after this they aren't anymore) and i always used to hold your publication with some regard. This is the biggest load of tripe i have read in last few weeks, and there has been some rubbish coming from all sort of angles. I just didn't expect this broadside from yourselves, maybe the Red tops, but you have out done them.
James Jackson (life long fan, season ticket holder and former shareholder)