Hughes calls for clarity over Tevez row, MuEN block comments

[Three_Hat-tricks]

Stuart, I don't want to get into this argument as I think it's a bit silly. But how did you get into journalism initially? I ask because when I was a kid that was the profession I aspired to join.

That was a near-miss for you!
To be honest, I fell into it. My eldest brother was a news journalist befpre he retired this year.
I left uni with a degree in history and politics in 1984 and was on the dole for a year. I applied for tons of jobs, everything from dishwasher to croupier to management consultant, and was getting nowhere.
My brother suggested doing som work experience at his office - the Winsford Guardian, no less, which I did, and enjoyed it. I taught myself shorthand and typing rather than waste my time on the dole, and when a job came up with the same group, at the Wilmslow World, I got it.

Fair play. Was your apprenticeship spent in the local law courts and fetes as is often the practice? ;-)

 

[bernabias home shirt]

Ah like the same sort of evidence that SB has been asking some muppets for who claim this,that and `tother happened,when evidently it didn`t.
Will have to use the word ALLEGEDLY,just in case it comes back to bite me arse !!!

I think that is a point well made - some voting that they do think that MEN are unfair in their coverage might be believing so from what they have heard / feel etc rather than factual evidence.

But even so that would prove something that I would suggest SB ought to pay attention to...........

Because if people (a growing number perhaps) are of that 'opinion' then this should be a concern that SB/MEN should seek to address - it is an opinion (if that is the outcome) that is established and growing amongst their catchement area

I`ve supported SB on BM because in my honest opinion I think he does a very good job and having read the paper for 30+ years I ain`t stopping now.
However I must admit that I found myself not agreeing with his observations that some of the National Media do not have an agenda against us.
Don`t need to look far to show that he is wrong with that statement,but it wont stop me from enjoying his match assessments etc,nor stop me from reading it.
Some people need to realise that it aint soley a Sports Paper,but a local area tabloid that reports on various aspects of life and people,within the area.

He still wont answer any questions on red top hacks (which is predictable)....would just love him to call neil custis a fat twat or norris is shagging oliver holts mum,go on stuart do it,them 2 are hated and despised on here and for good reason they hate city!

 

[stuart brennan]

Stuart, I don't want to get into this argument as I think it's a bit silly. But how did you get into journalism initially? I ask because when I was a kid that was the profession I aspired to join.

That was a near-miss for you!
To be honest, I fell into it. My eldest brother was a news journalist befpre he retired this year.
I left uni with a degree in history and politics in 1984 and was on the dole for a year. I applied for tons of jobs, everything from dishwasher to croupier to management consultant, and was getting nowhere.
My brother suggested doing som work experience at his office - the Winsford Guardian, no less, which I did, and enjoyed it. I taught myself shorthand and typing rather than waste my time on the dole, and when a job came up with the same group, at the Wilmslow World, I got it.

Fair play. Was your apprenticeship spent in the local law courts and fetes as is often the practice? ;-)

oh yes. Council estate kid covering the Cheshire Show!
There were two reporters, so I had to turn my hand to everything from day one - police calls, magistrates court, community health meetings, Alderley Edge bleedin Parish Council, and on Saturdays Wilmslow rugby.
Good grounding, to be honest

 

[oakiecokie]

I think that is a point well made - some voting that they do think that MEN are unfair in their coverage might be believing so from what they have heard / feel etc rather than factual evidence.

But even so that would prove something that I would suggest SB ought to pay attention to...........

Because if people (a growing number perhaps) are of that 'opinion' then this should be a concern that SB/MEN should seek to address - it is an opinion (if that is the outcome) that is established and growing amongst their catchement area

I`ve supported SB on BM because in my honest opinion I think he does a very good job and having read the paper for 30+ years I ain`t stopping now.
However I must admit that I found myself not agreeing with his observations that some of the National Media do not have an agenda against us.
Don`t need to look far to show that he is wrong with that statement,but it wont stop me from enjoying his match assessments etc,nor stop me from reading it.
Some people need to realise that it aint soley a Sports Paper,but a local area tabloid that reports on various aspects of life and people,within the area.

He still wont answer any questions on red top hacks (which is predictable)....would just love him to call neil custis a fat twat or norris is shagging oliver holts mum,go on stuart do it,them 2 are hated and despised on here and for good reason they hate city!

Thought every fucker in the world called Custis a "fat twat" ??

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

No. I'm just one of those people who saw the scum, real madrid, barca and chelsea in particular spend stupid money on players while the governing bodies sat back and did fuck-all about it, then decide it has to stop when we spend money. Look at the criteria ffs. A club in shitloads of debt can spend as much as they want but one with a benefactor can't? Have a word with yourself. If it wasn't brought in to stop us then that's one amazing coincidence.

Well I just had a word with myself and I established that you are still talking bollocks.

You are displaying all the classic signs of paranoia. Thinking the world revolves around you and that everything bad that happens is part of some 'plan' to thwart you.

It may have been designed to ensure that it didn't threaten the established order, I can't dispute that, but to suggest, as you have, that it was created to prevent Manchester City Football Club becoming successful is absurd.

If you concede that it was introduced to protect the established order then surely those that introduced this measure saw some threat to this order. Whether or not we were on the radar when the new rules were conceived is debatable. To dismiss anothers opinion as absurd or the poster as paranoid is a lttle silly imho.

I didn't say that it was introduced to protect the established order.

I said earlier that I believed it was initially conceived as a genuine attempt to bring some financial discipline into the game.

What has subsequently (and inevitably) happened is that the vested interests of the established elite have ensured that its design does not threaten their interests - as I posted above where I drew a distinction between the creation of FFP and the design of the means to deliver it.

I have no issue with people saying that in its current form FFP is there to protect the best interests of the established European clubs, but anyone who believes that it was conceived, created and developed with the sole intention of stopping Mnachester City Football Club is being absurd and paranoid.

Sorry if that makes me silly.

 

[80s Shorts]

Well I just had a word with myself and I established that you are still talking bollocks.

You are displaying all the classic signs of paranoia. Thinking the world revolves around you and that everything bad that happens is part of some 'plan' to thwart you.

It may have been designed to ensure that it didn't threaten the established order, I can't dispute that, but to suggest, as you have, that it was created to prevent Manchester City Football Club becoming successful is absurd.

If you concede that it was introduced to protect the established order then surely those that introduced this measure saw some threat to this order. Whether or not we were on the radar when the new rules were conceived is debatable. To dismiss anothers opinion as absurd or the poster as paranoid is a lttle silly imho.

I didn't say that it was introduced to protect the established order.

I said earlier that I believed it was initially conceived as a genuine attempt to bring some financial discipline into the game.

What has subsequently (and inevitably) happened is that the vested interests of the established elite have ensured that its design does not threaten their interests - as I posted above where I drew a distinction between the creation of FFP and the design of the means to deliver it.

I have no issue with people saying that in its current form FFP is there to protect the best interests of the established European clubs, but anyone who believes that it was conceived, created and developed with the sole intention of stopping Mnachester City Football Club is being absurd and paranoid.

Sorry if that makes me silly.

Well many disagree with you. Many of your arguments are self defeating so no more needs to be said. Your english and word sophistry would be impressive if it did not trip you up so much.

 

[Three_Hat-tricks]

That was a near-miss for you!
To be honest, I fell into it. My eldest brother was a news journalist befpre he retired this year.
I left uni with a degree in history and politics in 1984 and was on the dole for a year. I applied for tons of jobs, everything from dishwasher to croupier to management consultant, and was getting nowhere.
My brother suggested doing som work experience at his office - the Winsford Guardian, no less, which I did, and enjoyed it. I taught myself shorthand and typing rather than waste my time on the dole, and when a job came up with the same group, at the Wilmslow World, I got it.

Fair play. Was your apprenticeship spent in the local law courts and fetes as is often the practice? ;-)

oh yes. Council estate kid covering the Cheshire Show!
There were two reporters, so I had to turn my hand to everything from day one - police calls, magistrates court, community health meetings, Alderley Edge bleedin Parish Council, and on Saturdays Wilmslow rugby.
Good grounding, to be honest

I thought so! Just to swing things back to good ol' footie, I'd be most interested to hear your opinions on Roberto Mancini having been in press conferences with him. (Apologies if this has been addressed earlier but I was too busy washing my hair to read this entire thread!)

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

If you concede that it was introduced to protect the established order then surely those that introduced this measure saw some threat to this order. Whether or not we were on the radar when the new rules were conceived is debatable. To dismiss anothers opinion as absurd or the poster as paranoid is a lttle silly imho.

I didn't say that it was introduced to protect the established order.

I said earlier that I believed it was initially conceived as a genuine attempt to bring some financial discipline into the game.

What has subsequently (and inevitably) happened is that the vested interests of the established elite have ensured that its design does not threaten their interests - as I posted above where I drew a distinction between the creation of FFP and the design of the means to deliver it.

I have no issue with people saying that in its current form FFP is there to protect the best interests of the established European clubs, but anyone who believes that it was conceived, created and developed with the sole intention of stopping Mnachester City Football Club is being absurd and paranoid.

Sorry if that makes me silly.

Well many disagree with you. Many of your arguments are self defeating so no more needs to be said. Your english and word sophistry would be impressive if it did not trip you up so much.

haha.

'word sophistry'

I like it. Many would be insulted by that, but I take it as a compliment. I've always been clumsy so the last bit comes as no surprise.

 

[2sheikhs]

Well I just had a word with myself and I established that you are still talking bollocks.

You are displaying all the classic signs of paranoia. Thinking the world revolves around you and that everything bad that happens is part of some 'plan' to thwart you.

It may have been designed to ensure that it didn't threaten the established order, I can't dispute that, but to suggest, as you have, that it was created to prevent Manchester City Football Club becoming successful is absurd.

If you concede that it was introduced to protect the established order then surely those that introduced this measure saw some threat to this order. Whether or not we were on the radar when the new rules were conceived is debatable. To dismiss anothers opinion as absurd or the poster as paranoid is a lttle silly imho.

I didn't say that it was introduced to protect the established order.

I said earlier that I believed it was initially conceived as a genuine attempt to bring some financial discipline into the game.

What has subsequently (and inevitably) happened is that the vested interests of the established elite have ensured that its design does not threaten their interests - as I posted above where I drew a distinction between the creation of FFP and the design of the means to deliver it.

I have no issue with people saying that in its current form FFP is there to protect the best interests of the established European clubs, but anyone who believes that it was conceived, created and developed with the sole intention of stopping Mnachester City Football Club is being absurd and paranoid.

Sorry if that makes me silly.

And the whole tevez saga is just a misunderstanding. Martin Samuel, I suspect, is a lot more privvy to the facts than you. He isn't even a Blue but he believes it's been introduced to derail City. By the way, don't apologise for sounding silly, it suits you.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

If you concede that it was introduced to protect the established order then surely those that introduced this measure saw some threat to this order. Whether or not we were on the radar when the new rules were conceived is debatable. To dismiss anothers opinion as absurd or the poster as paranoid is a lttle silly imho.

I didn't say that it was introduced to protect the established order.

I said earlier that I believed it was initially conceived as a genuine attempt to bring some financial discipline into the game.

What has subsequently (and inevitably) happened is that the vested interests of the established elite have ensured that its design does not threaten their interests - as I posted above where I drew a distinction between the creation of FFP and the design of the means to deliver it.

I have no issue with people saying that in its current form FFP is there to protect the best interests of the established European clubs, but anyone who believes that it was conceived, created and developed with the sole intention of stopping Mnachester City Football Club is being absurd and paranoid.

Sorry if that makes me silly.

And the whole tevez saga is just a misunderstanding. Martin Samuel, I suspect, is a lot more privvy to the facts than you. He isn't even a Blue but he believes it's been introduced to derail City. By the way, don't apologise for sounding silly, it suits you.

Struggling to see what the 'Tevez saga' has got to do with FFP tbh.

I agree that Martin Samuel is more privvy to the facts than me, and whilst that doesn't mean that he has a monopoly on always being right, perhaps you could point out when he has expressly stated that FFP was introduced with the sole intention of derailing Manchester City, rather than it being detrimental as a by-product.