Hughes calls for clarity over Tevez row, MuEN block comments

[VOOMER]

No one believed what the Nazi's, or the communist were upto in there camps. No one could believe that Pol Pot was turning human beings in to fertilizer. The FFP were brought in with the sole purpose of trying to stop our owners turn us into a world wide power house. Its so blatant its laughable to call it the FFP. It should be the SCP, because you already have two teams in Real Madrid and Barca who are neither servicing their debt, nor covering it. Last year Barca had to get another loan just so they could pay the wages and Real owe over a billion. The biggest concerns for these two is that if the Spanish economy goes fully Greek, those debts will be called in before any bail out. This shows what a bag of bollocks it is, as even at full tilt on the cash generator lever, the two spanish big boys are still unable to pay there debts and have been living of the black mail of millions of Spainish people closing there accounts if the banks calll in the debt.

 

[Babbage]

Obviously there has been a lot of criticism of City from the mainstream media since 2008, some of it completely overboard. I wouldn't say it was bias as such, it's just jealousy from journalists who support other clubs. Myself I can't blame them. If it was West Ham or Everton who was joint top right now because they'd suddenly got a rich owner and bought the world's best players, all while John Wardle was struggling to find a way for us to pay the interest on 60m debt, I'd think it was unjust.

Before 2008, I know there were City fans who perceived a bias against City but I never really saw it. We were ignored a lot, but that's because we were crap. There was also that 'typical city' thing in the media but to be fair that was well earned.

As for financial fair play, I think that's the reaction of European officials who were beginning to panic over the power shift to England. Yes it's an anti-City rule, in a way, in that after years in which 3 of the top 4 Champions League positions were English clubs the rise of another English powerhouse was the straw that broke the camel's back.

 

[johnny crossan]

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.

What FFP has to do with City is covered in more detail elsewhere on this board, but the discussion on here was a byproduct of this:

Anyone looking for some form of co-ordinated conspiracy is wide of the mark. There are no meetings in smoke-filled rooms about how to form a strategy to 'stop these arabs ruining football.'

Your original bold assertion has since died the death of a thousand qualifications but I fear I must add to your pain by pointing out that many other respectable commentators on the beautiful game besides Mr Samuel have detected the prime destructive purpose of FFP. Anyway, stretch your mind a little beyond "sole intentions" and try to recognise it as a package of threats to parvenu clubs like City. There are other more welcome objectives in FFP as well and reducing player wages and therefore player power is one, and an attempt to stop "money laundering" investments in football from Eastern Europe and Asia is another. It's a complex and important issue for us and you do yourself no credit by abusing fellow blues who have made the effort to understand the detail.

 

[stonerblue]

In fairness, every one of those 'comments' should be deleted as they're usually a load of shit anyway.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

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.

What FFP has to do with City is covered in more detail elsewhere on this board, but the discussion on here was a byproduct of this:

Anyone looking for some form of co-ordinated conspiracy is wide of the mark. There are no meetings in smoke-filled rooms about how to form a strategy to 'stop these arabs ruining football.'

Your original bold assertion has since died the death of a thousand qualifications but I fear I must add to your pain by pointing out that many other respectable commentators on the beautiful game besides Mr Samuel have detected the prime destructive purpose of FFP. Anyway, stretch your mind a little beyond "sole intentions" and try to recognise it as a package of threats to parvenu clubs like City. There are other more welcome objectives in FFP as well and reducing player wages and therefore player power is one, and an attempt to stop "money laundering" investments in football from Eastern Europe and Asia is another. It's a complex and important issue for us and you do yourself no credit by abusing fellow blues who have made the effort to understand the detail.

And I am equally sure that there are numerous commentators who would agree with me that it was a laudable idea which has been, inevitably, muscled in on by the big clubs to suit their ends. On that basis I have already stretched my mind beyond sole intentions and recognised the Realpoitik of the situation. You may not agree with my assertion but I believe that I have demonstrated that I recognise that it is a complex and important issue for us, and the fact that I don't see it as a concerted conspiracy from day one in no way militates against that fact.

As to me abusing fellow blues I have reviewed the posts with 'anymore than 2sheikhs' and there was an escalation of words between us, but he was more sinned against than sinning and for that I apologise to him and to anyone else I offended, including you it would appear.

 

[tolmie's hairdoo]

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!

Neil Custis does not hate City, far from it.

His brother, Shaun, that's another matter, but that is more linked into his long-standing alliance with Kia Joorabachian.

Neil Custis has been banned from Old Trafford for large portions of the last 12 months as a result of what Slur Alex considers an agenda.

Oliver Holt, he's just a typical namby, self righteous, living in the past and with a platform for piss and wind.

I could write scores of names who have a lot of time for our club, but can't work past the politics of London-based media.

There are two sports editors who support United, one, The Sun.

As for Chris Bailey, he was never an outright Blue, more Bury FC from his time at Bury Times.

 

[u2fme2]

and what the fuck has it to do with him ?

 

[Tenerife City bar Stan]

Obviously there has been a lot of criticism of City from the mainstream media since 2008, some of it completely overboard. I wouldn't say it was bias as such, it's just jealousy from journalists who support other clubs. Myself I can't blame them. If it was West Ham or Everton who was joint top right now because they'd suddenly got a rich owner and bought the world's best players, all while John Wardle was struggling to find a way for us to pay the interest on 60m debt, I'd think it was unjust.

Before 2008, I know there were City fans who perceived a bias against City but I never really saw it. We were ignored a lot, but that's because we were crap. There was also that 'typical city' thing in the media but to be fair that was well earned.

As for financial fair play, I think that's the reaction of European officials who were beginning to panic over the power shift to England. Yes it's an anti-City rule, in a way, in that after years in which 3 of the top 4 Champions League positions were English clubs the rise of another English powerhouse was the straw that broke the camel's back.

you sound like one of my bitter red mates for some strange reason. fobtrc

 

[Dubai Blue]

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.

That simply isn't true. Martin Samuel correctly believes the rule has been brought in with no other intention than to protect the established order. He also believes that a bi-product of this is that it stifles the ability of teams like City to compete effectively. He has never once said the rule has been introduced with the sole purpose of derailing City.

 

[SWP's back]

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.

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.sport7.co.uk/martin-samuel-financial-fair-play-is-merely-to-stifle-manchester-city-post-105558.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.sport7.co.uk/martin-samuel-f ... 05558.html</a><br /><br />-- Mon Oct 10, 2011 10:51 am --<br /><br />

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.

That simply isn't true. Martin Samuel correctly believes the rule has been brought in with no other intention than to protect the established order. He also believes that a bi-product of this is that it stifles the ability of teams like City to compete effectively. He has never once said the rule has been introduced with the sole purpose of derailing City.

Title of above

Financial fair play is merely to stifle Manchester City by Martin Samuel