Re: Ex MCFC boss Mark Hughes calls for clarity over Tevez row
sbm said:
As to the Manchester Evening News, it is highly significant that they also did not permit comments on the two pieces yesterday about what Joorabchian said in defence of Tevez. I suspected long before this latest affair broke that at least one of their reporters has regularly based stories on (dis)information from Joorabchian.
It amused me that Brennan wrote that a "source to close to Tevez" had planted as a smokescreen the story that, immediately after he met the City inquiry team, Tevez had gone to holiday in Europe (rather than to Argentina) - without acknowledging that Brennan himself had tweeted that story. Brennan should be embarrassed not so much because he tweeted something that turned out to be wrong but because he believed something told him by a "source close to Tevez", particularly at this time. In any event, this episode merely confirmed what I had suspected previously about many of the "anonymous City sources" that Brennan has cited in the past.
While I am on the subject of Brennan, I have also been amused - and irritated - by his recent references to how critical much of the 'media' were of Edin and Mario last season - as though the MEN and Brennan were not party to it. As for Dzeko, from immediately after he signed, Brennan was insisting that Edin could not play in the same team as Tevez because they needed to occupy the same 'space' (and Brennan was such a Tevez fan that there could be only one implication for team selection). The MEN's treatment of Mario last season was as bad as that by the tabloids. A classic case was an article based on what looked like an exclusive interview with Nigel de Jong, the main feature of which was Nigel pleading with the media to give Mario a break. When Nigel read the final paragraph of that same article - gossip about how Mario had reportedly had a late-night confrontation with 'fans' - he must have thought: "Why did I bother?"
PS: Is it possible for the OP to change the title of the thread to include a reference to the MEN's blocking comments?
Right. I was in contact with Kia Joorabchian's people on the Tevez thing, because - for legal and moral reasons - you HAVE to attempt to put both sides of the story. Or are you only interested in hearing what City say about it?
To suggest that means I am on Tevez/Joorabchian's side is pathetic.
No matter what sbm suspects, I have not been getting anything from Joorabchian - I have never spoken to him - but I have contacted his PR people on this matter - it's called doing yopur job.
Neither Joorabchian nor his people have ever given me a City story.
On Edin and Tevez, what I said last season was that City needed to find a way to get the two playing together, as it wasn't working when Dzeko first joined. Quite a few City fans were saying similar things (no doubt because they were actually Reds with an anti-City agenda).
What sbm didn't mention about the Mario "confrontation with fans" was that it was said to be Dynamo Kiev fans who had surrounded his car - what is the harm in reporting that?
On the comments section in the MEN - a few years ago I used to moderate them, and the only time we kept comments off were if they were defamatory, abusive or otherwise offensive. Or if they were just nonsense, or plain lies.
The lad who does perhaps 90 per cent of the moderating these days is a Blue. He does not have an agenda to promote United and do City down, he does not have any bias towards Utd posters.
Utd fans moan that we block THEIR comments and allow City ones, as well.
To suggest the MEN has a Red bias because CP Scott was involved with newton heath is just laughable. I can honestly say CP Scott's ghost has NEVER tried to get me to write anything.
Again, as I've said before, the MEN Media sports staff is roughly half and half Utd and City.
City's press office does not believe we have a United bias - I speak to them regularly.
We would have to be insane to do so - what possible purpose would it serve, other than to try to lose sales?
I'm quite happy to take honest criticism, and admit I have made mistakes. The conspiracy theories make me laugh. But the lies piss me off - on BM I have been outed as owning an OT season ticket, something I have never had, and never wanted to have.
It was also invited on Talksport to talk about City and ended up going on about United, another utter lie.
Some of the stuff in this thread is speculative crap, some is plain lies.
Keep it civil, eh, folks?
