Jonathan Northcroft in The Sunday Times

[fbloke]

A pedantic moment for me now.

If you write a letter and say "i dont expect a reply' then dont expect a reply.

If you end with something more akin to 'I fully expect the senior editorial team to deal with this as a matter of urgency, and to forward a response to me directly via email or letter at the earliest possible time....'

Well they may feel a need to get back to you.

Just a thought!

 

[KenTheLandlord]

A pedantic moment for me now.

If you write a letter and say "i dont expect a reply' then dont expect a reply.

If you end with something more akin to 'I fully expect the senior editorial team to deal with this as a matter of urgency, and to forward a response to me directly via email or letter at the earliest possible time....'

Well they may feel a need to get back to you.

Just a thought!

The "i don't expect a reply was addressed to us.

The bit after Good Morning was addressed to the paper.

Yours,

P. Dantic
Surrey.

 

[adamgregory]

I don't expect a reply that's why I put it. Simple really.

 

[M24-CRC]

[/quote]

He didn't run down his contract and leave for free.

He was still under contract and a tribunal set a fee of around £5m[/quote]


Hi DID run down his contract so that he was able to leave......the only reason we did get a fee was because he was under 23

 

[Eccles Blue]

Well I got a reply:

Out of office.

Maybe he is just out of office for emails that have a subject relating to Manchester City!!

 

[Soulboy]

Not expecting a reply but we will see.

Good Morning,
I am a Times reader, I buy the paper daily as in my opinion it is the best paper out there not biased in any way shape or form and the facts are always reliable. Now I am also a Manchester City fan & season ticket holder, I was at the match on Saturday afternoon and had a thoroughly good day however this all changed come Sunday morning when the Times arrived as Jonathan Northcroft had some very fundamental facts 100% wrong. I feel obliged to point these out and would also like to press for an apology to be printed as this must of left the non city fan readers of your paper to think City fans turn on their own players, let me explain.

“Emmanuel Adebayor replaced his captain for the final minutes and, having been barracked by his own supporters while warming up, with chants like "one greedy bastard" and "that's why you're a substitute", even Adebayor ran about”

Now also let me draw your attention to who else was warming up on the sidelines at the same time as Adebayor, it was a young lad by the name of Daniel Sturridge, he came through the City youth system and had a fairly promising amount of talent. This talent unfortunately went to his head and he asked for ridiculous wage demands, which were refused. He then let his contract run down and left for a free to go to Chelsea for more money. So the chants of “one greedy bastard” were directed to Sturridge and not one of our current players and fans favourite Adebayor as Mr Northcroft would have the public believe.

I feel this has painted the club, the fans and your paper in a rather bad light, especially when all it took was either a bit of research or even to ask a City fan or Chelsea fan for that matter why the booing was taking place and for whom it was directed. I just hope that your other customers who may have watched the game on the TV knew where the boos were aimed and chose not to listen to Mr Northcroft.

Not that I expect any kind of response or anything to be done about this horrendous misquote but I will not be buying The Times anymore, I have also cancelled my daily delivery from the newsagent whilst I decide what paper to replace yours with as it seems The Times is no more factually correct than the Daily Sport.

Yours

Adam Gregory

You read The Times? And can't tell the difference beteen "have" and "of"?

Standards are clearly slipping at the Great Thunderer!

 

[waspish]

He didn't run down his contract and leave for free.

He was still under contract and a tribunal set a fee of around £5m[/quote]


Hi DID run down his contract so that he was able to leave......the only reason we did get a fee was because he was under 23[/quote]
Correct

 

[fbloke]

A pedantic moment for me now.

If you write a letter and say "i dont expect a reply' then dont expect a reply.

If you end with something more akin to 'I fully expect the senior editorial team to deal with this as a matter of urgency, and to forward a response to me directly via email or letter at the earliest possible time....'

Well they may feel a need to get back to you.

Just a thought!

The "i don't expect a reply was addressed to us.

The bit after Good Morning was addressed to the paper.

Yours,

P. Dantic
Surrey.

Not that I expect any kind of response or anything to be done about this horrendous misquote but I will not be buying The Times anymore, I have also cancelled my daily delivery from the newsagent whilst I decide what paper to replace yours with as it seems The Times is no more factually correct than the Daily Sport.

Yours

Adam Gregory

Apologies for any misunderstanding.

Pee Diddy Dantic

 

[Blue Mist]

Not expecting a reply but we will see.

Good Morning,
I am a Times reader, I buy the paper daily as in my opinion it is the best paper out there not biased in any way shape or form and the facts are always reliable. Now I am also a Manchester City fan & season ticket holder, I was at the match on Saturday afternoon and had a thoroughly good day however this all changed come Sunday morning when the Times arrived as Jonathan Northcroft had some very fundamental facts 100% wrong. I feel obliged to point these out and would also like to press for an apology to be printed as this must of left the non city fan readers of your paper to think City fans turn on their own players, let me explain.

“Emmanuel Adebayor replaced his captain for the final minutes and, having been barracked by his own supporters while warming up, with chants like "one greedy bastard" and "that's why you're a substitute", even Adebayor ran about”

Now also let me draw your attention to who else was warming up on the sidelines at the same time as Adebayor, it was a young lad by the name of Daniel Sturridge, he came through the City youth system and had a fairly promising amount of talent. This talent unfortunately went to his head and he asked for ridiculous wage demands, which were refused. He then let his contract run down and left for a free to go to Chelsea for more money. So the chants of “one greedy bastard” were directed to Sturridge and not one of our current players and fans favourite Adebayor as Mr Northcroft would have the public believe.

I feel this has painted the club, the fans and your paper in a rather bad light, especially when all it took was either a bit of research or even to ask a City fan or Chelsea fan for that matter why the booing was taking place and for whom it was directed. I just hope that your other customers who may have watched the game on the TV knew where the boos were aimed and chose not to listen to Mr Northcroft.

Not that I expect any kind of response or anything to be done about this horrendous misquote but I will not be buying The Times anymore, I have also cancelled my daily delivery from the newsagent whilst I decide what paper to replace yours with as it seems The Times is no more factually correct than the Daily Sport.

Yours

Adam Gregory

He didn't run down his contract and leave for free.

He was still under contract and a tribunal set a fee of around £5m

Sorry but he did run down his contract, otherwise we would not have let him leave. The reason why City got money for him is because of the rules. A club is entitled to compensation for player brought through the Academy who then leaves at the end of their contract. I believe the cut off is under the age of 23. Sturridge deliberately ran his contract out so that he could sign for Chelsea. The tribunal merely set a fee they believed he would be worth in the transfer market had Chelsea been made to buy him.

Oh and by the way I still haven't received a reply from the reporter, perhaps it is his day off.

 

[Ricster]

Not expecting a reply but we will see.

Good Morning,
I am a Times reader, I buy the paper daily as in my opinion it is the best paper out there not biased in any way shape or form and the facts are always reliable. Now I am also a Manchester City fan & season ticket holder, I was at the match on Saturday afternoon and had a thoroughly good day however this all changed come Sunday morning when the Times arrived as Jonathan Northcroft had some very fundamental facts 100% wrong. I feel obliged to point these out and would also like to press for an apology to be printed as this must of left the non city fan readers of your paper to think City fans turn on their own players, let me explain.

“Emmanuel Adebayor replaced his captain for the final minutes and, having been barracked by his own supporters while warming up, with chants like "one greedy bastard" and "that's why you're a substitute", even Adebayor ran about”

Now also let me draw your attention to who else was warming up on the sidelines at the same time as Adebayor, it was a young lad by the name of Daniel Sturridge, he came through the City youth system and had a fairly promising amount of talent. This talent unfortunately went to his head and he asked for ridiculous wage demands, which were refused. He then let his contract run down and left for a free to go to Chelsea for more money. So the chants of “one greedy bastard” were directed to Sturridge and not one of our current players and fans favourite Adebayor as Mr Northcroft would have the public believe.

I feel this has painted the club, the fans and your paper in a rather bad light, especially when all it took was either a bit of research or even to ask a City fan or Chelsea fan for that matter why the booing was taking place and for whom it was directed. I just hope that your other customers who may have watched the game on the TV knew where the boos were aimed and chose not to listen to Mr Northcroft.

Not that I expect any kind of response or anything to be done about this horrendous misquote but I will not be buying The Times anymore, I have also cancelled my daily delivery from the newsagent whilst I decide what paper to replace yours with as it seems The Times is no more factually correct than the Daily Sport.

Yours

Adam Gregory

He didn't run down his contract and leave for free.

He was still under contract and a tribunal set a fee of around £5m

DD, he let his contract run down and left for a tribunal. Either way he screwed City over for his own benefit's, not for footballing reason's.