Media coverage 2018/19

Status
Not open for further replies.
I had to listen to Paul Parker, Radio London, yesterday , he did mention the goals, and

How the weakness for City is the defence.
How Ederson makes mistakes, week after week.
How clumsy Walker looks as a player.
How Aguero never scores away.
How Sterling fails to control the ball.

When I finally got to watch the match , I was pleasantly surprised.
 
I had to listen to Paul Parker, Radio London, yesterday , he did mention the goals, and

How the weakness for City is the defence.
How Ederson makes mistakes, week after week.
How clumsy Walker looks as a player.
How Aguero never scores away.
How Sterling fails to control the ball.

When I finally got to watch the match , I was pleasantly surprised.
Fuck knows how we stumbled to 100 points last season.
 
I wonder if Herbert will slip a paragraph into his next Dipper report about how the City was built on proceeds of slavery!

They could just report on how they are currently sponsored by a British bank who have consistently over the last 5/6 years been fined hundreds of millions for money laundering various states and terrorist organisations money, something they are still allegedly doing.

The states include Iran, Burma, Libya, Sudan and the many many terrorist organisations which operate with those states funding them, is this linked back to liverpool in any way?

This whole country and every major organisation business and sporting is awash with money from the Middle East, why is this not being continually pointed to with the same moral indignation and outrage, only Manchester City?

We all know why, as the club already said, the 'The attempt to damage the club’s reputation is organised and clear'...
 
I had to listen to Paul Parker, Radio London, yesterday , he did mention the goals, and

How the weakness for City is the defence.
How Ederson makes mistakes, week after week.
How clumsy Walker looks as a player.
How Aguero never scores away.
How Sterling fails to control the ball.

When I finally got to watch the match , I was pleasantly surprised.

He's an esteemed pundit in Singapore and Malaysia where preaches that crap to the global hordes of dippers and rags on a weekly basis, he needs gently reminding he has a different audience when he returns home.
 
It's a good job the USA, Russia and the UK have such impeccable adherence to human rights.
Personally, having been brought up there from 1978 to 1987 and retuning to work there, briefly, I think the UAE has improved it's judicial and Human Rights systems enormously for such a young country. Still a long way to go though.
Perhaps a lot more to this current issue. NESA aren't idiots.
 
Last edited:
Seems to me the media have resigned themselves to teams other than City not winning the football argument so rather than have their mainstay customer base turn off their current team support they are.collectively attempting.to.devalue City's football achievements.
Anti City news sells to non City fans. City winning again turns non City fans off football.
 
What price football and books when an innocent man is jailed in the UAE?

https://www.theguardian.com/comment...d-books-when-an-innocent-man-is-jailed-in-uae

But it’s not just the rulers of the UAE and its allies that have been grappling with moral questions. The first were the fans of Manchester City – and Hedges’s life-sentence came just a week after Amnesty International had argued that the UAE’s investment in City and its success is an attempt to “sports-wash” – to use football and the loyalty of supporters to whitewash the UAE’s “deeply tarnished image”.
The emotional compact between football clubs and their supporters is visceral and usually lifelong. The
abandoning of a football club, an institution at the centre of supporters’ lives, self-image and sense of community, is not like switching toothpaste. It is more akin to a self-inflicted amputation.
It is perhaps not surprising – though nonetheless depressing – that City fans have taken to social media to defend the UAE and its legal system. Others constructed convoluted, moral-relativist hypotheses designed to at least get them through the week. Followers of the psychiatrist Elisabeth Kübler-Ross, the late inventor of the five-stage model of grieving, might recognise this as indicative of the bargaining stage of grief, the one that comes right after denial and anger and just before depression and finally acceptance.....

Has anyone in here constructed convoluted, moral-relativist hypotheses designed to get them through the week? Anybody been grappling with moral questions. or in the early stages of grief?

He must be talking about the rags.

PS: I love his call to arms....

If so, the season ticket holders of Premier League teams with links to the Middle East could become players rather than pawns in the game of global influence. Can they, from the terraces and through social media, pioneer a new form of inverted sports-washing?

What a patronising piece of shit journalism.

It is absolute nonsense. Since when did football fans discuss the theories of lizzie fucking kubler Ross on the terraces?

All of a sudden we have to concoct moral reflectivity hypontenuses?
Wow!
 
I dont remember the outrage with Chelsea being owned by a Russian oligarch, or Scum/Scousers with ownership from a country that has propped up numerous dictators over multiple decades.


Tbf, the spending itself was so relatively obscene at the time that people didn't really have time to become outraged by their ownership. They just focused on the money element. Plus with the fact the internet was less prevalent I think for a lot of people it was less obvious that Abramovich might have been somewhat dodgy.
People stopped giving a shit about Chelsea's spending all of a sudden when United started winning again. Go figure. And then by the time Chelsea started winning again, not only had they slowed their spending down but there was the greater looming evil that was City emerging.
 
I had to listen to Paul Parker, Radio London, yesterday , he did mention the goals, and

How the weakness for City is the defence.
How Ederson makes mistakes, week after week.
How clumsy Walker looks as a player.
How Aguero never scores away.
How Sterling fails to control the ball.

When I finally got to watch the match , I was pleasantly surprised.

we are shit aren't we? How come none of us can see these deficiencies?
 
We played nineteen surrender monkeys for the best part home and away!
Aha that’s how united could beat us!
They play the normal 11 and their entire bench from the start.

To help even it up, we lose a player every 10 minutes, till it’s just eddy and aguero.

Might give them a chance to draw?
 
It is absolute nonsense. Since when did football fans discuss the theories of lizzie fucking kubler Ross on the terraces?

All of a sudden we have to concoct moral reflectivity hypontenuses?
Wow!

This.....

"Others constructed convoluted, moral-relativist hypotheses designed to at least get them through the week"

Is particularly galling, the Guardian has used one high profile case and one high profile investment Manchester City, to construct a case for what, precisely?

To advance the case for ethical investment? To encourage us to use our purchasing power to bring about political change? Kind of, but not really. This is typical Guardian third way thinking, existing power structures remain intact, but by a drip, drip process of nudging public opinion, re-defining what is and what is not acceptable, slowly public opinion will shift and by osmosis the behaviour of governments and corporations change.

This is the neo-imperialism of the soft left, nothing too grubby, like the right to organise a trade union or a more equitable distribution of wealth, hell no! Human rights is more their thing. Public school educated intellectuals in the west lecturing the developing world on how to behave! It's so uplifting! Not too dissimilar to what their great grandad did, except in his day it was called civilizing the savages and was the moral underpinning of the British Empire.

This sham is profoundly dishonest and requires the building of mountains out of molehills in very select cases, it also requires our intellectual superiors to use broad brush generalisations and dumb down analysis to patronise the great unwashed in order that they might get it.

Our right wing posters might blow a bollock, but these are precisely the tactics used to smear Jeremy Corbyn, who now, of course, is both a racist and anti-Semite.
 
Last edited:
This.....

"Others constructed convoluted, moral-relativist hypotheses designed to at least get them through the week"

Is particularly galling, the Guardian has used one high profile case and one high profile investment Manchester City, to construct a case for what, precisely?

To advance the case for ethical investment? To encourage us to use our purchasing power to bring about political change? Kind of, but not really. This is typical Guardian third way thinking, existing power structures remain intact, but by a drip, drip process of nudging public opinion, re-defining what is and what is not acceptable, public opinion and by osmosis the behaviour of governments and corporations change.

It is profoundly dishonest and requires the building of mountains out of molehills in very select cases, it also requires our intellectual superiors to use broad brush generalisations and dumb down analysis in order to patronise the great unwashed so that they might get it.

Our right wing posters might blow a bollock, but these are precisely the tactics used to smear Jeremy Corbyn, who now, of course, is both a racist and anti-Semite.
All makes sense ....except the bit about Jezzer - who of course has no intellectual superiors according to his adherents.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top