Media Discussion - 2023/24

[ballbag]

I'm still celebrating the treble - subdued isn't a word I'd associate with any of my support for this club in any decade I've supported us. Still, its nice of the Guardian to ask the people who don't matter the questions nobody is asking. I'm sure everyone who was on the fence about us has been given the push off it they need with the Grimsby's chairman completely clear waffle.

 

[eyalluvitt]

Sly spurts spews
Brave young reds team share five goal thriller with Germanys 2nd best team as United reject Depay helps Madrids 3rd biggest team smash the Stockport oil billionaires who still have the spectre of 115 financial cheating charges hanging over them like the sword of Damocles.
Kenny Henry-McClair chief sports writer and self taught football financial expert

 

[Eds]

Players and managers have been warned they face tougher punishments for poor behaviour at games.

The new penalties are part of a charter introduced by football's authorities for the 2023-24 campaign.
Managers and coaches will also have to adhere to new rules covering the technical area.

The new measures state players "must not confront, invade the personal space of, or make physical contact with the match officials".

They add that "two or more players surrounding a match official in a confrontational manner will result in a yellow card and be reported to the Football Association".

The new 'participant charter' has been launched by the Football Association, Premier League, English Football League, Women's Super League, Women's Championship, National League System (Steps 1-4) and referees' governing body PGMOL.

It was also developed in partnership with the League Managers Association and Professional Footballers' Association.

The new measures also address the issue of fan behaviour and, in particular, tragedy chanting, which involves singing about tragic events involving the opposition.

"Our collective approach is to reset this behaviour on the pitch and from the sidelines, whilst giving our referees the respect and protection that they deserve," said FA chief executive Mark Bullingham.

"We are also determined to address the rise in unacceptable behaviour from the stands."

Wonder how the media will report the first time the likes of Arse / rags / dippers invade the personal space of a match official? As for the nonsense about tragedy chanting who is to decide what is a tragic event. If we sing about the 6-1 will someone moan that was a tragic event for the rags or is this specifically about Hillsborough and Munich? If it is someone needs to tell the PL that the 'always the victim' chant has nothing to do with Hillsborough

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

Thry go further than that. They dishonestly misrepresent our club’s ownership and present it as fact.

It’s a racist narrative. The campaign of hate is confined to our owner because of his ethnicity. Apparently he can’t invest his own money. Everything he does is geopolitical. If this sort of hate was applied to Jewish owner, eg blaming him for everything Israel does, it would be rightly condemned as anti-Semitic.

 

[Gaylord du Bois]

How does that work ?

What Bob said.

 

[spiny]

The Guardian has long lost its claim to report on news. Now it is little more than a blog promoting certain views pandering to followers who share similar views.

Methinks it is time to review the status of all the so called National Press and media including the BBC, including an open declaration of interests as online continues to kill off print.

 

[The perfect fumble]

It’s a strange, poorly written article. I don’t really understand what point (if any) he is trying to make.

That's because it's an entirely false narrative.

In order for this article to make any sense a false reality has to be constructed to accommodate it, one
where a fans attachment to a club is underpinned by wider considerations, considerations that Stockwood believes are self evident, paramount, universal and unquestionable. Without this false reality the central premise of the argument folds, that's why you and I struggle to understand what point he's making.

It's not so much the point he's making is nonsensical, assuming one can discern what it is, it's that it can only exist in Stockwood's alternate reality.

This is the sort of narrative employed when the actualité is at variance with the writer's ideology.

To disguise the unreality, Stockwood tries to hoodwink the reader with a bit of history and a dollop of terrace cred, before making a clumsy dash for his political point by way of Greek mythology and gobbledegook...

"If an object’s constituent parts are completely replaced, does it retain its original essence and continuity?
Although there may not be a definitive answer to the question of what endures, it appears that the threads guiding us through the labyrinth of time are either weakened or strengthened based on our alignment with our own identity and values. As the physical infrastructure of a football club undergoes upgrades and changes, it becomes increasingly challenging to establish a direct line connecting today’s achievements with the club’s past. It is crucial to recognise that while our relationship with a club is rooted in a shared story and collective memories, there is also a need to align with our present-day values and that is where ownership plays a significant role."

"crucial"...."need"...."align with our present day values"

The big flaws in his argument, such as it is, are easy to spot. Stockwood makes no attempt to explain why any of the above is "crucial", beyond his confection of nostalgic whimsy and references to Greek fairy tales, and as a consequence "need" falls off the table, and as for ""align with our present day values", the question arises why?

Why should my support be conditional on Sheikh Mansour's values being aligned with "present day values"? Values left mysteriously undefined. One suspects that was quite deliberate, because what Stockwood means is his values, liberal western values, The Guardian's values, the values everyone should aspire to, you know, the only ones that count.

Sounds like a retread of the white man's burden to me.

 

[The Light Was Yellow Sir]

That's because it's an entirely false narrative.

In order for this article to make any sense a false reality has to be constructed to accommodate it, one
where a fans attachment to a club is undermined by "outside considerations", considerations that the author believes to be paramount and unquestionable. Without creating this false reality the central premise of the argument folds, that's why you and I struggle to understand what point he's making.

But it's not so much that the point he's making is nonsensical, assuming one could discern what it is, it's that it exists in an alternate reality.

This is the sort of narrative that's employed when the actualité is at variance with an ideology.

In order to disguise the unreality of it all, the author is required to bury his political point in spurious analogies and gobbledegook like this...

If an object’s constituent parts are completely replaced, does it retain its original essence and continuity?
Although there may not be a definitive answer to the question of what endures, it appears that the threads guiding us through the labyrinth of time are either weakened or strengthened based on our alignment with our own identity and values. As the physical infrastructure of a football club undergoes upgrades and changes, it becomes increasingly challenging to establish a direct line connecting today’s achievements with the club’s past. It is crucial to recognise that while our relationship with a club is rooted in a shared story and collective memories, there is also a need to align with our present-day values and that is where ownership plays a significant role.

"crucial"...."need"...."align with our present day values"

The big flaw in the argument is very simple....It is not crucial and there is no need, and as for ""align with our present day values", sounds like a retread of the white man's burden to me.

I do suspect he’s had some ‘help’ in writing this, given he’s the owner of Grimsby Town. I suspect it was supposed to be that football is about more than winning and is about what counts locally and that, maybe, the ‘top 6/7’ have lost sight of that. I think he references city because of a; the father in law has been a life long city supporter and b; it’s the Guardian so it was only ever going to be about City.

 

[The perfect fumble]

I do suspect he’s had some ‘help’ in writing this, given he’s the owner of Grimsby Town. I suspect it was supposed to be that football is about more than winning and is about what counts locally and that, maybe, the ‘top 6/7’ have lost sight of that. I think he references city because of a; the father in law has been a life long city supporter and b; it’s the Guardian so it was only ever going to be about City.

I've no doubt he wrote it, he has form for writing bollocks in the Guardian........

Jason Stockwood​

Transformational Leaders Fellowship - Blavatnik School of Government, University of Oxford

https://www.linkedin.com/feed/updat...026804613121,FEED_DETAIL,EMPTY,DEFAULT,false)

 

[stonerblue]

That's because it's an entirely false narrative.

In order for this article to make any sense a false reality has to be constructed to accommodate it, one
where a fans attachment to a club is undermined by outside considerations, considerations that the author believes to be paramount and unquestionable. Without creating this false reality the central premise of the argument folds, that's why you and I struggle to understand what point he's making.

But it's not so much that the point he's making is nonsensical, assuming one could discern what it is, it's that it exists in an alternate reality.

This is the sort of narrative that's employed when the actualité is at variance with the author's ideology.

In order to disguise the unreality of it all, the author is required to bury his political point in spurious analogies and gobbledegook like this...

If an object’s constituent parts are completely replaced, does it retain its original essence and continuity?
Although there may not be a definitive answer to the question of what endures, it appears that the threads guiding us through the labyrinth of time are either weakened or strengthened based on our alignment with our own identity and values. As the physical infrastructure of a football club undergoes upgrades and changes, it becomes increasingly challenging to establish a direct line connecting today’s achievements with the club’s past. It is crucial to recognise that while our relationship with a club is rooted in a shared story and collective memories, there is also a need to align with our present-day values and that is where ownership plays a significant role.

"crucial"...."need"...."align with our present day values"

The big flaw in the argument is very simple, the author makes no attempt to explain why it is "crucial" and as a consequence "need" falls off the table, and as for ""align with our present day values", what he means is his values. Sounds like a retread of the white man's burden to me.

Great Post.