Centurions
Well-Known Member
That's a strange take given the one and only mention is:-
"Yet in the face of it, Abu Dhabi are relentless."
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Media Discussion - 2023/24
- Thread starter MAG
- Start date
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
"Yet in the face of it, Abu Dhabi are relentless."
Ithryn Luin
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 17 Feb 2018
- Messages
- 673
- Team supported
- City & Bolton
You should know the rules of the UK sporting media.....the only good Arab is a poor Palestinian and yes, as you point out, an individual Arab is incapable of accumulating personal wealth!Why does he use the label "Abu Dhabi" when he knows full well that CFG is owned by Sheikh Mansour. It is dehumanising to refer to our owner using the name of a state. He could also have used the name of his firm Newton Investment and Development. Does Wallace think that "all Arabs are the same" and can't have their own personal investments or is he just stupid? It is difficult to take any journalist seriously when they get such basic information wrong either deliberately or by mistake.
Centurions
Well-Known Member
My god, the media must live in some peoples heads 24/7.I hadn’t read it & thought the headline was very positive but the “tone” is very much faceless Arabs which is a known media trick.
It's a piece about multi-use stadiums to increase revenue and you're drilling down to try and find anything negative even if you have to make crap up to do so.
P
P
PPT
Guest
But why say Abu Dhabi at all? City is privately owned. That is an irrefutable fact. Does he mention the USA when talking about United or Liverpool? Of course he doesn’t. Why is that?That's a strange take given the one and only mention is:-
"Yet in the face of it, Abu Dhabi are relentless."
Centurions
Well-Known Member
He actually talks about the USA generally and how they're creating massive multi-use stadiums and complexes and then mentions the American owed football clubs. AD IS relentless in it's pursuit of the future. Try reading the piece without frothing at the mouth and understand what he's discussing.But why say Abu Dhabi at all? City is privately owned. That is an irrefutable fact. Does he mention the USA when talking about United or Liverpool? Of course he doesn’t. Why is that?
ZanteWeatherman
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 2 Jun 2009
- Messages
- 1,223
- Team supported
- Manchester City
Don't forget 2 x Community Shield.....And in those last 5 seasons City have only won 4 x Premier Leagues, 2 x FA Cups, 3 x League Cups and 1 x Champions League.
The article was about who is shaping world football. It highlighted the difference between the 2 Manchester clubs (sic) City were building the arena, expanding the stadium, Soriano worked the room for 2 days.... (and then got elected) whereas the rag fellah wasn't even present."almost implied", so he didn't imply that then? I'm sorry but that there is without doubt bias from the usual suspect sources against us but that's just nonsense.
He was talking about Soriano getting his seat at the table:-
"At times like these it seems everyone in the room has forgotten that City defeated a Uefa conviction of significant financial wrongdoing at the Court of Arbitration for Sport in 2020 and now face 115 more charges from the Premier League. Where that ends, no-one is prepared to hazard a guess. These are the most serious charges the Premier League has ever levelled against a member. Yet in the face of it, Abu Dhabi are relentless. Another new CFG club, this time in Brazil. A new arena. A seat at the top table."
If you object to the above then I can't convince you otherwise as your mind was set before you read it.
It mentioned the American money men who are shaping the world game. It was in many respects an excellent article about how certain people at certain clubs will shape the future of football and one specific club will not.
So why then mention City 'defeated' uefa. What a strange phrase by the way. And then go on to say about the 115 charges ? The article steers the reader towards a belief that Soriano, having worked the room, having become one of the most powerful men in football will make the charges simply disappear.
There was no need to mention the charges. It was not what the article was about. They were mentioned to keep the red shit fans happy. When we are eventually cleared it will be because Soriano is at the top table not because we are innocent.
BlueRockape
Well-Known Member
And one super European thingyDon't forget 2 x Community Shield.....
It only needs that one mention.That's a strange take given the one and only mention is:-
"Yet in the face of it, Abu Dhabi are relentless."
Have you ever read 'America are determined to hold onto Manchester United'
'Russia were forced to hand over Chelsea after the UK imposed sanctions ?
P
P
PPT
Guest
Calm down dear… Who’s frothing at the mouth except you.I can only presume you don’t read the Daily Telegraph on a regular basis. Their bias, which verges on outright hatred for our club is both explicit and blatant. There is only one reason the use the words Abhu Dhabi.He actually talks about the USA generally and how they're creating massive multi-use stadiums and complexes and then mentions the American owed football clubs. AD IS relentless in it's pursuit of the future. Try reading the piece without frothing at the mouth and understand what he's discussing.
If you think and believe differently. Then that’s great. Others on here don’t. Is that OK with you?
- Status
- Not open for further replies.