Media discussion - 2024/25

Status
Not open for further replies.
Many/a few on here regularly attack our PR team. 'Why dont we ban.....'
Why don't we sue him/her/them etc etc.
To them I say look how the media have treated us after the APT decision. Bar perhaps Martin Samuel, not one has asked questions about the PL acting illegally and why they did.
Instead we have been attacked on all sides. Their is a reason why our media/ PR team act like they do.
 
As I have said many times I don't follow the British football press/media. I only read it from here.

Are you lot slipping in posting anti City stories ?

You haven't ( or I missed them ) posted Neville, spitty, and others views on City winning this case. I see Wright has gobbed of abit





:)
 
Blue Mist said:
Many/a few on here regularly attack our PR team. 'Why dont we ban.....'
Why don't we sue him/her/them etc etc.
To them I say look how the media have treated us after the APT decision. Bar perhaps Martin Samuel, not one has asked questions about the PL acting illegally and why they did.
Instead we have been attacked on all sides. Their is a reason why our media/ PR team act like they do.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure I understand your point, with respect mate. City have secured significant legal victories, factually proven and the media have been in overdrive to rally around the Premier league and the red cartel. Articles, largely written by two bit sports journalists with little or no legal knowledge. May as well as refer to one of the youtubers for the same insights.

If that is the end result for something proven following a legal process, I'm not sure we are seeing any benefit from being cordial to the media. An invitation to Pep's press conference doesn't positively impact the quality of the questions asked, or the tone of reporting afterwards. I'm not advocating for some kind of petty approach where any negative article results in a ban, but there are clear examples of journalists overstepping the mark by some distance, with no repercussions.

After the Mirror's fan fiction this week, cheerleading every possible scenario from relegation, to Haaland leaving to Rodri 'never playing for City again.' They should be the first one's to experience a spell on the outside looking in. The gloves are off with the Premier league, it's time we took the same approach with the press.

As Pep said about Arsenal 'They want war, so we war'.
 
Last edited:
Blue Mist said:
Many/a few on here regularly attack our PR team. 'Why dont we ban.....'
Why don't we sue him/her/them etc etc.
To them I say look how the media have treated us after the APT decision. Bar perhaps Martin Samuel, not one has asked questions about the PL acting illegally and why they did.
Instead we have been attacked on all sides. Their is a reason why our media/ PR team act like they do.
Click to expand...

Because it's working so well?
 
I see the West Ham dolly birds article in the Sun this morning, where she points only to one element of the tribunals verdict on APT (sponsorship), and goes on to highlight the presence of an unfair playing field in that area. However, she completely avoids any mention of the now invalid practice of directors loans and the obvious fact that if those transactions were retrospectively assessed for the season 23/24 it could bring a complete quagmire of legal claims including some from the relegated teams who might highlight Everton as being incorrectly assessed with respect to PSR for the last rolling 3 year period.
 
DubCity said:
I see the West Ham dolly birds article in the Sun this morning, where she points only to one element of the tribunals verdict on APT (sponsorship), and goes on to highlight the presence of an unfair playing field in that area. However, she completely avoids any mention of the now invalid practice of directors loans and the obvious fact that if those transactions were retrospectively assessed for the season 23/24 it could bring a complete quagmire of legal claims including some from the relegated teams who might highlight Everton as being incorrectly assessed with respect to PSR for the last rolling 3 year period.
Click to expand...
Rough Rough !!
 
johnevans said:
. . . . . . . . . . . . Who knows what dreadful incident might befall some innocent person as a result of this kind of behaviour being fomented by the media?

They ought to be ashamed of themselves..
Click to expand...
Who was it who invited the gobshites of Anfield to give MCFC a 'warm welcome' when we visited that shithole for the CL game. Outcome? A wrecked coach. Did Klopp ever apologise and did LFC pay for the repairs/renewal?
 
Dave Ewing's Back 'eader said:
Who was it who invited the gobshites of Anfield to give MCFC a 'warm welcome' when we visited that shithole for the CL game. Outcome? A wrecked coach. Did Klopp ever apologise and did LFC pay for the repairs/renewal?
Click to expand...
Pep should've declared that the players were traumatised and unfit to play, booked 20 cabs, and returned in convoy to Manchester.

Global news.

Handle that UEFA & that dippers !!
 
nmc said:
Our dear friends at Football365 continue to wish Haaland away from the PL. desperate to link him to Barcelona. Their ignorance clearly extends to the financial peril that Barcelona are presently in. Barcelona couldn’t afford a week of Haalands wages let alone his fee.
Click to expand...
Barcelona couldn’t afford a weekend in Benidorm ..
 
Last edited:
DubCity said:
I see the West Ham dolly birds article in the Sun this morning, where she points only to one element of the tribunals verdict on APT (sponsorship), and goes on to highlight the presence of an unfair playing field in that area. However, she completely avoids any mention of the now invalid practice of directors loans and the obvious fact that if those transactions were retrospectively assessed for the season 23/24 it could bring a complete quagmire of legal claims including some from the relegated teams who might highlight Everton as being incorrectly assessed with respect to PSR for the last rolling 3 year period.
Click to expand...

Very telling that the media have no interest in the directors loans and the fact these have distorted the whole financial picture. It’s a farce but they are happy to live with it - but can imagine if we were the only ones with a directors loan - the PL and the media would be all over it.
 
I think we all have to accept, and most of us now do, that the Red Cartel clubs run the (London based) English Football Media, as well as previously running and controlling Richard ‘the Puppet’ Masters and the PL.

Thankfully there are some journalists who won’t fall in line, and will report the truth.(about City)

And fans from other PL clubs, Everton, Newcastle, Forest, Leicester, West Ham, etc, now understand why City have been fighting against Masters, the PL, and the 3 Red Shirt Cartel, clubs.(and other clubs like Spurs, Brighton, West Ham, etc)
 
JASR said:
If talking to a united fan and they bring it up, you just mention the continuing decade+ Saudi telecom sponsorship , and their soccer school academy in Saudi.
Or , when speaking of gay rights, there decade+ long Aeroflot deal (terminated quietly after the 2nd Ukraine invasion).

The hypocrisy of the red cartel fans is astounding, but they never own up to it.
Click to expand...
I had a prolonged “debate” with a couple of rag mates (I know, I know) a few years ago. I pointed out their long-term sponsorship by Middle Eastern companies but apparently that was fine as it’s completely different from being owned by a Middle Eastern company. I pointed out the ludicrousness of that position - surely dirty oil money is dirty oil money however much of it you take, and if you’re that morally opposed to it then you should choose to take none. Needless to say, they wouldn’t accept that!
 
Andy TheCatalyst Morrison said:
I had a prolonged “debate” with a couple of rag mates (I know, I know) a few years ago. I pointed out their long-term sponsorship by Middle Eastern companies but apparently that was fine as it’s completely different from being owned by a Middle Eastern company. I pointed out the ludicrousness of that position - surely dirty oil money is dirty oil money however much of it you take, and if you’re that morally opposed to it then you should choose to take none. Needless to say, they wouldn’t accept that!
Click to expand...
How did they feel about taking money from Aeroflot whose majority shareholder is the Russian government?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top