Media discussion - 2024/25

[gray740]

Simon Stone's done it again.

Another article on City, another (I quote) "City will get no sympathy because of their success and the money they have spent to achieve it".

Someone should spend a little time looking at how many times he decides who is worthy of sympathy and who isnt, and see which clubs 'deserve it'...

I don't think we'd be surprised.

Biggest tosser in the UK let alone the BBC, calling that bellend a journalist is a joke.

 

[TinFoilHat]

Talkshite laughing off the abuse our players got last night in Sweden as 'part of the game'.

Different story if it involved a ragette.

 

[Resurrection Joe...]

Biggest tosser in the UK let alone the BBC, calling that bellend a journalist is a joke.

unlike some other clubs...City don't actively seek 'sympathy'...

 

[TonyColemansbagofapples]

Fuck me. That's actually pretty good. I used to think journalists used AI to generate their articles, but that is way too good to have been written by Simon fucking Stone, for example, so clearly they don't.

Well done. Or well done AI, I suppose.

 

[Blueknows]

unlike some other clubs...City don't actively seek 'sympathy'...

or praise (not that weve ever gotten it) or constant validation that were relevant

 

[burning blue soul]

I sincerely hope at todays pre match talk with the media Pep states from the onset that he will NOT be answering any q`s on todays hearing, as he is coach of MCFC and NOT a "high flier in finance".
Pep just fuck `em off, especially that twat Rolling Stone.

You mean tRolling Stone? ;)

 

[55yr old teenager]

Simon Stone's done it again.

Another article on City, another (I quote) "City will get no sympathy because of their success and the money they have spent to achieve it".

Someone should spend a little time looking at how many times he decides who is worthy of sympathy and who isnt, and see which clubs 'deserve it'...

I don't think we'd be surprised.

What fucks me off is why does he always get to ask the first question?? We should leave him till last, and hopefully then Pep can say sorry we have run out of time, better luck next time. He is such a whiny prick talking shite all the time about us.

 

[Blue Pete]

I was surprised by how ignorant he was about the case. He didn’t have a clue what it was about. Just another rent-a-quote. It made the Times look stupid but no one in the national media seems to care about basic standards of balance and accuracy any more.

It's not the first paper (or expert) to look stupid.

And let's be clear I am not defending his views on City in any way shape or form. But outside of this forum, and Martin Samuel - where exactly are you expected to get information. Football is so polarised in the media hunt for clicks, balance and accuracy are no long important. Prof Hough is an expert in the theory of corruption , I have no idea about his knowledge or views on football. As such I assume his information will be from the usual media sources, and we know what they are like. If that's all you had to base you analysis on then you are not going to get the truth (or an approximation of it).

I don't doubt he's a rent-a-quote and it sounds great (for them or bad for us) that he came from the Centre for Studying Corruption but regards to his expert knowledge of this case you might as well ask Merson about the value of signing KDB.

 

[Spurs quarter 69]

Talkshite laughing off the abuse our players got last night in Sweden as 'part of the game'.

Different story if it involved a ragette.

Treatment of Bunny in particular a f*****g disgrace.

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

It's not the first paper (or expert) to look stupid.

And let's be clear I am not defending his views on City in any way shape or form. But outside of this forum, and Martin Samuel - where exactly are you expected to get information. Football is so polarised in the media hunt for clicks, balance and accuracy are no long important. Prof Hough is an expert in the theory of corruption , I have no idea about his knowledge or views on football. As such I assume his information will be from the usual media sources, and we know what they are like. If that's all you had to base you analysis on then you are not going to get the truth (or an approximation of it).

I don't doubt he's a rent-a-quote and it sounds great (for them or bad for us) that he came from the Centre for Studying Corruption but regards to his expert knowledge of this case you might as well ask Merson about the value of signing KDB.

My main issue is with the Times. They are putting someone up as an expert who doesn't even seem to be aware of what was in the APT Judges's statements (let alone the 115 case). It makes me doubt any other so-called experts who appear on their radio station to discuss any topic which I have previously thought was pretty balanced in its coverage. For example if you can't trust any media outlets to report fairly on City why should we trust what they report on the Ukraine War? It is no wonder conspracy theories are so rife.