Media discussion - 2025/26

blue b4 the moon said:
It's not just us then, I got the feeling the BBC only mentioned Chelsea's win so they could talk about Trump and even then it was the last segment in the sports news.
Click to expand...
Don't know which is worst the pollution by Trump or this faux posturing by the BBC ?

We just know if the rags or dippers were involved it would have been a completely different take by Roan's cockroaches.
 
bluealf said:
When do they ever do that?

Also, you complain about this thread but have added to it by arguing for Sam Lee since page 1.

That is fine but you haven't changed a single mind either way in 7 pages.

Sam Lee reported that we were guilty as charged by UEFA and listed a whole host of punishments we were about to get, and was quite delighted in that.

Not much of a City journalist, more a lying POS, fed a line by his other pals, and picked the wrong side.

That was when he ended up in most people's **** book.

I couldn't give a shit what he has typed since, any praise he has delivered smacks of being false, his true thoughts were printed before CAS.

But hey, he is all nice on that podcast with the guy who hated Mancini, what fun they must have.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I'm pretty sick of being nice about this.

I think you people are tapped. And worst than this, I think you're liars. Every time I tell you to show me what he said that was so egregious, there's some half baked tweet or an article where he printed both sides of an argument. You dont even remember what he said but have just decided to hate him because you're caught up in a reality tv show. Go on, why dont you personally show me where the big bad reporter hurt you?

Tis for example

"Sam Lee reported that we were guilty as charged by UEFA and listed a whole host of punishments we were about to get, and was quite delighted in that."

This is you lying. Show me this.

You want a cheerleader in the press because you're small and insecure men who are so fucking frightened that your rag mates will take the piss out of you that you need constant reassurance over how brilliant and not guilty and wonderful and everything else positive that City are. Your scousers in disguise, constantly jumping on anyone who might even be perceived to have veered from the "correct line".
 
gordondaviesmoustache said:
This is the part that @Damocles appears to be struggling to grasp the significance of to many City fans, partly because many might feel differently if Lee had engaged in any mea culpa, but his professional relationships with that cohort of cunts is plainly of greater currency to him than the feelings of the supporters of the club which he is privileged to cover.

That’s indefensible to me as it involves an ongoing choice on Lee’s behalf.
Click to expand...

I'm not struggling with it mate, I find it pathetic, ridiculous and hypocritical.

You keep going down this line, "well Damo doesn't understand". I perfectly understand. I find it risible. These aren't the same thing
 
Damocles said:
I'm not struggling with it mate, I find it pathetic, ridiculous and hypocritical.

You keep going down this line, "well Damo doesn't understand". I perfectly understand. I find it risible. These aren't the same thing
Click to expand...
Pathetic and ridiculous you are entitled to think, but how is it hypocritical to disapprove of the company he chooses to keep? That would only be hypocritical if those people expressing their disapproval were also mates with the people who they disapprove of, surely.

Are you suggesting that people on here are actually personal mates with Delaney and McKenna but keep it quiet?
 
Damocles said:
Sorry, I'm pretty sick of being nice about this.

I think you people are tapped. And worst than this, I think you're liars. Every time I tell you to show me what he said that was so egregious, there's some half baked tweet or an article where he printed both sides of an argument. You dont even remember what he said but have just decided to hate him because you're caught up in a reality tv show. Go on, why dont you personally show me where the big bad reporter hurt you?

Tis for example

"Sam Lee reported that we were guilty as charged by UEFA and listed a whole host of punishments we were about to get, and was quite delighted in that."

This is you lying. Show me this.

You want a cheerleader in the press because you're small and insecure men who are so fucking frightened that your rag mates will take the piss out of you that you need constant reassurance over how brilliant and not guilty and wonderful and everything else positive that City are. Your scousers in disguise, constantly jumping on anyone who might even be perceived to have veered from the "correct line".
Click to expand...

Couldn't agree more.

Either everyone should get cheerleaders in the media and every media outlet is a paid shill for someone, or it should all be neutral and objective. Lot of people want to have their cake and eat it too.
 
Damocles said:
Sorry, I'm pretty sick of being nice about this.

I think you people are tapped. And worst than this, I think you're liars. Every time I tell you to show me what he said that was so egregious, there's some half baked tweet or an article where he printed both sides of an argument. You dont even remember what he said but have just decided to hate him because you're caught up in a reality tv show. Go on, why dont you personally show me where the big bad reporter hurt you?

Tis for example

"Sam Lee reported that we were guilty as charged by UEFA and listed a whole host of punishments we were about to get, and was quite delighted in that."

This is you lying. Show me this.

You want a cheerleader in the press because you're small and insecure men who are so fucking frightened that your rag mates will take the piss out of you that you need constant reassurance over how brilliant and not guilty and wonderful and everything else positive that City are. Your scousers in disguise, constantly jumping on anyone who might even be perceived to have veered from the "correct line".
Click to expand...
You’re.
 
gordondaviesmoustache said:
Pathetic and ridiculous you are entitled to think, but how is it hypocritical to disapprove of the company he chooses to keep? That would only be hypocritical if those people expressing their disapproval were also mates with the people who they disapprove of, surely.

Are you suggesting that people on here are actually personal mates with Delaney and McKenna but keep it quiet?
Click to expand...

No. Let me give you a concrete example.

The other day, the NYT posted a bit of a poison pen piece about Sheikh Mansour and his involvement with the Sudanese Civil War. There were a lot of different moving parts in the story, but to focus on one, the NYT was essentially slagging off Sheikh Mansour for knowing and working with and meeting with a Sudanese General who is a bit of a ****.
I pointed out there that this is how diplomacy works. You meet with people, some of them dickheads, and work with people, some of them dickheads, because it's your job to do so.
Similarly, I've pointed out that Farage having a conversation with Nick Fuentes and Jeremy Corbyn talking to some Hamas guy doesn't imply their total agreement on everything nor does it taint them nor is it outrageous in any way. The idea of "well this guy had a conversation with this guy and they agreed on some stuff so therefore they're JUST LIKE THEM" is wrong. It's not just wrong, it's dull minded. Black and white thinking.

The point on this though, is that nobody bothered to argue that actually Sheikh Mansour should publicly apologise for meeting with the Sudanese General. In fact, people were roundly supportive of the idea that guilt by association is a terribly stupid concept. Because of course, that was something that benefited City to believe.

And what exactly do you mean "the company he chooses to keep"?

How many times has he met them? Are they good friends? How many conversations do they have? What's their relationship like professionally and outside of professional circumstances? How do you know this?

This whole argument is about 15 miles beneath you and you're on the "wrong side".
 
Pubteam Lomas said:
Henry Wopper blowing smoke up the dippers arse last night on the Back Page Review.

Called them 'classy' and a family club; when talking about them retiring the Jota number 20 shirt.

Were they classy when they attacked our coach, causing extensive damage and leaving the players in no fit state to play?
Were they classy when they booed the minute silence for the Queen?
Were they classy when they dropped a cup of coins on a young girl's head at the Etihad and didn't say who it was?

We all know there's plenty more where that came from, too.

I was choked by the death of Diogo Jota and his brother. It's truly heartbreaking. And Liverpool's gestures to his wife and family have been fantastic.

But don't paint them to be a club that is a without fault. They have so many.
Click to expand...
To be fair, those incidents weren't the club's fault, it was the fans.


As for the club, here's a few headlines...

Liverpool 'told father of youth signing to lie' in tapping cover-up scandal
Liverpool's Luis Suarez T-shirt gesture provokes angry reaction from black footballers
Liverpool managing director Ian Ayre questions Manchester City’s £400m deal with Etihad
Liverpool's embarrassing apology to Fulham sees Clint Dempsey tapping-up complaint dropped
Heysel disaster of 1985 is football's forgotten tragedy and Liverpool and Juventus' minimal reaction prolongs hurt
Liverpool owners FSG brag about 'transforming fans into customers' on website
Premier League clubs accused of betraying disabled fans with a third failing to meet wheelchair access promise
Two spygate reports sent to FA by computer expert
Liverpool apologise after Twitter account mocks Munich air disaster
Anfield: the victims, the anger and Liverpool's shameful truth
 
johnny crossan said:
Anyone trying to crack the goose shit on Cholomondley Castle cricket square to take guard (they are allowed to roam free as fertilizer depositers) knows that your description of it is way off - as is your support of Sam, he's a rag wrong'un.
Click to expand...

I was feeding the ducks as I was writing that and reaching for an analogy. Not my finest work, admittedly. I think I mixed up "green as goose shit" with "soft as shit" or something.
 
Damocles said:
No. Let me give you a concrete example.

The other day, the NYT posted a bit of a poison pen piece about Sheikh Mansour and his involvement with the Sudanese Civil War. There were a lot of different moving parts in the story, but to focus on one, the NYT was essentially slagging off Sheikh Mansour for knowing and working with and meeting with a Sudanese General who is a bit of a ****.
I pointed out there that this is how diplomacy works. You meet with people, some of them dickheads, and work with people, some of them dickheads, because it's your job to do so.
Similarly, I've pointed out that Farage having a conversation with Nick Fuentes and Jeremy Corbyn talking to some Hamas guy doesn't imply their total agreement on everything nor does it taint them nor is it outrageous in any way. The idea of "well this guy had a conversation with this guy and they agreed on some stuff so therefore they're JUST LIKE THEM" is wrong. It's not just wrong, it's dull minded. Black and white thinking.

The point on this though, is that nobody bothered to argue that actually Sheikh Mansour should publicly apologise for meeting with the Sudanese General. In fact, people were roundly supportive of the idea that guilt by association is a terribly stupid concept. Because of course, that was something that benefited City to believe.
Click to expand...
This is a complete non-sequitur.
 
Damocles said:
Sorry, I'm pretty sick of being nice about this.

I think you people are tapped. And worst than this, I think you're liars. Every time I tell you to show me what he said that was so egregious, there's some half baked tweet or an article where he printed both sides of an argument. You dont even remember what he said but have just decided to hate him because you're caught up in a reality tv show. Go on, why dont you personally show me where the big bad reporter hurt you?

Tis for example

"Sam Lee reported that we were guilty as charged by UEFA and listed a whole host of punishments we were about to get, and was quite delighted in that."

This is you lying. Show me this.

You want a cheerleader in the press because you're small and insecure men who are so fucking frightened that your rag mates will take the piss out of you that you need constant reassurance over how brilliant and not guilty and wonderful and everything else positive that City are. Your scousers in disguise, constantly jumping on anyone who might even be perceived to have veered from the "correct line".
Click to expand...
Completely OTT comments, silly and pretty insulting too. You want chapter and verse when folk have made a different judgement to you and then try to 'contextualise away' the many examples given of your boy happily following his smear City script as him just earning a crust. Btw it seems you are in a shrinking minority about Sad Sam - the rest of us recognised early what this raggy chiseller is doing to please his redshirt fanzine employer.
 
johnny crossan said:
Completely OTT comments, silly and pretty insulting too. You want chapter and verse when folk have made a different judgement to you and then try to 'contextualise away' the many examples given of your boy happily following his smear City script as him just earning a crust. Btw it seems you are in a shrinking minority about Sad Sam - the rest of us recognised early what this raggy chiseller is doing to please his redshirt fanzine employer.
Click to expand...
"your boy", are you really such a child?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top