Media Thread 2017/18

  • Thread starter Thread starter mat
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
mac said:
As we are getting on rather fine with Amazon it's no coincidence that sugar has started to bad mouth us .
Click to expand...

Their decision to bid for PL games may cause problems with the current Sky / BT arrangement as well. Perhaps they should all start to try to get in City´s good books rather than match their content towards a historically biased customer base that is likely to change quickly if City continue their improvements.

On Talk S this morning the Coral betting rep dismissed Alan B´s suggestion that the return of Ibrom would allow United to compete with City for the title he did however say they would have better odds to be perhaps included in the top 4.

The rest what I hear is geared around the PL title without the favourite. Again this will alter with Amazon and City bringing change to media as well as the PL title race.
 
Trevor Morley's Tache said:
Extreme bitterness with racist undertones. Sugar is an absolute Cock-Womble.
Click to expand...

This is a very serious point you raise and something our Club could potentially take further. I've re-watched his rant this morning after reading your comments and there is quite clearly racist undertones. Not only that, but he is spouting false information. 'If they want a player they just go to the oil well'. Well, we have been self sufficient now for 3 years you stupid prick so that statement is a complete fabrication of the truth. I'm half tempted to pass this over to the Club. Sugar is a business leader with potentially fingers in the same Pies as our owners. Would they treat slander of this nature differently to that of your two bob Journo?
 
Stevies Bald Head! said:
This is a very serious point you raise and something our Club could potentially take further. I've re-watched his rant this morning after reading your comments and there is quite clearly racist undertones. Not only that, but he is spouting false information. 'If they want a player they just go to the oil well'. Well, we have been self sufficient now for 3 years you stupid prick so that statement is a complete fabrication of the truth. I'm half tempted to pass this over to the Club. Sugar is a business leader with potentially fingers in the same Pies as our owners. Would they treat slander of this nature differently to that of your two bob Journo?
Click to expand...

AS could plead ignorance of our self sufficiency but that would imply his reputation as a businessman would be dented.

If he did know of our self sufficiency but deliberately took the opportunity to lie for whatever reason then unless he has the protection of being called a journo (which apparently allows lies etc.) then he could be vulnerable.
 
Caught the programme by accident as I normally don't bother with it, and thought that Sugar's comments were ignorant, disgraceful and highly offensive towards our owners and the club, in a cheap attempt to belittle them with a seriously racist thread.

Had a City representative of Sugar's status referred to Spurs and their Jewish connections , there would rightly be a public outcry .

The BBC however appear to have no issue with his comments,which says so much about their " impartiality and integrity " - a disgrace of an organisation paid for by the taxpayer .
 
BrianW said:
It appears it's still OK to be racist, as long as the victim is Arab or a Muslim, or both.
Click to expand...

Not sure if it was a racist inspired attack or not.
He was however incorrect claiming that oil money is used to buy players which shows his ignorance in business matters.
 
It is because of people like Sugar that Spurs have underachieved for more than 50 years. Just like the current owners who are only interested in fleecing their own fans and filling their own pockets. Spurs have been one of England's richest clubs throughout their history. Their current owners are much wealthier than the Glazers for example. It is a myth that it is a well-run club (just like Everton under Kenwright) The comments made about City are undoubtedly part of a racist narrative.
 
SilverFox2 said:
AS could plead ignorance of our self sufficiency but that would imply his reputation as a businessman would be dented.

If he did know of our self sufficiency but deliberately took the opportunity to lie for whatever reason then unless he has the protection of being called a journo (which apparently allows lies etc.) then he could be vulnerable.
Click to expand...

Completely agree.

Can someone please advise me of the appropriate email at MCFC to log such complaints. I will also look to make our City Journalists (Sam Lee/Mullock) aware of these comments. Maybe they can push something.

They were a complete disgrace.
 
After a take-over battle with Robert Maxwell, Sugar teamed up with Terry Venables and bought Tottenham Hotspur football club in June 1991. Although Sugar's initial investment helped ease the financial troubles the club was suffering at the time, his treatment of Tottenham as a business venture and not a footballing one made him an unpopular figure among the Spurs fans.[43] In Sugar's nine years as chairman, Tottenham Hotspur did not finish in the top six in the league and won just one trophy, the 1999 Football League Cup.

Sugar was gone from Spurs by the time Abramovich bought Chelsea, I suppose all those clubs like Wimbledon and Watford that managed to finish in the top 6 during his incumbency had oil wells too? Come to think of it we didn't have a pot to piss in and we finished 5th in that period.
 
SilverFox2 said:
Not sure if it was a racist inspired attack or not.
He was however incorrect claiming that oil money is used to buy players which shows his ignorance in business matters.
Click to expand...

Fair dos, there may well be no racist issue in this attack and and I should like to think there wasn't; but I can't help but think that if our owner had the same amount of money but had a different ethnic background, both he and City would get a lot less stick. The race and religion of some other owners seems to get mentioned far less. May be an unconscious thing, but I do wonder.
 
Thekinkygoat said:
After a take-over battle with Robert Maxwell, Sugar teamed up with Terry Venables and bought Tottenham Hotspur football club in June 1991. Although Sugar's initial investment helped ease the financial troubles the club was suffering at the time, his treatment of Tottenham as a business venture and not a footballing one made him an unpopular figure among the Spurs fans.[43] In Sugar's nine years as chairman, Tottenham Hotspur did not finish in the top six in the league and won just one trophy, the 1999 Football League Cup.

Sugar was gone from Spurs by the time Abramovich bought Chelsea, I suppose all those clubs like Wimbledon and Watford that managed to finish in the top 6 during his incumbency had oil wells too? Come to think of it we didn't have a pot to piss in and we finished 5th in that period.
Click to expand...

I also remember that when SKY were negotiating against others for the first PL TV contract Sugar was part of the PL's negotiating team and when it looked like SKY were not bidding sufficient to win the contract Sugar, a member of the PL team told SKY to pull their finger out and what they had to bid. That's how dodgy the guy is.
 
Blue Llama said:
I also remember that when SKY were negotiating against others for the first PL TV contract Sugar was part of the PL's negotiating team and when it looked like SKY were not bidding sufficient to win the contract Sugar, a member of the PL team told SKY to pull their finger out and what they had to bid. That's how dodgy the guy is.
Click to expand...
Not forgetting the fact that Amstrad, sugar’s electronics company, stood to make loads from the contracted sales of decoder boxes and dishes etc.to show sky’s product on our TVs.
No chance of any conflict of interests there then!!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top