Media Thread 2020/21

[wolviedinho]

The ‘hate’ all things Muslim narrative has really ramped up again. People in general have been brought up to fear the gulf states. The history is not a great read but the west has nothing to shout about either. The rag tops can’t get past their own personal views and write drivel after drivel to push their own narrative.

MCFC has fuck all to do with politics, wars or religion. The media have turned our good fortunes into a political vehicle to attack the the gulf via the club.

America = good.

Abu Dhabi = bad.

Why don’t they turn their attentions to the laundered money going into the scousers or why the Leicester owner can seemingly sponsor his own stadium while coming from a clean country like Thailand? The hypocritical bent bastards can fuck off.

 

[bluegaz13]

I didn't know that. I don't think there is an Arab v Jew aspect to this but there is a racist element in which an Arab Sheikh is targeted as a unfit person football owner in contrast to many others. What is the difference between Alisher Usmanov, Roman Abramovic and Sheikh Mansour? All are oligarchs with billions are with their hands on levers of power. One is targeted, the others are not.

I was supporting Leicester yesterday but the media fawning from Ian Wright etc almost made me want to go the other way. The owners of Leicester CIty have received patronage from the King of Thailand which is a military dictatorship and the same people that went crazy over Thaksin are the same people lauding the ownership of LCFC. I have nothing against LCFC owners as football owners but where are the critics of Thaksin now? What have they got to say about King Power? The very name gives the game away

Excellent post....I think the difference is that we actually pose a threat to the cartel....hence the rhetoric against our owners.

 

[Big Dave Watson]

Player wise, is there a more punchable face that Nevilles...?

Fernandes Pen.

 

[give it to gordon]

The Guardian is at it again:
"Manchester City play beautiful football but it masks the ugliness of their owners | Manchester City | The Guardian" https://amp-theguardian-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/may/15/manchester-city-play-beautiful-football-but-it-masks-the-ugliness-of-their-owners-nick-cohen?amp_gsa=1&amp_js_v=a6&usqp=mq331AQHKAFQArABIA==#amp_tf=From %1$s&aoh=16211037155373&referrer=https://www.google.com&ampshare=https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/may/15/manchester-city-play-beautiful-football-but-it-masks-the-ugliness-of-their-owners-nick-cohen

I dont remember this hatred to other clubs who have had rich owners.

I dont remember liverpool getting this hatred when the Moores family bankrolled them.

I dont remember Blackburn getting this hated when Jack Walker bankrolled them.

I dont remember utd getting this hatred with money from dodge pies etc.

Two things these clubs have in common bankrolled by a private person who is also white English.

Our owners if I am right hasnt bankrolled City because its against the rules. He bought a sleeping giant he sort investment, he used his and his employees business sense to build the club. He has a long term plan to make City self sustainable.
He has invested in building a state of the art campus. He has invested in East Manchester. He has saved Barclays bank from going bust. He has let the NHS use the campus. He has invested in the local community.

All of this is way above what the other clubs gave done. But I get the feeling if our owner was white English the press/media would be all over our great club with loads of praise.

Personally I think America is a terrible country, poking its nose into every war or starting every war. They shot each other on a daily basis.
American owners are the biggest threat to our English game.

I cant thin of any other reason why the press/media hate City so much. A club that has done so much for football and its local community.

Our owner didnt buy a few house and than leave derelict to knock down the other house prices. Our owners didn't lied about 50 million improvement to stop the club failing FFP.

Our owners wouldnt treat ex players and families like utd. Our owners wouldnt get sponsorship of the back of a tragedy. Our owners haven't let the statium deteriorate, or the surrounding area.

Our owners werent the driving force behind the closed shop ESL.

Even taking of my blue tinted glasses City are a model club, a club built on a good finance footing.

Ignoring all that I really dont see what is wrong with someone buying a company ( football club ) and than investing his/her own money into the company. If I could afford to buy a club why would I ?
What is the point of buying a company and not being able to invest in it, make it debt free. Just because it upset the company's with big debts ?. By stopping free investment it's going to lead to a closed shop, unless banks start to call in the big debts.
All fans (not dippers and rags) wish what happen to us would happen to them.

We have a great owner ( for any press/media reading my rant NOT a country ). An owner who should be seen as a leading light into how a football club should be run and involved in its community.

It's about time our racist press/media was called out by their behaviour towards our club.

That finishes my Sunday rant ;)

Edit ** the press/media like to throw human rights at City yet dont throw it at American owned clubs country where BLM started last year a country that huge racist problems. A country where the police feel free to shot anyone, as do its people

 

[solley attwell]

I didn't know that. I don't think there is an Arab v Jew aspect to this but there is a racist element in which an Arab Sheikh is targeted as a unfit person football owner in contrast to many others. What is the difference between Alisher Usmanov, Roman Abramovic and Sheikh Mansour? All are oligarchs with billions are with their hands on levers of power. One is targeted, the others are not.

I was supporting Leicester yesterday but the media fawning from Ian Wright etc almost made me want to go the other way. The owners of Leicester CIty have received patronage from the King of Thailand which is a military dictatorship and the same people that went crazy over Thaksin are the same people lauding the ownership of LCFC. I have nothing against LCFC owners as football owners but where are the critics of Thaksin now? What have they got to say about King Power? The very name gives the game away

Wait until next week when Leicester get top 4 instead of the dippers. We'll see how the 'fairytail' is perceived in the media

 

[pace89]

The problem with Cohen’s article is not that he raises issues relating to human rights abuses in Abu Dhabi but that he it’s in the context of Manchester City.

Investment from the UAE is prevalent in vast swathes of the western economy but, seemingly, it’s football where it goes beyond the pale. If City are supposedly contaminated by the policies of the Government of which are owner is part, then so is virtually every aspect of our society from the financial institutions on which we rely to infrastructure we use and the fuel we put in our cars. And then what’s the consequence? It’s implied in every article like this that City’s fans should rise up in an act of ethical resistance but seemingly the same isn’t expected amongst anyone else benefiting from UAE investment (or Chinese, Brazilian, Thai, etc) in the west.

Ultimately are we supposed to cut ourselves off from all nations that commit human rights abuses? Or are we supposed to hypocritically salve our consciousness by standing up to City whilst ignoring the egregious abuses that underpin the daily functioning of modern lives.

The second failure of Cohen’s article is the failure to understand that high profile investments from Abu Dhabi work in both directions. There’s a desire on their part to normalise Arab states as part of the furniture of the western world but it also exists to show conservatives that the UAE can invest and prosper in freer and more liberal cultures.

Nonetheless, the response on here to Cohen’s piece is typically depressing - he’s a **** etc. That’s playing the man and not the ball and we need more effective rebuttals. There may be blues who don’t care about torture and imprisonment without trial but I’m not one of them.

 

[Mike Cledford]

I've just seen a programme with Amir Khan. He has built houses and a village community centre in the Gambia. He talked quite movingly about helping people who had nothing. I did not know that he did so much for charity.
Then the BBC news told me that St Marcus was involved in a new scheme with WH Smith and other book related Companies to supply books to kids.
All well and good but he said that he had never read a book until.he was 17 because his family couldn't afford them. So he wasn't able to read books in primary school, not allowed to use the large free library in Withington and that he was not encouraged to use the.library at the very good school in Ashton on Mersey or that his English curriculum there didn't cover the standard set books all kids have. There are plenty of charity shops where you can get kids books for 10p.
I am quite sure that the other apprentices in his United Academy digs had books which they shared. Perhaps not - he doesn't seem to have been fed in his digs or school either if you believe him.
Why does he come out with such whoppers? I suspect he thought books were not cool but obviously cannot say that in his latest scheme.

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

The problem with Cohen’s article is not that he raises issues relating to human rights abuses in Abu Dhabi but that he it’s in the context of Manchester City.

Investment from the UAE is prevalent in vast swathes of the western economy but, seemingly, it’s football where it goes beyond the pale. If City are supposedly contaminated by the policies of the Government of which are owner is part, then so is virtually every aspect of our society from the financial institutions on which we rely to infrastructure we use and the fuel we put in our cars. And then what’s the consequence? It’s implied in every article like this that City’s fans should rise up in an act of ethical resistance but seemingly the same isn’t expected amongst anyone else benefiting from UAE investment (or Chinese, Brazilian, Thai, etc) in the west.

Ultimately are we supposed to cut ourselves off from all nations that commit human rights abuses? Or are we supposed to hypocritically salve our consciousness by standing up to City whilst ignoring the egregious abuses that underpin the daily functioning of modern lives.

The second failure of Cohen’s article is the failure to understand that high profile investments from Abu Dhabi work in both directions. There’s a desire on their part to normalise Arab states as part of the furniture of the western world but it also exists to show conservatives that the UAE can invest and prosper in freer and more liberal cultures.

Nonetheless, the response on here to Cohen’s piece is typically depressing - he’s a **** etc. That’s playing the man and not the ball and we need more effective rebuttals. There may be blues who don’t care about torture and imprisonment without trial but I’m not one of them.

Agree with most of your post but not the last paragraph. I am pretty sure that Nick Cohen (a strong supporter of US policy in the Middle East) doesn't care a jot about torture and imprisonment without trial. What he cares about is getting a nice fat cheque from the Observer for producing some re-hashed garbage. There's a big band of freelances making a nice living out of the human rights industry. They are despicable.

 

[domalino]

I didn't know that. I don't think there is an Arab v Jew aspect to this but there is a racist element in which an Arab Sheikh is targeted as a unfit person football owner in contrast to many others. What is the difference between Alisher Usmanov, Roman Abramovic and Sheikh Mansour? All are oligarchs with billions are with their hands on levers of power. One is targeted, the others are not.

We know the difference. City are not viewed as being owned by an individual but being owned by a state.

That is the crux of most of City's problems in the media and its one where the club has completely failed.

Whether the club is actuslly owned by Abu Dhabi or Mansour as an individual (and I've seen even people like @Prestwich_Blue say we are effectively owned by the AD executive council) is largely irrelevant, they allowed the club to be tied to the state from day 1 and that brings with it all the baggage of that state.

We weren't bought by Sheikh Mansour the individual. We were bought by Abu Dhabi United Group. Leicester and Chelsea were bought by individuals.

The Abu Dhabi state airline sponsors us. Leicester are sponsored by the personal company of the srivaddhanaprabha family.

Our chairman is the Head of a state owned investment fund, he sits on a bunch of government boards and councils. Leocester's chairman was the owners son.

The club failed to separate Sheikh Mansour as the owner and Abu Dhabi as the owner.

You look at Abramovic and hes front and centre of things at Chelsea. He went to every game for 10 years, he is known to make decisions personally. Vichai Srivaddhanaprabha went to almost every game before he died at a Leicester City game. He was publicly visible, in press releases and seen in public at club events etc.

Mansour issues a press release when we win the league and is snapped by a club photographer when the squad flies out to Abu Dhabi every couple of years and it only gets seen by City fans. There is 1 photograph of Mansour at a game that is used a decade after it was taken.

People believe the club is owned by a state because the club and its owner have done almost nothing to dissuade anyone from that idea.

And who knows if they even want to? They have done nothing to stop people linking the two. If they really wanted they could have a lawyer or PR person contact every single newspaper that says the club is owned by Abu Dhabi and make them correct it. They don't want to.


States are easy to hate. They all do terrible things and there's millions of people motivated to investigate them. They're on a global stage full stop.

Individuals are much harder to target. Abramovic is a horrendous person with a lot of blood on his hands, but its all rumours and its all very very small time compared to the bad deeds of even the smallest state.

As long as the club is linked to a state we are going to be hated by the press and treated completely differently to clubs owned by individuals. I would argue there's really not much point in caring about it anymore, particularly as the club doesn't.

 

[MillisleBlue]

Surprised this uncomfortable article hasn't been removed from t'interweb thingy:

Standard Chartered fined $1.1bn for money-laundering and sanctions breaches | Standard Chartered | The Guardian

All together now - sssssssssssshhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuussssssssssshhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh...