Media Thread - 2021/22

[Zapcity]

My guess will be Liverpool H, Liverpool A, Spurs A, Spurs H, Lyon, Chelsea final

Just read this (don't have BT sport) Did they also put the Monaco match on? The away one obviously ,not the home one!

 

[Spurs quarter 69]

Aston Villa are shit. It's simple really.

Always found a trip to St Andrews far more daunting than Villa Park. Fortunately the Zulus didn't seem interested in soft targets. Villa have a problem with us but then again so do many teams apart from Sunderland and West Ham

 

[donkinho]

B

Bad, written about a heroin addicted friend in Dublin, is one of the very best U2 tunes before they lost the plot, started wearing cowboy hats and pretending to be American

Glad it's not just myself that think U2 were a good band up to and including the Unforgettable Fire ? Anything after that thy started taking themselves way too seriously. Bono has to be one of the most pretentious twats walking the planet these days - proper up his own arse

 

[waspish]

Somewhere in this thread (sorry can't find it at the mo) a poster stated that rather than ask our owner we borrowed some money on the markets.. Actually, the borrowing was by CFG to fund infrastructure and IT development. It will not appear in our accounts and the MEN issued a completely wrong article about it, mixing up City and CFG.
Just for the sake of accuracy, City are still debt free. More piss boiled!
(If you know different, please put me right.)

Yeah you put it better than me.

My main point was our owner didn’t say here the money and it’s 0% apr like chelsea owner does. We went and got a loan to cover certain things in the CFG.

Think we do have debt but it’s debt that we can’t pay it up.

 

[Doctor Jimmy and Mr Jim]

Actually, the borrowing was by CFG to fund infrastructure and IT development.

Let's hope they went and got a new telephone switchboard system for the Etihad!

 

[cheekybids]

B

Bad, written about a heroin addicted friend in Dublin, is one of the very best U2 tunes before they lost the plot, started wearing cowboy hats and pretending to be American

reminded myself how great they were on my drive in today.

 

[Dave Ewing's Back 'eader]

Always found a trip to St Andrews far more daunting than Villa Park. Fortunately the Zulus didn't seem interested in soft targets. Villa have a problem with us but then again so do many teams apart from Sunderland and West Ham

And Southampton! Southampton are the new Everton! Took us seasons to get a result at Goodison! And I can still see the fuckin' gap in the wall open wider as Baines began his run-up at The Etihad.

 

[Pablo ZZZ Peroni]

Somewhere in this thread (sorry can't find it at the mo) a poster stated that rather than ask our owner we borrowed some money on the markets.. Actually, the borrowing was by CFG to fund infrastructure and IT development. It will not appear in our accounts and the MEN issued a completely wrong article about it, mixing up City and CFG.
Just for the sake of accuracy, City are still debt free. More piss boiled!
(If you know different, please put me right.)

It was for working capital so could be for anything and not specifically infastructure or IT.

Yes it was a CFG who arranged the finance but presumably with MCFC in mind.

This is how it appears in the notes to City's 20-21 financial statements:

 

[KS55]

It was for working capital so could be for anything and not specifically infastructure or IT.

Yes it was a CFG who arranged the finance but presumably with MCFC in mind.

This is how it appears in the notes to City's 20-21 financial statements:

View attachment 35755

Thanks for that. The infrastructure and IT comment was based on a press statement (I think) from CFG at the time. There were also some commentators suggesting that the principal purpose of the loan was for a stadium for NYCity.

 

[petrusha]

I’m playing catch up here, but who called Harris as an expert? And was his expert testimony simply that footballer’s wages aren’t publicly known?

I don’t see anything in that quote you posted that suggests it wasn’t accepted as expert testimony, but I do wonder what exactly he contributed there?

The passage in the Judgment concerning Nick Harris is in numbered paras 153 and 154. The message you're responding to quotes only para 154 as that discusses the scope of the evidence he gave, which is what was asked about in the post I was replying to. Whether Harris's evidence counted as expert evidence was discussed in numbered para 153.

That latter paragraph is reproduced more than once in messages above while I've also supplied a link to the Judgment, in which it can be found. Or else, the Judgment can be located at judiciary.uk - search for Manchester City. In truth, this point almost certainly made very little difference to anything. However, as I've written a few times in the thread, as someone who holds the man's abilities in the lowest possible regard, I found it somewhat amusing to see a High Court Judge say that, in giving testimony, Harris wasn't providing the court with expert evidence.

Nick Harris once complained to the club that I was nasty to him on Twitter and was also an admin of this site therefore a representative of the whole City fan base. The obvious implication being that I should be removed from this technical role on a totally unofficial site by the club somehow.

Another amusing aspect of this whole thing is that members of the so-called 'WhatsApp Group' down the years have consistently derided City fans as knowing nothing about the issues surrounding the ownership and running of the club. They've continually accused us of being deluded partisans whose intractable bias leads us to swallow unquestioningly whatever line our Abu Dhabi masters wish us to put forward in their defence.

You'd think, then, that these supposed top-quality journalists would be totally relaxed in letting our responses speak for themselves for the most part and in batting them away with ease when absolutely necessary. Yet they don't half get touchy when challenged, even (or perhaps especially!) when it's by perfectly reasonable people who remain impeccably polite. There's something not quite consistent in their attitude.