Media Thread - 2021/22

Status
Not open for further replies.
petrusha said:
Thanks. That wording is very revealing, isn't it?!

Not something along the lines of, "Things will come out that won't pint the club in a good light and you'll lose credibility if you're seen to be defending it." That might be contentious - for example, the FFP 'revelations' in Der Spiegel were dishonestly presented and subsequent discussions were risibly overblown. But at least such an approach would imply that sports journalists generally regarded their overriding objective as being to report the truth.

Your interlocutor may well be a decent guy whose primary interest was to look out for you. But he quite clearly implies widespread hostility among those in his profession, taking the form of a concerted attack on us. We basically knew this already, of course, but it's interesting to have confirmation that it can be spoken of like that in private, too. In contrast, publicly and especially on social media, people like Delaney usually just try to gaslight us.
Click to expand...
Gaslighting is exactly what they are doing when they play the “Touchy City fans” card after they get a bit of their own medicine back
 
I think in general the media look for excuses to mitigate what Peps achieved.

At Barca (arguably the best side ever) there was constant sniping about PED's and blood doping, it's all Messi etc. This is taking over a team who finished 4th.

At Munich he was criticized for taking over a team that had won the treble, even though when he signed his contract in the Oct for the season after they'd not won the league for 2 years, and they dominated in a way never seen before.

At City they talk about our owners infinite resources even though FFP means we up until this year could only spend less than United on our running costs. And our "infinite resources" led to us scraping 4th on the last day of the season before he joined.

I don't know if this is some rose tinted nostalgic view that things were better in the past

Or they just don't want to accept that he's been proven to be the best and is therefore better than Busby, Clough, Fergie, Shankley, Klopp, Jose whoever they idolise.

It's just a method of coping I guess, that and generating clicks
 
Talulah said:
Yes, quite bizarre. He's actually a Liverpool fan... did you not get the "Klopp is a god" feeling about it!

Most of the points have already been countered effectively by Ste Tudor's article as BK mentioned above, but several, as you say, are very vague in source and more emotional than factual. It just shows how much he's hurting, and a dipper fan hurting should be a pleasure for all of us. Pure karma!
Click to expand...

Are you sure about his allegiances ? The only record I can find of him authoring anything is a contribution to an anthology of stories about united.
 
mat said:
www-footballinsider247-com.cdn.ampproject.org

Man City saluted after 'phenomenal' January deal struck - Dr Dan

Football Insider has been told by Dan Plumley that Man City deserve credit for their "phenomenal" work in the commercial department.
www-footballinsider247-com.cdn.ampproject.org www-footballinsider247-com.cdn.ampproject.org
Click to expand...
It says in that article that The deal will be tested by the top flight’s new curbs on inflated related party sponsorship arrangements.'

Why?

We are multiple champions, people want to be associated with winners, 3 times in the last 4 years City have been champions and champions in the right fashion btw playing fantastic football.

Where were they when utd had got a fucking noodle deal, go fuck yourselves you bitter pathetic cunts.
 
bluealf said:
It says in that article that The deal will be tested by the top flight’s new curbs on inflated related party sponsorship arrangements.'

Why?

We are multiple champions, people want to be associated with winners, 3 times in the last 4 years City have been champions and champions in the right fashion btw playing fantastic football.

Where were they when utd had got a fucking noodle deal, go fuck yourselves you bitter pathetic cunts.
Click to expand...
Because they're testing all new deals over £1m. Having said that, I thought we'd signed these prior to the new rules coming in
 
The deloony piece is a fucking yawn a minute. I stopped at this, and could have stopped earlier to be honest.

"If you were to try and imagine what a state project with unlimited funds would produce, where they could afford the absolute best of everything, it would be this.".

Its at this point, probably before tbh, you realise he's smiling at you whilst mouthing "You ****".

What an abhorrence he is.
 
Mike D said:
A great article in the Independent an honest review I would say. long but week worth a read
Click to expand...
For fucks sake if you're going to link stories written by that intellectually dishonest, Qatar funded, (some people say) turtle bothering, (it is believed) gall stone licking, mono testicled, dumb as a stick gobshite at least warn people.
I accidentally clicked the bastard thing and I don't want to go on that (sources believe) stained ladies underwear sniffing perverts metrics.
 
citizen_maine said:
I wasn't aware Newcastle had any new deals, but then I'm not that interested in their finances
Click to expand...
They have new owners I am sure there will be some new deals in place soon if not already.

But the point of the original post was to do with the wording 'over inflated'

What is over-inflated when you are the club people want to spend their money on to sponsor and even more so in the owners home country as everybody there will want to be associated with our success.

No such thing as an overinflated deal in our circumstances, when you are getting millions whilst only being 7th then people should maybe start asking questions, no?
 
bluealf said:
They have new owners I am sure there will be some new deals in place soon if not already.

But the point of the original post was to do with the wording 'over inflated'

What is over-inflated when you are the club people want to spend their money on to sponsor and even more so in the owners home country as everybody there will want to be associated with our success.

No such thing as an overinflated deal in our circumstances, when you are getting millions whilst only being 7th then people should maybe start asking questions, no?
Click to expand...
But that is what they're testing to see?
 
lancs blue said:
"state project", "limitless funds", "owned by Abu Dhabi", "all for...the glory of Abu Dhabi, who have essentially used a football club, and changed it so it is unrecognisable to its previous form or anything ever seen in the game."

Same old Deloony bullshit.
Click to expand...
'State project...limitless funds' is exactly the point I stopped reading.
 
citizen_maine said:
Because they're testing all new deals over £1m. Having said that, I thought we'd signed these prior to the new rules coming in
Click to expand...
There are some inaccuracies in the report and I think this is one of them. By the same token he states that Abu Dhabi gov own the hotel group. He has mixed up ownership of the building (AD Gov) with ownership of the hotel business, which is part British, part Chinese.
I expect that our sponsorship contract is with the hotel business not the AD Gov.
 
madloaf said:
The deloony piece is a fucking yawn a minute. I stopped at this, and could have stopped earlier to be honest.

"If you were to try and imagine what a state project with unlimited funds would produce, where they could afford the absolute best of everything, it would be this.".

Its at this point, probably before tbh, you realise he's smiling at you whilst mouthing "You ****".

What an abhorrence he is.
Click to expand...


Yeah I stopped at the state project unlimited funds bollocks as well.

It's like groundhog day reading a Delenay piece about City.
 
bobbyowenquiff said:
It is the usual despicable piece you would expect from the author. It is riddled with mistakes. He describes Khaldoon as the "de facto Prime Minister of UAE" and City as a a "state project." He says the club was bought for "the glory of Abu Dhabi" and for "political aims." He also claims we have "limitless funds" and escaped from Covid unscathed (ignoring our £126m loss last season).
He also repeats the fake claim that we just bought the whole management structure from Barcelona. In fact Sorriano and Soriano had both left Barca before they came to City. Soriano was running a Spanish airline. Every paragraph emphasises the false narrative that Delooney has created in his head.
For the absence of any doubt City are not "state owned" and never have been. Dozens of independent auditors from all over the world and scores of lawyers have poured over our books for ten years and they have never found we are "state owned." Not even UEFA have ever alleged that.
There is no evidence that Sheikh Mansour or the US and Chinese consortiums who own our club are the slightest bit interested in so-called "sportswashing" They have made billions from their investments in MCFC and the City of Manchester so far and have only just got going. In fact there is no such thing as "sportswashing" Most businesses in the Gulf region are on an urgent mission to diversify their incomes away from declining fossil fuels, like oil. No one acccuses Dubai of "tourismwashing." Sheikh Mansour is no different which is why, despite being accused of making "dirty oil money," he is one of the world's biggest investors in renewable energy.
Click to expand...
Ironically, the media are the only people constantly mentioning Abu Dhabi in connection with us. After some excitement immediately after the takeover, AD has faded into the background of our own discourse.
Khaldoon mentions it once a year in the chairman's statement but that's about it. I've never heard Soriano talk about AD. You would think, if it was all for the glory of AD, it would be a constant part of our PR. AD themselves as far as I am aware never use City as a PR point.
 
KS55 said:
There are some inaccuracies in the report and I think this is one of them. By the same token he states that Abu Dhabi gov own the hotel group. He has mixed up ownership of the building (AD Gov) with ownership of the hotel business, which is part British, part Chinese.
I expect that our sponsorship contract is with the hotel business not the AD Gov.
Click to expand...
Calling it a "report" is pushing it I'd have thought, but they say it's a UAE-based luxury hotel brand rather than AD owned. It's nonsense anyway as no one has stated amounts for these 2 deals. So mentioning "inflated related party sponsorship arrangements" in the piece is pure made up bollocks.

Edit: I'm presuming it's not been altered BTW.
 
Centurions said:
Calling it a "report" is pushing it I'd have thought, but they say it's a UAE-based luxury hotel brand rather than AD owned. It's nonsense anyway as no one has stated amounts for these 2 deals. So mentioning "inflated related party sponsorship arrangements" in the piece is pure made up bollocks.

Edit: I'm presuming it's not been altered BTW.
Click to expand...
I thought I had read "owned" but I'm probably wrong. But the article is still wrong; the hotel group is based in Hong Kong, not UAE.
Incidently, the article is in praise of our commercial ops. The author expresses no opinion on our sponsorships being inflated, merely references the new PL rules.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top