Media Thread - 2021/22

Status
Not open for further replies.
The club should challenge that, or better still Sheikh Mansour himself sue the lying bastard for defamation.

We could start by asking that ignorant **** of a journalist what evidence he has showing our owner is greedy, or has taken money out of the club. It looks to me like it’s the opposite.

I don’t understand why we as a club never fight back against this narrative that harms its reputation.
 
You have to laugh at the Mail's Damascene conversion to socialist principles as soon as it's not the establishment clubs winning everything. Let's look at Holt's rationale for imposing an independent regulator on football;

"After everything that has happened in the past 18 months — the car crash of Project Big Picture, the backlash against the aborted European Super League, the shame of the approval of the Saudi Arabia bid for Newcastle United and the defrocking of Roman Abramovich at Chelsea — no one trusts them to run football any more"

What exactly has happened ? "Project Big Picture" ? In case, like Oliver Holt, you've forgotten;

"The plan, put together by Liverpool and Manchester United, would see teams in the EFL - ie the leagues below the Premier League - given £250m ($325m) right now, to share between themselves, plus 25% of revenue from future TV deals that the Premier League secures.
Those clubs, led by the EFL's chair Rick Parry, have been demanding money from the Premier League for some time, because they have been struggling financially in the absence of crowds due to Covid-19" -Ah..Liverpool and Manchester United.

European Super League ? In case, like Oliver Holt, you've forgotten;

"Barcelona president Joan Laporta has slammed Manchester United and Liverpool by accusing the Premier League duo of being the 'real founders' of the failed European Super League.

All three of the clubs were intended to be founding members of the failed ESL when it was initially announced back in April with United co-owner Joel Glazer one of the figures who publicly endorsed the controversial plans"

"The shame of the approval of the Saudi Arabia bid for Newcastle United" ? In case, like Oliver Holt, you have forgotten who was behind the appointment of the Premier League's chief decision maker;

"Liverpool and Manchester United have left their Premier League rivals furious after reportedly having had special access to weigh up the candidates to be the new chief executive of the Premier League.

The two English giants met with candidates for the position, which had initially been taken up by Susanna Dinnage before the Animal Planet president pulled out of the appointment"

Which just leaves Abramovic. Maybe Holt criticised him and called him out before Putin's invasion of Ukraine but, if so, I can't find it. And, even so, who, at the proposed regulator's office will decide which wars are acceptable to football and which aren't. Who at the Regulator's will decide how close a person needs to be to another person to be deemed sufficiently responsible for that other person's actions ? One thing's certain. It can't and won't be someone independent.

In short, Oliver Holt isn't stupid enough not to know all that. The guy is, simply, a ****.
 
Exeter Blue I am here said:
I see the results of Harris’s confirmation bias survey are in (not gonna post a link to the cnut’s article). Unsurprisingly, questions along the lines of “would you like to see the evil, baby killing monsters, who own dirty cheating Manchester City, thrown out of football”, have been firmly endorsed by supporters of the rags and the dippers, who absolutely haven’t got a hat in the ring of any description. The man’s an utter fucking prick
Click to expand...
Was there a part of the survey asking about the dippers association with Standard Chartered and Western Union? I very much doubt it because I’ve been asking for ages and never once got past the moderators even when on an unmoderated thread. Clear and fucking obvious which way the narrative is pushed by these cunts.
 
Newman Noggs said:
You have to laugh at the Mail's Damascene conversion to socialist principles as soon as it's not the establishment clubs winning everything. Let's look at Holt's rationale for imposing an independent regulator on football;

"After everything that has happened in the past 18 months — the car crash of Project Big Picture, the backlash against the aborted European Super League, the shame of the approval of the Saudi Arabia bid for Newcastle United and the defrocking of Roman Abramovich at Chelsea — no one trusts them to run football any more"

What exactly has happened ? "Project Big Picture" ? In case, like Oliver Holt, you've forgotten;

"The plan, put together by Liverpool and Manchester United, would see teams in the EFL - ie the leagues below the Premier League - given £250m ($325m) right now, to share between themselves, plus 25% of revenue from future TV deals that the Premier League secures.
Those clubs, led by the EFL's chair Rick Parry, have been demanding money from the Premier League for some time, because they have been struggling financially in the absence of crowds due to Covid-19" -Ah..Liverpool and Manchester United.

European Super League ? In case, like Oliver Holt, you've forgotten;

"Barcelona president Joan Laporta has slammed Manchester United and Liverpool by accusing the Premier League duo of being the 'real founders' of the failed European Super League.

All three of the clubs were intended to be founding members of the failed ESL when it was initially announced back in April with United co-owner Joel Glazer one of the figures who publicly endorsed the controversial plans"

"The shame of the approval of the Saudi Arabia bid for Newcastle United" ? In case, like Oliver Holt, you have forgotten who was behind the appointment of the Premier League's chief decision maker;

"Liverpool and Manchester United have left their Premier League rivals furious after reportedly having had special access to weigh up the candidates to be the new chief executive of the Premier League.

The two English giants met with candidates for the position, which had initially been taken up by Susanna Dinnage before the Animal Planet president pulled out of the appointment"

Which just leaves Abramovic. Maybe Holt criticised him and called him out before Putin's invasion of Ukraine but, if so, I can't find it. And, even so, who, at the proposed regulator's office will decide which wars are acceptable to football and which aren't. Who at the Regulator's will decide how close a person needs to be to another person to be deemed sufficiently responsible for that other person's actions ? One thing's certain. It can't and won't be someone independent.

In short, Oliver Holt isn't stupid enough not to know all that. The guy is, simply, a ****.
Click to expand...
Comprehensive, cold and forensic dismantling of the odious prick, beats an emotion-fuelled rant every time. Good one..
 
bulldogblue said:
What a disgusting headline with the article including a photograph of our owners. Oliver Holt is an absolute plonker.
Click to expand...
There's nothing wrong with the headline and the picture may well have been selected by someone else (or at least that's my understanding of how it works).

I've not read it and have no intention of doing so given Newmans dissection a few posts above, but does it actually mention us at all?
 
Newman Noggs said:
You have to laugh at the Mail's Damascene conversion to socialist principles as soon as it's not the establishment clubs winning everything. Let's look at Holt's rationale for imposing an independent regulator on football;

"After everything that has happened in the past 18 months — the car crash of Project Big Picture, the backlash against the aborted European Super League, the shame of the approval of the Saudi Arabia bid for Newcastle United and the defrocking of Roman Abramovich at Chelsea — no one trusts them to run football any more"

What exactly has happened ? "Project Big Picture" ? In case, like Oliver Holt, you've forgotten;

"The plan, put together by Liverpool and Manchester United, would see teams in the EFL - ie the leagues below the Premier League - given £250m ($325m) right now, to share between themselves, plus 25% of revenue from future TV deals that the Premier League secures.
Those clubs, led by the EFL's chair Rick Parry, have been demanding money from the Premier League for some time, because they have been struggling financially in the absence of crowds due to Covid-19" -Ah..Liverpool and Manchester United.

European Super League ? In case, like Oliver Holt, you've forgotten;

"Barcelona president Joan Laporta has slammed Manchester United and Liverpool by accusing the Premier League duo of being the 'real founders' of the failed European Super League.

All three of the clubs were intended to be founding members of the failed ESL when it was initially announced back in April with United co-owner Joel Glazer one of the figures who publicly endorsed the controversial plans"

"The shame of the approval of the Saudi Arabia bid for Newcastle United" ? In case, like Oliver Holt, you have forgotten who was behind the appointment of the Premier League's chief decision maker;

"Liverpool and Manchester United have left their Premier League rivals furious after reportedly having had special access to weigh up the candidates to be the new chief executive of the Premier League.

The two English giants met with candidates for the position, which had initially been taken up by Susanna Dinnage before the Animal Planet president pulled out of the appointment"

Which just leaves Abramovic. Maybe Holt criticised him and called him out before Putin's invasion of Ukraine but, if so, I can't find it. And, even so, who, at the proposed regulator's office will decide which wars are acceptable to football and which aren't. Who at the Regulator's will decide how close a person needs to be to another person to be deemed sufficiently responsible for that other person's actions ? One thing's certain. It can't and won't be someone independent.

In short, Oliver Holt isn't stupid enough not to know all that. The guy is, simply, a ****.
Click to expand...
Is Holt stupid enough? I could say yes but I have no evidence. I could say there are rumours that his Mom didn't show him enough love but I've never spoken to his Mom. I could say that multiple unnamed sources have confirmed that he constantly smells of shit but to be fair i just made that up.

To the back pages. This sports journalism is easy.
 
Last edited:
Exeter Blue I am here said:
I see the results of Harris’s confirmation bias survey are in (not gonna post a link to the cnut’s article). Unsurprisingly, questions along the lines of “would you like to see the evil, baby killing monsters, who own dirty cheating Manchester City, thrown out of football”, have been firmly endorsed by supporters of the rags and the dippers, who absolutely haven’t got a hat in the ring of any description. The man’s an utter fucking prick
Click to expand...
It’s amazing how Tottenham have 2 teams in the PL, and Norwich have already been relegated.
We all, already know that the poll is completely biased and meaningless - if you appeal to a certain pre- formed mindset of fans, and block certain fans, then it’s not going to be worth the spreadsheet it’s typed on.
Doubling a team, and losing another, shows the absolute crap that it and he is.

edit: the pic I saw of the Twitter post, had 2 Tottenham’s and no Norwich
 
Is Harris not very clever or doesn’t want to add in the details that the FFP investigation was thrown out by the CAS? Or ask the question why the Premier league has had an ongoing case against City but hasn’t got the balls to close or follow through with it? Surely any reporter worth his salt would add that context in or does that not fit his slant that he is trying to push onto the uneducated masses?
 
Semper aggressus said:
The club should challenge that, or better still Sheikh Mansour himself sue the lying bastard for defamation.

We could start by asking that ignorant **** of a journalist what evidence he has showing our owner is greedy, or has taken money out of the club. It looks to me like it’s the opposite.

I don’t understand why we as a club never fight back against this narrative that harms its reputation.
Click to expand...
If you sit by the river long enough….
 
The current cash generator is football ownership. The hacks all go with the flow. Share the same information, no checks or balances but 1 sided slander with racial undertones. Bale called them out recently.

Scum behaviour.
 
Centurions said:
There's nothing wrong with the headline and the picture may well have been selected by someone else (or at least that's my understanding of how it works).

I've not read it and have no intention of doing so given Newmans dissection a few posts above, but does it actually mention us at all?
Click to expand...
Yes.
 
Exeter Blue I am here said:
I see the results of Harris’s confirmation bias survey are in (not gonna post a link to the cnut’s article). Unsurprisingly, questions along the lines of “would you like to see the evil, baby killing monsters, who own dirty cheating Manchester City, thrown out of football”, have been firmly endorsed by supporters of the rags and the dippers, who absolutely haven’t got a hat in the ring of any description. The man’s an utter fucking prick
Click to expand...

Once again, this is a completely meaningless piece of research, even ignoring the loaded questions.

First, Twitter, isn't representative of any fanbase. Second, Twitter as a research tool is rendered completely unsuitable by his practice of blocking anyone with a different opinion to his own. Thirdly, the questions didn't allow for context. Then, lastly, you have to question how he has validated which team someone supports. Could be any level of cross-contamination in the replies.

If anyone thought it wasn't bollocks, how is this for a conclusion: "Man City's owner came 5th in the list of owners that fans of other clubs found most admirable and No1 in the list of owners fans of other clubs felt had the most damaging influence."

Which leads to my main takeaway from all this nonsense: other fans admire the fact that Mansour has damaged the game (as far as the "historical elite" are concerned).
 
halfcenturyup said:
Once again, this is a completely meaningless piece of research, even ignoring the loaded questions.

First, Twitter, isn't representative of any fanbase. Second, Twitter as a research tool is rendered completely unsuitable by his practice of blocking anyone with a different opinion to his own. Thirdly, the questions didn't allow for context. Then, lastly, you have to question how he has validated which team someone supports. Could be any level of cross-contamination in the replies.

If anyone thought it wasn't bollocks, how is this for a conclusion: "Man City's owner came 5th in the list of owners that fans of other clubs found most admirable and No1 in the list of owners fans of other clubs felt had the most damaging influence."

Which leads to my main takeaway from all this nonsense: other fans admire the fact that Mansour has damaged the game (as far as the "historical elite" are concerned).
Click to expand...
The conclusion was the father of the survey. This is the outcome we want; what questions do we need to ask to deliver it
 
halfcenturyup said:
Once again, this is a completely meaningless piece of research, even ignoring the loaded questions.

First, Twitter, isn't representative of any fanbase. Second, Twitter as a research tool is rendered completely unsuitable by his practice of blocking anyone with a different opinion to his own. Thirdly, the questions didn't allow for context. Then, lastly, you have to question how he has validated which team someone supports. Could be any level of cross-contamination in the replies.

If anyone thought it wasn't bollocks, how is this for a conclusion: "Man City's owner came 5th in the list of owners that fans of other clubs found most admirable and No1 in the list of owners fans of other clubs felt had the most damaging influence."

Which leads to my main takeaway from all this nonsense: other fans admire the fact that Mansour has damaged the game (as far as the "historical elite" are concerned).
Click to expand...
Pretty much what I was going to post. He’s a bad faith actor in the extreme where City are concerned.

What makes me laugh is how many thousands of replies he will have had to work through from Blues & fans of other clubs calling him a ****, to get the data he needed to support the article he had clearly already written.

You could tell how the final article would read by the questions on his survey. He’s a cretin.
 
It’s clear an ‘independent regulator’ is in the works. What I don’t understand, is how they can get one in place when the clubs who own the Premier League & will need to vote on it in order for it to happen, are all opposed?

Lastly, if Harris et al think a regulator is going to come on board and simply remove football owners they don’t like, and their business models, they are going to be deeply disappointed.
 
Last edited:
Citizen Green said:
It’s clear an ‘independent regulator’ is in the works. What I don’t understand is how they can get one in place when the clubs who own the Premier League & will need to vote on it in order for it to happen are all opposed?

Lastly, if Harris et al think a regulator is going to come on board and simply remove football owners they don’t like, and their business models, they are going to be deeply disappointed.
Click to expand...
Newcastle is a v. good example of that. If a regulator had been in place before the takeover he may well have blocked it. Fine except the Saudis would have gone to the government mentioned oil and arms sales (just like they did 6 months ago) and the takeover would be allowed.
Would a regulator stop the Burnley take over ? Nope, and yet if they are relegated and don't immediately bounce back they are fucked.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top