Media Thread - 2021/22

[The perfect fumble]

A bit of lighthearted nostalgia in the gloom....

Cigars and showmen: the summer that changed English football punditry​

https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...summer-that-changed-english-football-punditry

From left: Bob McNab, Paddy Crerand, Jimmy Hill, Derek Dougan, Brian Moore and Malcolm Allison on the set of ITV’s 1970 World Cup coverage.

 

[GaudinoMotors]

Racist undertones.
Surely not.

 

[Centurions]

It's always our fault, it's always our fault, we are Man City, it's always our fault.

Not true, sometimes it was the Chelsea fans.

 

[Centurions]

so the survey goes from 10k-11k to 100k in the blink of eye

10,000 fans & 90,000 bots?

 

[Shirley]

Harris, City washing, continues

And the headline article.

It’s a miracle!

I don’t do much twitter but harris immediately blocked me because I questioned his credibility.
soft ****

You just watch the narrative and agenda explode the closer it get’s to playing the Scousers twice.

 

[Bill Walker]

Regarding City being voted most damaging to the game , wasnt it the American owned clubs that wanted the ESL. No promotion a closed shop. Even their fans were against it but some how all football problems are Citys fault lol

Good point.
And the attempted furloughing has been conveniently forgotten.

 

[give it to gordon]

Good point.
And the attempted furloughing has been conveniently forgotten.

Or buying up local houses and leaving them derelict.

 

[eyalluvitt]

The only thing the Sheikh has damaged is the red teams' trophy count.

He has been a godsend for Harris and his ilk, given them a legitimate target for their hate and bile, cheered on and encouraged by a nation of gullible brain dead armchair & very very jealous football supporters.

 

[The slaughtered lamb]

Are we surprised that the most successful club is considered most damaging to the game? For the average football fan, ‘the good of the game’ means their club winning everything.

 

[halfcenturyup]

The conclusion was the father of the survey. This is the outcome we want; what questions do we need to ask to deliver it

OK, which one of you was this?

3007 Spider Variant
@HydeRoadCiteh
·
34m

Replying to
@sportingintel
Hello pal. I lied on this survey. So did most people. You've been fvcked in the ass with this. Cheers from a Liverpool fan.

 

[Bonzo Nododo]

The simple question to ask fans was:
Would you prefer an owner who invests profits in the team or one who puts them into his own pockets?
Only one answer really except those fans who recognise that the latter part of the question shows their owner in bad light and votes in the opposite way to the intelligent answer.

 

[train man]

He has been a godsend for Harris and his ilk, given them a legitimate target for their hate and bile, cheered on and encouraged by a nation of gullible brain dead armchair & very very jealous football supporters.

Not legitimate, only in their tiny hypocritical minds...

 

[dickie davies]

What exactly does the knob jockey Holt want ? He moans when our owner puts money in now he moans when owners take money out.

Perhaps the owners need to shake it all about

 

[blue61]

10,000 fans & 90,000 bots?

I am all for FFP being meaningful and regulated as it won’t affect City. That drawbridge has been well and truly closed

 

[jimharri]

God knows I'm not the sharpest knife in the kitchen drawer but bloody hell, she's thick. Spending big on Lukaku is "different" to spending big on Grealish.

 

[laserblue]

so the survey goes from 10k-11k to 100k in the blink of eye

The semi literate prick can't even spell regulator. "...specific things for a regular to do".

 

[Semper aggressus]

I am all for FFP being meaningful and regulated as it won’t affect City. That drawbridge has been well and truly closed

I‘m all for ffp being completely fucked off and the only limiting criteria being clubs cannot go into debt. So if an owner and income mean a club can spend £500m in one transfer window without taking it into debt, that’s fine. If a richer owner than ours comes along and they spend £800m in one window then fair enough.

But if a club has £400m of debt loaded onto it, or a huge stadium to pay for, then tough shit, they’ll have to sign free transfers from league 1.

It should be exactly as if you have £1m in the bank, you can go out and buy a new Range Rover, no worries. But if you have about £200 and thousands of pounds in credit card debts and a mortgage, you can’t. Why doesn’t football operate that way?

Why is it that the Glazers can pile £400m debt on rags but they’re allowed to buy Sancho and pay Ronaldo millions a month? But if we tried to sign Haaland, Rice and Mbappe in summer there would be an outcry about us ruining football. I genuinely don’t understand, unless it’s purely down to jealousy, tribalism and racism.

 

[oakiecokie]

God knows I'm not the sharpest knife in the kitchen drawer but bloody hell, she's thick. Spending big on Lukaku is "different" to spending big on Grealish.

The thick stupid woman.

 

[laserblue]

Or buying up local houses and leaving them derelict.

While forcing the remaining residents of the resulting wasteland to sell up for peanuts.

 

[Chris in London]

Is it the owner who hasn’t taken money out if the club hmmm.

It’s a weird sort of greed, that one