Media Thread - 2021/22

Status
Not open for further replies.
In todays world, it's not the facts that need to be correct, it's the narrative that needs to be right, sadly. And they all got that right.
I get that, but surely they have to report the facts. Liverpool going top is factually wrong. And someone should be pulled up for incorrectly informing the public.
 
A big win at Wolves would almost seal it for us because of goal difference. We could end up realistically just needing one more win. Tommorrow is the key match I think. One more push. I thought Liverpool were poor tonight. If they repeat their performance tonight Chelsea will easily win the FA Cup.
Did anyone notice how many times Villa players were slipping and sliding all over the pitch and losing the ball. It was like they were all out in sympathy for Slippy G.
 
This new thing of including wages on top of transfer fee is doing my nut. I assume they will apply this too all clubs this summer then? Even that thick c*nt Micky Gray was at it just now on talkshite.
I understand the figures have been privately confirmed for Haaland as £51m transfer fee, £30m agents fees, and approx £18m annual salary. All the costs are spread over five years so it will cost City about £34m a year. This is a tiny figure for an organisation with revenues of around £600m year. In any event Haaland's presence will increase our sponsorship revenues by at least £30m plus per year.
So why are some pundits still persisting with the lie (and that's what it is) that Haaland will cost £200m plus. Are they stupid or biased? Why did the same people mock City last year when we sensibly walked away from Levy's absurd demands for Kane?
 
Did anyone notice how many times Villa players were slipping and sliding all over the pitch and losing the ball. It was like they were all out in sympathy for Slippy G.

Didnt watch the game but it seems to be happening at most grounds lately. Dont know what's going on
 
So that’s 3000 Norwegian-Scousers who won’t be coming to the Etihad next season to see Haaland.

Norwegian, not Scouse.

CA93-FC7-A-45-F5-4-A61-813-F-95-A1945-A8-E53.jpg
Looks like he’s missed off the end part of his user name, as I can’t see fiddler anywhere. Then I looked at his photo and it screams NONCE!
 
If we will be better with Haaland (or Alvares for that matter) is yet to be seen. Fact is we have been brilliant with and without a recognised striker. But it makes me smile to read the over dramatic reactions.

As it is now we have got ourselves a pair of very young dynamic strikers, adding to the one running the show in the academy (and maybe would have had more minutes if for his injuries). It surely gives Pep more options. I obviously expect these CFs will gel soon and gives us what we all want. Goals.
Delap would make a great understudy for Haaland. He will learn a lot and will get plenty of game time because Pep will not allow Haaland to be burned out. We play 60 plus matches a season so Delap could get 20 games. The other positive is that Pep will change formations to maximise the impact of a central striker and that will also help Delap.
 
I understand the figures have been privately confirmed for Haaland as £51m transfer fee, £30m agents fees, and approx £18m annual salary. All the costs are spread over five years so it will cost City about £34m a year. This is a tiny figure for an organisation with revenues of around £600m year. In any event Haaland's presence will increase our sponsorship revenues by at least £30m plus per year.
So why are some pundits still persisting with the lie (and that's what it is) that Haaland will cost £200m plus. Are they stupid or biased? Why did the same people mock City last year when we sensibly walked away from Levy's absurd demands for Kane?
Standard reporting of city transfer business - add agents fees and ten years wages to the fee, and round it up each time you report it. It'll be a billion by July.
 
John Watson has compromised. He now reports that Liverpool have "pulled level" with City. Try again.
The main headline on BBC football online is currently "Liverpool back level with Man City" which is totally false because they are still in second place. I know we are in the post-truth age but things are getting ridiculous. Even LFC fans must see this is farcical.
 
The main headline on BBC football online is currently "Liverpool back level with Man City" which is totally false because they are still in second place. I know we are in the post-truth age but things are getting ridiculous. Even LFC fans must see this is farcical.
I look forward to them correcting it as the day goes on.
Any chance they'll start talking about it being an Un-champions League Final at the end of May, given that the scousers scraped in as 4th in their league and Real were only runners-up to Atletico in theirs?
Thought not.
 
Last edited:
What about the committed most fouls with least Yellow cards conceded league. Or the most crosses sent into the opposition league. Or the most world classes long passes attempted league.
Can't remember the exact figures, but in the Spurs game they had something like 45 crosses into the box compared to around 7 by Spurs. And people think this is entertaining.
 
The main headline on BBC football online is currently "Liverpool back level with Man City" which is totally false because they are still in second place. I know we are in the post-truth age but things are getting ridiculous. Even LFC fans must see this is farcical.
i heard that we were 'neck 'n neck'! I think our neck is just a little longer than theirs.
 
rag comic.

What pull have the rags got for young players ?

A good stable manager = No

A good team = No

A well run club = No

A happy set of fans = No

A modern stadium = No

A state of the art training campus = No

Pay top wages = Yes
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top