Media thread 2022/23

Status
Not open for further replies.
View attachment 62176
Is this right ,and could this be what the Premier League are looking into .
Sssshhhh fuck me, don't fuckin tell everyone, we've kept it quiet for all this time.
You could blow our cover that we're state owned.
Delete this post mate before the cunts in the press get hold of it.
 
Another hypocrite to add to the ever growing money media hypocrite list.

View attachment 62178

It’s absolutely tragic how easily people buy into right wing propaganda on here.

What you’re saying is Gary Lineker isn’t allowed to criticise Qatar because between 2009-2012 he worked for Al-Jazeera.

I wonder if anything might have happened since 2009 that would make someone change their mind about the Qatari regime?

I wonder if you also hold yourself to the (moronic) standard of never changing your position on something over 10 years?


Gary Lineker is a smug prick, but he’s not a hypocrite. The Daily Mail has been desperately running hit pieces on him ever since he backed up his pro refugee and other left leaning statements by hosting refugees in his home.

You’d think someone who spends their time raging against biased media sources and agendas would pick up on one when they see it…
 
It’s absolutely tragic how easily people buy into right wing propaganda on here.

What you’re saying is Gary Lineker isn’t allowed to criticise Qatar because between 2009-2012 he worked for Al-Jazeera.

I wonder if anything might have happened since 2009 that would make someone change their mind about the Qatari regime?

I wonder if you also hold yourself to the (moronic) standard of never changing your position on something over 10 years?


Gary Lineker is a smug prick, but he’s not a hypocrite. The Daily Mail has been desperately running hit pieces on him ever since he backed up his pro refugee and other left leaning statements by hosting refugees in his home.

You’d think someone who spends their time raging against biased media sources and agendas would pick up on one when they see it…

How were LGBTQ rights in 2009, migrant labour & don’t forget about the wimmin;)

I agree Lineker & Neville should be allowed their rights to speak & earn but at times they also need to be a little less sanctimonious in their approach to others.

I liked Barry Hearns view, whilst it’s legal I have the duty to get the best I can for my clients. Let the governments make the rules,
 
How were LGBTQ rights in 2009, migrant labour & don’t forget about the wimmin;)

I agree Lineker & Neville should be allowed their rights to speak & earn but at times they also need to be a little less sanctimonious in their approach to others.

I liked Barry Hearns view, whilst it’s legal I have the duty to get the best I can for my clients. Let the governments make the rules,

It's almost as if he was ignorant of the situation, widespread global coverage made him aware of it, and he changed his stance based on that new information.
 
View attachment 62176
Is this right ,and could this be what the Premier League are looking into .
CAS didn't "look into" anything that was obviously time barred as that would be a waste of their time and resources, so no, it's not right. There may have been disagreement on what constituted being time barred or not but that is the extent of it.

Please tell me that you don't get your information from random idiots on media comments posts?
 
It’s absolutely tragic how easily people buy into right wing propaganda on here.

What you’re saying is Gary Lineker isn’t allowed to criticise Qatar because between 2009-2012 he worked for Al-Jazeera.

I wonder if anything might have happened since 2009 that would make someone change their mind about the Qatari regime?

I wonder if you also hold yourself to the (moronic) standard of never changing your position on something over 10 years?


Gary Lineker is a smug prick, but he’s not a hypocrite. The Daily Mail has been desperately running hit pieces on him ever since he backed up his pro refugee and other left leaning statements by hosting refugees in his home.

You’d think someone who spends their time raging against biased media sources and agendas would pick up on one when they see it…
Well said.
 
CAS didn't "look into" anything that was obviously time barred as that would be a waste of their time and resources, so no, it's not right. There may have been disagreement on what constituted being time barred or not but that is the extent of it.

Please tell me that you don't get your information from random idiots on media comments posts?
Ah, but if they had looked at them, we would obviously have been guilty, so therefore will be this time. It's easy this legal malarkey.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.