Media thread 2022/23

Status
Not open for further replies.
mcfcpride said:
Click to expand...


City bingo card filling up there.

Lets see who her beloved red dippers navigated on their way to a first European Cup:

Crusaders
Trabzonspor
St Etienne
FC Zurich
Borussia Monchengladbach

The European Cup was a different competition in them bygone days compared to the Champions League today.
 
Nick Harris tweeted that people wouldn't believe the amount of suppression of any analysis of Manchester City's ownership that was going on. I replied with this:

Please provide detailed information on the tactics used to suppress critical analysis of
@ManCity ownership, and specific details and evidence of who is behind those efforts. Saying it, and backing it up with evidence are two very different things.

He blocked me, immediately, and it was the first ever tweet that I had sent him.
 
tregyblue61 said:
mcfcpride said:
Click to expand...


City bingo card filling up there.

Lets see who her beloved red dippers navigated on their way to a first European Cup:

Crusaders
Trabzonspor
St Etienne
FC Zurich
Borussia Monchengladbach

The European Cup was a different competition in them bygone days compared to the Champions League today.
Click to expand...

Just to add further context:

To win our first Champions League title we had to beat a team in the group stages that has been a finalist 2 times, then had to defeat a team in the quarterfinal that has been a finalist 11 times (winning it 6 times), then had to defeat a team in the semifinal that has been a finalist 17 times (winning it 14 times), then had to defeat a team in the final that has been a finalist 6 times (winning it 3 times).

The two teams we knocked out in the QF and SF rounds have collectively contested 9 of the last 15 CL finals (winning it 7 times). The team we defeated in the final also won it during that time.

And we did it without losing a single game and qualifying for the Champions League as actual champions.

Rudd’s equivocations and qualifications are intellectually dishonest, like most of her “analysis”.

 
oldius said:
Nick Harris tweeted that people wouldn't believe the amount of suppression of any analysis of Manchester City's ownership that was going on. I replied with this:

Please provide detailed information on the tactics used to suppress critical analysis of
@ManCity ownership, and specific details and evidence of who is behind those efforts. Saying it, and backing it up with evidence are two very different things.

He blocked me, immediately, and it was the first ever tweet that I had sent him.
Click to expand...
You might as well have just called him a sad, pathetic bitter charlatan ****
Which is unequivocally provable
 
Tariq Panja is a ****.

I noticed he blocked me yesterday for asking a polite question but then whilst listening to a podcast & who is the expert but fck me TP.

He was the resident crime, finance, corruption expert & the bullshit he came out with was quite unbelievable. There was so many holes in his opinions that it’s no wonder he doesn’t debate with anyone.

 
Just submitted a complaint to the BBC, I encourage other fans to keep calling them out in their biased reporting.

"As an institution the BBC consistently reports on Manchester United in a favourable and biased way compared to all other football clubs. For instance the second leading news headline on the football supporter wearing the number 97 and the words "not enough" an offensive reference to the Hillsborough disaster, the BBC failed to point out the supporter was actually wearing a "Manchester United top", references were made to the incident occurring at the match between Manchester City and United, but the vital fact it was a United shirt was deliberately omitted. Readers of the news article were left in the dark who's shirt the offending fan was wearing.

Both Simon Stone in his article on Manchester City’s Chairman's address and Dan Roan in his coverage of the City treble winning parade lead with negative references about PL charges, although as yet they are unproven. The actual football achievement was secondary.

Several articles are written about Manchester United looking to sign Kane, Rice and others this summer although they are more likely to be at other clubs.

The football sports gossip section on transfers consistently leads with fantasy 'fan boy' stories about Manchester United, while other clubs such as Manchester City are written about in a consistently negative way, invariably focusing on who's leaving the club rather than new arrivals.

Perhaps the consistent biased coverage in favour of Manchester United has a subconscious element, but more likely there is a large number of Manchester United fans in the BBC that find it very difficult to report news in a fair and independent manner."
 
Plain Speaking said:
Just submitted a complaint to the BBC, I encourage other fans to keep calling them out in their biased reporting.

"As an institution the BBC consistently reports on Manchester United in a favourable and biased way compared to all other football clubs. For instance the second leading news headline on the football supporter wearing the number 97 and the words "not enough" an offensive reference to the Hillsborough disaster, the BBC failed to point out the supporter was actually wearing a "Manchester United top", references were made to the incident occurring at the match between Manchester City and United, but the vital fact it was a United shirt was deliberately omitted. Readers of the news article were left in the dark who's shirt the offending fan was wearing.

Both Simon Stone in his article on Manchester City’s Chairman's address and Dan Roan in his coverage of the City treble winning parade lead with negative references about PL charges, although as yet they are unproven. The actual football achievement was secondary.

Several articles are written about Manchester United looking to sign Kane, Rice and others this summer although they are more likely to be at other clubs.

The football sports gossip section on transfers consistently leads with fantasy 'fan boy' stories about Manchester United, while other clubs such as Manchester City are written about in a consistently negative way, invariably focusing on who's leaving the club rather than new arrivals.

Perhaps the consistent biased coverage in favour of Manchester United has a subconscious element, but more likely there is a large number of Manchester United fans in the BBC that find it very difficult to report news in a fair and independent manner."
Click to expand...
Bang on the money that
 
cheekybids said:
Tariq Panja is a ****.

I noticed he blocked me yesterday for asking a polite question but then whilst listening to a podcast & who is the expert but fck me TP.

He was the resident crime, finance, corruption expert & the bullshit he came out with was quite unbelievable. There was so many holes in his opinions that it’s no wonder he doesn’t debate with anyone.

Click to expand...

Even the interviewer was suffering from his narrative, if he was telling a story in a pub it would end with “to cut a long story short” we’d all reply “too fucking late you boring ****”.
 
Plain Speaking said:
Just submitted a complaint to the BBC, I encourage other fans to keep calling them out in their biased reporting.

"As an institution the BBC consistently reports on Manchester United in a favourable and biased way compared to all other football clubs. For instance the second leading news headline on the football supporter wearing the number 97 and the words "not enough" an offensive reference to the Hillsborough disaster, the BBC failed to point out the supporter was actually wearing a "Manchester United top", references were made to the incident occurring at the match between Manchester City and United, but the vital fact it was a United shirt was deliberately omitted. Readers of the news article were left in the dark who's shirt the offending fan was wearing.

Both Simon Stone in his article on Manchester City’s Chairman's address and Dan Roan in his coverage of the City treble winning parade lead with negative references about PL charges, although as yet they are unproven. The actual football achievement was secondary.

Several articles are written about Manchester United looking to sign Kane, Rice and others this summer although they are more likely to be at other clubs.

The football sports gossip section on transfers consistently leads with fantasy 'fan boy' stories about Manchester United, while other clubs such as Manchester City are written about in a consistently negative way, invariably focusing on who's leaving the club rather than new arrivals.

Perhaps the consistent biased coverage in favour of Manchester United has a subconscious element, but more likely there is a large number of Manchester United fans in the BBC that find it very difficult to report news in a fair and independent manner."
Click to expand...
They will probably rejoice in that, because it's all about clicks rather than actual content, if Fred the Red from hampshire is clicking on it then job done, it's not fair I know and we who actually pay for the service should expect unbiased coverage, I would have thought that writing to OFCOM would be better
 
hammocity said:
Even the interviewer was suffering from his narrative, if he was telling a story in a pub it would end with “to cut a long story short” we’d all reply “too fucking late you boring ****”.
Click to expand...

I wonder if he’d said that the premier league has been built as the flag ship league to wash the atrocities at the hands of the British empire. He could have then talked about Dr David Kelly & how many believe he was murdered before talking about the exorbitant wealth of the premier league attracting all the talent, making it a vacuum & driving costs up around the world where no one could compete.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top