Media thread 2022/23

Status
Not open for further replies.
The perfect fumble said:
I'm guessing you mean this fella....

hq720_2.jpg


Dumb as a f**king doorknob.
Click to expand...
Some of his meltdowns when they lose are epic.
 
You have to love the BBC comments section. I go on every now and then for shits and giggles

I responded to a poster called blue moon, calling out Liverpool failing FFP, admittedly on the cup draw article comments section.

My response:
Correct. Wrote off £50m against the new stadium to bypass FFP. Anyway all anyone says on here is that City get easy draws. Chelsea twice in the same season.

Guess what, post deleted as off topic. I then for the hell of it reported the original post which referred to the Etihad as the empty had. I reported it as defamatory with the following statement:

If my response was deemed to be off topic, how is it acceptable to refer to the Etihad stadium as the empty had.

Their response:

Further to your complaint about some of the content on a BBC website (reference number P43939560), we have decided that it does not contravene the House Rules and are going to leave it on site.

So there you go, another example of saying what you like about City on the BBC and it's not an issue. Glad I fucked off paying their license fee over a decade ago.
 
manimanc said:
Some of his meltdowns when they lose are epic.
Click to expand...
My mate’s lad once messaged him during a live when they were in the middle of that mad losing run of home games. Said ‘you’re gonna cry in a minute’
Mr Potato head went on a mad 5 minute rant all but offering him a straightener
The lad was 13
Shows his mental age
 
bonespost said:
View attachment 62176
Is this right ,and could this be what the Premier League are looking into .
Click to expand...
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.
 
jrb said:
Another hypocrite to add to the ever growing money media hypocrite list.

View attachment 62178
Click to expand...

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…
 
domalino said:
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…
Click to expand...

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,
 
cheekybids said:
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,
Click to expand...

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.
 
bonespost said:
View attachment 62176
Is this right ,and could this be what the Premier League are looking into .
Click to expand...
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?
 
domalino said:
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…
Click to expand...
Well said.
 
Centurions 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?
Click to expand...
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.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top