Media thread 2022/23

Status
Not open for further replies.
Eds said:
So it’s an almost total eradication of competition but we only won it because Arsenal faltered which infers it was a competitive league. Make your mind up. How does any publication worth its salt employ this idiot.
Click to expand...
Clicks!

Lot's and Lot's of clicks.
 
The Lone Whalley Ranger said:
Carragher being all matey with our lads on the TV last night, pretending to be professional. The next day he’s calling for the Premier League charges to stick and calling us cheats. I think it’s long overdue we start banning these twats from the stadium. What do we actually get out of them being let in? Literally nothing in it for us.
Click to expand...
Watch out for this dick head doing the same thing again today.
 
The Lone Whalley Ranger said:
Watch out for this dick head doing the same thing again today.
Click to expand...

Spot on mate. Carragher and Ferdinand are such hypocrites. All matey with the players and Pep trying to worm their way in and as soon as they're out of ear shot they go back to peddling their biased, anti City rhetoric to placate their fan base. The players are in a difficult position, but I'd love it if one of them calls them out for it. I reckon Dias has it in his locker to do that. Pep certainly does!
 
gordondaviesmoustache said:
The so called ‘academic’ knows the square root of fuck all if he thinks something being outside the limitation period is a loophole. Limitation periods are mandated in statute, and followed by bodies such as UEFA in the interests of justice and fairness to all clubs that are subject to its rules. They exist to provide certainly around litigation and require parties to commence proceedings within a prescribed time-limit. They are apparent to all parties involved from the outset, and cannot be imposed retrospectively.

They bear absolutely no resemblance to a loophole. They are (in the context of the UEFA charges) a well-established, widely understood, unequivocal, mutually agreed term of the contract between the parties.

They are also taught to law students at a very base level.

I have never heard a competent lawyer describe a limitation period as a loophole, and nor have I ever heard one describe their deployment as unfair. They are widely accepted across the legal profession as both manifest and a hard and fast rule - something to be closely observed and treated with respect, especially in the contemplation of any litigation.

How could something with those characteristics ever be described as a loophole, unless you didn’t know what you were talking about?
Click to expand...

They do/don't know but just choose to keep on throwing the mud relentlessly to brainwash the thick masses that we're cheats. Of course the crying mardarses of the red shirts don't need any convincing it helps comfort the crybabies as they sob into their club quilts.
 
gordondaviesmoustache said:
The so called ‘academic’ knows the square root of fuck all if he thinks something being outside the limitation period is a loophole. Limitation periods are mandated in statute, and followed by bodies such as UEFA in the interests of justice and fairness to all clubs that are subject to its rules. They exist to provide certainly around litigation and require parties to commence proceedings within a prescribed time-limit. They are apparent to all parties involved from the outset, and cannot be imposed retrospectively.

They bear absolutely no resemblance to a loophole. They are (in the context of the UEFA charges) a well-established, widely understood, unequivocal, mutually agreed term of the contract between the parties.

They are also taught to law students at a very base level.

I have never heard a competent lawyer describe a limitation period as a loophole, and nor have I ever heard one describe their deployment as unfair. They are widely accepted across the legal profession as both manifest and a hard and fast rule - something to be closely observed and treated with respect, especially in the contemplation of any litigation.

How could something with those characteristics ever be described as a loophole, unless you didn’t know what you were talking about?
Click to expand...
Excellent points, however I believe they know all this, but this is a concerted attempt to tarnish the club and it’s achievements
 
paulchapo said:
They do/don't know but just choose to keep on throwing the mud relentlessly to brainwash the thick masses that we're cheats. Of course the crying mardarses of the red shirts don't need any convincing it helps comfort the crybabies as they sob into their club quilts.
Click to expand...
I get all that, but my point is that this so-called academic can be nothing of the sort (or at least not a legal academic) if he thinks the application of a limitation period is a loophole. The fact he’s said that it is on BBC News suggests he’s a charlatan, which certainly suits the narrative to which you point.

They’ve basically interviewed a know nowt **** because of what he’ll say, not because of his knowledge on the subject.
 
Mr Fraser said:
www.bbc.co.uk

Ros Atkins on… Manchester City's finances

As Manchester City make it five league titles in six years, Ros Atkins looks at the issues raised by the club facing more than 100 Premier League charges.
www.bbc.co.uk www.bbc.co.uk
Click to expand...

The only interesting part of that, and probably the most factual one, is that the club have launched a legal challenge of the PL case a week or so ago. Something I had missed.
 
stan bowles said:
I honestly think we'll be featured on the BBC's Panorama in the next couple of weeks. They've already wheeled out Ros Atkins within 2 hours of us winning the league (again). Maybe the Watchdog team will do a feature too ?
Piss boiling is off the scale tonight.
Click to expand...
No story. City charged, City exonerated. The only thing getting that aired is the spin.
 
pudge said:
I know it's been said before but why don't the club just fuck them off?
Click to expand...
That would be the logical thing to do.

However, MCFC do things differently. Very differently.

Have you ever heard the expression: "give someone enough rope"

Fans of other clubs read his ramblings and they will eventually come to the conclusion that this deluded individual is not worth their time or readership.
 
Tracking back said:
That would be the logical thing to do.

However, MCFC do things differently. Very differently.

Have you ever heard the expression: "give someone enough rope"

Fans of other clubs read his ramblings and they will eventually come to the conclusion that this deluded individual is not worth their time or readership.
Click to expand...
I dunno mate. We’ve been taking the ‘holistic’ approach for well over a decade and the vitriol is worse than ever, from the media and rival fans alike.

Why we’d ever let Spitty Carragher step foot in our stadium again is beyond me.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top