Mike Riley

[trublue55]

If he mentions things "evening themselves up over the season" even once, can someone there please punch him on the side of the head.

why the side? How about front on, bang on the nose?

 

[The Future's Blue]

I guess it is impossible to answer this question without breaking the official secrets act so by all means feel free to ignore it.

However, did he give an indication that he feels that English football refereeing has a problem, more so than other sports officials, with their ilk being unable to avoid undue influence from teams, press, players, officials and crowds? And did he give any genuine, tangible reason to think that he is actively seeking to address this disgraceful state of affairs?

That is the crux of the matter for me.

I ill have my mortgage on him paying lip service to it but in reality doing absolutely fuck all to address it, lest too many people be upset by it.

Cheers mate, I think that's the only question that needed to be answered.

 

[bernabias home shirt]

what is this context then?

Everything involved in refereeing from training and assessment to on-the-field issues and the disciplinary process.

Answer me this p.b and be honest..

Did you or bill say to him you think refs were told to make sure the rags win at all costs?

As you state many times on here..

 

[BertTrautmann'sParachute]

Riley turned up to do a PR job. He did it. Anyone seriously think he was going to say "yep. some of the refs make morally questionable decisions but what can you do? We don't want to upset rasherface."?

 

[SWP's back]

I'd harbour a guess that nothing of any great interest was said.

So why go on about it?

They went, were asked not to publish it, that should be the end of it.

 

[johnmc]

I'd harbour a guess that nothing of any great interest was said.

So why go on about it?

They went, were asked not to publish it, that should be the end of it.

Well really if they were asked not to publish it, maybe they shouldnt have made the meeting public knowledge on a city forum.

Say someone posted transfer gossip along the lines of i know we are signing someone but i cant say who, what would your reaction be??

Should I leave the thread?

 

[SWP's back]

Well really if they were asked not to publish it, maybe they shouldnt have made the meeting public knowledge on a city forum.

Only if you continue to not be able to put your brain in gear.

Here goes:

PB made the thread before he went as he had every intention (along with Bill and JMW) of giving details of what went on in the meeting (he had pm'd me earlier in the day yesterday to tell me to look out for the thread).

At the meeting, they were asked not to reveal the details, but the thread was already up and people asking questions. He then posted in the thread saying they were asked not to reveal what had gone on in detail.

It's not fucking rocket science but if you are still struggling, I shall try and break it down further for you.

 

[BoyBlue_1985]

Well really if they were asked not to publish it, maybe they shouldnt have made the meeting public knowledge on a city forum.

Only if you continue to not be able to put your brain in gear.

Here goes:

PB made the thread before he went as he had every intention (along with Bill and JMW) of giving details of what went on in the meeting (he had pm'd me earlier in the day yesterday to tell me to look out for the thread).

At the meeting, they were asked not to reveal the details, but the thread was already up and people asking questions. He then posted in the thread saying they were asked not to reveal what had gone on in detail.

It's not fucking rocket science but if you are still struggling, I shall try and break it down further for you.

Could you explain it in the medium of expressionist dance
Failing that use Lego's

 

[johnmc]

Well really if they were asked not to publish it, maybe they shouldnt have made the meeting public knowledge on a city forum.

Only if you continue to not be able to put your brain in gear.

Here goes:

PB made the thread before he went as he had every intention (along with Bill and JMW) of giving details of what went on in the meeting (he had pm'd me earlier in the day yesterday to tell me to look out for the thread).

At the meeting, they were asked not to reveal the details, but the thread was already up and people asking questions. He then posted in the thread saying they were asked not to reveal what had gone on in detail.

It's not fucking rocket science but if you are still struggling, I shall try and break it down further for you.

Ok I take onboard that the thread was made prior to the meeting, fair enough. Well done on the pm as well.

Ignored my question though. I still think you would call someone out if they said they were going into a meeting regarding a major transfer and then turned round after and said sorry it was confidential. Maybe I'm wrong about that but I think your attitude would be different. It just this thread suits your agenda.

Maybe I could have another reply to tell me I'm thick and your ever so clever as well.

 

[JoeMercer'sWay]

what is this context then?

Everything involved in refereeing from training and assessment to on-the-field issues and the disciplinary process.

Answer me this p.b and be honest..

Did you or bill say to him you think refs were told to make sure the rags win at all costs?

As you state many times on here..

As I've tried to hint to you, Bill didn't give him a minute's peace.

and the minute Bill shut up, I assure you, as the room would attest, that I reeled off a number of questions that clarify many of the gripes/myths people talk about on here.

Though Bill did get bored halfway through my questioning and decided he was Mike and started answering the question for him...