Mike Riley

[BoyBlue_1985]

It would be difficult as I would imagine some of the pieces would end up being eaten by those upset with the thread.

Well, eating them is preferable to the suppository approach I assumed they'd take.

Oh look, we are so much cleverer, me and you, lets try and be funny

I happen to think explaining complex situations in the form of Lego's is the way forward

 

[bertisbigbanana]

I'd love to see the chain of events expressed with the use of lego.

Step 1. The 'over aggressive' tackle

What's the referee saying to the player he just given a red to, or aren't you allowed to tell us?

yeah. and whats with scholes getting straight into the referee's face? what did mike have to say about that?

 

[monkey-trousers]

I'd love to see the chain of events expressed with the use of lego.

Step 1. The 'over aggressive' tackle

What's the referee saying to the player he just given a red to, or aren't you allowed to tell us?

Sorry, can't say. ;)

 

[Matty]

It would be difficult as I would imagine some of the pieces would end up being eaten by those upset with the thread.

Well, eating them is preferable to the suppository approach I assumed they'd take.

Oh look, we are so much cleverer, me and you, lets try and be funny

I don't really get the problem:-

1 - A thread was started telling people about a meeting with Mike Riley, with the intention of passing on all information gathered at said meeting.

2 - The meeting took place, at which attendees were requested not to divulge what was said.

3 - Those who attended the meeting have abided by the wishes of Mike Riley/Manchester City/whoever was responsible for the request.

4 - PB has posted on this thread an explanation as to why he will not be providing the information he'd previously indicated he would, specifically the aforementioned request for non-disclosure.

It's really that simple. You may question why one of the attendees hasn't ignored the request, after all it wasn't legally binding, but those who were at the meeting have obviously made the decision to do as requested. Maybe it's a moral decision? Maybe it's in the hope that further meetings/information will be divulged if previous requests have been adhered to? Who knows, but whatever the reason it is what it is.

 

[JohnMaddocksAxe]

I'd love to see the chain of events expressed with the use of lego.

Step 1. The 'over aggressive' tackle

What's the referee saying to the player he just given a red to, or aren't you allowed to tell us?

If it were several other sports you'd hear it on the TV yourself.

As it is people like Riley and others in influence in football are doing their best to make sure that it never happens in football.

For one reason and one reason only, football would instantly become the most embarrassing farce in world sport and the weak and easily influenced nature of referees would be there, coming through the speakers, for all to see.

The pleading with players to stop being dirty, the difference in attitudes when communicating with different players, the abuse that they will generally allow to be spouted at them and constantly undermine them, the influence that players have on them when 'claiming' for things.

It would be a farce. Because English football officiating is a farce. Microphones would leave nowhere for them to go when they deny it in public or at meetings like this.

 

[BoyBlue_1985]

This is the meeting

Batman was there to mediate it<br /><br />-- Fri Apr 13, 2012 1:02 pm --<br /><br />This is the club PB went to after the meeting

 

[SWP's back]

This is the meeting

Batman was there to mediate it

Now I understand the secrecy, we have signed Van Persie!

 

[Dirty Harry]

Well, eating them is preferable to the suppository approach I assumed they'd take.

Oh look, we are so much cleverer, me and you, lets try and be funny

I don't really get the problem:-

1 - A thread was started telling people about a meeting with Mike Riley, with the intention of passing on all information gathered at said meeting.

2 - The meeting took place, at which attendees were requested not to divulge what was said.

3 - Those who attended the meeting have abided by the wishes of Mike Riley/Manchester City/whoever was responsible for the request.

4 - PB has posted on this thread an explanation as to why he will not be providing the information he'd previously indicated he would, specifically the aforementioned request for non-disclosure.

It's really that simple. You may question why one of the attendees hasn't ignored the request, after all it wasn't legally binding, but those who were at the meeting have obviously made the decision to do as requested. Maybe it's a moral decision? Maybe it's in the hope that further meetings/information will be divulged if previous requests have been adhered to? Who knows, but whatever the reason it is what it is.

And the thread should be locked at that as far as I'm concerned, I don't like it as much as the next person, but they've given their word, and I respect that, in fact it would piss me off more if they went back on it, I'm sure many things will come out over time anyway.

 

[johnmc]

Well, eating them is preferable to the suppository approach I assumed they'd take.

Oh look, we are so much cleverer, me and you, lets try and be funny

I don't really get the problem:-

1 - A thread was started telling people about a meeting with Mike Riley, with the intention of passing on all information gathered at said meeting.

2 - The meeting took place, at which attendees were requested not to divulge what was said.

3 - Those who attended the meeting have abided by the wishes of Mike Riley/Manchester City/whoever was responsible for the request.

4 - PB has posted on this thread an explanation as to why he will not be providing the information he'd previously indicated he would, specifically the aforementioned request for non-disclosure.

It's really that simple. You may question why one of the attendees hasn't ignored the request, after all it wasn't legally binding, but those who were at the meeting have obviously made the decision to do as requested. Maybe it's a moral decision? Maybe it's in the hope that further meetings/information will be divulged if previous requests have been adhered to? Who knows, but whatever the reason it is what it is.

1. Fair enough

2. Fair enough

3. As far as I could tell it was the request of Mike Riley. If it was the club as well that asked this then again fair enough I missed that and it is different. I just couldnt see why there was such a loyalty to Mike Rileys request.

4. Yes I understand PB's explanation. However, if someone who attended PM'd someone who wasnt there and told them to put it up, there would be no way the person could be tracked. I doubt Mike is reading this waiting to see if his wishes are granted.

And I will add, just say Mike Riley said there was corruption in the game against City and all refs are trying to stop us win the league, but that info was only betwen these 4 walls, would his request still be granted?

 

[lust overlord]

Step 1. The 'over aggressive' tackle

What's the referee saying to the player he just given a red to, or aren't you allowed to tell us?

If it were several other sports you'd hear it on the TV yourself.

As it is people like Riley and others in influence in football are doing their best to make sure that it never happens in football.

For one reason and one reason only, football would instantly become the most embarrassing farce in world sport and the weak and easily influenced nature of referees would be there, coming through the speakers, for all to see.

The pleading with players to stop being dirty, the difference in attitudes when communicating with different players, the abuse that they will generally allow to be spouted at them and constantly undermine them, the influence that players have on them when 'claiming' for things.

It would be a farce. Because English football officiating is a farce. Microphones would leave nowhere for them to go when they deny it in public or at meetings like this.

Great points again.If the FA had any balls at all they could roll the microphoned refs out slowly.A select few games as a trial using their best most "respected" officials like Mr Webb.