Paddy Barclay Backtracks

Ric said:
silverback said:
Paddy Barclay is Slur's official hagiogropher so is unlikely to say too much to offend the guru of mind games. Logically, not long left at the helm over at the swamp so surely another tome is in the offing. Would any journalist in his right mind not want the return gig?

Pretty sure it was an unofficial biography of Ferguson, and there's no love lost between the two.

Regardless, Barclay writing us off in November (whilst unbeaten) was pretty idiotic. Yet another football journalist with little credibility.

Which is precisely what puzzles me. Barclay is not a stupid journalist. Like Henry Winter or Martin Samuel he is one of the more knowledgable and articulate of football writers. Had it been an idiot like Custis or Ashton writing us off you would have yawned and turned over. But for Barclay to come out with such a load of twaddle when we are
(a) unbeaten,
(b) carrying a few injuries to influential players,
(c) not conceding any more than we did last year
(d) etc etc
Is just stupid. For years the mantra of fleet street has been that winning when you are not playing well is the sign of champions. You would think that this seasons league record of 8 wins, 4 draws and 0 defeats would tick that particular box quite neatly.

I wonder why he did come out with it. The usual 'he's a rag twat who hates City' doesn't wash in this instance. Is he just losing the plot? Shame if he is because he has been a fine journalist, and football has not produced many of those.
 
Barclay belongs to that self appointed group of football writers who believe its their job to act as moral guardians of the game. To look down on the rest and adopt a higher moral tone. Others in this group include James Lawton, Patrick Collins and Brian Glanville.

They also share a believe that the game was much cleaner 30 years ago. That Balotelli is repugnant but George Best was a loveable rogue.
 
He has now responded to a blue who accused him of hatred for city with this...

"I Hate Manchester City? I've heard it all now. Used to pay to stand on the Kippax and fall under Nellie's spell"

Now saying he is actually a 'paid up' blue! File alongside, Schindler & Conn!!!
 
levets said:
He has now responded to a blue who accused him of hatred for city with this...

"I Hate Manchester City? I've heard it all now. Used to pay to stand on the Kippax and fall under Nellie's spell"

Now saying he is actually a 'paid up' blue! File alongside, Schindler & Conn!!!

Ah that's where it all went wrong....he was happy when we were shite so he could wear a big 'look at me I don't follow the crowd' badge.
 
blue b4 the moon said:
levets said:
He has now responded to a blue who accused him of hatred for city with this...

"I Hate Manchester City? I've heard it all now. Used to pay to stand on the Kippax and fall under Nellie's spell"

Now saying he is actually a 'paid up' blue! File alongside, Schindler & Conn!!!

Ah that's where it all went wrong....he was happy when we were shite so he could wear a big 'look at me I don't follow the crowd' badge.

Agree mate... that's what I was getting at... Same as Colin Schindler, David Conn... And RASCAL!


Only joking Russ ;-)
 
levets said:
He has now responded to a blue who accused him of hatred for city with this...

"I Hate Manchester City? I've heard it all now. Used to pay to stand on the Kippax and fall under Nellie's spell"

Now saying he is actually a 'paid up' blue! File alongside, Schindler & Conn!!!

City-supporting journos told me he was one of us many years ago and so I've never understood the slagging he gets on here. For him to say one week that we're hopeless and the next that we are gonna win the league sounds like most of us that used to stand on the Kippax, me included. What more proof do you need?
 
coleridge said:
levets said:
He has now responded to a blue who accused him of hatred for city with this...

"I Hate Manchester City? I've heard it all now. Used to pay to stand on the Kippax and fall under Nellie's spell"

Now saying he is actually a 'paid up' blue! File alongside, Schindler & Conn!!!

City-supporting journos told me he was one of us many years ago and so I've never understood the slagging he gets on here. For him to say one week that we're hopeless and the next that we are gonna win the league sounds like most of us that used to stand on the Kippax, me included. What more proof do you need?

He just tweeted me and said "stop talking crap.. he's a paid up Dark Blue but had a lifelong soft spot for City" words to that effect...
 
He is really a moron.

He said last time t's not United but City that will win the league.

No he came up with this:


If Manchester City win the Premier League, it will be judged the worst in history



Manchester City’s chances of winning the Premier League have improved as a result of their removal from Europe, which should make them fresher at weekends.

We can be sure of that because Sir Alex Ferguson, the wiliest campaigner in the League, has publicly questioned it, offering the alternative theory that Roberto Mancini will now find it harder to satisfy his squad members’ desire for time on the pitch.

True, several of Mancini’s players will be heard moaning over the next five months. But we have got used to that and, more important, so has the City manager. Just as Chelsea under Roman Abramovich’s ownership have offered an argument for creative instability, City, with their matchless collection of stars, have come to gainsay the convention that a happy ship is essential for success.

Oddly, their attitude doesn’t seem to apply to Europe. But we shall see how determined City are to retain the domestic title on Sunday, when Ferguson takes United to the Etihad Stadium for the first of the season’s title deciders — even the broadcasters will use the phrase sheepishly this time, saving their full sense of portent for the Old Trafford derby in April, by which time the nature of United’s latest transition should be more clear.

Sometimes United look like champions, sometimes not. It has been that sort of season.

No sooner did Chelsea put together an ominous run of form than Abramovich ripped up the plan. No sooner did Arsenal tighten their defence than it fell apart. Spurs, having won at United, threatened to take advantage, only to find, in Emmanuel Adebayor’s flailing feet, an agent of self-destruction. City alone have shown consistency.

But, if they win the League, it will probably be judged the worst Premier League in our admittedly short memories — and City’s failure in Europe will be rightly cited. This time last year we had, for all the faults that led Chelsea to change the Andre Villas-Boas regime and the justified belief that Robin van Persie’s goals were flattering Arsenal, a top four good enough to withstand the challenge of a superb Newcastle. Now Spurs can limp into the top four.

Yet every day we read of players who rate themselves worthy of a pay rise — Bacary Sagna, for example, as if he were the engine of some relentless trophy-winning machine. Perhaps easy money is a clue to the Premier League’s problem.
 
Ignoring the dig at City, he is quite right. The quality of the Premier League so far this year has been dreadful, save Chelsea early on maybe. Some exciting games but quality? Nowhere to be seen. Whether City win it or not won't change that.


GoMancini7 said:
He is really a moron.

He said last time t's not United but City that will win the league.

No he came up with this:


If Manchester City win the Premier League, it will be judged the worst in history



Manchester City’s chances of winning the Premier League have improved as a result of their removal from Europe, which should make them fresher at weekends.

We can be sure of that because Sir Alex Ferguson, the wiliest campaigner in the League, has publicly questioned it, offering the alternative theory that Roberto Mancini will now find it harder to satisfy his squad members’ desire for time on the pitch.

True, several of Mancini’s players will be heard moaning over the next five months. But we have got used to that and, more important, so has the City manager. Just as Chelsea under Roman Abramovich’s ownership have offered an argument for creative instability, City, with their matchless collection of stars, have come to gainsay the convention that a happy ship is essential for success.

Oddly, their attitude doesn’t seem to apply to Europe. But we shall see how determined City are to retain the domestic title on Sunday, when Ferguson takes United to the Etihad Stadium for the first of the season’s title deciders — even the broadcasters will use the phrase sheepishly this time, saving their full sense of portent for the Old Trafford derby in April, by which time the nature of United’s latest transition should be more clear.

Sometimes United look like champions, sometimes not. It has been that sort of season.

No sooner did Chelsea put together an ominous run of form than Abramovich ripped up the plan. No sooner did Arsenal tighten their defence than it fell apart. Spurs, having won at United, threatened to take advantage, only to find, in Emmanuel Adebayor’s flailing feet, an agent of self-destruction. City alone have shown consistency.

But, if they win the League, it will probably be judged the worst Premier League in our admittedly short memories — and City’s failure in Europe will be rightly cited. This time last year we had, for all the faults that led Chelsea to change the Andre Villas-Boas regime and the justified belief that Robin van Persie’s goals were flattering Arsenal, a top four good enough to withstand the challenge of a superb Newcastle. Now Spurs can limp into the top four.

Yet every day we read of players who rate themselves worthy of a pay rise — Bacary Sagna, for example, as if he were the engine of some relentless trophy-winning machine. Perhaps easy money is a clue to the Premier League’s problem.
 
Interesting theory. If City win the league its poor quality but if another club wins it then presumably it isn't? Would like to know the theory behind that. Whilst its been poor so far there's plenty of time for some good football to be played, and even if it remains poor I'm not sure I'd have any qualms about City lifting the title in May.
 

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.