PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

bobbyowenquiff said:
I really hope the people of Manchester boycott John Bishop’s gigs after his poisonous tirade against City on TalkSPORT today. His comments saying clubs and rival fans should boycott games against City were despicable, especially as he lives in Manchester. His claim that: “There are 115 charges so we must have done something” showed him to be a total moron. It’s always funny when the mask slips from people like him.
Click to expand...
Why anyone would go in the first place? More jokes about him pretending to be so so pooower when he was a kiddeh.
Stan Boardman did the same routine 4 decades ago.
 
bobbyowenquiff said:
What Bishop said was City could be innocent or guilty but if you had 115 charges you must have done something. Sterling tried to backtrack. Just the usual distortion and dishonest coverage.
Click to expand...
It wasn’t much of a backtrack. Almost a throwaway line which the producer no doubt told him to mention that Bishop had said City could be innocent or guilty.

However, Bishop stated clubs should refuse to play City. Does he think they should refuse to play us if we are innocent ?

Stellings own words a couple of weeks ago were that City need the book thrown at them if found guilty, and if innocent then so be it !!!

And the ironic point of the day is that Bishop has today announced a gig at the Co Op live !!!
 
Cityfan1977 said:
I remember when the Der Spiegel 4 articles came out it was very one sited, it was "this is how City cheated". but not " Did City cheat?"
I dont remember but where there any comments from City in the Der Spiegel articles.?
Any way there was nothing normal how one sited Der Spiegel was and here we are 6 years later .
Does anyone remember how did City responce in the aftermath of Der Spiegel, where there any counterargument in the Der Spiegel from City site.
Could City not have taken Der Spiegel to court before UEFA charged us ?
Click to expand...
IIRC, City put out a statement - that would be repeated time and time again over the coming years - stating that the e-mails were hacked and, more importantly, out of context.

I agree with your view of the slant Der Spiegel put on the e-mails. They assumed guilt when in fact they could be interpreted many different ways. From what I can recall, the articles themselves were also very poorly written, so much so that you could've been mistaken for thinking a 10 year old had been let loose in certain parts. No disrespect to 10 year olds of course but you get my drift. There were also racist overtones to them as well. However, the funniest thing about this sensational 4 part expose was that with each passing article the sensationalism went out of it completely. They largely spunked their load in article 1 with most of the so-called evidence, but by article 4 they were basically acknowledging - through gritted teeth of course - that City are now a very well run football club. They'd gone from completely slagging us off to begrudgingly praising us!
 
Manc in London said:
Scousers must be funny. After all, they always laugh at their own 'jokes'.

Many years ago, I sat in front of three inebriated scousers on a four-hour flight. Each one of them thought they were a comedian. Non-stop drivel for the whole flight. I had a headache after the flight as I spent so much time grinding my teeth. It was excruciating.
Click to expand...

You shouldn’t have taken 5 E’s before a flight mate. Should’ve saved them for when you got there.
 
halfcenturyup said:
You know all this, but it's important for everyone to always remember that no-one has ever challenged (in any legal or regulatory case, UEFA disciplinary action or PL disciplinary action, afaik) that Mansour owns City in a personal capacity rather than as some vehicle for AD. The fact that no-one has, means that no-one can, as I am sure some people would have liked to. The closest anyone got was UEFA in 2014 through the definition of a possible related party connection between ADUG and the AD sponsors, and UEFA eventually threw that out themselves.

City fans should be careful not to fall into the AD "trap" by combining ownership and sponsorship. They are two very different issues.

The whole concept of sportswashing is that we are owned by an AD sheikh and as such the purpose of the investment is to improve the image of Abu Dhabi, which falls at the first ownership hurdle (I once had this discussion with Delaney whose response was "I can't take you seriously if you can't see the link between Mansour and the AD government" as if it was some sort of gotcha. If I could shake my head on Twitter, I would have done).

The issue of AD sponsorship is nothing to do with sportswashing, which is why Emirates sponsorships aren't an issue. The issue rival clubs have with the number and amount of City's AD sponsors is that Mansour has contacts in AD, of course, and is using them to increase revenue. Yeah, tough. Suck it up, which I still hope will be the result of the APT case.

Anyway, I am sure you know all this. I was trying to summarise my thoughts for the thread as a whole.
Click to expand...

Purposely breaking 115 rules seems an incredibly bizarre way to try to “wash” public perception of you, I must say.
 
Thing is with scousers is they are victims by nature and its because despite their front of being proud scousers and dipperland being great la they know they will always be the poor relations just never quite good enough.

They blame us for only winning 1 title in the last 35 years but tell us we didnt exist before 2008, they know that manchesters music scene obliterates theirs in every way, the first thing that every professional scouser does as soon as they achieve any level of success is move, hell they cant even get the award for most irritating accent.

Scousers protest all the time as deep down they know that the only thing they will ever be known as is that shithole with the thieving cunts with excruciating accents near manchester.
 
bobbyowenquiff said:
I really hope the people of Manchester boycott John Bishop’s gigs after his poisonous tirade against City on TalkSPORT today. His comments saying clubs and rival fans should boycott games against City were despicable, especially as he lives in Manchester. His claim that: “There are 115 charges so we must have done something” showed him to be a total moron. It’s always funny when the mask slips from people like him.
Click to expand...
John Bishop reminds me of my ex brother in law who was from the Wirral. His Mum, (the ex brother in law, not John Bishop) paid for elocution lessons “to help him succeed in a career”. Not much of an accent until he told a joke. The people of Merseyside believe it’s a scientifically proven fact that all jokes are 17.6% funnier if told in a Scouse accent with half a pint of phlegm in your gob. He was a narcissistic sociopath and eventually my sister left him, (again, the brother in law, not John Bishop…… I think).

Bishop always bangs on about how he has loads of mates that come to his gigs from his time as a Chemical Sales Specialist. Biggest Walter Mitty since Ronnie Irani. If he told me the time I’d double check.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

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.