PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[TueartsOHK]

I’ve had an email reply from the BBC today. Their main defence was that this was originally intended as a Q and A piece and the sub headings were derived from the most popular questions coming from Forrest and Everton fans

 

[KS55]

Had a response from the BBC. Acknowledging the language was misleading and one sided, plus usual corporate language...

A lot better than their average reply.

 

[levets]

The PL have appointed the 2 PL referees with the least favourable stats for our club, in the next 2 away matches: Taylor and Kavanagh,(both about 55% when are normal win % is over 70%). The PL seems to be trying to ensure we don't achieve the historic 4 successive top flight wins. I put the stat. details in the Ref Watch forum.

Both Greater Manchester Referee’s

 

[Sale Moor Blue]

The BBC should be shut down.

 

[HelloCity]

Had a response from the BBC. Acknowledging the language was misleading and one sided, plus usual corporate language...

That’s surprising honest from them.

Almost like a ‘Yeah, it was wank and we’ve told them’.

They’ve given their best explanation on why it was written based on what BBC Sport probably told them.

 

[nmc]

Well done! It's rare to get such a frank admission of shortcomings out of them. When they called Pete the Badge 'Bertie' they repeatedly lied through their teeth.

I'd like to think their contrition at least partly came from City having a very strong word with them.

I personally had a conversation re the Pete the Badge story with a senior Exec at the BBC and even when banged to rights…. He just kept repeating the lie…. Have zero respect for the BBC following that.

 

[BringBackSwales]

just had the same response to my complaint to them last night. May do a stage 1b. The thing is is that these errors won’t be made in bold under their original headline stating an apology that they allowed for some tiresome red wearing nobhead to be given carte blanch to take spiteful jibes at the club of their loathing will they? Oh no!

Go for a stage 1b and tell them BBS says they are all disgusting rag cunts (aka 1c)

 

[Roachy]

I’ve had an email reply from the BBC today. Their main defence was that this was originally intended as a Q and A piece and the sub headings were derived from the most popular questions coming from Forrest and Everton fans

Any indication which wanker wrote it and allowed it to be published?

 

[manimanc]

They knew what they was doing, not having all this oh we didn't mean to put it out as it was.

Get to fuck, they are as anti city as can be and they do the following if we're involved.

Totally ignore our wins and positive news.
Or
Put out shite like this.

Add to the fact Chris Sutton, who works for them, constantly dumbing down our achievements with a but at the end of everything and the whole organisation is fucking wank.

 

[mcfcphil]

Reply received about that BBC "article". I'll post in the media thread as well.

Thanks for contacting us about an article on our BBC Sport website, now headlined ‘Manchester City 115 charges explained: What is latest on club's PSR case?’ (https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/cgrjv9ydv31o).

The initial version of this article featured some errors in language in some of the headings and subheadings, which could have given readers the impression that we were assuming guilt on the part of Manchester City, relating to alleged breaches of Premier League rules.

The article was written as an internet search ‘Question and Answer’, setting out to answer some of the most popular searches off the back of Everton and Nottingham Forest’s breaches of PSR rules. The headings in the article were made up of the most prevalent searches by fans, but we didn’t explain this context in the piece, which then could have given the impression we were assuming guilt. The article itself however, did repeatedly outline City’s defence and denial of all charges.

We have now corrected this language, and added some further context as to where the questions in the piece were taken from.

We’re sorry for the mistakes made here, and we’d like to thank you for flagging this to us. We’ve shared your disappointment with the team at BBC Sport, which helps to inform our work moving forward.

This is our response at Stage 1a of the BBC’s complaints process. If you’re dissatisfied with this reply, a follow-up complaint may be considered at Stage 1b. You must submit a follow-up within 20 working days through the BBC Complaints webform. If you do decide to contact us again, please include your case number, and explain why you feel your complaint has not been addressed. We will then review your complaint.

Thanks again and wishing you all the best,

BBC Complaints Team
www.bbc.co.uk/complaints

Great perseverance, well done.

It was clear as day that something had gone badly, badly wrong with that article which is demonstrated in the BBC’s response - completely indefensible even for them.

I’m also not one to bash the City comms team because it’s a tough gig, but they should have been all over this and had it pulled - not corrected - as soon as it was published.

The fact it took a fan to intervene is ridiculous.