By his assumption we should be punished heavily if we broke the rules that everyone signed up to, so if look at examples of breaking rules like his own team hacking into our database to gain a sporting advantage AND admitting to it then if we are guilty (which we arent) a million quid fine and say no more about it should be about right yeah?Fuckin hate that scruffy scouse twat.
Him and the other bitter red prick are a pair of absolute tarts who are clinging on to the hope we are guilty.
Sky sports are quite welcome to them.
Fuckin hate that scruffy scouse twat.
Him and the other bitter red prick are a pair of absolute tarts who are clinging on to the hope we are guilty.
Sky sports are quite welcome to them.
Spit badmouthing us again to the American audience. Basically calling our accounts fraudulent. According to Sky we don’t have any viewers because people don’t care yet he won’t shut the fuck up the spitting tramp. This interview in a nutshell is every bitter, twisted, jealous red cartel view.
No mention we won the recent case and no mention that we had the biggest audience last year from the states.
On Manchester City's legal case
GOAL: I wanted to ask about Man City and the 115 charges against them for alleged breaches of Premier League rules. How do you think that gets resolved?
Carragher: You know what? I'm not sure it ever gets resolved. Because I think in some ways, no matter what happens, if City are found to be proven not guilty, I think most people in the country, certainly fans of rival teams will all believe they have done it - it's just that they've got the best lawyers. So it'll never go away.
And if they are found guilty, City will come out and say, ‘It was persecution from the Premier League - United, Liverpool and Arsenal don't want the new kids in town coming and taking their trophies,’ or, ‘that’s the world we live in.’
I'm just tired and bored of it, if I'm being honest. Some of the things City claim… sometimes I just can't believe… when they claim that they bring in more revenue than anybody else, like Real Madrid, and teams like that, I’m like, ‘behave.”
"If they broke the rules that they signed up for as every other Premier League club did, they should be punished, and punished very, very heavily." - Carragher, on charges against Man City
I know that myself in the media, if I do a newspaper article on Liverpool or Man United, the amount of clicks is going to get compared to City because people aren't as interested in Manchester City. That's not a criticism, that's just a fact. We know that from viewing figures on Sky Sports. If Man United or Liverpool play they go through the roof. If Manchester City, it doesn't move the needle. And again, it's not a criticism, it's just a fact.
We know those things. They’re facts. So for City to say that they bring in more revenue than some of the biggest clubs in the Premier League or Real Madrid is just a nonsense.
But we want it over. We want to be talking about football on the pitch. Manchester City, they’ve got an unbelievable manager, an unbelievable team. We want to get back to judging them as a football team on the pitch, but if they broke the rules that they signed up for as every other Premier League club did, they should be punished, and punished very, very heavily.
Exposed himself like the one rabid dog in the pack over city and these charges.I’ve felt for some time that Carragher sails far closer to the wind in terms of what he says about City’s finances than pretty much any other mainstream broadcaster. He’s essentially accusing the club of committing industrial scale fraud there, in terms of our turnover numbers. I don’t think there’s any other reasonable way of evaluating what he’s said there in the penultimate paragraph.
It also exposes an inability (or wilful blindness) to undertake a simple analysis of the numbers, because City’s turnover is essentially pretty simple maths that is significantly made up in recent years of the largest TV revenue of any team in world football and huge levels of prize money, figures for which are readily and publicly available, especially to someone like Carragher. It’s actually pretty straightforward to see where the rump of City’s revenue comes from, given how successful we’ve been over the last decade. Any person with a modicum of understanding about simple accountancy principles should be able to grasp how the numbers are broadly arrived at.
Thinking this through logically, Carragher would certainly not be questioning the club’s turnover if it wasn’t for the subsistence of the 115 charges. They plainly embolden him and provide a gateway for him to do so. On the basis the relevant charges are dismissed ((or equivalent) I also have no doubt that he will desist from questioning the numbers and/or will be restrained from so doing by the legal bods at the various broadcasters he works for. Given all that, if those charges are dismissed, I wonder what steps (if any) the club will take against him personally, given what he has repeatedly said has gone beyond the routine nods, winks and innuendo.
Maybe they’ll just leave it, or simply be happy to accept a public apology, but I do think he’s exposed himself in a way that pretty much the rest of his cohort haven’t.
Thinking this through logically, Carragher would certainly not be questioning the club’s turnover if it wasn’t for the subsistence of the 115 charges. They plainly embolden him and provide a gateway for him to do so. On the basis the relevant charges are dismissed ((or equivalent) I also have no doubt that he will desist from questioning the numbers
im actually amazed sky dont reign him in, like you have said he is basically accusing us of fraud in print, thats at best defamation.I’ve felt for some time that Carragher sails far closer to the wind in terms of what he says about City’s finances than pretty much any other mainstream broadcaster. He’s essentially accusing the club of committing industrial scale fraud there, in terms of our turnover numbers. I don’t think there’s any other reasonable way of evaluating what he’s said there in the penultimate paragraph.
It also exposes an inability (or wilful blindness) to undertake a simple analysis of the numbers, because City’s turnover is essentially pretty simple maths that is significantly made up in recent years of the largest TV revenue of any team in world football and huge levels of prize money, figures for which are readily and publicly available, especially to someone like Carragher. It’s actually pretty straightforward to see where the rump of City’s revenue comes from, given how successful we’ve been over the last decade. Any person with a modicum of understanding about simple accountancy principles should be able to grasp how the numbers are broadly arrived at.
Thinking this through logically, Carragher would certainly not be questioning the club’s turnover if it wasn’t for the subsistence of the 115 charges. They plainly embolden him and provide a gateway for him to do so. On the basis the relevant charges are dismissed ((or equivalent) I also have no doubt that he will desist from questioning the numbers and/or will be restrained from so doing by the legal bods at the various broadcasters he works for. Given all that, if those charges are dismissed, I wonder what steps (if any) the club will take against him personally, given what he has repeatedly said has gone beyond the routine nods, winks and innuendo.
Maybe they’ll just leave it, or simply be happy to accept a public apology, but I do think he’s exposed himself in a way that pretty much the rest of his cohort haven’t.
Without question.What strikes me, though, is that Carragher isn't confining his comments to the period covered by the 115 charges, he's openly suggesting that our current accounts are false;
Good point . He earns his living by spouting opinion , like all pundits, and has been swimming in the twin Churches of Liverpool and Social Media for so long he has swallowed the orthodoxy wholesale . His world view of earnings is distorted by being overexposed to the clicks and viewing figures for Sky , as this will drive his value up or down , so these are the only facts that count . It's the modern way and not just in football of course ( exhibit A : many politicians ) ..He's got as much objectivity as a man with his head in a bucket convinced he's reached the Pacific because he's swallowing salt water .I’ve felt for some time that Carragher sails far closer to the wind in terms of what he says about City’s finances than pretty much any other mainstream broadcaster. He’s essentially accusing the club of committing industrial scale fraud there, in terms of our turnover numbers. I don’t think there’s any other reasonable way of evaluating what he’s said there in the penultimate paragraph.
It also exposes an inability (or wilful blindness) to undertake a simple analysis of the numbers, because City’s turnover is essentially pretty simple maths that is significantly made up in recent years of the largest TV revenue of any team in world football and huge levels of prize money, figures for which are readily and publicly available, especially to someone like Carragher. It’s actually pretty straightforward to see where the rump of City’s revenue comes from, given how successful we’ve been over the last decade. Any person with a modicum of understanding about simple accountancy principles should be able to grasp how the numbers are broadly arrived at.
Thinking this through logically, Carragher would certainly not be questioning the club’s turnover if it wasn’t for the subsistence of the 115 charges. They plainly embolden him and provide a gateway for him to do so. On the basis the relevant charges are dismissed ((or equivalent) I also have no doubt that he will desist from questioning the numbers and/or will be restrained from so doing by the legal bods at the various broadcasters he works for. Given all that, if those charges are dismissed, I wonder what steps (if any) the club will take against him personally, given what he has repeatedly said has gone beyond the routine nods, winks and innuendo.
Maybe they’ll just leave it, or simply be happy to accept a public apology, but I do think he’s exposed himself in a way that pretty much the rest of his cohort haven’t.