Red Issue shameful front cover

very distasteful. the message/argument is a fair one, but to feature it as the main focus of the front cover?? no need.


if the editor wants to suggest that perhaps the grieving has gone a bit too far, then it needs one sentence slipped into an article in the middle of the magazine. not taking up the whole fucking front cover.
 
WNRH said:
Poor taste but the message it's trying to say is right.

Still hypocritical though with all the munich stuff they do. What made the 50th anniversary any different than the 49th or 51st? Yet they still tried to force people into respecting it in an OTT fashion.

Exactly. It isn't that I disagree with the sentiment, it's more the motivations. Rags think they have an absolute monopoly on "tragedy". This is what allows them to sing about Marc Vivien Foe whilst castigating the idiots who sing about Munich.
 
Fair play to them, I totally agree with the issue they are raising. They're not trying to take the piss out of Muamba or his situation. Some of the stuff that was being said was just ridiculous (didn't we have a thread about this kind of stuff a couple of months ago?). However, I'm sure once work is finished we'll have 10 pages of outrage.
 
One of their more controversial covers, but think the heading makes it clear it's not belittling Muamba himself. A debate I've already had with friends, think its fair enough to raise it.
 
It's certainly not a shameful front cover, just ironic given their fascination with Munich.
 
Dubai Blue said:
It's pretty much spot on, to be honest.

It's not in any way taking the piss out of Muamba or his condition, it's taking the piss out of the people who were scrambling over each other to grieve the most for a player who hadn't even died.

There is obviously a fair bit of irony, though, as pointed out above.

agree with this but isn't it fucking ironic that its the munich air disaterTM (sponsored by AIG) lot taking the piss?
 
I don't buy into a lot of the criticism that you see on here re Munich and people who seem to revel in accusing them of milking it. I think a lot of those criticisms are far too vitriolic and motivated not by a balanced, fair minded critique but, too often, a point scoring, need to 'get one over' on a footballing entity that they don't like.

However, I will say that in this case it isn't the most appropriate for such a publication to be putting this message out. Don't get me wrong, I agree with the sentiment. But for a publication that is associated with a club that receives criticism (justified or not) for a similar - but not identical phenomenon - reason to be the tome that is sending this message is either very brave (if they have addressed the theme to goings on at their club in the same article) or betrays a complete lack of self awareness.

Then again, perhaps you could paint it as the opinion of an individual. I see lots of stuff that I consider bollocks on here portrayed as the "view of City" fans and I don't feel compelled to change my views or comments based on that. Then again, I am not writing a publication that sets itself up as representative of the fans. So for that reason alone I'm viewing this as a fair message but, unless the article is actually addressing the whole of football, society and specifically the same allegations made towards United it is surely an idiotic move from people with no self awareness.

Fair play though, if the article does take on these points.
 

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.