The Agenda (Merged)

[TCIB]

Just made the mistake of putting Sky Sports on and extended highlights (on sky sports news) of the Utd v Pool game. Not seen this before on the News channel. anyhow as they were announcing it, a headline in the background had "City's reputation tarnished".
So thought WTF is this all about and its this:

Manchester City should not have signed Frank Lampard, says Patrick Barclay
However, the Independent and Evening Standard’s Patrick Barclay told the Sunday Supplement City have tarnished their reputation over the Lampard affair.
“If Mourinho and Chelsea had done this the other way round, they would be getting pelters from the press and from all the commentators, and rightly so,” Barclay told the Supplement.

What a fucking clown

This fella is funny as fuck, he is so bitter it is comedy gold.
He is a laughing stock but other reporters will like him as he sets the marker so low they all look like martin samuel against him.

 

[Len Rum]

Re: so this agenda thing.

If any other team done this it would be a masterstroke,as its us its viewed ( wrongly) as the rules being bent,surprised one of the hacks hasn't spouted about us being docked points or some other bollocks to that effect,Wenger was up in arms over this but forgets he took henry on loan,what's the difference....

the difference is its us.

* awaits the rag non agendaists to comment*

The difference is Arsenal had no financial control or interest in New York Bulls.

Pigeonho's successor.

 

[franksinatra]

Re: so this agenda thing.

the difference is its us.

* awaits the rag non agendaists to comment*

The difference is Arsenal had no financial control or interest in New York Bulls.

so you think the Lampard loan has tarnished our image?

No I do not but there is a difference and to not recognise that because it does not suit does nothing for the debate.

Personally I do not see NYC being used as a vehicle by city to circum navigate ffp but it is a way clubs could abuse the regulations.

The situation at Watford a few years ago did nothing for the integrity or traditions of football. But thats a different debate for another day.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Re: so this agenda thing.

Just imagine the headlines if we'd been the team playing Liverpool today. "Hart spares City's blushes as Liverpool fail to take chances in a game they dominated".

Yet what we'll probably read is "De Gea shines as United brush Liverpool aside".

 

[manimanc]

Re: so this agenda thing.

Just imagine the headlines if we'd been the team playing Liverpool today. "Hart spares City's blushes as Liverpool fail to take chances in a game they dominated".

Yet what we'll probably read is "De Gea shines as United brush Liverpool aside".

In a nutshell mate....

 

[franksinatra]

Re: so this agenda thing.

the difference is its us.

* awaits the rag non agendaists to comment*

The difference is Arsenal had no financial control or interest in New York Bulls.

Pigeonho's successor.

Exactly you cant debate the point.

 

[squirtyflower]

Re: so this agenda thing.

The difference is Arsenal had no financial control or interest in New York Bulls.

so you think the Lampard loan has tarnished our image?

No I do not but there is a difference and to not recognise that because it does not suit does nothing for the debate.

Personally I do not see NYC being used as a vehicle by city to circum navigate ffp but it is a way clubs could abuse the regulations.

The situation at Watford a few years ago did nothing for the integrity or traditions of football. But thats a different debate for another day.

If City have done nothing wrong then posters are right to post about Barclay's attempt at trying to slur City as being mean spirited and underhand

i get the impression that you do feel that we have tried to circumnavigate FFP in some other way though
Perhaps you'd like to enlighten me with a few examples

 

[franksinatra]

Re: so this agenda thing.

so you think the Lampard loan has tarnished our image?

No I do not but there is a difference and to not recognise that because it does not suit does nothing for the debate.

Personally I do not see NYC being used as a vehicle by city to circum navigate ffp but it is a way clubs could abuse the regulations.

The situation at Watford a few years ago did nothing for the integrity or traditions of football. But thats a different debate for another day.

If City have done nothing wrong then posters are right to post about Barclay's attempt at trying to slur City as being mean spirited and underhand

i get the impression that you do feel that we have tried to circumnavigate FFP in some other way though
Perhaps you'd like to enlighten me with a few examples

Well you get the wrong impression. I have no issue with people commentating on Barclays article but on the wider discussion about the two loans (Henry and Lampard) they are different and thats what I pointed out.

If in the future clubs used affiliated clubs to buy players to circum-navigate FFP I think that would be wrong.

In the instance of Lampard I do not think this is the case as its a free transfer and were paying all his wages.

 

[waspish]

Re: so this agenda thing.

The most insulting gobshite from Barkley was if ffp wasn't introduced our owner wouldn't of extended the ground or built the academy!! He would of just thrown money on players every window like no tomorrow! How NIAVE and insulting is that to someone who invested in horse racing decades ago and is at the forefront of it all now!!

 

[The Light Was Yellow Sir]

Re: so this agenda thing.

A coordinated agenda? This lot? I think not. A lot of shallow, unimaginative fools, desperate to be proved right, having put in print their inane ramblings? Most definitely.

Great post that (the whole thing). Do you work in the media?

Happily not.