One thing that's telling about the press coverage of the entire episode is that there's been no consideration given at any stage to the idea that we might have exploited loopholes in the rules and not broken them. This seems to me to be one possible explanation for UEFA and City taking completely different stances over this.
But the media view is that we're a state-owned club that has benefitted from state funding and that's how the court of public opinion sees it, too. There's potentially a significant difference between ADEC funding our Abu Dhabi sponsorships and ADUG footing the bill, because the former is arguably (depending on the interpretation of IAS 24) within the rules and the latter isn't, but most journalists and rival fans I've seen expressing a view seem not to give a toss about the distinction. We'll be seen as guilty and getting off an a technicality if that's what emerges in the end.
Could be. Or maybe he's just doing the honourable thing and keeping his counsel, which is more than can be said for some of the other vermin at that rat-infested organisation!
One thing that's telling about the press coverage of the entire episode is that there's been no consideration given at any stage to the idea that we might have exploited loopholes in the rules and not broken them. This seems to me to be one possible explanation for UEFA and City taking completely different stances over this.
But the media view is that we're a state-owned club that has benefitted from state funding and that's how the court of public opinion sees it, too. There's potentially a significant difference between ADEC funding our Abu Dhabi sponsorships and ADUG footing the bill, because the former is arguably (depending on the interpretation of IAS 24) within the rules and the latter isn't, but most journalists and rival fans I've seen expressing a view seem not to give a toss about the distinction. We'll be seen as guilty and getting off an a technicality if that's what emerges in the end.
Indeed if we get a 100% innocent verdict the media will just whip up some other shit to pop at us & the sheep will rant about it.I’m past caring what we are “seen” as, I just want us to win and get the ban overturned.
Couldn’t care less what a bunch of thieving scousers or out of town glory hunting rags think, fuck em.
If indeed it is overturned (and I'm not holding my breath), can you image the torrent of "righteous" indignation from several quarters? Carragher springs to mind. Most rag-biased journos. The fatuous Matthew Syed. The likes of Piers Morgan and other people with no genuine connection to football. Tabloid hacks. Merson, probably.
"City's escape shows that crime does pay", and the like.
They'd all be on their moral high horse, believe me.
But we'll doubtless get punished anyway, so it's all irrelevant.
Is that short for Lizard? ;-)"Lizzie" ?
One thing that's telling about the press coverage of the entire episode is that there's been no consideration given at any stage to the idea that we might have exploited loopholes in the rules and not broken them. This seems to me to be one possible explanation for UEFA and City taking completely different stances over this.
But the media view is that we're a state-owned club that has benefitted from state funding and that's how the court of public opinion sees it, too. There's potentially a significant difference between ADEC funding our Abu Dhabi sponsorships and ADUG footing the bill, because the former is arguably (depending on the interpretation of IAS 24) within the rules and the latter isn't, but most journalists and rival fans I've seen expressing a view seem not to give a toss about the distinction. We'll be seen as guilty and getting off an a technicality if that's what emerges in the end.
Indeed if we get a 100% innocent verdict the media will just whip up some other shit to pop at us & the sheep will rant about it.
As you say fuck 'em, fuck 'em all.
I love and am proud of our club & achievements no matter what happens or what new shit is verbalised at us.
If that happens it's up to the club to push things. Demand apologies, on air walk backs or limit/remove access. Put out briefings, make statements that are strong enough they have to be reported etc.
The upside to how over the top and strong some of the reactions are is that they demand apology if the club is innocent. Jonathan Liew said that Soriano was engaging in a disinformation campaign and muddying waters with his statement. If his statement is proven to be true, that can't won't go unanswered.