Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Bluemoon forum' started by razman, 7 Mar 2019.
They are waiting to see how far we progress in this years Chumps before handing down the sentence.
He looked incredibly dehydrated after about 4 minutes last night tbf.
You’d really think Uefa would try to stop the press running things that say “sources close” or “investigations head Yves Leterme understood to favour a ban.”
Especially if a case is still ongoing.
Lie or not it’s detrimental to their argument, particularly when we’re targeting their process. Looks rather bad that the person in charge has his opinion leaked every week
From a journalistic point of view is it likely to "sell papers" so having any truth is surely a secondary consideration. There again.......
This is the start of the backpedalling in the UK media. Ziegler and his pals should have checked out their sources more carefully. The Times has made a fool of itself with a lot of the stuff they have published on the FFP probe which has been based on information from our commercial rivals. Coverage in the US media has been much more accurate. The Times has virtually ignored the key dimension to the story which is: What happens in the Pinto case? Pathetic journalism.
Correct... it’s gone from guilty as charged - punishment at the end of the week, guilty and thrown out off the UCL sometime soon, to could drag on all season.
Ziegler - in particular, but a few other journalists too - just can’t be objective. They are Fans of other clubs, horrified by what Pep has put together and getting us banned is their only antidote to having to admit how good we are.
The times article says this:
The leaked emails appeared to show City being paid directly by the owners instead of the Etihad airline for a sponsorship deal, and allegedly also backdated sponsorship deals with partners from Abu Dhabi — Etihad, Aabar and the tourism authority.
Very dodgy statement that and poor choice of words The leaked emails don't appear to show that at all, which is basically core to the entire debate, yet the times have seemingly decided already?
The Times coverage has been truly appalling and built entirely on the Der Spiegel version of events despite the huge question marks over the source of the material. The paper has continued to publish stories based on second-hand information from sources with a clear agenda against us. They have not challenged any of this information or put it into context as the New York Times has done. The most bizarre thing of all is that the background context to the City emails is a much better story than what they have published. As far as I know not a single UK journalist has ever managed to get an interview with anyone senior at City though Khaldoon has spoken to the international business media. I think Martin Samuel may have been briefed by City on the background as most of his columns have been spot-on. The UK media is in a dreadful state.