Author Topic: General Manchester City thread  (Read 3422299 times)

Offline Twelfth Man

  • Rhianna fan. my arse! Someone fill me in. Any takers? :) We are the fabulous CFC...
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 19,012
Re: Manchester City
« Reply #5520 on: July 30, 2013, 11:50:34 pm »
Just read that at work. Doubt it will raise even the slightest bit of concern.
The courts, the rich, the powerful or those in authority never lie. It has been dealt with 'by the courts' nothing to see here run along.

Offline Max_powers

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 9,756
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Manchester City
« Reply #5521 on: July 30, 2013, 11:52:42 pm »
Who cares about deaths and torture, we have real moral issues to discuss in Football dammit like biting and diving.

Offline ManchesterBlue

  • Hologram fan with digital flag 'full members cup runners up 1986'.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,614
  • Blue Moon, you saw me standing alone
Re: Manchester City
« Reply #5522 on: July 31, 2013, 12:14:24 am »
We're City fans. We've spent years being tortured by various owners.

Offline Twelfth Man

  • Rhianna fan. my arse! Someone fill me in. Any takers? :) We are the fabulous CFC...
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 19,012
Re: Manchester City
« Reply #5523 on: July 31, 2013, 12:23:56 am »
We're City fans. We've spent years being tortured by various owners.
I'm sure you're aware of the difference between your torture and what is mentioned in the article? or perhaps not.
The courts, the rich, the powerful or those in authority never lie. It has been dealt with 'by the courts' nothing to see here run along.

Offline ManchesterBlue

  • Hologram fan with digital flag 'full members cup runners up 1986'.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,614
  • Blue Moon, you saw me standing alone
Re: Manchester City
« Reply #5524 on: July 31, 2013, 12:44:10 am »
I'm sure you're aware of the difference between your torture and what is mentioned in the article? or perhaps not.
Of course I am. I don't condone human rights abuses of any sort but our own 'boys in blue' have been beating and killing people for years. And conspiring to cover up the deaths of 96 at Hillsborough that were caused partly by their own negligence.

But Conn (who I'm an avid reader of) has got this wrong, certainly in linking this to City. Did the Abu Dhabi ruling family really say "We might have a human rights problem here. Let's buy Manchester City to cover it up"? I somehow doubt it. Did it bother many at Anfield that you were, up to recently, owned by a man who was a friend and avid supporter of George W Bush? You were far more worried about him borrowing money to buy your club.

Does it bother many Arsenal or Chelsea fans that they're owned or part owned by supporters of Vladimir Putin? Or Newcastle fans, that they're owned by Mike Ashley, who derives his wealth from a company that uses zero hours contracts?
« Last Edit: July 31, 2013, 12:54:46 am by ManchesterBlue »

Offline Bergkamp10

  • massive, massive WUM...
  • Main Stander
  • ***
  • Posts: 88
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Manchester City
« Reply #5525 on: July 31, 2013, 12:50:21 am »
Surprised at City's transfer activity this summer, seem to have gone back a couple of years paying well over the odds for not very good footballers. Bit like Arsenal's transfer policy, without the excess.

Jovetic could be great mind, if Pellegrini can get the best out of him. Fernandinho also provides more athleticism in midfield. So maybe they'll prove me wrong.

Offline Twelfth Man

  • Rhianna fan. my arse! Someone fill me in. Any takers? :) We are the fabulous CFC...
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 19,012
Re: Manchester City
« Reply #5526 on: July 31, 2013, 12:56:46 am »
Of course I am. I don't condone human rights abuses of any sort but our own 'boys in blue' have been beating and killing people for years. And conspiring to cover up the deaths of 96 at Hillsborough that were caused partly by their own negligence.

But Conn (who I'm an avid reader of) has got this wrong, certainly in linking this to City. Did the Abu Dhabi ruling family really say "We might have a human rights problem here. Let's buy Manchester City to cover it up"? I somehow doubt it. Did it bother many at Anfield that you were, up to recently, owned by a man who was a friend and avid supporter of George W Bush? Does it bother many Arsenal or Chelsea fans that they're owned or part owned by supporters of Vladimir Putin? Or Newcastle fans, that they're owned by Mike Ashley, who derives his wealth from a company that uses zero hours contracts?
All fair points, personally I wish people were more bothered. My view has always been football is used to stop people thinking about important issues home and abroad. Give us our weekly dose and we are all pacified. Without fan ownership football means nowt.

The article says the ruling family sees football as an effective way to rebrand their kingdoms, Russian oligarchs have been doing this for similar reasons. If I had your owners I would be kicking up a fuss no matter how many shiny trophies the oil brings in. You can see my posts when the Dubai lot were in for us. No thanks. Some things are more important than entertainment you have to draw the line somewhere.
The courts, the rich, the powerful or those in authority never lie. It has been dealt with 'by the courts' nothing to see here run along.

Offline TitanTrigger

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,006
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Manchester City
« Reply #5527 on: July 31, 2013, 12:58:35 am »
Of course I am. I don't condone human rights abuses of any sort but our own 'boys in blue' have been beating and killing people for years. And conspiring to cover up the deaths of 96 at Hillsborough that were caused partly by their own negligence.

But Conn (who I'm an avid reader of) has got this wrong, certainly in linking this to City. Did the Abu Dhabi ruling family really say "We might have a human rights problem here. Let's buy Manchester City to cover it up"? I somehow doubt it. Did it bother many at Anfield that you were, up to recently, owned by a man who was a friend and avid supporter of George W Bush? You were far more worried about him borrowing money to buy your club.

Does it bother many Arsenal or Chelsea fans that they're owned or part owned by supporters of Vladimir Putin? Or Newcastle fans, that they're owned by Mike Ashley, who derives his wealth from a company that uses zero hours contracts?

There is a slight difference between being owned by a country as a PR exercise to deflect attention away from their stasi like operations and being owned by someone who gave donations to a democratically elected president. Dunno why I even had to write that.

Offline ManchesterBlue

  • Hologram fan with digital flag 'full members cup runners up 1986'.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,614
  • Blue Moon, you saw me standing alone
Re: Manchester City
« Reply #5528 on: July 31, 2013, 01:13:13 am »
There is a slight difference between being owned by a country as a PR exercise to deflect attention away from their stasi like operations and being owned by someone who gave donations to a democratically elected president. Dunno why I even had to write that.
City are owned by an individual not a country. He hasn't, to the best of my knowledge beaten or tortured anyone. But the democratically elected (you sure about that - remember Florida?) President waged an illegal war that killed tens, possibly hundereds of thousands. And the UAE isn't perfect but the group that they are battling against is one that would restrict religious freedoms, the rights of women and seek to impose a fundamental Islamic state. They're called Al-Islah and you can read about them here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_Islah
Of course I would prefer it if people weren't beaten in custody and there was due legal process. But in general the UAE rulers are a pretty benevolent bunch compared to most. I admire your stance on Dubai so I assume you boycott anything made in China, which has an appalling human rights record?
« Last Edit: July 31, 2013, 01:18:37 am by ManchesterBlue »

Offline TitanTrigger

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,006
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Manchester City
« Reply #5529 on: July 31, 2013, 01:24:42 am »
City are owned by an individual not a country. He hasn't, to the best of my knowledge beaten or tortured anyone. But the democratically elected (you sure about that - remember Florida?) President waged an illegal war that killed tens, possibly hundereds of thousands. And the UAE isn't perfect but the group that they are battling against is one that would restrict religious freedoms, the rights of women and seek to impose a fundamental Islamic state. They're called Al-Islah and you can read about them here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_Islah
Of course I would prefer it if people weren't beaten in custody and there was due legal process. But in general the UAE rulers are a pretty benevolent bunch compared to most.

Yeah yeah, they are owned by an individual with lots of sponsorship deals with other individuals who just happen to be family members and members of the ruling family of the country, just happened that way I guess. And they are investing more money in the area and the club than they could ever hope to recoup because they are just such bad businessmen.

They have arrested and imprisoned secular dissenters before so don't be fooled into thinking their motives are anything other than the maintenance of their own power. As supreme dictatorial rulers of the country they are obviously responsible for it's security apparatus, I doubt Hitler killed many Jews himself, so your first point is pretty redundant.

As we saw in Bahrain recently, these countries are usually pretty calm because of their oil wealth but if any political dissent arises it is crushed ruthlessly.

Offline ManchesterBlue

  • Hologram fan with digital flag 'full members cup runners up 1986'.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,614
  • Blue Moon, you saw me standing alone
Re: Manchester City
« Reply #5530 on: July 31, 2013, 02:47:41 am »
Yeah yeah the UAE really are an Enlightened lot... ManchesterBlue who the hell are you trying to kid... yourself I guess...

http://edition.cnn.com/2013/07/20/world/meast/uae-norway-rape-controversy
And we always deal with sexual abuse and rape cases so well...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20026910
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-23460778

In the UAE case, the publicity helped the victim and she was pardoned.

Of course they're far from perfect and they've some way to go. I'm not trying to kid myself or anyone. But you're guilty of applying the same sort of simplistic logic that Bush applied in Iraq - that we can simply turn an autocracy into a democracy overnight. But, as I said, maybe in the same way that negative publicity worked in favour of the Norwegian woman, then it could work the same way for other incidents in the UAE.
« Last Edit: July 31, 2013, 02:50:50 am by ManchesterBlue »

Offline ManchesterBlue

  • Hologram fan with digital flag 'full members cup runners up 1986'.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,614
  • Blue Moon, you saw me standing alone
Re: Manchester City
« Reply #5531 on: July 31, 2013, 03:02:38 am »
[/b]
No I'm not. Mainly because I never said anything of the sorts.

You are delusional and quite frankly insulting comparing the UK (a democracy) with the UAE ( a tyrannical autocratic dictatorship) and in comparing these rape cases...

Oh and if you'd look into my posting history you'd find out that I am highly critical of the hypocrisy of the West what with my country of birth bombed to smithereens. But this.. this  is just shocking tribalism you are displaying.. Take off you skyblue coloured glasses and realize just who owns you. Monsters masquerading as men.
"Monsters masquerading as men"? Pathetic. Utterly pathetic. Grow up.

Offline ElstonGunn

  • is Billy Beane
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 3,271
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Manchester City
« Reply #5532 on: July 31, 2013, 03:26:54 am »
Of course I am. I don't condone human rights abuses of any sort but our own 'boys in blue' have been beating and killing people for years. And conspiring to cover up the deaths of 96 at Hillsborough that were caused partly by their own negligence.

But Conn (who I'm an avid reader of) has got this wrong, certainly in linking this to City. Did the Abu Dhabi ruling family really say "We might have a human rights problem here. Let's buy Manchester City to cover it up"? I somehow doubt it. Did it bother many at Anfield that you were, up to recently, owned by a man who was a friend and avid supporter of George W Bush? You were far more worried about him borrowing money to buy your club.

Does it bother many Arsenal or Chelsea fans that they're owned or part owned by supporters of Vladimir Putin? Or Newcastle fans, that they're owned by Mike Ashley, who derives his wealth from a company that uses zero hours contracts?

GTFO with this shit. Are you even buying your own bullshit? Being friends with (an admittedly bad, possibly seriously immoral) President of the United States of America, a fucking democracy, is the moral equivalent of being a monarch of a repressive autocratic regime where women are put in prison for being raped? Using questionable/bad contract practices with employees? Are you shitting me?

And yes, it bothers the hell out of me that Abramovich is treated the way he is. He probably did some seriously messed up stuff to get where he is. I don't know about Gazidis, but I wouldn't be surprised. And I'll add, our shirt sponsor was accused of laundering money for the Iranian government. If that's true, it bothers the hell out of me, and I'd take a lot less money--and worse players--for a different sponsor.

Offline ElstonGunn

  • is Billy Beane
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 3,271
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Manchester City
« Reply #5533 on: July 31, 2013, 03:28:07 am »
I wouldn't trade places with Man City or Chelsea for a second. You keep your sugar daddies.

EDIT: Geez, got a little heated there, sorry. I do think that for all that's wrong with modern football, there should be someplace we draw the line. And the Abu Dhabis, Abramovichs and possibly the Standard Chartereds are about where we need to draw it. You can be money and prestige obsessed, but at some point you just have to stop accepting that it doesn't matter who these people are.
« Last Edit: July 31, 2013, 03:40:53 am by ElstonGunn »

Offline McrRed

  • Member of International Hill Climbers Group. Only gets happy endings at Christmas.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 4,156
  • In the town where I was born
Re: Manchester City
« Reply #5534 on: July 31, 2013, 06:50:52 am »
I felt compromised with the shinawatra situation, that both clubs have in common. But put aside my principles for the idea of some shiny new players and a shiny new stadium.
Greed. Lust. Is that the same thing that all these "oligarchs" are suffering from?

Offline lionel_messias

  • likes pulling cocker spaniels out of Kim Kardassian's ass
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 16,449
  • 'You can throw your plan in the purple bin'
Re: Manchester City
« Reply #5535 on: July 31, 2013, 09:14:17 am »
Show me a football fan who would turn his or her back on their mega-rich club because of the immorality of its owners?

I'd like to see one. I really would.

At the end of the day, when you're standing in the stadium the eleven players on the pitch (however they arrived there) represent the club and the club is the fan. And the fan doesn't do complicated equations of morality as Navas jinks past a player, or Aguero slots another goal in.
Follow me on twatter: @JDMessias

Offline Hank Scorpio

  • is really a Virgo, three pinter. Royhendo's stalker.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 13,939
  • POOLCHECK HOMIE
Re: Manchester City
« Reply #5536 on: July 31, 2013, 09:45:35 am »
John O'Shea jumping with a knee right into the back on Negredo. Would of been sent off in the PL for that, here the commentators just laugh it off as 'Welcome to the PL'  :butt
I saw that.  Absolutely ridiculous.  Just clattered into the back of him, there was no chance to get the ball.  Then he jogs off with that 'I just showed him' look.

John O'Shea is extremely shite as well.  I mean if someone like Terry does that, then you kind of take it because he's been a good defender and still can be but this guy...

Offline ManchesterBlue

  • Hologram fan with digital flag 'full members cup runners up 1986'.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,614
  • Blue Moon, you saw me standing alone
Re: Manchester City
« Reply #5537 on: July 31, 2013, 10:24:40 am »
Here's one.  :wave
With the greatest respect, you've already admitted you were born thousands of miles away from Merseyside. You've latched onto Liverpool for whatever reason but not because they're your local team or the one your family have supported for generations. You might even quietly ditch them if they got relegated. You've admitted you'd ditch them if they were owned by someone that didn't meet your high standards. That's not a "fan" in my book. A real fan is pretty much a hypocrite in most respects. Like United fans who buy the green and gold scarves to wear to matches. Or the Liverpool fans who supported Suarez after he was found by the FA to have made racist remarks. I understand that.

Many City fans, me included, were concerned about Shinawatra and there were bitter arguments among fans about his political record and ownership of the club. But we still went even though it became clear he was running the club into the ground. That bothered me much more than what he'd done in Thailand.

The political issues in the Persian Gulf are nothing to do with Manchester City or my support of the club over the last 40 years. The club is the club, not the owners. There probably are circumstances where my loyalty would be severely tested by actions of the owners but these barely even register on that scale. HRW has shamelessly used Manchester City to publicise its report because no one else would give two hoots otherwise. Yet they have the nerve to accuse the owner of using City to promote his country.

Offline robertobaggio37

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 8,162
  • But we will conquer the ball, each fucking time.
Re: Manchester City
« Reply #5538 on: July 31, 2013, 10:34:00 am »
Why the hell did they not go for Suarez?
The biggest problem anywhere in the world is that people's perceptions of reality are filtered through the screening mesh of what they want, and do not want, to be true.

Offline zero zero

  • Karma's a bitch. Innit.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 15,474
Re: Manchester City
« Reply #5539 on: July 31, 2013, 11:58:31 am »
The political issues in the Persian Gulf are nothing to do with Manchester City or my support of the club over the last 40 years. The club is the club, not the owners.
I can see exactly where you're coming from and hopefully this should be your last word on the matter. Sadly this thread has taken a turn for the ridiculous.

Offline ManchesterBlue

  • Hologram fan with digital flag 'full members cup runners up 1986'.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,614
  • Blue Moon, you saw me standing alone
Re: Manchester City
« Reply #5540 on: July 31, 2013, 12:57:43 pm »
My father became Liverpool supporter in the 70s. Because of Shankly. Because of the Liverpool Way. Because of his views on socialism in footbal. And thats why I support LFC. And yes, you are right, I would ditch LFC the very same second if/when a dictatorial autocrat (like your owner) or an oligarchical kleptocrat (like Abramovic) would come to rule it because ownership by such scum would, for me, spell the end of LFC and the end of the Liverpool Way or to put it more bluntly: it would be the end of the club mr. Shankly, in many respects, started and the club I proudly support. My high standards? You mean my standards of wanting the club to operate in a way similar to the vision of the man who established the clubs core ethos and modus operandi?

Well, I guess they are high standards. We are Liverpool after all, not some small team from Manchester. So yeah. I would not forsake my morals for shiny new toys. You stay a 'fan' of your club and its billionaire dictatorial autocrat, Ill support Liverpool thank you very much. I'm many things but not a hypocrite.

- Oh and LFC fans were not hypocritical to stand by Suarez during the farcical Evra episode. That is what LFC is all about. But its clear to me that you just simply don't get this.

- Oh and if the bit In bold is correct then.. Well then you are not only a self-admitted hypocrite but also a bad human being if you think in that way.
Where do I start with this?

First of all, I suspect your father's main motivation was the fact that Liverpool were a very successful team, rather than their socialist principles. Having been a season ticket holder at City since the early 1970's, I don't recall Liverpool being run as some sort of socialist collective. Shankly was as autocratic as any Emir. They charged us money to get into Anfield (and not on a 'pay what you can afford' basis). When we were being chased through Stanley Park, it wasn't just the middle class fans they chased. You didn't escape a good kicking if you could establish your socialist, working class credentials. They made money and presumably paid dividends to the shareholders.

The money that sustained Liverpool and made up the fortune of the family that controlled both Merseyside clubs came from gambling and charging people excessive amounts to buy goods on credit. Usury in other words. Was your father a Muslim? If so, did that fact trouble his conscience for a fleeting moment?

And even if we put all that aside, you could say that the continuance of what Shankly built started to die when Ronnie Moran was overlooked in favour of Gerard Houllier. With that, and the subsequent sale to Hicks & Gillett, Liverpool became just another club, being run as a business by men who had no link to the past and no allegiance to the ideals of men like Shankly or Paisley. Would those two have meekly soldiered on under Hicks & Gillett? I somehow doubt it. For the last 6 years, you've been a fan of a club run by foreign businessmen, for their profit. And while not as much as my club's owners have, they have pumped money into it. Yet you still support the club. And that's what it's about. Supporting the club. Not owners, managers or players but the club.

Hence my comment that I was more concerned about what Thaksin did to my club than what he did to Thailand. The problems of Thailand aren't my problems. As concerned as I might be about the future of democracy there it doesn't keep me awake as night as it doesn't affect me in any material way. Neither do the problems in Sri Lanka, Myanmar, Malaysia, etc. There are enough human rights issues in my own country to worry about. In Manchester recently, an unarmed man was tasered to death by a policeman despite already being restrained by other officers. Just over 8 years ago, an innocent man was shot to death on a tube train by police officers. And I'm sure you don't need reminding that 96 innocent people died in 1989 and the police conspired to cover up the circumstances of that incident.

As for the Suarez incident, the way it was dealt with made you a laughing stock which would not have happened under Shankly or Paisley. They would have dragged Suarez into the boot room, given him a verbal blasting and told him never again to put the club in a position where he could be perceived to have dragged the good name of Liverpool through the mud. Then they would have come out and said "Yes he said the wrong thing. He didn't understand the significance of what he said at that time but he does now and wishes to apologise to all concerned. He has assured us it will not happen again."

But we're all football fans and more often than not, the love of our club, just like the love we have for our family, blinds us to their faults. Personally I don't think that makes either of us "a bad human being" but it does make us human.

And as I've already said, the authors of this press release have hypocritically used Manchester City to get a far wider audience than it would otherwise have got. But I've also said that if our owner wants to use us to project a certain favourable image, then he has to accept that it can also be used against him. And that definitely is my last word on this particular matter.

Now, what time is this Audi Cup match, hopefully on a decent pitch? Oh hang on. Auto Union were Nazi collaborators so maybe I'll send my season ticket back.  ;)

« Last Edit: July 31, 2013, 01:01:29 pm by ManchesterBlue »

Offline Paul JH

  • Elmer Fudd. I'm a witch! A WITCH!
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 14,279
  • "Don't do drugs..."
Re: Manchester City
« Reply #5541 on: July 31, 2013, 01:30:09 pm »
Did the Abu Dhabi ruling family really say "We might have a human rights problem here. Let's buy Manchester City to cover it up"? I somehow doubt it.

Does it bother many Arsenal or Chelsea fans that they're owned or part owned by supporters of Vladimir Putin? Or Newcastle fans, that they're owned by Mike Ashley, who derives his wealth from a company that uses zero hours contracts?

The most naive way of looking at it this. Asking 'does it bother other fans?' is ridiculous, the answer is 'No' but then thats a a sad reflection on society.

Also, no, I doubt they did say 'shit, what do we do? Lets buy Man City, that'll cover it up' and yet the article doesn't say that. It suggest, quite rightly, and in the same way Abramovich has done at Chelsea, buying a Premier League club gives you good publicity, or at least you can use it to provide good publicity for yourself. 'Look what we are doing with the local community' etc etc. If that gets done in another part of the world, and people start saying 'the owners have been great with the local community!' people will start to conveniently ignore the fact that back home they have questionable ethics.
Sarcastic Net Pest and Sanctimonious Arse.

Offline ManchesterBlue

  • Hologram fan with digital flag 'full members cup runners up 1986'.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,614
  • Blue Moon, you saw me standing alone
Re: Manchester City
« Reply #5542 on: July 31, 2013, 01:34:31 pm »
oooh I'm going to take my sweet time to write a reply to this.. I would say 'point by point' but that would be too generous a description of the quality of your post
You take as long as you like. I've said my piece and am off to take the piss out of Davey boy.  :wave

Offline Il Capitano

  • Forza Liverpool. This thing of ours...
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 5,199
Re: Manchester City
« Reply #5543 on: July 31, 2013, 02:21:32 pm »
There's a whole lot of naivety on display in this thread. Football is knee deep in murky politics, if you want to follow a squeaky clean sport with high standards of morality then maybe you should take up curling. All the clubs in the league are owned by millionaires and billionaires, the international game is policed by a set of the most blatantly corrupt individuals you'll see in any industry outside of government, player's rights are routinely bought and sold by shady investors and parasitic agents, tapping up is practically conventional, and the tone of all this is set by a billionaire media empire that has more fingers in pies and conflicts of interest than Gordon Gekko. Seriously, what the fuck did you think this was all about?

Offline Dubred

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 3,416
Re: Manchester City
« Reply #5544 on: July 31, 2013, 02:28:00 pm »
There's a whole lot of naivety on display in this thread. Football is knee deep in murky politics, if you want to follow a squeaky clean sport with high standards of morality then maybe you should take up curling. All the clubs in the league are owned by millionaires and billionaires, the international game is policed by a set of the most blatantly corrupt individuals you'll see in any industry outside of government, player's rights are routinely bought and sold by shady investors and parasitic agents, tapping up is practically conventional, and the tone of all this is set by a billionaire media empire that has more fingers in pies and conflicts of interest than Gordon Gekko. Seriously, what the fuck did you think this was all about?

As Rafa said.....'Football is a lie'.  Its all that needs to be said.

The sport is completely corrupt, yet its too hard to give it up as a fan.

Its just some areas of the sport/ individuals/ clubs are more corrupt than others.

But the sport as a whole is f*cked.

If anybody does have stern principles on corruption, I think football is unfortunately the wrong sport for them

Offline ElstonGunn

  • is Billy Beane
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 3,271
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Manchester City
« Reply #5545 on: July 31, 2013, 04:03:32 pm »
There's a whole lot of naivety on display in this thread. Football is knee deep in murky politics, if you want to follow a squeaky clean sport with high standards of morality then maybe you should take up curling. All the clubs in the league are owned by millionaires and billionaires, the international game is policed by a set of the most blatantly corrupt individuals you'll see in any industry outside of government, player's rights are routinely bought and sold by shady investors and parasitic agents, tapping up is practically conventional, and the tone of all this is set by a billionaire media empire that has more fingers in pies and conflicts of interest than Gordon Gekko. Seriously, what the fuck did you think this was all about?
It's not naive. It's perfectly reasonable to say, "The sport is obviously fucked up in general. I love football, and I love my club, so I'm willing to put up with a lot of shit from my owners that I don't support. However, there comes a point at which it's just too much, and I can't support it anymore, at least with my money. Or, at the very least, I will oppose it, acknowledge it for what it is, but support my club anyway because I won't let someone like this take the club away from me."

Everyone has that line, I think. It's just a question of where it is. If Mugabe bought Liverpool, I hope you agree that that would be over the line. Surely we wouldn't give our money to someone who committed genocide on his people. So the question is, do City's owners, Chelsea's, our sponsors, etc., cross that line? It's a tough question, and there isn't one right answer, but the all-too-common "it's all the same," or "everybody does it" responses are not "realistic" or avoiding "naivete," but are just disingenuous. At least be willing to acknowledge what's really happening--without saying, "oh, but Mike Ashley is mean to his workers, it's all the same"--and just say straightforwardly that it's not over that line for you.

Offline Kadian

  • Trolling along... The Specious One. Whistles the Liquidator as he types disparaging comments about Mario Balotelli So utterly predictable, Moreno's best mate
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,779
  • We're coming
Re: Manchester City
« Reply #5546 on: July 31, 2013, 04:27:52 pm »
bang

That's a wicked bark, you have there :D

Offline sinnermichael

  • I copy other people's photoshops and twitter posts and texts and pretend they're mine.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 26,723
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Manchester City
« Reply #5547 on: July 31, 2013, 04:43:21 pm »
playing ac milan at 5.15 on ESPN

Offline Twelfth Man

  • Rhianna fan. my arse! Someone fill me in. Any takers? :) We are the fabulous CFC...
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 19,012
Re: Manchester City
« Reply #5548 on: July 31, 2013, 04:48:30 pm »
Feel humbled after reading that awesome rebuttal from wickedbark.
« Last Edit: July 31, 2013, 05:16:49 pm by Twelfth Customer »
The courts, the rich, the powerful or those in authority never lie. It has been dealt with 'by the courts' nothing to see here run along.

Offline Chip Evans

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,619
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Manchester City
« Reply #5549 on: July 31, 2013, 05:12:21 pm »
snip

Doff of the cap as usual. Sooner the better someone gives you your own show.  A political leaning reversed football themed version of the O'Reilly factor would be the vision. "The Wicked Bark", we'd all watch it.

Offline Chakan

  • Chaka Chaka.....is in love with Aristotle but only for votes. The proud owner of some very private piles and an inflatable harem! Winner of RAWK's Carabao Cup captian contest.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 91,079
  • Internet Terrorist lvl VI
Re: Manchester City
« Reply #5550 on: July 31, 2013, 05:13:33 pm »
Playing AC Milan now in some cup or other.

Offline SerbianScouser

  • Far from world class.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 15,808
  • ...All the best
Re: Manchester City
« Reply #5551 on: July 31, 2013, 05:21:03 pm »
Great Jovetic assist to Silva. 1-0 against Milan.

Offline SerbianScouser

  • Far from world class.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 15,808
  • ...All the best
Re: Manchester City
« Reply #5552 on: July 31, 2013, 05:24:07 pm »
City again with a flat 442. Silva and Navas as wingers. Bit weird, I thought Pellegrini was 433 type of coach and all that...

Offline dave 5516

  • Is in a world of shit and loves it! Loves to Buffy up Danny Dyer. A Cyclopath without a Garmin. Sadly not quite bad enough to make the worst commentator list
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 32,781
  • Si muore sulla bici.
Re: Manchester City
« Reply #5553 on: July 31, 2013, 05:26:59 pm »
As always it's a pleasure to read your post's WB. :wellin

Exercise is to the body what reading is to the mind.

"If I hadn't doped, I would never have won". "Doping improves your performance between 5 and 7 per cent, and maybe 10 to 12 per cent when you are in a peak shape.

"Doping isn't addictive but it's an instrument of power: whoever wins attracts the money; for themselves, the team and the sponsors"

Offline Quaid

  • Thinks clinical is cretinous. Takes one to know one.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,237
Re: Manchester City
« Reply #5554 on: July 31, 2013, 05:27:55 pm »
City again with a flat 442. Silva and Navas as wingers. Bit weird, I thought Pellegrini was 433 type of coach and all that...

To be honest his favoured formation is more like a 4-2-2-2 from what I've seen of his Villareal and Malaga sides.
“By definition, you have to live until you die. Better to make that life as complete and enjoyable an experience as possible, in case death is shite, which I suspect it will be.”

Offline SerbianScouser

  • Far from world class.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 15,808
  • ...All the best
Re: Manchester City
« Reply #5555 on: July 31, 2013, 05:32:17 pm »
To be honest his favoured formation is more like a 4-2-2-2 from what I've seen of his Villareal and Malaga sides.

Never really had a closer look at Pellegrini`s tactics in Spain all I thought was that Txiki and Sorriano wanted someone to make them play like Barca as opposed to Mancini`s narrow and obsolete version of 442. Maybe he is just experimenting now but having Silva on the left wing instead of in the central positions to me is just a bit `meh`.

Offline SerbianScouser

  • Far from world class.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 15,808
  • ...All the best
Re: Manchester City
« Reply #5556 on: July 31, 2013, 05:36:04 pm »
18`   2-0 Richards...this is a proper demolition.

Offline Chakan

  • Chaka Chaka.....is in love with Aristotle but only for votes. The proud owner of some very private piles and an inflatable harem! Winner of RAWK's Carabao Cup captian contest.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 91,079
  • Internet Terrorist lvl VI
Re: Manchester City
« Reply #5557 on: July 31, 2013, 05:36:26 pm »
2-0 Richards.

Offline TheGOAT

  • Gruff handbagger
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 5,842
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Manchester City
« Reply #5558 on: July 31, 2013, 05:37:34 pm »
No idea why but it's a bit of a shame to see AC with such a mediocre squad.

Offline sinnermichael

  • I copy other people's photoshops and twitter posts and texts and pretend they're mine.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 26,723
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Manchester City
« Reply #5559 on: July 31, 2013, 05:39:38 pm »
rout