Monday, 6 December 2010

this week

This week
Well it was all about the training ground bust up between Boateng and Balotelli in the press. Tedious.
Great display against stuffy Bolton again (Son's girlfriend thinks Coyle looks like an ugly George Clooney!) but at least we didn’t give a pen away in the last minute like that time when we also hit the woodwork half a dozen times. Today only twice. Carlos did it again, surely we must find someone else to score goals as well, Joe had some dodgy moments, and the Carlos/Mancini spat at the end didn’t help our cause.
Kammy, on tv, reckoned that the linesman was ‘spot on’ disallowing our perfectly good second goal and Kolarov’s sending off was right too.
Didn’t hear it but Neil Ashton of the NOTW on talkshite was, apparently on about us imploding again. Now I don’t want to worry you but Neil’s dad is a massive Blue and Neil’s a very honest sort of chap so there could be some truth in it. Hopefully not.
Not a bad weekend with the rags chickening out at Blackpool cos of the cold and Chelsea and Spurs only drawing whilst the Arse, sadly, won.
With a game to go Bob has hit Hughes' 29 points after 17 games target so anything at West Ham will mean the decision to install Bob is vindicated!?
Just a point here that the deadline for KK 184 is due on Wednesday and stuff is rolling in so we aim to be at the printers before Juventus and out at Newcastle on Boxing Day. The Santa run went well although not shown on TV and there’s rumour that Blues will turn up in Geordieland suitably attired. Just as I was, what, 15 years or so ago?!
Dave

28 comments:

  1. I feel the spat with Tevez has strengthened Mancini's hand. Bolton were going long and City required more height to cope with their set piece threat. Tevez might be our most popular player, but his reaction was pathetic.
    Neil Ashton is a Crystal Palace fan, but he obviously enjoys the limelight, especially when predicting the downfall of our manager. He actually predicted in August that Mancini would be sacked before Christmas.
    The offside law is a complete joke which nobody fully understands. I don't mind our goal being disallowed as long as I don't hear the media criticising the officials for an identical decision next week.

    ReplyDelete
  2. MotD reckoned that the goal should have stood (fan me someone) and, like Neil says the law is a joke and open to interpretation of each referee.

    ReplyDelete
  3. re offside, what about WBA's 1st goal against Newcastle with an attacker about 2 yards offside standing in front of the goalkeeper, Is that given offside, no! Ours had our player not obscuring anyone and moving away from goal. It's not our fault that all the Bolton defence stopped and stuck their hands in the air.
    One stat put forward that I hadn't realized, apparently we scored more goals last season from corners that any other prem team! Never have thought that.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I buy the guardian because I am left-leaning and i thought it to be an intelligent paper. Step forward so-called journalist daniel taylor, whose ant-city bile continues to fill the columns unchecked and unchallenged every single week. Six weeks ago, there were a series of winners (according to him) during rooneygate... fergiscum for excellent man management,rooney for trousering the an extra million or two out of the rags... the thugs who lay in wait outside rooney's house and one loser... yes city and its fans! Work that one out. On saturday he was at it again, reporting negatively about training ground handbags between balotelli and boateng, To cap it all this morning, taylor produced a non-existent match report on city's brilliant performance against bolton, preferring to highlight tevez's tantrum and kevin 'donkey' davies' embarassing comments. What i want to know is why lying/devious rag bastards like this are allowed anywhere near city property? Perhaps its time to get tough with these journos and if this cannot be achieved peacefully, then perhaps city fans should adopt a more militant/ultra approach to this problem.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I suggested that after the recent 'Sunday Supplement' episode featuring Rob Beesley. I'd be first in line to knock his teeth out. Oops!

    ReplyDelete
  6. Good morning all.The rule was changed with the best of intentions to stop goals being disallowed when a player who happened to be in an offside position but stood by the cornerflag prevented a legal goal,but now it has become very tricky judging the active inactive aspect,personaly I think any player in the 6 yard box and close enough to affect play should be deemed offside. As for the Tevez goal I saw it analyised by Alan Wylie and he said it was a mistake by the assistant pure and simple.
    I didn't think Bolton played the long ball that often and that Tevez's reaction was a sign that he cares something we have lacked in the past.

    If not for poor finishing and equaly poor officiating we would have won the game about 4 nil so on this occasion height was not a problem.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Steven (Cumbo) I buy or get to read most of the daily tabloids due to the fact that I am at Tesco once a day and so take advantage of their coffee shop. They are all exactly the same in their condemnation of anything that City do. The Guardian is probably no different to the other broadsheets I would imagine in that City bashing is the latest sport. Take a look at this piece in this mornings Sun newspaper from SWP's dad.

    http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/sport/sunsport_columnists/3262993/Ian-Wright-refuses-to-be-silenced-by-Man-City.html

    Occasionally, such as after we beat Liverpool, they think about it and realise that if we become successful, then they will need to keep us sweet to gain stories, then we have a bad result and they feel safe that it wont happen so they go back to slagging us off.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Tony and everyone else: I had an interesting conversaion last night at my supporters club meeting with City's head of PR.

    She made a good point by saying that if we react to every ridculuas story the press come out with, we are giving time to these idiots and that dignified silence was the way forward. Hmmm.

    She also said that legally we can not ban journalists in some circumstances and in doing so would cause us more problems than it was worth.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Thanks for that Guardi. It's not so much the ridiculous stories it's the continual City bashing and scurilous lies that can affect the players manager and the fans. As for banning journalists as I understand the law we can ban anyone we like from the ground without reason or explanation,as for causing more trouble than it was worth,it may cause her problems but that is her job and by continually allowing certain journalists to continually undermine what our owners are trying to achieve she is failing in that job.
    I have noticed Kevin Davies mouthing off about City and accusing us of being "divers" thats a bit rich coming from one of the most prolific "divers" in the Premiership watching him go up for the ball feeling the slightest of touches then the arms go up in the air followed by the belly flop.I had a lot of respect for Kevin Davies,had being past tense.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I never had any respect for Davies. What a carthorse and it shows this countries lack of talent when he gets a cap.

    Back on the first point - Is it better to not try to spin positive news? Clubs are legally bound to speak to the media as part of the league set up. I said to her, what about Fergie? she said he is law unto himself. I said well should we not be either?

    ReplyDelete
  11. Steve's right. There is a difference between ridiculous stories and pure City bashing. Take the interview that Tevez gave that is currently being shown on the City site. In it, Tevez blows away all the rumours of rifts between players and that he and Mancini don't get on. Yet a journo in one paper said, "You would expect him to say that.” But he didn't have to give that interview. If he really did have a problem with Mancini, I would have thought that keeping silent when asked would be the same as a thousand words. So even when players come out and openly say, there are no problems, they are saying that because they have to and the press continue making stuff up to suit. I would like to see our owners spend some of their cash in taking the newspapers on in court. Obviously that can only be when they use one of those made up stories that come from "a club source" but they may think twice if they knew that we’d sue. As form SWP's dad's comments. I think we can safely assume that SWP is on his way out.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Unfortunatly (fortunatly) we live in a society where the press are allowed to publish what they want more or less. Journos are well trained in saying the right thing to avoid legal action.

    Tony - I bought up similar examples to this women. She reckoned that we have forced papers to print apologies if they have printed a false story but they always do it in the middle of the papers. I have to say that I have never seen an apology!

    ReplyDelete
  13. What I don't get is, WHY are they all so keen to have a go?

    I've always thought City were regarded as a very hospitable club. If our new owner was a tyrant just out to make a buck out of City and to hell with traditions etc. I could perhaps understand it. However, with the possible exception of Hughes's sacking, I feel Sheikh Mansoor and his associates have been exemplarary. I just don't get it.

    I haven't read the Ian Wright article as I just know it will make me angry.

    ReplyDelete
  14. The press's right to protect a source was meant to protect people from prosecution who reveal things that are in the public interest which hardly applies to football. The press are not alowed to print anything defamatory unless they can prove it to be true according to libel laws. I would not like to see City dragged through the courts but why not ban a particular newspaper from the stadium and let the lawyers or the league take whatever action they deem legal and appropriate and accept the consequences,sometimes you have stand up against the verbal bullies with the continual piss taking and snide articles and draw a line in the sand.

    ReplyDelete
  15. True steve - so why with all the money in the world have we not done this? surely we have the best Solicitors no?

    Is it better to be everyones second favourite but patronised club? or one that people are really fearful of?

    ReplyDelete
  16. It will be interesting to see if the leaks from the fifth columnist disappear once SWP has left the club.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Guardi: I think the question must be asked by our owners"do the snide/scurrilous?defamatory comments by the press have a negative effect on the club and what they are trying to achieve? bearing in mind that the stated objective was to make us a global brand, I know what I think and I know how UTD would react to a similar barrage of negative press.
    Neil,An intresting point about SWP something to ponder,and how did the press get hold of the handbags at dawn scuffle pictures between Boateng and Balotelli? Maybe we should ask our PR lady?

    ReplyDelete
  18. Tonight I should've been seeing Faithless at Glasgow's SECC. As you probably know, middle belt Scotland has been hit particularly hard by snow so the concert has been cancelled.

    On their facebook announcement someone called Kevin Charlton FROM NOTTINGHAM has (IMO) needlessly commented something like "Fuck the porridge munchers - waste of a good concert." I just looked at his profile and guess what his other interests are - Man United.

    Couldn't resist answering his comment and here is his response....

    "Shut up you jock prick and wind your neck in before I snap the cunt".

    And they wonder why..... ha ha.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Steve I asked exactly the same question - The pictures come from the paps based on the public footpath on the edge of carrington. An extremely high fence does not stop them climbing trees apparently

    ReplyDelete
  20. http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/m/man_city/9266181.stm

    Take a look at this picture... the papers have used this photo to suggest Tevez had to be restrained. Now take a look again a bit closer. Milner has just come on for Tevez and is 'patting' him like they do when they go off/come on the pitch.

    Iwould say both arguments would stand up in court though so its hard to get the buggers unfortunatly.

    You have to understand I agree with you about banning journalists etc etc. I was very pissed off when I spoke to the women, but I had to say her answer made some sense tbh

    ReplyDelete
  21. Strange isn't it Guardi that UTD who also train at Carrington never have similar pictures published. BTW I have some expertise in photography and I doubt that picture was taken with a long telephoto lense and judging by the angle was not taken from up a tree.I remain unconvinced by her arguments and think we need a new PR person.
    I have not seen the Tevez photos but to be honest the press can put any caption under a picture it proves nothing and can still be defamatory.

    ReplyDelete
  22. I saw Tevez's reaction when he was coming off, he was not restrained by Milner, who as Guardi says, was just trying to shake his hand as he came on, but Tevez did confront Mancini and clearly says something to him. But whatever was said, lasted seconds and when he sat down on the bench next to Silva, he shared a joke. He didn't sit down looking frosty faced as I always do when I'm pissed about something.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Steve - I have always thought we have a mole in the club. I have a friend of a friend who works at the club and he reckons that they were read the riot act just after the takeover that anyone caught leaking to the press would be sacked for breach of contract. Obviously no one listened!

    A new PR person maybe, but I think our major problem has been and will remain until he is sacked is Garry Cook. Time for someone new me thinks...

    ReplyDelete
  24. It was announced today that City are in negotiations with Disney to open a theme park next to the stadium. This is not a joke, it was reported on Talksport and was in at least one tabloid. Followed by "funny" comments such as City turning into a Mickey Mouse Club etc. I would be interested if this story were true and if not, where did it originate from?

    ReplyDelete
  25. Sounds to me like part of the never ending quest by jounalists to belittle us.Humour can be a most devastating weapon for the victim,complain and we are accused of being humourless or taking ourselves too seriously. If I were a player it really motivate me to win some silverware or better still the league which with a couple of astute signings is within our grasp and then f..k em all.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Tony - can you remember the city 'burger bar' thingy when they first took over? and he was being serious! jesus. At least he was moved aside soon after

    ReplyDelete
  27. Morning all. It seems that even non entities that I have never heard of are getting in on the City bashing act. This is from today's Sun newspaper.

    "Crawley boss Steve Evans claims his money bags owners are much wiser than Manchester City's spendthrift Sheiks. Crawley have spent huge by Conference standards, but he insisted "We won't buy overprices players. People probably see Crawley coming the way they see Man City coming. The difference is, and I have to be careful what I say about the City idiots, but they will just pay it."

    Amazing, even little shits who manage teams in the conference are given a platform to have a pop at us.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Tony:

    Don't forget that this is the same Steve Evans who was proscuted for tax evasion whilst at Boston United.
    Is that what David Moyes meant about lacking Class?

    ReplyDelete