Jump to content


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 18/02/20 in Posts

  1. 10 points
    They trudge the worn and mud strewn ways, Weary to their bones, their silence betrays, Spewed bile the dressing for their wounds, Heysel, VAR, Ifithadntbeenfer loons, The shellshocked accounts, the money gone, The trench long breached named Goodison.
  2. 10 points
  3. 9 points
    The Goodison Guns by S.Baldrick Boo boo boo boo Boo boo boo Boo boo boo boo Boo boo boo
  4. 6 points
    Yet you come on and give it the biggun. Yeah, I’m really hating seeing him do so well. You can just see it dripping off all the posts I’ve made recently praising him. I’m hating it. You, on the other hand, wanted him dropped a few months ago. LFD gon’ LFD. I give in with you.
  5. 5 points
    There's no way City provided 'proof' of the above-board nature of their sponsorship deal. Even without the hacked emails, Uefa would have been within their rights to say okay, what was the second highest bid you received so we can guage your value in the marketplace? This lad has them sussed:
  6. 4 points
    It’s really weird. He was at the point where he was dropped by Klopp and only making the bench. People want to rewrite history rather than judging him on what actually happened. It’s self delusion and done to protect their ego. Same with anybody that can’t admit how well he is doing now. He went from somebody that would general put in a 5 or 6 performance to somebody who puts in 7 or 8 every week without fail. Add on top of that his leadership that is becoming more and more evident, and he deserves all the credit in the world. I’m not going to rewrite history over it, but I’m certainly over the moon with him. What I find weird is that people like LFD are so quick to try to point score whilst as short a time ago as November they were on here saying he should be Fabinho’s back up as he would prefer Keita and Gini starting ahead of him. Essentially, during the period where he has come to the best form of his career, he wanted him back on the bench.
  7. 4 points
    To Goodison the blueshite go To sit disgruntled, row on row Each in their place; and in the sky The larks, still bravely singing, fly Scarce heard amid the boos below.
  8. 3 points
    I can never remember which poster said what. Who cares who was right? Just enjoy watching our Captain strut around midfields. bossing it. The arguing about it is a shitfest on both sides. I hope Ferguson gets asked about Hendo a lot.
  9. 3 points
    I was talking to Jimmy, the Ancelotti-alike manager of the Vernon last night. He was saying that he gets a lot of people staring in the street these days. One fella even stopped and asked (in the kind of stilted way idiots do when they're talking to someone foreign) " DO. YOU. MANAGE. A. FOOTBALL. TEAM?" Jimmy answered in kind "YES. AND. THEY'RE. SHITE."
  10. 3 points
    https://www.theguardian.com/football/2020/feb/17/manchester-city-backers-are-not-the-sort-to-take-punishment-lying-down?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other Manchester City backers are not the sort to take punishment lying down There is resentment among City fans about their treatment and word is that Abu Dhabi will be fighting back against Uefa In 2011 Sheikh Khalifa bin Zayed Al Nahyan, the emir of Abu Dhabi and president of the United Arab Emirates, received a letter. It came from a group of Emirati intellectuals inspired by the recent wave of pro-democracy protests sweeping through the Middle East and north Africa, and requested a range of modest reforms, including an extension of the voting franchise which at the time encompassed just 2% of the country’s population. No marching on the streets. No popular unrest. Certainly no disorder of any kind. Just a letter. Nonetheless, with a regime petrified to the point of paranoia by the spectre of political Islamism, the reprisals would be swift and merciless. Within weeks the arrests had begun, rounding up most of the 160 letter’s signatories, who were designated as “terrorists” plotting to overthrow the regime. Citizenships were revoked. Hefty prison sentences were dished out. In 2014, Abu Dhabi enacted Terrorism Law No 7, reclassifying peaceful opposition as a terrorist act punishable by death, and criminalising a whole range of hazily-defined acts, from “antagonising the state” or “stirring panic among a group of people” to “carrying explosive crackers for a terrorist purpose”. Now: does this strike you as a group of people that is going to be intimidated by the fine print of Article 56, section (a) of the 2018 edition of Uefa’s Club Licensing and Financial Fair Play Regulations? Does a regime serially defying a United Nations arms embargo in Libya – according to the UN’s own reports – strike you as the sort that places a high premium on bureaucratic process? Does the family that bought itself the world’s largest super-yacht – a $600m behemoth two-thirds the size of the Titanic and reportedly equipped with its own missile defence system – strike you as the sort to take a swingeing punishment with humility and good grace? These are just some of the ways of understanding Manchester City’s current dispute with Uefa, one that for all its clear footballing repercussions carries far more sinister overtones. Trawl the City messageboards in the wake of Uefa’s decision to ban the club from the Champions League for two seasons, and it won’t take you long to stumble across the rhetoric of scorched earth: of traitors and revolutionaries, violence and purgation, shady cartels and subhuman scum. This is the language of existential threat, the register of total warfare, and it is fed by the incendiary invective coming out of the club. One little snippet to emerge is the fact City’s appeals to the court of arbitration for sport have been dubbed “Cas One” and “Cas Two”, as if they were military campaigns, rather than ringbinders being delivered to a courtroom by clerks in TM Lewin suits. Witness, too, the assertion of the club’s lawyer Simon Cliff in the Der Spiegel leaks of 2018 that “Uefa doesn’t respond to anything other than aggression”, that a lawsuit against their auditor could “destroy the entire organisation within weeks”. City talk about their footballing enemies the way Abu Dhabi talks about its real ones. This, perhaps, was the most persuasive argument against allowing cherished footballing institutions to fall under the control of entire states. It wasn’t the lack of transparency or the potential for financial distortion, grave as those are. But in hindsight it was perhaps inevitable over time clubs would come to resemble state actors in their own right, that sporting problems would impel geopolitical solutions, that the cut and thrust of footballing sabre-rattling would increasingly take on the character of the real thing. There has always been a slight misconception about the concept popularly known as “sportswashing”, the attempt by autocratic regimes to embed their soft power through sport. It is never purely a PR exercise: there are PR firms for that, and they tend not to go to the trouble of spending £1.5bn on footballers or rebuilding large parts of east Manchester. Rather, it helps to think of the sportswash as some vast, pointless infrastructure project: a man-made glacier, a giant bridge to nowhere, a Nando’s visible from space. The objective is to create something so iridescently perfect that it generates its own innate shock and awe, a timeless monument to beauty, wealth and the power to do whatever the hell you want. And so there is a rich double irony at work here. Firstly, for all the eye-watering sums lavished on the brilliant Guardiola sides, it is instead the years of faltering ascent, the 2012-16 era, for which City are being punished: not the years of £50m full-backs, but your Mangalas and Rodwells and Wilfried Bonys. Secondly, that one of the world’s most meticulously-crafted sporting projects could be undone by simple naivety: an apparent belief the rule of law could be subverted by force of will alone, a failure to build any sort of political or diplomatic contingency against it. While the Qataris at Paris Saint-Germain made it a priority to infiltrate the corridors of power, City find themselves adrift: friendless and alone, with only their money and their hubris to protect them. It may yet be enough. The word is City are stockpiling a cache of inflammatory evidence against other clubs, in anticipation of an epic fight. Perhaps, armed with a battery of lawyers and accountants, they will get their ban overturned. Perhaps, as some of the more bellicose voices insist, they will even destroy the apparatus of football as we know it, which definitely feels like a proportionate response to not being allowed to sign Stevan Jovetic. Either way, you sense for City the ends will always justify the means. After all football, like geopolitics, is very much a results business.
  11. 3 points
    Yeah, but if I was looking to sponsor someone, I'd be sure to look for the team that wins the league before the outbreak of world wars. Who wouldn't be drawn to a brand like that? They're so fucking robust, they survived 2 world wars and were only taken out by heysel.
  12. 3 points
    Cheers, miss the big fella as do plenty of others, if we win the league I’ll be raising a glass , that’s for you mate.
  13. 2 points
    Am I the only person who had no idea about this? I'm looking at that thinking "nah, no way" but I'm guessing it's real. Seriously? Jesus. Placcy flags is bad (Norwich last weekend anybody?) but LED screen flags is a whole new world of excruciating. When we got into the stadium at Kiev a couple of years ago, seeing the LFC banners draped over the stands, covering at least 2/3rds of the perimeter, was gobsmacking. Like "wow". And then I see those City banner sceens up there? Please. Never.
  14. 2 points
  15. 2 points
    Should buy them a few more flat screens, then they can each have a go at drawing something and putting it on a slide show so they all get a turn.
  16. 2 points
    "Another fucking shite match report" - Jon Moss
  17. 2 points
  18. 2 points
  19. 2 points
  20. 2 points
  21. 2 points
    Well, I might as well tell you now. You lot may all be internationals and have won all the domestic honours there are to win under Guardiola. But as far as I'm concerned, the first thing you can do for me is to chuck all your medals and all your caps and all your pots and all your pans into the biggest fucking dustbin you can find, because you've never won any of them fairly. You've done it all by bloody cheating.
  22. 2 points
    The most straightforward article that I’ve read so far https://www.forbes.com/sites/bobbymcmahon/2020/02/16/uefa-ban-manchester-city-for-2-years-separating-the-facts-from-fiction/#4a185091204f Social media chatter has made it difficult to separate the facts from the bull, so here are the facts with some editorial added for the purpose of clarity. The background Late in 2018, Spiegel International published a number articles alleging that Manchester City had been playing fast and loose when it came to Uefa Financial Fair Play (FFP) regulations and other licensing requirements. The most damming allegation was that a holding company, Abu Dhabi United Group (ADUG), owned by Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed al Nahyan, a billionaire brother of the ruler of the United Arab Emirates, funneled money to City sponsors based in Abu Dhabi who then rerouted the money to Manchester City as sponsorship. Sheikh Mansour is the owner of Manchester City, and as such, the scheme contravened FFP regulations. The allegations were part of a new series of “Football Leaks.” At the time, Manchester City refused to make comment on the accusations but later claimed that Spiegel’s articles were based on hacked and stolen documents that were then taken out of context. Uefa’s investigatory chamber started an investigation of Manchester City in the spring of 2019. When City was officially charged in May of last year it claimed that the club had been subjected to a hostile process that the investigation had ignored a body of “irrefutable evidence.” The charge and process The investigatory chamber found Manchester City guilty and the adjudicatory chamber imposed the punishment that was announced on Friday. (The two chambers are designed to act independently of each other and independently of Uefa.) Manchester City was found guilty of two charges: of falsely inflating sponsorship revenues when making submissions as part of the Financial Fair Play (FFP) compliance process; of breaching regulations by failing to cooperate in the investigation of the case by the Club Financial Control Body (CFCB). Uefa acknowledged the decision but offered no further comment given that Manchester City has the right of appeal to the CAS. Financial hit If Manchester City’s appeal fails and subsequent other action also fails, then the financial cost will far exceed the €30m fine. There will the cost of 2 years of UEFA Champions League prize money at an estimated €200m or more. This reduction in revenue could set off a downward spiral that may leave Manchester City unable to carry their current costly squad. Some have speculated that players could even try to have their contracts nullified based on the club’s gross misconduct. Two years of the no Champions League participation may also weigh heavy on coach Pep Guardiola’s decision about his future with the club. Roll all this together and you can see why Manchester City is going to fight this one to the death. Then there is another problem, the Premier League....... The Premier League has a different form of FFP. However, the same sets of financial statements provided to Uefa would have been provided to the Football Association and the Premier League. The Premier League regulations have gone through a couple of iterations but a core component has been restricting wage increases. Some of the permitted increases have been tied to any increase in self-generated increases (that doesn’t include Premier League TV money.) If Manchester City has perpetrated an accounting fraud then they will also be in contravention of Premier League FFP regulations and subject to other league-specific sanctions. And if that’s not enough, let’s remember that the present Uefa punishment covers just 2012 to 2016. If City has cooked the books and misled the authorities then it would seem plausible that they have continued to do so after 2016. This could lead to further fines and bans. Should Manchester City win this season’s Champions League - they play Real Madrid in the round of 16 - the win could be nullified. Court of Arbitration for Sports There is a lot of social media noise surrounding the CAS and there is a lot folks guessing what the law is and what the process is. This is what the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) does. The CAS process is generally more transparent that the Uefa process but if you don’t want embarrassing information to come out then that’s not necessarily a good thing. Further, the CAS appeal is a fresh hearing of all evidence, essentially a new “trial”. Manchester City’s emails were hacked so they can’t be used as evidence. Not so fast. Uefa used hacked material to find Manchester City guilty. We don’t know that and it is very doubtful that Uefa did. Certainly, materials that were made public through Football Leaks are almost certainly hacked. However, opening an investigation based on readily available public knowledge is very different than using hacked material to prove a case. Uefa investigators would have only needed to ask very straight forward questions and asked Manchester City to show the paper trail that supported their submitted financial statements. Based on the second charge, it can be presumed that Uefa believes that City failed to comply with the investigators requests. When you get down to it the two charges are very fact based and there seems to be very little room for nuance. A decision has to be reached before July 15 so England’s representation can be submitted for Europe’s two club competitions. The process could be expedited but if City lose they will almost certainly fight on by any means necessary. City’s punishment could be postponed pending a final outcome. FFP is a farce and Manchester City shouldn’t be punished for bucking the rules. Just as in life, you may not like the laws of the land, but as a citizen (no pun intended) you are obliged to follow the laws. Nobody forced Manchester City to play in the Champions League and nobody forced the team to cash the cheques from Uefa. Manchester City knew the rules and it worth remembering that the charge does not relate to failing to meet FFP requirements but rather the fraudulent submission of documents and failing to cooperate with the investigation. This is part of a Vendetta by big clubs who are using Uefa and FFP to “get” Manchester City. Again, City signed on as a free and willing participant in the Champions League. It’s a fact that the genesis of Financial Fair Play was long before Manchester City was a twinkle in Sheikh Mansour’s eye. Further, if the Premier League and the Football Association take action would that mean that all of English football has signed on to the Vendetta? Manchester City is the victim of an unjust system. The City comment below has quickly become standard fare and used to support the contention that City is the victim. The fact is the system is used by every major sports organization in the world and is the reason why the CAS concept was conceived in the 80s. The same process is followed by sport organizations as a matter of course because otherwise the formal legal systems around the world would be clogged with sport issues, most of them petty. Sport is not above the law but it has been acknowledged many times by the formal legal system that it has a right to make its own rules and to follow its own disciplinary system. Is this really such a big deal? It actually is. The charge is essentially one of accounting fraud which is a form of theft. Beyond the sanctions applied to the club there are also potential ramifications for any Manchester City personnel such as lawyers and accountants who may have been part of the alleged fraud. That also goes for directors of the club. City’s whining that FFP isn’t fair doesn’t address the actual charges of falsifying accounts and failing to co-operate. Also interesting that 1) their directors could be banned from running the club if they are found guilty of fraudulent accounting 2) no one has even started to look at what happened post-2016. Have Etihad suddenly started paying the full amount?
  23. 2 points
    Somehow had never seen Local Hero, so gave it a watch. Proper 80’s movie. Bags of natural, understated charm, stunning cinematography, throwaway patches of silliness and eccentricity characteristic of films in that era, wore its uplifting core message relatively lightly and, of course, features that classic feel-good Knopfler soundtrack to perfect effect. 8/10 while watching, rising to a 9 an hour or so afterwards for having put me in a great, nostalgic mood.
  24. 2 points
    As Paulie's song should have been.
  25. 2 points
    I'm sure I've posted thoughts along these lines before around here but sod it, it's something I feel very strongly about . . . he was the greatest. Not just the greatest at Liverpool, the greatest. You know how Moyes failed hard at Old Trafford, and the consensus after the fact was that it was impossible replacing Alex Ferguson, that no one could have succeeded? And the historical record tells us this is true. There's a reason there are no dynasties in English football. With one exception. It's telling that Klopp was drawn to the down-on-their-luck club that was Liverpool when he took over. He could dispense with the past without resistance from within, without anyone going 'well, it worked under the old gaffer'. What's more, he did it at both ends. Ferguson's legacy has been diminished by how he dropped Man Utd in the crapper, going long on just-past-their-peak types like Van Persie so he could have one more chance at glory before saddling his successor with those players who were now well-past-their-peak. Bob Paisley left Liverpool in better condition than he found it. The greatest.