The Appalling Sunday Supplement

[johnny crossan]

So if Fulop plays....that's okay.
If we lose....that's okay.
If he doesn't have anything to do....that's okay.
BUT if as last minute penalty is given, he should let it go in to avoid controversy?

Honestly, these guys get money for spewing this crap?

here's me and Radio 5's Alan Green in discussion on the same subject last night - ends rather abruptly!

[youtube]CRlfRKVhrEo[/youtube]

[Ted Hughes]

So if Fulop plays....that's okay.
If we lose....that's okay.
If he doesn't have anything to do....that's okay.
BUT if as last minute penalty is given, he should let it go in to avoid controversy?

Honestly, these guys get money for spewing this crap?

here's me and Radio 5's Alan Green in discussion on the same subject last night - ends rather abruptly!

[youtube]CRlfRKVhrEo[/youtube]

Alan Green is a horrible, nasty, big headed, biased, scouse licking git & is gutted that we may take over from them. Another reason to celebrate Liverpool's failure to qualify for the Champion's league.

[Slim]

QUALITY! Don't let that sniveling little cunt get a word in.

[edge275]

What an absolute cunt!!!!!!

[Niall Quinns Discopants]

So if Fulop plays....that's okay.
If we lose....that's okay.
If he doesn't have anything to do....that's okay.
BUT if as last minute penalty is given, he should let it go in to avoid controversy?

Honestly, these guys get money for spewing this crap?

here's me and Radio 5's Alan Green in discussion on the same subject last night - ends rather abruptly!

[youtube]CRlfRKVhrEo[/youtube]

HAHA

Top stuff. To be fair, you hardly gave him a chance did you! But you were absolutely spot on regarding the original subject.

You should've also mentioned that this was hardly first time this was done. Villa got emergency keeper to to my recollection few years back. Also, it's hardly Mancini's fault that Hart is on loan in Birmingham without recall clause in his contract. For once I agree with redknapp when he said that we were tad arrogant to not include such clause on the loan deal in case of the emergency. Especially as we got Taylor as number two who is hardly proven at ANY level.

[The Original Special One]

So if Fulop plays....that's okay.
If we lose....that's okay.
If he doesn't have anything to do....that's okay.
BUT if as last minute penalty is given, he should let it go in to avoid controversy?

Honestly, these guys get money for spewing this crap?

here's me and Radio 5's Alan Green in discussion on the same subject last night - ends rather abruptly!

[youtube]CRlfRKVhrEo[/youtube]

To be fair Johnny when I was listening to that I didn't think you were doing your cause any good by continually ignoring his question about Nielsen, and trying to talk him down.
(apart from that I thought you were the rational advovate we needed and Green knew it: also, because you had shown him up he was always going to wait for his opportunity to cut you off and you gave him that 'out' by contiually talking over him: no I can't stand him, either!)
I don't know the rules but I thought there would be some kind of emergency release clause for loaned players.
I think if the remaining 5 goalkeepers on our books are not senior players then its fair that we be allowed to get an emergency loan as even if we played Nielsen, we would still need to have a senior goalkeeper on the bench.
Nielsen was a sub for Shay so, in his case, we're on shaky ground trying to claim he wasn't experienced enough

[johnny crossan]

So if Fulop plays....that's okay.
If we lose....that's okay.
If he doesn't have anything to do....that's okay.
BUT if as last minute penalty is given, he should let it go in to avoid controversy?

Honestly, these guys get money for spewing this crap?

here's me and Radio 5's Alan Green in discussion on the same subject last night - ends rather abruptly!

[youtube]CRlfRKVhrEo[/youtube]

To be fair Johnny when I was listening to that I didn't think you were doing your cause any good by continually ignoring his question about Nielsen, and trying to talk him down.
(apart from that I thought you were the rational advovate we needed and Green knew it: also, because you had shown him up he was always going to wait for his opportunity to cut you off and you gave him that 'out' by contiually talking over him: no I can't stand him, either!)
I don't know the rules but I thought there would be some kind of emergency release clause for loaned players.
I think if the remaining 5 goalkeepers on our books are not senior players then its fair that we be allowed to get an emergency loan as even if we played Nielsen, we would still need to have a senior goalkeeper on the bench.
Nielsen was a sub for Shay so, in his case, we're on shaky ground trying to claim he wasn't experienced enough

Fair enough, although I did keep repeating that Gunnar had no Premiership experience. (No football League experience at all actually.) I still don't see his appearance from the bench against Arsenal constitutes enough experience. Actually I wanted the chance to remind Green of his remark in January "City in the Champions League? Don't make me laugh." But he outmanoeuvred me there. I believe that a season long loan is strictly a temporary transfer in terms of FA rules and as such out of window changes are not allowed. That's what I said to him anyway but I may be wrong.

[The Original Special One]

So if Fulop plays....that's okay.
If we lose....that's okay.
If he doesn't have anything to do....that's okay.
BUT if as last minute penalty is given, he should let it go in to avoid controversy?

Honestly, these guys get money for spewing this crap?

here's me and Radio 5's Alan Green in discussion on the same subject last night - ends rather abruptly!

[youtube]CRlfRKVhrEo[/youtube]

To be fair Johnny when I was listening to that I didn't think you were doing your cause any good by continually ignoring his question about Nielsen, and trying to talk him down.
(apart from that I thought you were the rational advovate we needed and Green knew it: also, because you had shown him up he was always going to wait for his opportunity to cut you off and you gave him that 'out' by contiually talking over him: no I can't stand him, either!)
I don't know the rules but I thought there would be some kind of emergency release clause for loaned players.
I think if the remaining 5 goalkeepers on our books are not senior players then its fair that we be allowed to get an emergency loan as even if we played Nielsen, we would still need to have a senior goalkeeper on the bench.
Nielsen was a sub for Shay so, in his case, we're on shaky ground trying to claim he wasn't experienced enough

Fair enough, although I did keep repeating that Gunnar had no Premiership experience. (No football League experience at all actually.) I still don't see his appearance from the bench against Arsenal constitutes enough experience. Actually I wanted the chance to remind Green of his remark in January "City in the Champions League? Don't make me laugh." But he outmanoeuvred me there. I believe that a season long loan is strictly a temporary transfer in terms of FA rules and as such out of window changes are not allowed. That's what I said to him anyway but I may be wrong.

Green was cute enough to see you had scored a point off him with your initial point, which was why he was so quick to hit you with the 'what about Nielsen' stick, and keep hitting you over the head with it.
Still, you can always say that you showed Green up on his home turf, at least for a while, and made him look so bad that he had to bully you.
Far better than to have to admit you got 'nice and cosy' with him

[Abu Dhabi]

Good on ye Johnny mate.
Nielsen is a 1st team player, having no experience is no excuse. However, you should have told him that we need TWO goalkeepers on the team sheet.

[johnny crossan]

The Sunday Suppository is back for a new season

(I know, I know...... if you don't like it don't watch it - but I have a grim fascination for this bile.)

[youtube]GjGHRQ__VhE[/youtube]

this clip was on another thread which someone in authority has seen fit to lock - so here's another chance to comment if you wish

[avoidconfusion]

I never really watch this Sunday Supplement stuff but do they ever have opposing views on anything or is this just some kind of televised "let's all have a dig at City" circle jerk?

[dazby]

Seriously Johnny, there's not a great deal wrong with what they've said. If I was on that show and we were talking about say Liverpool doing what we are, I'd be into them big time.

They don't have to suck our dick. It would be nice if they did but they are not obliged to do so.

[The Man In Blue]

They don't have to suck our dick. It would be nice if they did but they are not obliged to do so.

this is true. i think the frustration with this programme stems from the fact that the opinions expressed are ill-informed - similar to Alan cunt's mistake on the recall clause (well in on that one JC) - and there is no way of correcting/challenging said opinions. the fact that thousands of people then take these opinions as fact and go around spouting them off makes it even worse.

[johnny crossan]

Seriously Johnny, there's not a great deal wrong with what they've said. If I was on that show and we were talking about say Liverpool doing what we are, I'd be into them big time.

They don't have to suck our dick. It would be nice if they did but they are not obliged to do so.

You've been away too long my friend. Not a lot right is how I'd put it. Here are a few quotes from our brothers in the other place after I posted the same clip there ...

As I watched this I was aghast at what I was watching.
There are so many points that are wrong and not argued fairly on a TV show that is supposed to be neutral.
First of all, it's hosted and participated in by people who more often than not get things very very wrong.
They then go on to slate players we have yet to signed, compare an immensely talented and yes trouble player to a money hungry fame orientated coke head, in the meantime not taking the opportunity to raise the issue of vast racism in Italy. Claim that there has been no research done in an attempt to sign a player that MANCINI coached for 3 years! Then Milner is not a player suitable to take a team to that extra level, yet complain that we priced Chelsea out of the market??
I guarantee that non of these clowns has seen Kolarov play more than 10 games, and claim that our 4 signings have come as a scatter gun approach? Boateng heavily scouted and picked up quickly without much media attention or fuss, Silva is a proven player with undoubted quality, a difference maker that we badly needed in lots of games last year. Ya Ya, where do I start, they make up his wages, and no nothing about him, compare him to De Jong, you only have to watch him play for 10 minutes to see that he's so much different.
Suggest Adebayor is surplus to requirements, despite the club not only saying he is very much not for sale, and they completely ignore the fact that Adebayor has been given the no. 9 shirt!
The squad is no bigger than any top four side, and if we sign Milner that will be 8 current or capped England players in the 25 man squad, no other side can come close to that!
Hughes won 1 in 12 or something similar, would Ancelotti still be in a job if that happened, Jesus hull sacked Brown for less!
I can't be bothered to type anymore, but there is so much wrong with that TV clip it's a joke!
I actually emailed into sky about this, complaining about a forum that can just create their own script with no grounds or proof and voice almost libelous opinions on a Sunday morning TV show!
I've not heard that much twaddle on a Sunday since I last went to church!

A number of things on this just betray the biased, incompetent football journalism in this country.

1. Milner is now a 'good, solid midfielder'. Pretty sure about 6 months ago the press couldn't get enough of him. Can guarantee if he went to the rags he would be classed as something like a 'midfield dynamo'. Also, complete lack of knowledge in the areas we need to strengthen ie energy in our midfield, which we seem to lack atm.

2. The whole dissection and condemnation of Balotelli before he's even made his transfer. Mourinho isnt a God. Hes a quality manager yes, but he makes mistakes and has a reputation for favouring functional, solid, consistent players who work hard (maybe he should be interested in Milner according to the rules of this lot!). Point is, Mourinho was never going to like Balotelli, much as he never liked Ibrahimovic, being as they are precocious, mercurial talents who are brilliant, yet dont fit in with the Mourinho mould. As well as this, they complete ignore the entire context of Balotelli's race and the problems that come with it, that are possibly a factor in his temperament in Italy and the desire of his club to let him go etc. These are the reasons why Mourinho didnt like him and Inter want him to go. Just because Mourinho doesnt like a player, doesnt mean he is definitely shit or problematic you Chelsea twats!

3. Comparing Mutu to Balotelli. Yeah Balotelli has loads in common with a (then) 26 year old Romanian coke addict.

4. Apparently there's no thought process for City buying players. We just go for anyone who's good apparently. So why then are we not in for Ozil, Khedira (pre-Madrid), Sneijder, Higuain, Mertesacker, Bastos, Fabiano etc etc, the list goes on? And why have we bought Boateng (who we pretty much had before he was epic at the WC), Yaya (who hardly played for Barca last season, yet was still quality), Silva (doesn't get in te Spanish first team, but proven quality), Kolarov (Virtual unknown not even 6 months ago) and possibly Milner (good season last season, but some drive we need) and Balotelli (risky, but a talent)? If we were adopting a scattergun approach with no thought process, we wouldn't have bought players like these. We clearly have a plan in mind with tranfers, we buy what we need and we spend for it.

5. 160k net is too much, ruining football, alienating fans etc, but 100-120 k net a la Rooney, Lampard, Terry etc is perfectly acceptble and not disgusting to the general public? Ok then, I'd forgotten that an extra 30k a week when it gets up to those figures makes ALL the difference...

6. Richads won't get a look in? Yeah that's why he's been one of our better players pre season, guaranteed to be in the 25 man squad and is definitely not getting tranfered.

7. Apparently it's all meaningless unless after all of our spending we have something to show for it. True, but its been what, 2 seasons? And after failing to win the Champions League/Prem 3 seasons after we finished mid-table is failure apparently. How long did it take Ferguson, Wenger, hell even Houllier to win something after spending vast amounts? And how long did it take Chelsea to win the Champs League? Oh wait...

As you lot can tell, this video has REALLY pissed me off. It captures in 8 minutes all of the misconceptions, bias and downright lies spun about us by the media. Lets see all your faces in about 3 seasons time when we're dominating.

this sums it up for me though

I understand that a lot of people in the meedya don't go in for reasoned argument, just the incessant repetition of an opinion, but what I have difficulty with is getting my head round the fact that for as long as I have been watching football, no team other than MCFC over the past two seasons has come in for such criticism. In the days of WimbledonFC kickin' the ball as far as they could, no organised reaction to their 'style' was ever orchestrated across the dailies, and, though we didn't have the plethora of opinion-based, phone-in radio shows, there was never the constant anti-club tirades against the likes of Don Revie's Leeds, or Docherty's MANUre. If it's not a constant undermining of Mancini, it's the excessive wage that the players are on, and the unfettered joy when we lose a point or go down to teams we should beat, or it's Garry Cook's gaffes. We even had the BBC, was it, repeated by that idiot Wilson in The Observer, that no supporter knew that a woman was in at the beginning of the club. We have been marked out in this day and age of instant, 25hr/day information that we are the devil incarnate. And yet it's the darlings camped outside the City boundary who are the devil's disciples.

[john@staustell]

There is absolutely no doubt Woolnough loads this programme heavily against City and, as someone said, much of what they say is just not true, as their knowledge on City is appalling. I would say 2, at most, of all the contributors have a good knowledge and fair, unbiased view.

Might start taking notes on the factual errors this season just to e-mail in!

[dazby]

So what you are doing essentially is giving the show what it needs: controversy and ratings. It was mentioned earlier in the thread: win something and most of their arguments dry up.

[johnny crossan]

So what you are doing essentially is giving the show what it needs: controversy and ratings. It was mentioned earlier in the thread: win something and most of their arguments dry up.

"If a way to the better there be it exacts a full look at the worst"
well known early City fan Thomas Hardy

[john@staustell]

So what you are doing essentially is giving the show what it needs: controversy and ratings. It was mentioned earlier in the thread: win something and most of their arguments dry up.

It was mentioned, but is unlikely to be the case.

[johnny crossan]

Rather sad, confused and fearful tone pervades the emissions this week.
Suppository takes an unexpected twist.
[youtube]e7JsYoJzH3I[/youtube]
[youtube]LSkngpV_wnI[/youtube]

they are trying to say nice things about City fans now too

[Douglas Higginbottom]

So what you are doing essentially is giving the show what it needs: controversy and ratings. It was mentioned earlier in the thread: win something and most of their arguments dry up.

Exactly right