The mancityfans.net football forum

City64 wrote:

Justified logic wrote:Loving the Sky Sports TV advert.

Aguerrrrrroooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!!

Yeah and the city blue butterflies and the Etihad ..........

its like the cunts owe us all something ? Nice all the same and certainly hits the mark and gets the city match day passion going and all that .

After last year's Beckham advert...

Justified logic wrote:

City64 wrote:

Justified logic wrote:Loving the Sky Sports TV advert.

Aguerrrrrroooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!!

Yeah and the city blue butterflies and the Etihad ..........

its like the cunts owe us all something ? Nice all the same and certainly hits the mark and gets the city match day passion going and all that .

After last year's Beckham advert...

Fuckin Beckham. I was fuming when he popped up on King Arthur. Guy Ritchie is a prick for doing that.

Justified logic wrote:Loving the Sky Sports TV advert.

Aguerrrrrroooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!!

They've got a fucking cheek.

Mase wrote:

Justified logic wrote:

City64 wrote:

Justified logic wrote:Loving the Sky Sports TV advert.

Aguerrrrrroooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!!

Yeah and the city blue butterflies and the Etihad ..........

its like the cunts owe us all something ? Nice all the same and certainly hits the mark and gets the city match day passion going and all that .

After last year's Beckham advert...

Fuckin Beckham. I was fuming when he popped up on King Arthur. Guy Ritchie is a prick for doing that.

I swear to god I wont watch that film just because squeaky voice is in it.

Of course, sky know it's nasty old city that are ruining football again.

Monaco release a statement referring to "certain european clubs " making illegal approaches for Mbappe.

Sky then say it's city.

We should sue the cunts if it's not true.

http://dailycannon.com/2017/07/as-monac ... an-mbappe/

Original Dub wrote:Of course, sky know it's nasty old city that are ruining football again.

Monaco release a statement referring to "certain european clubs " making illegal approaches for Mbappe.

Sky then say it's city.

We should sue the cunts if it's not true.

http://dailycannon.com/2017/07/as-monac ... an-mbappe/

Probably based on the rumours of a couple of days ago (not just Sky) that Pep had words directly with Mbappe's camp about joining us

Foreverinbluedreams wrote:

carl_feedthegoat wrote:

Foreverinbluedreams wrote:

carl_feedthegoat wrote:Can City not make a statement( regarding the 45 million plus 5 million for walker) that the comics should retract their lies regarding the fee we paid.

If its 45 plus 5 then its not fuckign 54 is it !!!..Why cant the hierarchy have some fuckign balls and slate the press ?????

They've already briefed the press, that's why the real figure and the details of the add ons are in the public domain.

They briefed them prior to them making shit up -yet still ''record fee'' gets peddled by some comics.

They briefed them in response to the likes of The Mirror's back page.

They should do exactly what I said they should do, as the papers are still fuckign insisting the deal is up to 54 FUCKING MILLION...so either the club are not telling us the truth or the papers are Lying.

Anyone read this?

http://bet.unibet.co.uk/football/premie ... -ruination

Decent read.

Original Dub wrote:Of course, sky know it's nasty old city that are ruining football again.

Monaco release a statement referring to "certain european clubs " making illegal approaches for Mbappe.

Sky then say it's city.

We should sue the cunts if it's not true.

http://dailycannon.com/2017/07/as-monac ... an-mbappe/

One of the Salford wankers in the BBC sport section is trying to heavily imply it's us without saying it - and without putting his/her (very probably his though) name to it.

Just look at how Bernardo Silva's deal was done, and how we have almost certainly been negotiating with Monaco over mendy and try and tell me you really believe we would do something like this for Mbappe because I certainly don't. We have a good relationship with the club and I can't see how we would need to illegally approach one of their players.

Also - didn't Sky Sport understand that Chelsea were approaching us for Aguero just before the rumour was shot down by Pep? Look how much understanding there was for that. They just trawl social media like a red top tabloid and try to find some juicy click bait.

Just caught the match report on BBC News 24, they showed the scum goals after which the presenter swooned her breathless tribute - 'two fantastic players'.This uncontrolled rag infestation of the national tv broadcaster is simply unacceptable - something should be done

johnny crossan wrote:Just caught the match report on BBC News 24, they showed the scum goals after which the presenter swooned her breathless tribute - 'two fantastic players'.This uncontrolled rag infestation of the national tv broadcaster is simply unacceptable - something should be done

They're reporting on friendlies?! How long have they done that for?

Reporting of this friendly is bullshit. It's clear that we are disliked in the mainstream media. Every opportunity for a dig is grasped with open arms.

Beeb saying many Manchester City fans in the UK had to get up at 03:00 in the morning, pay a £7.00 subscription fee for their rivals' TV channel and watch their team lose....

I don't think any city fans would pay to subscribe to that shit. Pisstakers.

london blue 2 wrote:Reporting of this friendly is bullshit. It's clear that we are disliked in the mainstream media. Every opportunity for a dig is grasped with open arms.

Beeb saying many Manchester City fans in the UK had to get up at 03:00 in the morning, pay a £7.00 subscription fee for their rivals' TV channel and watch their team lose....

I don't think any city fans would pay to subscribe to that shit. Pisstakers.

Sky subscription only costs £7.00 over there?

The report on the Sky app talks about Foden as " a so called City fan, according to Pep".

WTF

So called?

Foreverinbluedreams wrote:

london blue 2 wrote:Reporting of this friendly is bullshit. It's clear that we are disliked in the mainstream media. Every opportunity for a dig is grasped with open arms.

Beeb saying many Manchester City fans in the UK had to get up at 03:00 in the morning, pay a £7.00 subscription fee for their rivals' TV channel and watch their team lose....

I don't think any city fans would pay to subscribe to that shit. Pisstakers.

Sky subscription only costs £7.00 over there?

£7 was the MUTV charge, it wasn't on Sky

johnny crossan wrote:

Foreverinbluedreams wrote:

london blue 2 wrote:Reporting of this friendly is bullshit. It's clear that we are disliked in the mainstream media. Every opportunity for a dig is grasped with open arms.

Beeb saying many Manchester City fans in the UK had to get up at 03:00 in the morning, pay a £7.00 subscription fee for their rivals' TV channel and watch their team lose....

I don't think any city fans would pay to subscribe to that shit. Pisstakers.

Sky subscription only costs £7.00 over there?

£7 was the MUTV charge, it wasn't on Sky

I think FIBD was alluding that Sky and MUTV are birds of a feather

nottsblue wrote:

johnny crossan wrote:

Foreverinbluedreams wrote:

london blue 2 wrote:Reporting of this friendly is bullshit. It's clear that we are disliked in the mainstream media. Every opportunity for a dig is grasped with open arms.

Beeb saying many Manchester City fans in the UK had to get up at 03:00 in the morning, pay a £7.00 subscription fee for their rivals' TV channel and watch their team lose....

I don't think any city fans would pay to subscribe to that shit. Pisstakers.

Sky subscription only costs £7.00 over there?

£7 was the MUTV charge, it wasn't on Sky

I think FIBD was alluding that Sky and MUTV are birds of a feather

I think FIBD is as confused about it as he is about right backs

Thank you NB.

What's that about right backs JC? You've lost me.

Foreverinbluedreams wrote:Thank you NB.

What's that about right backs JC? You've lost me.

I promise I'll try to explain but first can you please tell me where you think londonblue is based?

johnny crossan wrote:

Foreverinbluedreams wrote:Thank you NB.

What's that about right backs JC? You've lost me.

I promise I'll try to explain but first can you please tell me where you think londonblue is based?

London.