The mancityfans.net football forum

Posted: **Sat Jun 17, 2017 3:17 pm**

Wooders wrote:
Peter Doherty (AGAIG) wrote:
Mase wrote:I certainly do Patrick. 100%

It's the same with the owners as well. You never hear anyone say 'Yank Money' but you always hear 'Arab money/owners' being used. You see videos on Facebook 'City owners outside the Etihad' and it will be a video of Arabs rioting somewhere in the world.

Stones moved to us last summer and he has been in the spotlight in the media this season about his personal life rarely (think there was a story about him cheating on his girlfriend). But Raheem goes to Poundland and it makes he news?! Why?

There's still a massive problem.

Spot on, mate.

It doesn't quite add up - there are plenty of black players in the league and England squad who are not subjected to the same level of scrutiny from the press and other teams fans - so how does skin colour affect it?

That was my view as well, which was why I asked the question.
I still think it's because of him forcing a move from scouse1 to City, and being painted by our lovely unbiased media as a mercenary.
I don't think Stones attracts the same vilification, as he was always expected to leave Everton for a bigger club, whereas a lot of the media take the view that Liverpool is as big as you can get.
If it was the other way round, I think it would be Stones getting the shite.

Posted: **Sat Jun 17, 2017 4:12 pm**

patrickblue wrote:
Wooders wrote:
Peter Doherty (AGAIG) wrote:
Mase wrote:I certainly do Patrick. 100%

It's the same with the owners as well. You never hear anyone say 'Yank Money' but you always hear 'Arab money/owners' being used. You see videos on Facebook 'City owners outside the Etihad' and it will be a video of Arabs rioting somewhere in the world.

Stones moved to us last summer and he has been in the spotlight in the media this season about his personal life rarely (think there was a story about him cheating on his girlfriend). But Raheem goes to Poundland and it makes he news?! Why?

There's still a massive problem.

Spot on, mate.

It doesn't quite add up - there are plenty of black players in the league and England squad who are not subjected to the same level of scrutiny from the press and other teams fans - so how does skin colour affect it?

That was my view as well, which was why I asked the question.
I still think it's because of him forcing a move from scouse1 to City, and being painted by our lovely unbiased media as a mercenary.
I don't think Stones attracts the same vilification, as he was always expected to leave Everton for a bigger club, whereas a lot of the media take the view that Liverpool is as big as you can get.
If it was the other way round, I think it would be Stones getting the shite.

Milner ran his contract down ensuring City didn't get a transfer fee and that he was in a better position to negotiate a contract when he moved to Liverpool on a free - it never gets a single mention, infact I've seen it painted as City forcing him out.

Posted: **Sat Jun 17, 2017 4:19 pm**

Milner signed a contract and honoured it.

Posted: **Sat Jun 17, 2017 5:17 pm**

Scatman wrote:Milner signed a contract and honoured it.

Yeah he's a model of integrity that one.

Posted: **Sat Jun 17, 2017 5:34 pm**

Scatman wrote:Milner signed a contract and honoured it.

He moved clubs on his own terms and not on CIty's terms which is my point - and his terms were to the detriment of City.

Posted: **Sat Jun 17, 2017 5:45 pm**

Dameerto wrote:
Scatman wrote:Milner signed a contract and honoured it.

He moved clubs on his own terms and not on CIty's terms which is my point - and his terms were to the detriment of City.

I think that's a bit unfair.

His terms with Liverpool were irrelevant to City.

Milner signed a contract with us and almost always performed well for us. He fulfilled his contract with minimal fuss. He left when it was over.

Since he's left he's not used the best choice of words, particularly as the trophies he won with us will be the only trophies he'll ever win. So he has quite rightly lost favour with us. But whilst with us he was generally well behaved.

Posted: **Sat Jun 17, 2017 5:57 pm**

nottsblue wrote:....Considering how great Alves has been at Juventus this year....

has he been reading your posts?

Posted: **Sat Jun 17, 2017 6:06 pm**

johnny crossan wrote:
nottsblue wrote:....Considering how great Alves has been at Juventus this year....

has he been reading your posts?

For a year he would be a great signing. A brilliant stop gap.

Posted: **Sat Jun 17, 2017 6:11 pm**

So what's the excuse with our owners getting racist digs here and there?

Posted: **Sat Jun 17, 2017 6:40 pm**

Mase wrote:So what's the excuse with our owners getting racist digs here and there?

This just got me thinking Mase.

It seems so long ago now that Shinawatra was our owner and, at the time, there were some doubts about his 'suitability' because of his record in Thailand, but what was the level of criticism levelled against him and how were City, as a Club, viewed in the media and in footballing circles back then ??

I can't remember the Club itself suffering the same degree of denigration that we are subjected to these days, but what about our owners when compared to Shinawatra ??

Genuine question as I just can't recall.

Posted: **Sat Jun 17, 2017 6:49 pm**

Alves wouldnt be bad. Surely he wont come to backup Walker though

Posted: **Sat Jun 17, 2017 6:51 pm**

Mikhail Chigorin wrote:
Mase wrote:So what's the excuse with our owners getting racist digs here and there?

This just got me thinking Mase.

It seems so long ago now that Shinawatra was our owner and, at the time, there were some doubts about his 'suitability' because of his record in Thailand, but what was the level of criticism levelled against him and how were City, as a Club, viewed in the media and in footballing circles back then ??

I can't remember the Club itself suffering the same degree of denigration that we are subjected to these days, but what about our owners when compared to Shinawatra ??

Genuine question as I just can't recall.

His suitability got questioned. But it was never referred to as 'Thai money'. Not like the 'oil/Arab money' we get now!

Posted: **Sat Jun 17, 2017 6:51 pm**

Mase wrote:So what's the excuse with our owners getting racist digs here and there?

Agree with that, it seems that that a lot of the media think they're fair game, and the racial discrimination act doesn't somehow apply.

Posted: **Sat Jun 17, 2017 6:59 pm**

Mikhail Chigorin wrote:
Mase wrote:So what's the excuse with our owners getting racist digs here and there?

This just got me thinking Mase.

It seems so long ago now that Shinawatra was our owner and, at the time, there were some doubts about his 'suitability' because of his record in Thailand, but what was the level of criticism levelled against him and how were City, as a Club, viewed in the media and in footballing circles back then ??

I can't remember the Club itself suffering the same degree of denigration that we are subjected to these days, but what about our owners when compared to Shinawatra ??

Genuine question as I just can't recall.

As owners go, I think at the time Hitler would have been welcomed with open arms considering we were about to go under.
The club certainly didn't suffer the same degree of denigration as now, simply because we were still little city, everyone favourite second club.
As for Frank, no-one was really sure if he was dodgy or not.

Posted: **Sat Jun 17, 2017 7:02 pm**

Saul Goodman wrote:Alves wouldnt be bad. Surely he wont come to backup Walker though

I don't want to get anyone's hopes up, but this bollox suggests Walker's not coming.

http://www.football.london/tottenham-hotspur-fc/news/hes-man-city-tottenham-fans-13199201

Posted: **Sat Jun 17, 2017 7:05 pm**

patrickblue wrote:
Saul Goodman wrote:Alves wouldnt be bad. Surely he wont come to backup Walker though

I don't want to get anyone's hopes up, but this bollox suggests Walker's not coming.

http://www.football.london/tottenham-hotspur-fc/news/hes-man-city-tottenham-fans-13199201

Perhaps we simply don't want to pay Spurs in the region of £50m for a full back and have switched attention to a cheaper alternative with the hope Walker is cheaper next year

Posted: **Sat Jun 17, 2017 7:12 pm**

Saul Goodman wrote:Alves wouldn't be bad. Surely he wont come to backup Walker though

on the face of it, swapping one ageing right back for an even older one is risky, maybe he'll turn out another Kafu or Zanetti though.

Posted: **Sat Jun 17, 2017 7:54 pm**

aaron bond wrote:
Dameerto wrote:
Scatman wrote:Milner signed a contract and honoured it.

He moved clubs on his own terms and not on CIty's terms which is my point - and his terms were to the detriment of City.

I think that's a bit unfair.

His terms with Liverpool were irrelevant to City.

Milner signed a contract with us and almost always performed well for us. He fulfilled his contract with minimal fuss. He left when it was over.

Since he's left he's not used the best choice of words, particularly as the trophies he won with us will be the only trophies he'll ever win. So he has quite rightly lost favour with us. But whilst with us he was generally well behaved.

That statement is entirely accurate - fairness has nothing to do with it - he wound down his contract until he could negotiate with other clubs from a strong personal position and with City receiving nothing in return for him moving. What the hell has fairness got to do with that?

Posted: **Sat Jun 17, 2017 8:33 pm**

'Dani Alves has already given his personal consent over a move to Manchester City. [@romeoagresti]'

That was very good of him I'm sure but my strong sense is that this is all part of a contractual negotiation with a different party - as so often in the past.

Posted: **Sat Jun 17, 2017 9:25 pm**

Wooders wrote:
Peter Doherty (AGAIG) wrote:
Mase wrote:I certainly do Patrick. 100%

It's the same with the owners as well. You never hear anyone say 'Yank Money' but you always hear 'Arab money/owners' being used. You see videos on Facebook 'City owners outside the Etihad' and it will be a video of Arabs rioting somewhere in the world.

Stones moved to us last summer and he has been in the spotlight in the media this season about his personal life rarely (think there was a story about him cheating on his girlfriend). But Raheem goes to Poundland and it makes he news?! Why?

There's still a massive problem.

Spot on, mate.

It doesn't quite add up - there are plenty of black players in the league and England squad who are not subjected to the same level of scrutiny from the press and other teams fans - so how does skin colour affect it?

Raheem is not seen to be a shrinking violet.

The mancityfans.net football forum

Transfer rumours

Re: Transfer rumours

Re: Transfer rumours

Re: Transfer rumours

Re: Transfer rumours

Re: Transfer rumours

Re: Transfer rumours

Re: Transfer rumours

Re: Transfer rumours

Re: Transfer rumours

Re: Transfer rumours

Re: Transfer rumours

Re: Transfer rumours

Re: Transfer rumours

Re: Transfer rumours

Re: Transfer rumours

Re: Transfer rumours

Re: Transfer rumours

Re: Transfer rumours

Re: Transfer rumours

Re: Transfer rumours