- The Euros: how are the media doing so far?
- The problem of signing players
- It is time Arsenal bought some older players
By Buylldog Drummond
“Can 11 Englishmen be on the same pitch without looking confused?”
That question was posed by the Guardian A similar question could be posed along the lines about journalists or bloggers or…. well most people and most activities. And indeed in terms of 20 clubs arguing about Manchester City’s financial doings it certainly applies.
I suppose we expect footballers and journalists who write about football not to be confused because they are dealing with a limited world, but the fact is, whatever they look at, they keep on reaching different conclusions.
And yet football reporting is based on the notion that one person writing or talking about football can reach a conclusion which is worth passing on to others. But what gives them this idea other than an insatiable desire to travel the world and watch football at other people’s expense?
The number of football reporters (and yes football bloggers) is expanding all the time, while apparently, the number of reporters covering crime is a third of what it was 20 years ago. (According to Press Gazette) probably because crime is decreasing in Britain.
So why do we need more football reporters?
It certainly isn’t because football journalists are getting any better at their jobs – they were getting about 3 in every 100 transfer predictions right when we first counted about seven years ago, and that number has been fairly consistent ever since.
That decline in the number of journalists in relation to crime is easy to understand. Before the exposure of the tactics of the media in gathering “stories” in the Leverson Enquiry into the culture, practices, and total lack of ethics in most of the British newspaper media, journalists were doing pretty much as they liked.
The News International phone hacking scandal put an end to that and journalists don’t do nearly so much phone hacking as they used to. But this change didn’t affect football journalists who were left to make up stories much as before – and obviously we see this every transfer window.
The police force tend to refuse to talk to journalists knowing that they will be misquoted. And as the police seem to have no desire to improve their links with the media (and why should they given the media’s desire to make everything up) so football has rushed in to the gap. But all this means is that most football news was what might be called “deep fakery” long before AI came along.
Of course the BBC and other organisations now have fact-checkers working with them in “BBC Verify”. But BBC Verify won’t fact check football reports, and even if it did with the BBC, that wouldn’t stop the blogs and other media from running totally unchecked stories and so most football reporting is fantasy anyway.
Of course, there has been quite a bit of deep fake news circulating about Manchester City’s 115 charges, not least over the Premier League statement that Manchester City failed to co-operate fully in the investigation.
Indeed it has been reported of late that Manchester City still has not presented any evidence to the Premier League, and it is now being suggested that Manchester won’t present its evidence for another year, which means we won’t get a conclusion until 2025.
Why this is happening and why the League clubs are allowing this to happen is a matter of considerable debate within football. One suggestion being made is that despite their bluster ManC are trying to get an out-of-court settlement with the League.
The reason for this seems to be the realisation that if M City won completely, the rest of the League would, as was first suggested by Untold, simply resign and form a new league without Manchester C in it. Besides, it seems there is also a lot of feeling in the league against reaching a settlement with the club since Everton and Nottingham Forest were not allowed this option.
The worry is that a settlement with ManC would mean Everton and Forest would then sue the league for breach of due process and demand considerable compensation.
There is also the argument that Manchester C benefit by stringing the process out, which of course they can far more readily afford than the League can, and hope in the end the League will give them a modest punishment just to be things over with.
In reality games are dominating on both sides. Man C spinning it out in the hope that the League will run out of money, the other clubs preparing for a new League without Manchester C. How such diverse thinking can come back together for a settlement that satisfies everyone is hard to imagine.
” There is also the argument that Manchester C benefit by stringing the process out, which of course they can far more readily afford than the League can” “Man C spinning it out in the hope that the League will run out of money, ” Do you really think that the bill will run into hundreds of millions ? Or that the league cannot afford such a sum?
Time for Premier league clubs to leave the league now . This delaying by Manky115 shows their owners are again up to no good . Do we actually need an excuse to leave the FA and ditch Manky115 ?
After all if they were straight and above board the info would be there asap. 1 day to get their books over to be examined .
Tony
This bit intrigues me
Indeed it has been reported of late that Manchester City still has not presented any evidence to the Premier League, and it is now being suggested that Manchester won’t present its evidence for another year, which means we won’t get a conclusion until 2025.
That sort of goes against everything I have read and indeed everything that the City supporters themselves seem to suggest is the case . Can you direct me to the source please?
When this was before CAS who operate in accordance with Swiss law I believe that failure by City to provide info to UEFA didn’t materially work against City as no inference could be taken from their silence but I don’t actually believe that is the case in the PL matter
Mike T = it is hard to get a full picture because the League is remaining quiet and Man C are putting out propaganda statements. Plus we’ve never been here before. But I think it is like this…
Manchester City have been challenging the League on each one of the charges, as they have been discussed week by week in the hearings. But (presumably because Man C thought they were losing) they suddenly abanonded that approach and starting suing the league on the grounds that the financial rules were unlawful.
That claim against the league is separate from the 115 league claims against Man C and claims that the regulations disciminate against Man C but benefit most other clubs. Hence their use of the phrase the ‘tyranny of the majority’ which comes from John Stuart Mill’s 1859 book “On Liberty.”
So in essence Man C are claiming that the rules are unreasonable and should not be allowed even though the League is a private organisation, that normally would simply make its own rules.
If the hearing found against Man C, then the chances are they would be guilty of most of the 115 breaches and the League would decide on the punishment.
If the hearing found in favour of Man C and the rules are considered unreasonable, then the 115 breaches would fall, and Man C could continue.
However then the rest of the League could resign and form a new league, just as the clubs did when they left Division One. It could be then claimed that the clubs have to give three season’s notice, although the clubs could do this but just play their reserve teams, while forming a new league of their own.
This is not going to play out very well for anyone, and I suspect one way or another Man C will lose. The clubs are very aware of the way they got out of the Court of Arbitration in Sport enquiry, and are taking all such moves into account – as I hear it.
Tony
Was in your old stomping ground yesterday. Went across from Poole Quay to Brownsea. Was very hot and expensive £23.50 each and yes it’s a beautiful place but £23.50.
Coming back over it was incredible just how much the shoreline has changed in the last 20 years it’s just not the same place. Well it is but you probably get what I mean.
Anyway back to City. This latest tactic from City is an interesting one and personally I think its just aimed to get the PLs legal resources to be divided and by having to divert part of the team to face this latest matter it will mean that the PL won’t be able to deal with two such complex matters at the same time.
When St James Holdings Ltd took the PL /FaAto a Competitions Tribunal the feeling from the PL team was that it was a deliberate act to divert resources from the arbitration hearing between the PL and Newcastle Utd and from having read the transcripts it was a reasonable conclusion. If you have an hour or two to never get back it’s worth reading
https://www.catribunal.org.uk/cases/14025721-st-james-holdings-limited
When City lost their case before the HC that clearly was an attempt not just to delay the hearing but to test the validity of the PLs process and rules. It seems to me that City have set out to delay at every tip and turn but I don’t think they have been as bold as to not engage in the process but I suspect that their legal team has exploited every opportunity to challenge and delay. You have to wonder if they are as innocent as they claim why they don’t want this matter cleared up asap
Ah Brownsea Island. Wow that takes me back a bit. And a bit more!