ALF

Let's ALL Mock City- Chequebook Pep “May win the league with the most expensive squad”

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, peterswellman said:

I’ll tackle the initial bit ASAP. Genuinely insanely busy.

It should be really easy. You said:

On 19/02/2018 at 23:16, peterswellman said:

Whats Pep’s excuse for his tunnel antics tonight? I don’t hear you denounce his class there. Unsurprising.

 

19 hours ago, peterswellman said:

Still agitated over last night I see and still no comment on Pep’s tunnel behavior.

 

19 hours ago, peterswellman said:

You would be frothing at the mouth if it were José.

So we had tunnel antics after the derby. I would apparently be frothing at the mouth over this. Where are my comments frothing at the mouth about it?

19 hours ago, peterswellman said:

You would have lept at the chance to put was the boot in to Jose wouldn’t you? 

Again, we had tunnel antics after the derby. Where are my comments putting the boot in over it? If I would have leapt at the chance, they should be there. You were on here less than half an hour after the match getting the boot in. It's been two months since the derby. Which of us leapt

19 hours ago, peterswellman said:

The double standards and hypocrisy of you is reaching new levels.

Where's the double standard? I reacted the same way to both incidents. How's that hypocritical?

19 hours ago, peterswellman said:

Ive already admitted to bias against Pep, we’ve been over this. You still fail to admit you’re apparent double standards. That my friend is pathetic.

Again, we have two incidents in the mixed area, one involving Pep, one involving Mourinho. One of us has treated them differently, the other has treated them the same. One of those is a double standard, the other isn't.

19 hours ago, peterswellman said:

He should get banned for the conduct, he won’t though.

Should Mourinho have been banned? What about the pizza throwing in 2004? No bans handed out there? Why should Pep be banned for something other people weren't? Which one of us is the double-standard using hypocrite here?

This is a really simple thing to show. You argue that I have a double standard, and that in a similar situation I couldn't have waited to put the boot in to Mourinho. Yet such a similar situation exists, and I didn't put the boot into Mourinho. I treated both incidents the same, while you're calling for a ban despite not calling for Mourinho to be banned. Your argument is objectively false. You can't show me calling for Mourinho to be banned and staying silent about Pep.

2 hours ago, peterswellman said:

So to round it all off, you have zero proof that Jose’s leaked the story? Not one shred of evidence other than this suppiosed “link” you’ve created?

It's not a link I've created.

When an agreement was made for Mourinho to take over as manager, two parties knew: the club, and Mourinho's camp. For that information to have leaked into the public domain, it had to come from one of those parties.

Someone at the club would be risking a (n at least) six figure salary, their job, their ability to work for a publically traded company, a criminal record, and possible jail time.

So where did it come from? There's not much evidence of people at publically traded companies leaking market sensitive information. Those drawbacks are designed to not make it worth their while, and so it's not a common occurence.

However, Mourinho's moves to Chelsea (both times), Inter, Madrid, and Utd were all leaked to the press before the move. So it's a pretty common occurence with him. We're the only club of those where legal obligations would prevent the release of market sensitive information, yet it still occured.

You were willing to wage a lot of money on it being the case that the club leaked it. Why is that? Where is your rationale, your evidence? It's pretty clear that this is something that happens with Mourinho. It's pretty clear that it's a huge risk for someone at the club to take. So why are you so sure of it? Your argument relies on someone from the club ignoring their responsibilities, breaking the law, risking losing their job, for questionable benefit, to achieve something that has happened anyway every time he's moved jobs. Mine relies on the same thing that happened every time he's moved jobs and used the one common factor to explain it.

2 hours ago, peterswellman said:

My issue was never with Scholes critic of Jose, although he has some neck given he never went into management. It’s his OTT stuff on Pogba just because he doesn’t like him as a person and I was agreement with backing his player and defending himself.

You were happy enough about the story until it became criticism of Mourinho. When it was first leaked you said:

On 15/09/2017 at 20:09, peterswellman said:

Castles is Mourinho's go to guy. This is almost certainly true and leaked by Jose.

Then when it was used to criticise Mourinho, suddenly your opinion changed. Not only did you not think it was true and leaked by Mourinho, you started looking at how you could discredit the story:

On 08/01/2018 at 15:09, peterswellman said:

That was a tabloid story that no serious newspaper put any weight into as far as I remember. There was no quotes from Jose nor anyone named from within the club. It was carried in The Sun, The Daly Star and the Mirror amongst others primarily off the back of a Sun report. The guy who "broke" the story is called Dan Cutts, it doesn't take much to look into his background and suggest he hardly seems the most credible figure but you love these invented stories so I can't exactly tell you what to believe. Journo_Slash is his twitter handle https://twitter.com/Journo_Slash That's without even examining his bio: Online Gubbins @TheSun - 'Largely tweets about wrestling' - Once ran the 100m in 18.7 seconds flat. Write about games as well. Views my own. #TooSweet. A "wrestling" and games journalist is now the go-to guy on these type of stories? Forgive me if I don't think this "exclusive" to be factual.

A few pages back, you shared a post using a quote that Pep never said to criticise him. Remind me, who has a double standard? Who just invents things?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, lucretius said:

It should be really easy. You said:

 

 

So we had tunnel antics after the derby. I would apparently be frothing at the mouth over this. Where are my comments frothing at the mouth about it?

Again, we had tunnel antics after the derby. Where are my comments putting the boot in over it? If I would have leapt at the chance, they should be there. You were on here less than half an hour after the match getting the boot in. It's been two months since the derby. Which of us leapt

Where's the double standard? I reacted the same way to both incidents. How's that hypocritical?

Again, we have two incidents in the mixed area, one involving Pep, one involving Mourinho. One of us has treated them differently, the other has treated them the same. One of those is a double standard, the other isn't.

Should Mourinho have been banned? What about the pizza throwing in 2004? No bans handed out there? Why should Pep be banned for something other people weren't? Which one of us is the double-standard using hypocrite here?

This is a really simple thing to show. You argue that I have a double standard, and that in a similar situation I couldn't have waited to put the boot in to Mourinho. Yet such a similar situation exists, and I didn't put the boot into Mourinho. I treated both incidents the same, while you're calling for a ban despite not calling for Mourinho to be banned. Your argument is objectively false. You can't show me calling for Mourinho to be banned and staying silent about Pep.

It's not a link I've created.

When an agreement was made for Mourinho to take over as manager, two parties knew: the club, and Mourinho's camp. For that information to have leaked into the public domain, it had to come from one of those parties.

Someone at the club would be risking a (n at least) six figure salary, their job, their ability to work for a publically traded company, a criminal record, and possible jail time.

So where did it come from? There's not much evidence of people at publically traded companies leaking market sensitive information. Those drawbacks are designed to not make it worth their while, and so it's not a common occurence.

However, Mourinho's moves to Chelsea (both times), Inter, Madrid, and Utd were all leaked to the press before the move. So it's a pretty common occurence with him. We're the only club of those where legal obligations would prevent the release of market sensitive information, yet it still occured.

You were willing to wage a lot of money on it being the case that the club leaked it. Why is that? Where is your rationale, your evidence? It's pretty clear that this is something that happens with Mourinho. It's pretty clear that it's a huge risk for someone at the club to take. So why are you so sure of it? Your argument relies on someone from the club ignoring their responsibilities, breaking the law, risking losing their job, for questionable benefit, to achieve something that has happened anyway every time he's moved jobs. Mine relies on the same thing that happened every time he's moved jobs and used the one common factor to explain it.

You were happy enough about the story until it became criticism of Mourinho. When it was first leaked you said:

Then when it was used to criticise Mourinho, suddenly your opinion changed. Not only did you not think it was true and leaked by Mourinho, you started looking at how you could discredit the story:

A few pages back, you shared a post using a quote that Pep never said to criticise him. Remind me, who has a double standard? Who just invents things?

After that long winded and almost unnecessary post. Have you any proof at all, even a smidgen of Mourinho leaking the story? Actual proof, because if you haven't we are just going to keep going round in circles. This is when Mourinho announced and where you are putting the boot in. You've brought up Mourinho's previous behaviour in the past countless times to beat him down, I didn't realise if the timescale isn't momentarily after the match it doesn't count and doesn't appear as double standards. It's not simply tunnel behaviour, its the media behaviour you've been critical of. Pep says something similiar though nothing is said from you.....why because you're biased as fuck.

You think there is a fair balance between your critic between Pep and Mourinho? If you do, honestly you're utterly delusional. 

Again for the 500th time, I readily admit to having double standards. If I bold it will it actually sink in?

I have biased and double standards between Pep and Jose......so do you.

Also, you have double standards and you invent things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, peterswellman said:

After that long winded and almost unnecessary post. Have you any proof at all, even a smidgen of Mourinho leaking the story? Actual proof, because if you haven't we are just going to keep going round in circles.

No, I've no proof, just like I've no proof that we landed on the moon or that Al Capone was a gangster, but there's a shitload of evidence for them.

Logically there are only two places it could have come from. I've told you why one of them won't have happened, and we know that it always leaks out in Mourinho's case. I've explained it, and provided my evidence. I've no more invented it than someone who explains any other occurence.

Did I invent that the leak came from once of those sources? No. That's simply logically true.

Did I invent the reasons why it wouldn't have come from the club? No, there are legal and regulatory reasons that you can see for yourself.

Did I invent that Mourinho's previous moves have leaked? No, you can read them for yourself.

What part of that did I invent?

You are choosing to believe something, against the evidence, and would wager a lot of money on it being right, rather than that admit what the evidence shows.

11 minutes ago, peterswellman said:

This is when Mourinho announced and where you are putting the boot in.

When Pep leaks his next move while the previous manager is still employed and in the middle of celebrating a cup win, I'll call him classless too. Bold it, quote it, do what you like.

11 minutes ago, peterswellman said:

You've brought up Mourinho's previous behaviour in the past countless times to beat him down, I didn't realise if the timescale isn't momentarily after the match it doesn't count and doesn't appear as double standards.

You literally said that I couldn't wait to put the boot in if it was Jose. Yet I had the opportunity to, and didn't. The timescale matters only in as much as you brought it up. We're still waiting for me to put the boot in on Mourinho for the same thing.

You are objectively wrong.  And you're inventing things.

11 minutes ago, peterswellman said:

It's not simply tunnel behaviour, its the media behaviour you've been critical of. Pep says something similiar though nothing is said from you.....why because you're biased as fuck.

Pep says something similar to what?

You said that I would attack Jose for the same thing. I didn't. It would be really simple for you to prove that you're right, because there would be evidence of me sticking the boot into Jose after the derby. I would be frothing at the mouth. You would have a quote. Something. Anything. Unless you just invented this?

Parse your argument out logically:

1) Lucretius has double standards and is a hypocrite.

2) Lucretius would put the boot into into Mourinho for something he didn't criticise Pep doing. He won't be able to wait and will be frothing at the mouth.

3) Pep was involved in mixed zone antics after the Wigan game.

4) Mourinho was involved in mixed zone antics after the derby

5) Given 1 and 2, Lucretius will have criticised Mourinho after 4, and not have criticised Pep after 3.

Yet there is no evidence to support 5.

If your argument doesn't work logically it is, like in this case, bollocks.

11 minutes ago, peterswellman said:

You think there is a fair balance between your critic between Pep and Mourinho? If you do, honestly you're utterly delusional. 

Again for the 500th time, I readily admit to having double standards. If I bold it will it actually sink in?

I have biased and double standards between Pep and Jose......so do you.

Also, you have double standards and you invent things.

I stand by what I've said about Mourinho. If Pep gouges someone's eye, you can watch me criticise it. If Pep calls himself a special one, you can watch me criticise that.

Ok, so you don't invent things, you're just a journalist that spreads false quotes about people they don't like. Still waiting on you showing what I invented, too.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, parksey said:

Fair enough about Aguero, but how has Pep not been disciplined for the tunnel bust up though? It's all on camera right?

Marca have said that Guardiola was peacemaking there, because someone of his staff was getting heated with the opponent manager, and that he was just trying to take the Wigan manager to the dressing room and calm him.

Don't know if true, but Marca being a 100% Anti-Pep propaganda machine, it would surprise me big time if it wasn't. Has there been anything in the press in England talking about it?! It might explain why he's not been charged. What did the Wigan manager say?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Txrt said:

Marca have said that Guardiola was peacemaking there, because someone of his staff was getting heated with the opponent manager, and that he was just trying to take the Wigan manager to the dressing room and calm him.

Don't know if true, but Marca being a 100% Anti-Pep propaganda machine, it would surprise me big time if it wasn't. Has there been anything in the press in England talking about it?! It might explain why he's not been charged. What did the Wigan manager say?

Well apparently city aren't happy about it because it reflected badly on them and theres no way he was peace making when people were having to hold him back, thats not peace making unless you're George Bush or Tony Blair. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, THE BASTARD said:

I'm beginning to think I must have missed some footage or something.    All I saw was a but of pushing and the usual shouting and bickering.    The clip I saw was the BBC tunnel cam.     If it got any worse then I haven't seen it.

Ok so as long as you're not kicking water bottles it's fine.

15 hours ago, Txrt said:

Marca have said that Guardiola was peacemaking there, because someone of his staff was getting heated with the opponent manager, and that he was just trying to take the Wigan manager to the dressing room and calm him.

Don't know if true, but Marca being a 100% Anti-Pep propaganda machine, it would surprise me big time if it wasn't. Has there been anything in the press in England talking about it?! It might explain why he's not been charged. What did the Wigan manager say?

That could be possible, he has priors with that bizarre rant at Redmond last year that turned out to be some sort of pep talk (pardon the pun)t

Still it all seemed pretty intense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Txrt said:

Marca have said that Guardiola was peacemaking there, because someone of his staff was getting heated with the opponent manager, and that he was just trying to take the Wigan manager to the dressing room and calm him.

Don't know if true, but Marca being a 100% Anti-Pep propaganda machine, it would surprise me big time if it wasn't. Has there been anything in the press in England talking about it?! It might explain why he's not been charged. What did the Wigan manager say?

first look at the footage and I too had the same opinion frankly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They should have the league wrapped by mid April..then concentrate on Ucl..and if they win tomorrow. .then the treble is on..Thank you Jose. .you let them achieve. .what Moyes and Gaal never.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

A journalist asked -
"But Pep; you talk a lot about politics there. You talk a lot about freedom. You talk a lot about Sheik Mansour. Sheik Mansour is a leader in the UAR, which is criticised for not recognising freedoms and the right to protest. How do you reconcile that?"

Pep answered -
"Every country decides the way (they) want to live for themselves. And if (they) decide to live (that way) themselves, it is what it is. I am in a country in which democracy is installed since years ago and I try to protect that situation".

Good to see the face of a UAE propaganda operation and ambassador for Qatar called out for the spineless hypocrite he really is. "It is what it is". Cunt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎2‎/‎25‎/‎2018 at 09:21, butler said:

They should have the league wrapped by mid April..then concentrate on Ucl..and if they win tomorrow. .then the treble is on..Thank you Jose. .you let them achieve. .what Moyes and Gaal never.

The Treble is the 3 Major trophies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, lucretius said:

My favourite part about this thread is that the title is based on a tabloid story about Pep throwing money at Sanchez rather than giving time to young attacking talents.

Not just on Sanchez, he even went all out for Mahrez only for his club to play hard ball. In any case we have not seen any youngsters from him yet. Ofcourse he has improved the current lot of first team and has got great depth and relying on the available players in the squad to the extent of not naming a full bench 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/26/2018 at 16:09, TFIA said:

Good to see the face of a UAE propaganda operation and ambassador for Qatar called out for the spineless hypocrite he really is. "It is what it is". Cunt.

Only if FA had balls to Ban him for life and that overship too. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎28‎/‎02‎/‎2018 at 21:46, lucretius said:

My favourite part about this thread is that the title is based on a tabloid story about Pep throwing money at Sanchez rather than giving time to young attacking talents.

It was about Iheanacho. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now