Manchester City

[mrbojangles]

17 minutes ago, RonniePickering22 said:

 

Its an extraordinary situation....all our CL games are now at Wembley so I am expecting this to continue until the end of November.

 

No doubt its a shambles regarding the contractor...its not entirely in the hands of the club as I'm sure you know in any case.

 

The games must be played and at compromise for everyone.

So why couldn't the compromise to have played at West Ham at the original time? Afterall, you wanted that ground anyway and they are away that weekend.

 

I also haven't a clue what that American Rugby game will leave the condition of the pitch in

[mrbojangles]

1 minute ago, champers said:

Not many clubs have the good fortune to have a new ground gifted to them after it was mostly built and paid for by someone else. Just saying.

What's that got to do with the price of fish? That's not the subject matter here. Talk about going off on a tangent.

[mrbojangles]

10 minutes ago, sanemax said:

Look at it from a positive angle , you would have four home games on the bounce later during the season .

We're playing them on the 20th April. There is no "later in the season". In the final run in you really don't want to swap a home game for an away game

[champers]

3 minutes ago, mrbojangles said:

What's that got to do with the price of fish? That's not the subject matter here. Talk about going off on a tangent.

In which case I'll not mention that was Spurs preferred option too.

[mrbojangles]

1 minute ago, champers said:

In which case I'll not mention that was Spurs preferred option too.

I know it was, as I mentioned a few posts back about playing at west ham instead

[carmine]

7 hours ago, mrbojangles said:

So why couldn't the compromise to have played at West Ham at the original time? Afterall, you wanted that ground anyway and they are away that weekend.

 

I also haven't a clue what that American Rugby game will leave the condition of the pitch in

There must have been reasons why it couldn't be played at West Ham because it was an obvious choice.  That answer we are not privy to.  Which is why we offered to swop the fixture and play at yours.  But you said no and the end result is your fans having to come down to London on a monday night.

 

All we asked for was a bit of give and take. Asked for a compromise.  You "chose" to give none.  End result,  a nightmare monday night journey for your supporters.

 

Thats another way of looking at it.  The FA is atleast acknowledging that we have been let down by our contractors rather than the ridiculous tabloid /TV line that its all Levy's fault.  I'm sure Chelsea, with their new stadium plans are looking on with interest.  Their scheduled build is twice as long as ours.

[Bredbury Blue]

9 hours ago, RonniePickering22 said:

 

Its an extraordinary situation....all our CL games are now at Wembley so I am expecting this to continue until the end of November.

 

No doubt its a shambles regarding the contractor...its not entirely in the hands of the club as I'm sure you know in any case.

 

The games must be played and at compromise for everyone.

See the Spurs shambles is not only affecting City and our supporters with the added difficulty  to have to go for a night game on a Monday  instead of on a sunday  afternoon, but is affecting ManU and Everton who've  had their game moved from a Saturday to a more difficult logistically sunday fixture. But hey the good news is spurs aren't  affected.

[owl sees all]

Considering the EPL clubs have to OK their season's fixtures I am often saddened by some of the timings. Say Newcastle to play Bournemouth on a Monday night. Harldy fair on the supporters that one.

 

Brighton v Liverpool should in my view be a standard 3pm ko.

Edited September 5, 2018 by owl sees all

[mrbojangles]

1 hour ago, carmine said:

Which is why we offered to swop the fixture and play at yours.  But you said no and the end result is your fans having to come down to London on a monday night.

 

All we asked for was a bit of give and take. Asked for a compromise.  You "chose" to give none.  End result,  a nightmare monday night journey for your supporters.

So your blaming us because we didn't want to play a load of away games on the bounce in the run in to the end of the season. Love the way you highlight "asked for a compromise, You "chose" to give none". Well we obviously compromised by agreeing to play Monday night. Couldn't make this garbage up.

[Bredbury Blue]

9 hours ago, champers said:

Not many clubs have the good fortune to have a new ground gifted to them after it was mostly built and paid for by someone else. Just saying.

“Sport England wished to avoid creating a white elephant, so they insisted that Manchester City Council (MCC) agree to undertake and fund extensive work to convert the City of Manchester Stadium from a track and field arena to a football stadium, thereby ensuring its long-term financial viability.” MCC needed a football stadium tenant. City were interested; don’t think ManU were interested. So MCC and City helped each other with the deal. City spent in excess of £30 million to convert COMS to football use. It was a brilliant smart deal for us (engineered by City’s chairman David Bernstein I believe), and COMS and the land around it is considered one of the key reasons why Sheikh Mansour chose City to buy while looking for the most suitable football club with potential to buy.

 

30M in 2003 compared to +800M in 2018...just saying

[carmine]

53 minutes ago, mrbojangles said:

So your blaming us because we didn't want to play a load of away games on the bounce in the run in to the end of the season. Love the way you highlight "asked for a compromise, You "chose" to give none". Well we obviously compromised by agreeing to play Monday night. Couldn't make this garbage up.

I'm not blaming you at all.  I simply said you were offered a solution that would have been far more preferable to your supporters and didn't take it.  I think its very clear in what i said.  I know its not your fault and i know its not the situation you should have to contend with but thats the way it is and its not the fault of Spurs either when the main contractor messed up so badly.

 

And how else was i supposed to word a situation like this.  Say we "demanded" which we clearly couldn't and didn't.  We asked you!!  How else were we supposed to approach you with an alternation.  And you did choose not to didn't you!!  The offer was placed on the table and you chose not to take it.

 

Talk about being pedantic, jeeeez!!!!

[smokie36]

12 minutes ago, carmine said:

I'm not blaming you at all.  I simply said you were offered a solution that would have been far more preferable to your supporters and didn't take it.  I think its very clear in what i said.  I know its not your fault and i know its not the situation you should have to contend with but thats the way it is and its not the fault of Spurs either when the main contractor messed up so badly.

 

And how else was i supposed to word a situation like this.  Say we "demanded" which we clearly couldn't and didn't.  We asked you!!  How else were we supposed to approach you with an alternation.  And you did choose not to didn't you!!  The offer was placed on the table and you chose not to take it.

 

Talk about being pedantic, jeeeez!!!!

 

1 hour ago, carmine said:

I'm not blaming you at all.  I simply said you were offered a solution that would have been far more preferable to your supporters and didn't take it.  I think its very clear in what i said.  I know its not your fault and i know its not the situation you should have to contend with but thats the way it is and its not the fault of Spurs either when the main contractor messed up so badly.

 

And how else was i supposed to word a situation like this.  Say we "demanded" which we clearly couldn't and didn't.  We asked you!!  How else were we supposed to approach you with an alternation.  And you did choose not to didn't you!!  The offer was placed on the table and you chose not to take it.

 

Talk about being pedantic, jeeeez!!!!

 

They are just scared they might get beat so they wanted it moved to a more KDB friendly timeframe.

[smokie36]

1 hour ago, Bredbury Blue said:

“Sport England wished to avoid creating a white elephant, so they insisted that Manchester City Council (MCC) agree to undertake and fund extensive work to convert the City of Manchester Stadium from a track and field arena to a football stadium, thereby ensuring its long-term financial viability.” MCC needed a football stadium tenant. City were interested; don’t think ManU were interested. So MCC and City helped each other with the deal. City spent in excess of £30 million to convert COMS to football use. It was a brilliant smart deal for us (engineered by City’s chairman David Bernstein I believe), and COMS and the land around it is considered one of the key reasons why Sheikh Mansour chose City to buy while looking for the most suitable football club with potential to buy.

 

30M in 2003 compared to +800M in 2018...just saying

 

You don't own it however little council estate kids.

[carmine]

3 minutes ago, RonniePickering22 said:

 

 

They are just scared they might get beat so they wanted it moved to a more KDB friendly timeframe.

 

If by some huge surprise we won i'm thinking the backlash will be worse that the CL defeats to Liverpool. And the game isn't even till the end of octobe??r

[carmine]

3 minutes ago, RonniePickering22 said:

 

You don't own it however little council estate kids.

I think i'd rather read a Kafka novel pissed than trawl through that post you just put yourself through!!?

[smokie36]

1 minute ago, carmine said:

I think i'd rather read a Kafka novel pissed than trawl through that post you just put yourself through!!?

 

I only posted it so you could see the drivel. 

[carmine]

2 minutes ago, RonniePickering22 said:

 

I only posted it so you could see the drivel. 

Sadist!!!

[smokie36]

22 minutes ago, carmine said:

Sadist!!!

 

Oh yes. ?

[Bredbury Blue]

59 minutes ago, RonniePickering22 said:

 

You don't own it however little council estate kids.

City have the Etihad Campus, which is mostly owned and operated by City, includes the Stadium, the City Football Academy (CFA) training facility and lots of adjacent undeveloped land, on a 250-year lease at £3m yearly charge. Yeah we got mugged.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Bredbury Blue]

2 minutes ago, Bredbury Blue said:

City have the Etihad Campus, which is mostly owned and operated by City, includes the Stadium, the City Football Academy (CFA) training facility and lots of adjacent undeveloped land, on a 250-year lease at £3m yearly charge. Yeah we got mugged.

 

 

 

Here’s our campus compared to your titchy liccle campus ground (unfinished) ...you've not enough room to swing a cat! 

 

 

[mrbojangles]

9 hours ago, carmine said:

I'm not blaming you at all.  I simply said you were offered a solution that would have been far more preferable to your supporters and didn't take it. 

You didn't offer a "solution". You offered a like it or lump it unacceptable alternative, (for reasons mentioned). If you consider that a solution, maybe you should take over Brexit negotiations. You'd do a better job dealing with Michel Barnier than those currently doing it

[mrbojangles]

8 hours ago, RonniePickering22 said:

They are just scared they might get beat so they wanted it moved to a more KDB friendly timeframe.

Yeah. That's it !!

[carmine]

10 hours ago, mrbojangles said:

You didn't offer a "solution". You offered a like it or lump it unacceptable alternative, (for reasons mentioned). If you consider that a solution, maybe you should take over Brexit negotiations. You'd do a better job dealing with Michel Barnier than those currently doing it

You are becoming more and more pedantic with anything concerning City.  Suggest you read your post again because its quite ridiculous in the context were talking.  

 

So, how would you have had a proposal delivered, via a plea on national television?  And how could you have possibly known we gave you a "like it or lump it" offer?

 

Let me answer that...you couldn't, don't and will never know how that was addressed, you're just reading it as you want to see it.

 

Reads dealing with Barnier, of course i would.

[mrbojangles]

2 hours ago, carmine said:

You are becoming more and more pedantic with anything concerning City.  Suggest you read your post again because its quite ridiculous in the context were talking.  

 

So, how would you have had a proposal delivered, via a plea on national television?  And how could you have possibly known we gave you a "like it or lump it" offer?

 

Let me answer that...you couldn't, don't and will never know how that was addressed, you're just reading it as you want to see it.

 

Reads dealing with Barnier, of course i would.

Not sure how you conclude I'm being a pedant. I mean, how dare we criticise Spurs. Your club is at fault here, nobody else, so suck it up and accept the criticism. Until we find out anything else, as far as we know you only offered to swap the home fixture around and when we declined that, you said Monday night it is then. Not really many choices as far as I can see. I'm liking your Mourinho tactic though of shifting the focus away from your clubs failings to calling me pedantic.

 

I'm also surprised that you don't seem to be concerned as to what the pitch will be like.

[carmine]

36 minutes ago, mrbojangles said:

Not sure how you conclude I'm being a pedant. I mean, how dare we criticise Spurs. Your club is at fault here, nobody else, so suck it up and accept the criticism. Until we find out anything else, as far as we know you only offered to swap the home fixture around and when we declined that, you said Monday night it is then. Not really many choices as far as I can see. I'm liking your Mourinho tactic though of shifting the focus away from your clubs failings to calling me pedantic.

 

I'm also surprised that you don't seem to be concerned as to what the pitch will be like.

You are being a pedant because you have created a situation in your mind that has in fact no baring in your knowledge to the actual sequence of events..  This is irrefutable, unless you are going to tell me you you were informed of this by a chum of yours on the City board.  Hence, pedantic.  You are deliberately making us out to be difficult and unhelpful because its in line with what you want it to be.  In truth you might be right, you might be wrong, but in reality, you got got a clue and neither have i.

 

I am going to take the Brexit thingy seriously though because you have a valid point.  Perhaps i could be our saving grace from the disastrous decision to vote leave in the first place?

[smokie36]

I'm willing to give them a second chance to swap the fixture around and play it on the Sunday given his Brexit reference carms. 

[Bredbury Blue]

I do hope City, ManU and Everton will making claim to Spurs for any costs they/the fans incur as a result  of Spurs <deleted> (City are now having to provide  free coaches to the fans to help and appease them with the change to monday). It's almost like everyone is supposed to be sympathetic  to spurs because their ground isn't  ready on time - definitely  no sympathy should be given. Many clubs build AND move to new grounds in different  locations, not next door  like Spurs, and they do it on time. From what I've  been reading spurs should have known it was going to be difficult  to move in at the beginning of the season based on progress and should have had a contingency  plan ready in case the ground wasn't  ready - and construction  projects  not finishing on time is very common - but they didn't  and blundered on! Facking shambles!

[smokie36]

4 minutes ago, Bredbury Blue said:

I do hope City, ManU and Everton will making claim to Spurs for any costs they/the fans incur as a result  of Spurs <deleted> (City are now having to provide  free coaches to the fans to help and appease them with the change to monday). It's almost like everyone is supposed to be sympathetic  to spurs because their ground isn't  ready on time - definitely  no sympathy should be given. Many clubs build AND move to new grounds in different  locations, not next door  like Spurs, and they do it on time. From what I've  been reading spurs should have known it was going to be difficult  to move in at the beginning of the season based on progress and should have had a contingency  plan ready in case the ground wasn't  ready - and construction  projects  not finishing on time is very common - but they didn't  and blundered on! Facking shambles!

 

Good luck with your compo claim BB as there is no law which says any is due. No EU261 on stadium builds! 

[Bredbury Blue]

What we do know is:

1. Spurs requested City to reverse the Sunday fixture from london  to Manchester  - we refused as it would result in 4 consecutive  away fixtures in April (think our rejection is very understandable).

2. The game has been moved from Sunday afternoon to a monday night game in london causing:

2.1 Difficulties for City's fans,

2.2 The ManU vs Spurs game to be moved from Saturday  to sunday.

3. All of the changes are solely because  spurs <deleted> up your ground arrangements  consequently now affecting THREE premier clubs. Facking shambles!

[Bredbury Blue]

1 minute ago, RonniePickering22 said:

 

Good luck with your compo claim BB as there is no law which says any is due. No EU261 on stadium builds! 

I would imigine  that clubs wouldn't  resort to making claim but will have to take spurs <deleted> on the chin.