Mancheater City: 115

[Jury]

Absolutely. What makes it worse is that there are clearly people who turned a blind eye to the allegations which in turn enabled Bennell to abuse more children. The fact that some of those people worked for the club I support is something that saddens me deeply and if the present day MCFC has to take a hit in terms of legal action taken against the club then so be it - I don’t want to see any stone unturned on this, no matter how bad it may reflect on the club.

What seems to have slipped under the radar of the wider public is that Bennell was convicted of several offences of this nature about 20 years ago - linked to his time working with Crewe - but as much as I like to think I’ve got a good memory I can’t honestly remember any reports about his trial at the time. No doubt it would’ve been reported but it wasn’t anywhere near as prominent as these latest convictions and the current wide-ranging investigations into child sex abuse in football. If the coverage of his abuse back then had been more high-profile then that may have come to the attention of more of his victims, hence encouraging them to come forward, and meaning further justice could’ve been achieved nigh on 2 decades earlier than it was.

I can vaguely remember him getting in trouble in the USA. I cant say I remembered his name, but I remember the time. It's weird how more wasn't made of it... Dark forces at work, possibly? It was 1994... The Sky era hadn't fully kicked in, so sordid stories linked to football didn't carry as much weight. Child sex abuse scandals on their own weren't as big news either. I feel social media has had a positive effect on the reporting of such crimes. Shame it wasn't about in 94...

The sad thing from a reporting perspective, is more would have came out a lot earlier had a high profile player went to the police. It's very likely that the late Gary Speed was abused by him--even if his family, understandably, don't want to entertain the thought--and had that came out when he was at his peak during his Leeds days, I'm sure all the rest would have had the strength to go to the police as well. It's so sad and infuriating.

 

[Rimaal]

All the sanctimony reads like hypocritical sour grapes, to me. Quite cringe worthy, really, and very petty.

 

[Toby]

All the sanctimony reads like hypocritical sour grapes, to me. Quite cringe worthy, really, and very petty.

Only if you put football first and go about reading these statements like that, and if you think winning something isn't a nice to have but the bare minimum. That's exactly when you end up labelling valid criticism towards a dodgy business model as cringy and petty sanctimony. Quite snobbish and small minded, really.

I can't fathom how some people seem to think football and winning it is the most important thing in the world and any valid criticism on things that might be somewhat peripheral to football but very central to allround lifes gets branded as envy. I don't envy City one bit. I wouldn't want their kind of success neither at Arsenal nor at Stuttgart. I couldn't care less about that club, don't care if they win or lose.
But what I care about is criminal states using investments in popular sports as political and marketing tools and the most people being ****ing alright with it for some reason. It boggles my mind and I actually take it somewhat as an insult, that I got labelled a sour grape on the grounds that I'm apparently envious Arsenal don't have a dirty sheikh to splash some cash. There are more important things than football, it's not the beginning and end of all.

I feel the whole ownership thing has brainwashed some fans. Just spent the ****ing money and give me some ****ing trophies, don't care where the money comes from, don't care about anything but a big, silver cup! I'm glad complete ownership of clubs is still forbidden in the Bundesliga. Keeps most of the fans decent in at least that regard.

 

[al-Ustaadh]

Only if you put football first and go about reading these statements like that, and if you think winning something isn't a nice to have but the bare minimum. That's exactly when you end up labelling valid criticism towards a dodgy business model as cringy and petty sanctimony. Quite snobbish and small minded, really.

I can't fathom how some people seem to think football and winning it is the most important thing in the world and any valid criticism on things that might be somewhat peripheral to football but very central to allround lifes gets branded as envy. I don't envy City one bit. I wouldn't want their kind of success neither at Arsenal nor at Stuttgart. I couldn't care less about that club, don't care if they win or lose.
But what I care about is criminal states using investments in popular sports as political and marketing tools and the most people being ****ing alright with it for some reason. It boggles my mind and I actually take it somewhat as an insult, that I got labelled a sour grape on the grounds that I'm apparently envious Arsenal don't have a dirty sheikh to splash some cash. There are more important things than football, it's not the beginning and end of all.

I feel the whole ownership thing has brainwashed some fans. Just spent the ****ing money and give me some ****ing trophies, don't care where the money comes from, don't care about anything but a big, silver cup! I'm glad complete ownership of clubs is still forbidden in the Bundesliga. Keeps most of the fans decent in at least that regard.

Well stated. The Mancs around here will point to Henry Norris in Arsenal’s history (Mayor of Fulham and real estate developer, who was responsible for moving Arsenal from Woolwich to North London and heavily invested in them), but they conviently ignore WW2 and how it just about destroyed the club (and Highbury literally). Had to build from scratch from that standpoint. While I don’t like Kroenke nor Usmanov, City’s owners take the cake home for being the biggest ****s.

 

[M18CTID]

Well stated. The Mancs around here will point to Henry Norris in Arsenal’s history (Mayor of Fulham and real estate developer, who was responsible for moving Arsenal from Woolwich to North London and heavily invested in them), but they conviently ignore WW2 and how it just about destroyed the club (and Highbury literally). Had to build from scratch from that standpoint. While I don’t like Kroenke nor Usmanov, City’s owners take the cake home for being the biggest ****s.

I'm not being funny but why do you keep mentioning WW2 and the bombing of Highbury in relation to Norris? Norris's involvement with Arsenal began a few years prior to WW1, and ended a decade before WW2 even started. Indeed, Norris died 5 years before the start of the Second World War. I'm not even an Arsenal fan but I can see you're getting 2 significant events in Arsenal's history totally mixed up in terms of timelines and trying to link them together when there's no link there whatsoever.

I'd also argue that City's previous owner Thaksin Shinawatra - aka Doctor Death - was a significantly bigger c**t than the current owner if Human Rights Watch is anything to go by so any chance of cutting us a break instead of going over the same stuff time and time again? We get it - you don't have any time for City's owner and you think he's the devil personified. That's fine - you're entitled to your opinion and I'm not even going to attempt to change it because I'm not on here to do that. I've already stated on this very thread that there are things that go on in Abu Dhabi that aren't particularly palatable but I don't feel the need to have to keep repeating it to appease the pitchfork brigade.

Anyway, I'm looking forward to what should be an entertaining League Cup Final a week on Sunday and I'll be the first to congratulate Arsenal if you beat us.

 

[al-Ustaadh]

I'm not being funny but why do you keep mentioning WW2 and the bombing of Highbury in relation to Norris? Norris's involvement with Arsenal began a few years prior to WW1, and ended a decade before WW2 even started. Indeed, Norris died 5 years before the start of the Second World War. I'm not even an Arsenal fan but I can see you're getting 2 significant events in Arsenal's history totally mixed up in terms of timelines and trying to link them together when there's no link there whatsoever.

I'd also argue that City's previous owner Thaksin Shinawatra - aka Doctor Death - was a significantly bigger c**t than the current owner if Human Rights Watch is anything to go by so any chance of cutting us a break instead of going over the same stuff time and time again? We get it - you don't have any time for City's owner and you think he's the devil personified. That's fine - you're entitled to your opinion and I'm not even going to attempt to change it because I'm not on here to do that. I've already stated on this very thread that there are things that go on in Abu Dhabi that aren't particularly palatable but I don't feel the need to have to keep repeating it to appease the pitchfork brigade.

Anyway, I'm looking forward to what should be an entertaining League Cup Final a week on Sunday and I'll be the first to congratulate Arsenal if you beat us.

Nah, City's new owners are even worst. Not only are they Human Rights violators, but they're also turning into the main arms dealer of the Middle East now. Lets see how far that starts going in effect.

And I bring up Norris because of your Manc counterpart on here did that, not me. And when I brought up the World War II point, i.e. using historical reasoning like him, he ignored it. He wanted to say that Arsenal have a history of heavy investment, i.e. being the Bank of England Club, but he conveniently ignored the fact that it didn't maintain us in any way. World War II just about destroyed us - we were almost relegated following it. What Norris did, along with his reputation, pales in comparison to City and their new (and previous) owners.

Put plain and simple: **** your club. But especially **** your club's owners.

 

[A_G]

While I don’t like Kroenke nor Usmanov, City’s owners take the cake home for being the biggest ****s.

Not sure why Arsenal fans are moralising on this issue tbh. We know how vile Kroenke is and Usmanov is in lockstep with an authoritarian despot who imprisons/murders journalists, political opponents and other dissidents.

 

[M18CTID]

I can vaguely remember him getting in trouble in the USA. I cant say I remembered his name, but I remember the time. It's weird how more wasn't made of it... Dark forces at work, possibly? It was 1994... The Sky era hadn't fully kicked in, so sordid stories linked to football didn't carry as much weight. Child sex abuse scandals on their own weren't as big news either. I feel social media has had a positive effect on the reporting of such crimes. Shame it wasn't about in 94...

The sad thing from a reporting perspective, is more would have came out a lot earlier had a high profile player went to the police. It's very likely that the late Gary Speed was abused by him--even if his family, understandably, don't want to entertain the thought--and had that came out when he was at his peak during his Leeds days, I'm sure all the rest would have had the strength to go to the police as well. It's so sad and infuriating.

Yeah, they showed footage of his conviction in the States last night and his sickening reaction to it. I can't remember it at the time but I agree if things had been more high profile back in 1994 then much of this that's coming out now would've come to light sooner.

There used to be a perception way back in the 70's when I was growing up that paedophiles were dodgy types who wore rain macs and went flashing in parks but the reality has dawned in recent years that many of them held positions of responsibility and respectability - positions that often gave them easy access to kids - such as coppers, priests, teachers, and of course, football coaches. Back then we weren't told to be wary of people in those positions, just not to speak to strange men in cars, etc.

 

[al-Ustaadh]

Not sure why Arsenal fans are moralising on this issue tbh. We know how vile Kroenke is and Usmanov is in lockstep with an authoritarian despot who imprisons/murders journalists, political opponents and other dissidents.

As I said, I don't like Kroenke or Usmanov either. But City's owners are worst in my eyes. For example, neither Kroenke or Usmanov, as far as I am aware, are involved in arms dealing.

 

[M18CTID]

Nah, City's new owners are even worst. Not only are they Human Rights violators, but they're also turning into the main arms dealer of the Middle East now. Lets see how far that starts going in effect.

And I bring up Norris because of your Manc counterpart on here did that, not me. And when I brought up the World War II point, i.e. using historical reasoning like him, he ignored it. He wanted to say that Arsenal have a history of heavy investment, i.e. being the Bank of England Club, but he conveniently ignored the fact that it didn't maintain us in any way. World War II just about destroyed us - we were almost relegated following it. What Norris did, along with his reputation, pales in comparison to City and their new (and previous) owners.

Put plain and simple: **** your club. But especially **** your club's owners.

I wasn't aware Abu Dhabi was a major arms dealer in the ME - thought that was more of a Saudi thing to be honest. Have you got any evidence of this? I was under the impression that AD, Dubai, etc, were more concerned with conducting straightforward business with the Western world - for example, City is only a small cog in that wheel and Abu Dhabi has many other business interests such as a 90% stake in the Chrysler building in New York, and a stake in the Hakkasan nightclub venture.

Edit - just done a quick search and an arms deal was signed by the UAE with an American firm - seems to be linked to the Saudi-Yemen conflict. Not nice for sure but are you saying countries aren't allowed to acquire weapons for their own security? Last time I looked, pretty much every country in the world does the same.

 

[Jury]

There used to be a perception way back in the 70's when I was growing up that paedophiles were dodgy types who wore rain macs and went flashing in parks but the reality has dawned in recent years that many of them held positions of responsibility and respectability - positions that often gave them easy access to kids - such as coppers, priests, teachers, and of course, football coaches. Back then we weren't told to be wary of people in those positions, just not to speak to strange men in cars, etc.

And they're not old either! That's something that I've only managed to get my head around quite recently. Years ago, parents would have had no worries leaving their kids alone with young men--particularly men in their mid-twenties, which is the earliest reported case of abuse by Bennell. It's very likely he started much earlier.

 

[M18CTID]

And they're not old either! That's something that I've only managed to get my head around quite recently. Years ago, parents would have had no worries leaving their kids alone with young men--particularly men in their mid-twenties, which is the earliest reported case of abuse by Bennell. It's very likely he started much earlier.

Exactly. I can't begin to imagine what those abused have gone through. Some may be able to put it behind them but others won't and will be traumatised for life.

I actually have first hand experience of abuse as a child when I was in foster care at the age of 4. I was physically assaulted and still have the scar on my head nearly 44 years later. Thankfully, it's never really affected me mentally but that's probably because as ugly as the incident was at the time, I don't think physical abuse is anything like as disturbing as sexual abuse. If it was the latter, it doesn't bear thinking about.

As for Bennell, he wasn't the only wrong 'un his family. I've come across this today - his cousin was a double murderer and although it's not mentioned below, I think he took his own life before he could face justice for the second murder the coward. Edit: It is actually mentioned in the second paragraph. Silly me.

Bennell's cousin was a notorious sex killer who raped and murdered two women.

Ronnie Bennell hanged himself in his prison cell before he could face trial for his second killing.

Ronnie was 18 when he raped and killed Lynda Stewart in Burnage, Manchester in November 1970.

She was seven months' pregnant and suffered massive head injuries. Ronnie beat her to death with his bare hands and raped her as she lay unconscious.

He was found guilty and given a life sentence in 1971 but spent just 12 years behind bars.

He married in June 1989 but eight months after the wedding, he raped and murdered mum of three Pamela Noone, 42, in Bramhall, near Stockport.

Like the first victim, she was beaten unconscious before being raped.

 

[tap-in]

Blood cells are red
Veins are all blue
Our players aren't on EPO
How about you?

Ha, great response. We have signed the guy from Team Sky so its only a matter of time

 

[pacstud]

As I said, I don't like Kroenke or Usmanov either. But City's owners are worst in my eyes. For example, neither Kroenke or Usmanov, as far as I am aware, are involved in arms dealing.

Your dealing in terms of relativity. That's a no-no on websites.

Stick with polemic absolutes, those sell more papers.

Remember, cheating on a math test is the same as genocide.

 

[samshere]

Don't really care about how the City owners acquired their wealth or what they're doing outside of football. My main grouse with them is that they're so hell bent on seeing their team win that they're spoiling the PL as a spectacle. If they'll just get the best manager, best players, hell even the best backups then whats left for teams that are trying to use their own resources. A title winning team is supposed to battle many challenges through the season, caused by injury, caused by scheduling, caused by their opponents. But if they go and build two teams capable of challenging for the title it just washes away all their problems, its just akin to buying the PL trophy for cash.

 

[al-Ustaadh]

I wasn't aware Abu Dhabi was a major arms dealer in the ME - thought that was more of a Saudi thing to be honest. Have you got any evidence of this? I was under the impression that AD, Dubai, etc, were more concerned with conducting straightforward business with the Western world - for example, City is only a small cog in that wheel and Abu Dhabi has many other business interests such as a 90% stake in the Chrysler building in New York, and a stake in the Hakkasan nightclub venture.

Edit - just done a quick search and an arms deal was signed by the UAE with an American firm - seems to be linked to the Saudi-Yemen conflict. Not nice for sure but are you saying countries aren't allowed to acquire weapons for their own security? Last time I looked, pretty much every country in the world does the same.

Mentioned more in that article.

 

[Vinci]

It's not only clubs, though, that are falling for the big money and don't think twice where it came from.

Recently Sneijder has moved to Qatar with his wife, pretty much acting as a poster couple for them now. Talking about how great they are being treated and what a wonderful country it is, etc. No sh*t, Sherlock. You are a famous couple who are in the media a lot, of course they will treat you like gods.

The biggest contradiction in all this it that Sneijder and his wife are actually ambassadors to the human rights organisation Free a Girl. It's crazy that they don't even give a sh*t and are just being used as puppets. Money talks and it's very sad honestly.

 

[M18CTID]

Mentioned more in that article.

I’m aware of McGeehan’s article and while some of it is factual, a fair bit is also speculation. Namely his claim - with no supporting evidence - that Mansour isn’t the true owner of City, a claim that he tries to back up by saying that the fact he has only attended one match means he can’t have much interest in the club. That’s total cobblers and he knows it. It’s like saying Jack Walker has no interest in Blackburn because he didn’t go to many games, instead staying at his home in Jersey.

The arms dealing you refer to I’ve already acknowledged in my other post. I can’t confess to knowing enough about the situation in Yemen but I do think that the UAE siding with Saudi smacks of sucking up to a more powerful nation. Ditto their alliance against Qatar which itself is hardly exempt from criticism but it’s a bit rich for Saudi to take the moral high ground against Qatar and it’s not good that the UAE has sided with Saudi against Qatar. However, McGeehan then makes an utterly bizarre comment about the Abu Dhabi sponsored naming rights of Real Madrid’s stadium and perhaps calling it the Qatar/ISIS alliance Arena - this after he pointed out that Abu Dhabi and Qatar aren’t exactly bosom buddies at the moment. Also, his reference to the infamous cattle-prod incident has been chucked in there to somehow link it to City when the perpetrator has absolutely nothing to do with the club and never has. Unless he thinks that with Mansour being his half brother then that makes him guilty by association, but then he was keen to point out that Mansour has nothing to do with City.

In short, the article is a mish-mash of truths that were already out in the public domain and wild speculation that he can’t back up with any supporting evidence. It also seems odd that he’s only name-checking City in this when Abu Dhabi has had other business interests in the UK. Was he equally keen to name-check Barclays Bank when Mansour made a bigger investment in buying billions of pounds of Barclays shares at the height of the global banking crisis? Does he ever go all in against Formula One, given that the Abu Dhabi Grand Prix is now a permanent fixture on the F1 roster? I did hear that McGeehan is a Sp**s fan and funnily enough this article appeared not long after we beat them 4-1 in December. Whether he is a Sp**s fan I don’t know but I do know he’s into human rights in that region in quite a big way. It’s just a shame that he can’t stick to facts when reporting it.

 

[al-Ustaadh]

I’m aware of McGeehan’s article and while some of it is factual, a fair bit is also speculation. Namely his claim - with no supporting evidence - that Mansour isn’t the true owner of City, a claim that he tries to back up by saying that the fact he has only attended one match means he can’t have much interest in the club. That’s total cobblers and he knows it. It’s like saying Jack Walker has no interest in Blackburn because he didn’t go to many games, instead staying at his home in Jersey.

The arms dealing you refer to I’ve already acknowledged in my other post. I can’t confess to knowing enough about the situation in Yemen but I do think that the UAE siding with Saudi smacks of sucking up to a more powerful nation. Ditto their alliance against Qatar which itself is hardly exempt from criticism but it’s a bit rich for Saudi to take the moral high ground against Qatar and it’s not good that the UAE has sided with Saudi against Qatar. However, McGeehan then makes an utterly bizarre comment about the Abu Dhabi sponsored naming rights of Real Madrid’s stadium and perhaps calling it the Qatar/ISIS alliance Arena - this after he pointed out that Abu Dhabi and Qatar aren’t exactly bosom buddies at the moment. Also, his reference to the infamous cattle-prod incident has been chucked in there to somehow link it to City when the perpetrator has absolutely nothing to do with the club and never has. Unless he thinks that with Mansour being his half brother then that makes him guilty by association, but then he was keen to point out that Mansour has nothing to do with City.

In short, the article is a mish-mash of truths that were already out in the public domain and wild speculation that he can’t back up with any supporting evidence. It also seems odd that he’s only name-checking City in this when Abu Dhabi has had other business interests in the UK. Was he equally keen to name-check Barclays Bank when Mansour made a bigger investment in buying billions of pounds of Barclays shares at the height of the global banking crisis? Does he ever go all in against Formula One, given that the Abu Dhabi Grand Prix is now a permanent fixture on the F1 roster? I did hear that McGeehan is a Sp**s fan and funnily enough this article appeared not long after we beat them 4-1 in December. Whether he is a Sp**s fan I don’t know but I do know he’s into human rights in that region in quite a big way. It’s just a shame that he can’t stick to facts when reporting it.

Smoke bomb post. This was just about the arms dealing assertions, which are most definitely true. Not concerned with the other **** you want to point out, as it isn't relevant to what I was talking about in other posts, i.e. human rights violations and arms dealing.

 

[celestis]

It's not only clubs, though, that are falling for the big money and don't think twice where it came from.

Recently Sneijder has moved to Qatar with his wife, pretty much acting as a poster couple for them now. Talking about how great they are being treated and what a wonderful country it is, etc. No sh*t, Sherlock. You are a famous couple who are in the media a lot, of course they will treat you like gods.

The biggest contradiction in all this it that Sneijder and his wife are actually ambassadors to the human rights organisation Free a Girl. It's crazy that they don't even give a sh*t and are just being used as puppets. Money talks and it's very sad honestly.

Probably did it because their agent thought it would be good PR , as you say money talks for some at least .