2016/17 Premier League & General Football Discussion

  • Thread starter Liquid
  • 2,138 comments
  • 64,396 views

Do you want a Team GB football team?

  • Yes - Full integration

  • Yes - A limited one

  • I Don't Know

  • Indifferent

  • No, Not At All

Results are only viewable after voting.
Good weekend forn United so far, would be perfect if City lose tomorrw. Only 2 points between 2nd and 6th.
 
Famine
To be honest I don't see that much difference between this, Wikipedia banning the Daily Mail from being used as a source, and Donald Trump declaring CNN to be 'fake news'.
Click to expand...

Principally yes, they're all taking newspapers/media outlets and not endorsing them any more. Good, that's how you should treat rags and hacks who are dishonest. Don't like? Don't buy.

The context why is arguably more important sentimentally though. Bit of a difference between "The Truth" and "We don't find Daily Mail reliable". Not everyone will care, mind.
 
Liquid
Principally yes, they're all taking newspapers/media outlets and not endorsing them any more. Good, that's how you should treat rags and hacks who are dishonest. Don't like? Don't buy.
Click to expand...
I disagree. There's a huge difference between people not buying or endorsing them due to what they think about their conduct or contents and organisations banning them. Okay, so Liverpool is a private body and is entitled to give free admission to whomever it wishes (though you'd think they'd have banned Sun reporters a mite sooner than this; perhaps Trump has emboldened them), but the message this sends over is 'it's okay when it's a news outlet we don't like, but not okay when it's a person we don't like doing the banning'. Imagine if Manchester United had banned the BBC... oh, wait.

If you think the Sun was terrible with access to the source material, how much better do you think it will be without access to the source material and a grudge?

There's not very many steps between these kind of actions and the loss of free press. Banning accredited journalists never ends well, for anyone...
 
Burnley 1-1 Chelsea, well done to Burnley getting a well deserved point, only a blip for Chelsea surely!, Great free kick by Brady for the equalizer.

Swansea v Leicester next, such a big game at the bottom, CMON SWANSEA!!!!!!

Edit, YES!!! Mawson what a strike from the defender, Swansea 1-0!!!

Edit x2, now 2-0!, Olsson with it just before half time! :D:D
 
Last edited:
Was a cagey game up until the goal, Leicester were playing pretty well but we were defending well, double change for Leicester at the break.

Edit, 2-0 it finished, brilliant three points for Swansea! 👍👍👍
 
Last edited:
Famine
I disagree. There's a huge difference between people not buying or endorsing them due to what they think about their conduct or contents and organisations banning them. Okay, so Liverpool is a private body and is entitled to give free admission to whomever it wishes (though you'd think they'd have banned Sun reporters a mite sooner than this; perhaps Trump has emboldened them), but the message this sends over is 'it's okay when it's a news outlet we don't like, but not okay when it's a person we don't like doing the banning'. Imagine if Manchester United had banned the BBC... oh, wait.

If you think the Sun was terrible with access to the source material, how much better do you think it will be without access to the source material and a grudge?
Click to expand...

I doubt that Liverpool fans will care what the Sun thinks. I can't speak for anyone who is behind the movement but I doubt that there is anything the Sun can do to nurse the wounds.

I think the Sun will be as terrible as they always have been.

Now with added vitriol!

Famine
There's not very many steps between these kind of actions and the loss of free press. Banning accredited journalists never ends well, for anyone...
Click to expand...

Wouldn't it tax the definition of a free press if a private entity was ordered to allow a newspaper onto its premises? Certainly a government regulatory body can't do that. It would be a different story if the Premier League issued an edict; that would be a condition of entering their private members' clubhouse.

I don't disagree with what you say; in the long term it probably will hurt Liverpool and entrench bad feelings. But it's their decision to make.
 
Liquid
Wouldn't it tax the definition of a free press if a private entity was ordered to allow a newspaper onto its premises?
Click to expand...
Yes, and for exactly the same reasons.
Liquid
But it's their decision to make.
Click to expand...
Just as it is Wikipedia's - and Trump's - but they are all essentially saying 'this is a publication we don't like because it doesn't report what we say are the right facts'.

People deride Trump for doing it (because thin-skin, leader of the free world, etc), but not the world's leading encyclopaedia site or one of the world's most famous football clubs - because they don't like Trump and they don't like the Sun/Mail - despite there being very little difference.
 
I predict the score for Middlesbrough vs Crystal Palace will be 1-1
And if anybody is wondering, I support Middlesbrough because I'm from around there.
 
Big game for AC Milan today at Lazio in Rome. Due to injuries and red card suspensions, they had to call up two 19 year old defenders from the academy team... :nervous:

Edit: Well, the rossoneri held their own for a 1-1 draw. It felt like they could have won it at the end though as they were the far more threatening team in the 2nd half.

@lxmmy They used both Ocampos (LW) and Deulofeu (false 9) and benched Bacca yesterday.
 
Last edited:
Russian hooligans issued a warning against the English to expect a festival of violence during the WC.

I'm looking forward to this. I expect **** to go down like never before.
 
If Clattenburg referees a match in Saudi Arabia, makes a mistake and ends up robbing a team of 3 points, will he have his hand cut off?
 
So that's the Premier League's best Ref gone then.

Edit, some breaking news, Man City fined £35k for their breach of the anti-doping rules and have been warned about their future conduct.
 
It makes a mockery of the Anti-Doping rules. So now any team can provide incorrect information so as to avoid a player being tested and just get a £35k fine.

Yet criticise a referee and that's £50k, kick a water bottle as well and that's another £16k, almost double.

As for Clattenberg, good riddance, I thought he started out okay but in the last several seasons he's been a liability in most games he's refereed.
 

Latest Posts

Back