Born in the late 1900s Semi-professional adult & parent. Gooner.
LONDON, ENGLAND
Joined February 2010
- Tweets21K
- Following2.5K
- Followers391
- Likes65.6K
Referee has had a mare there. The foul was far worse than the reaction from Dowman. Ludicrous. Should appeal the red.
Joe Harakis retweeted
For those who don't know why Saka was chosen by Socrates family for this award:
🏥 Funded 120 life-changing surgeries for children in Nigeria
🌍 Sponsored 100 pediatric surgeries across Kenya, Rwanda & Tanzania
🇹🇷 Housed 26 displaced families after the Turkey earthquake
🇲🇦 Built a village shelter for 255 people in Morocco
🎒 Donated 1,000+ school uniforms to families in West London
🎓 Funded academic scholarships for 20 international students
To do this doesn't just require money, the amount of planning and outreach you have to do to make sure all this help gets to the right people wherever they are is not easy
Love @ben6white
Spoke to Ben White after Arsenal’s win over Everton:
🏴 Hunger for an England recall
😢 Tears after his knee injury in May
🏡 Wanting be at Arsenal forever
🔁 Benefit of rotating with Timber
👇🏻
thesun.co.uk/sport/40806403/…
Souness out here making wild accusations all to promote his book.
🤕 “Saka DIVES all over the place... the minute he looks like losing possession, he’s down!”
🚫 “Anyone who simulates a foul is a CHEAT!”
Graeme Souness calls Arsenal winger Bukayo Saka a “cheat” for going down too easily...
📺 youtu.be/flpiWmEZyEQ
@piersmorgan
We have to learn to play to Gyokeres' strengths when he plays, the whole point of having different options is to be able to implement different game plans
Wrote it and turned off comments. He knows its a ridiculous comparison.
I watched the F1 film with Brad Pitt the other day, and there’s a moment where his character asks to add something to the car that isn’t really in the rules. The FIA punishes it, but the team can still race with the earlier car. It made me think.
In F1, the best teams live at the edge of the regulations. Sometimes the FIA allows what they’ve found, and sometimes it says that goes too far. Occasionally the rules are rewritten afterwards.
Now, City. I’m not defending them. A commission found they entered into sham agreements and broke the spending limits. A sham is an arrangement that isn’t what it claims to be, so that’s a different thing from using a gap nobody had spotted.
City deny it and will appeal. But I find it useful to ask/reflect on how people inside the club see it.
From their point of view, PERHAPS they believe they were doing what elite competitors do: looking at the rules, finding the limits, challenging interpretations and moving faster than the regulatory system.
From the outside, you might look at that and say, “That’s cheating.” From inside the organisation, they might say, “We found something nobody had thought of.”
If you believe you’ve found a way to bring money in, more or less within the rules (and the commission said it was not in the rules and it was cheating), you might tell yourself you’re just being a sharp competitor.
We are all asking “did City cheat?”. But I find this question interesting too: “how did City come to believe they weren’t?”
And understanding a mindset, or trying to, isn’t excusing it.
Readers added context they thought people might want to know
Manchester City were found guilty of 114 out of 115 charges by an independent commission. The comparison made is not in the same ball park to the level of rule breaking Man City have committed.
premierleague.com/en/news/472777…
