Tag Archives: politics

The world has a left wing epidemic

2 Replies

The biggest talking point in the summer was Arsenal’s failure to land a top left winger.

Eventually, we opted to stick with just the one new signing in Christos Tzolis, who would be supported by a combination of Eberechi Eze and Noni Madueke.

Now I have always maintained that the left wing is the toughest position in the world to find talent right now. There is simply not an abundance of top draw players out there, which in turn inflates the prices of those that are simply average.

Liverpool broke the bank in the summer to sign Bradley Barcola.

At the time, I labelled him as a French Gabriel Martinelli – someone who has blistering pace, poor one on one from a standing start, and not great end product. He has looked distinctly average for Liverpool this season and has certainly not shown anywhere near enough to justify the huge price tag.

Long term target Vinicius Jr looks a shadow of his former self.

We were willing to brank the bank to sign the Brazilian in the summer, and maybe the sage has taken its toll mentally. Or maybe, at 26, with over 500 senior games under his belt, the spark has gone and the demise is beginning.

One of my favourite things right now is reading the conspiracy theories about Vinicius Jr and about how he is on a yacht somewhere in the Caribbean sea enjoying life and what we see playing week in week out for Real Madrid is a body double.

Then we have Iliman Ndiaye. He was some fans favourite for us to go for – a lower level player who many thought had the game to step up if he joined a top club. A bit like Antoine Semenyo. He is yet to get off the mark for Man City and it is beginning to feel he was overhyped – remember, Ndiaye scored just 6 league goals last season.

Ndiaye’s Man City team mate Jeremy Doku is probably the most overhyped player in world football.

Doku does some brilliant things with the ball at his feet, and is a scorer of great goals. But he will always lack the consistency to ever be considered a top player.

The Belgium left wingers goal against Liverpool was his 1st of the season. That takes his tally to 12 Premier League goals in over 3 seasons. One of the best in the world apparently.

Meanwhile, another fan favourite Rafael Leao ended up in the Turkey retirement home. Get your teeth and hair done whilst earning millions playing football at a lower level. He has yet to score this season.

Anthony Gordon scored his first Champions League goal for Barcelona earlier this week. He celebrated like he had done it all himself, completely ignoring Yamine Lamal’s world class build up play to put it on a plate.

Two goals this season, Gordon is what he is. Hard working, direct, quick. An English Martinelli.

Kenan Yildiz, another long term arsenal target, fractured his metatarsal back in September and will do well to be back before Christmas. Likewise, Junior Kroupi is recovering from an injury picked up in July. Both have required surgery, with the Frenchman potentially back in 4-6 weeks.

Finally, we come onto Luis Diaz and Khvicha Kvaratskhelia.

Dias is decent, but not really World Class. He is now just getting huge numbers in a very poor league. Khvicha Kvaratskhelia, meanwhile, has looked off the pace for PSG.

Ultimate, it feels like Arsenal did well to spend big in a market where talent is thing. Only really Morgan Rodgers has shown any sort of form to have justified us spending big – and he is playing in a much narrower position than we would have played him.

Come January, the calls will come again for us to sign a left winger. Yildiz and Kroupi will come into the equation. Although I see Yildiz as more of a Martin Odegaard replacement.

Kroupi would be a very good option – I think his future would be down the middle, but he has shown he can play as an inside left forward in the Premier League. He could be a sensible recruit for the 2nd half of the season before transitioning next season into a centre forward option (replacing Viktor Gyokeres).

The only other one I would bother keeping an eye on is Desire Doue. I think this kid has it.

At the moment he is playing right wing for PSG with Kvaratskhelia one of the first names on the teamsheet on the left – but his best position is on that left wing.

Maybe a PR campaign, highlighting that he can become a superstar at Arsenal rather than a player playing out of position for PSG could see a summer move. Who knows?

What we do know is the market is still very thin, and, Rogers aside, none of those who moved have exactly shown Arsenal wrong for opting not to sign them

Keenos

Manchester City case “enters bullying stage”

7 Replies

Let’s get it right, Manchester City’s defence of the 115 was nothing short of a disaster.

114 of the 115 charges stuck, the Premier League labelled it a “sham”, and key witnesses and irrefutable evidence on behalf of Manchester City either did not materialise or could not be proven.

Manchester City’s sole defence of the entire situation is that it was not Abu Dhabi United Group (ADUG) that subsidised the huge sums paid to Man City by sponsors, But the Abu Dhabi Government (AD).

This line of defence directly contradicts what Etihad Airways told the US Government back in 2015.

And this is exactly why the Man City case has fallen the way it has.

Whilst City may have claimed that the sponsorship money was subsidised by AD, and not ADUG, they were unable to provide any evidence. Neither AD, Etihad, or alternative organisations would have been able to provide proof of where funding comes from because it would have completely contradicted that 2015 investigation.

City fans across social media are claiming that lawyers defence is “genius” and that they are playing 4D chess. This is laughable.

You do not go into a hearing, a court case, or anything else, with the aim of losing so that you can win on appeal. It does not happen. And it is ludicrous that anyone is claiming that City lawyers were hoping to lose so that they could “expose the Premier League on appeal”. Especially when you consider the cost of those lawyers.

High up executives at Man City, ADUG and AD know exactly the predicament they are in – and there only two paths out.

Man City or Etihad Airways. The will have to choose a fighter.

The evidence needed to exhonorate Man City throws Etihad under the bus with the US Government. 

If evidence is presented to show that Etihad were funded by AD, then the US will reopen their 2015 investigation. That could have huge implications for not only one of the biggest airlines in the world, who are also AD’s flagship brand, but also for those who presented the evidence in 2015.

Not only would presenting the evidence in support of City be an existential threat to Etihad, it would likely lead to criminal proceedings for those who then lied in the evidence above.

The alternative for AD is to back Etihad, and it is Man City who are then pushed under that bus.

Without AD or Etihad being willing to corroborate Man City’s claims, the Premier League can rightly disregard Man City’s claims of where the funding came from.

The question ultimately for AD is do they want to sacrifice Man City to the Premier League to protect Etihad, or do they want to sacrifice Etihad to the US Government in an attempt to protect Man City.

And that leads us to where we are now. The bullying stage.

AD and ADUG can not keep their two flagship operations clean. One will have to fall. So in an attempt to get two favourable outcomes, they are now using political, legal and PR posturing to bully the Premier League and UK Government.

Firstly we have Etihad threatening to sue the Premier League.

The headline is that they have hired “the world’s most feared litigation law firm” in Quinn Emanuel.

Firstly, the chances that they have only just hired Quinn Emanuel are laughable. Major companies like Etihad will likely have major global law firms on retainers. We’ve all watched Suits. We all know how this works.

Secondly, I am not really sure what the basis of any case by Etihad against the Premier League could be built on.

It is an independent commission panel that heard the case, and made the judgement. Not the Premier League. The PL merely presented their case, their evidence. And when it came to evidence around where the funding came from, everything that mentioned Etihad came from Man City or ADUG emails. You can no sue someone for presenting the facts as they appear.

If Etihad are to sue anyone, it would actually be Man City, as it is them that have made the claim that their sponsors, including Etihad, were subsidised by AD. If this as an untrue statement by Man City, then that is where the lawsuit sits.

As for the posturing by the UAE, there is zero chance that they will pull investment in the UK due to the decision against Manchester City.

A move like this would have huge ramifications across the globe. It would show to the world that the UAE and the Emirati that make it believe that they are above the law in whichever county they have organisations, companies or sports teams operating. It sends out a sign to governments worldwide that they believe their organisations can operate however they want, and if they are sanctioned then government level investment will be pulled.

This position is not a position of strength.

Whilst on the short term, the UK may lose out on investment, it would not be a catastrophe. 

In the grand scheme of things, the UAE is not one of the biggest investors in the UK. The are no where near the US, India or France. The billions they claim that they will pull from the UK is only around 0.3-1.4% of the foreign investment in the UK. Although it must be said that is public money. There is also a private side, such as the millions pumped into Manchester by ADUG.

Whilst pulling investment would not be catastrophic for the UK, it would be a catastrophic decision by the UAE. 

As we briefly outlined above, why would any foreign government want to do investment deals with the UAE if the UAE show themselves as willing do drop their investment due to one of their organisations have been sanctioned? It would lead governments being less willing to make deals with UAE. And we all know those deals are massive for the UAE as they attempt to invest the email money before the income dries up.

The estimation is that oil in the UAE will dry up in 80 years. Due to this they have a global investment strategy with the aim of reducing the reliance on oil – in 1980, 55% of the UAE GDP was based on oil, that is now just 23%.

UAE need to continue investing in both themselves (tourism) and foreign countries to ensure they survive once the oil runs out. If they fail to do so, the area will just become a desert. Pulling investment in the UK would directly damage this strategy, especially if other countries decide the UAE are no longer trustworthy enough to strike big deals with.

Etihad will not sue the PL. The UAE will not pull their investment in the UK. It is just bullying and PR.

The hope is to force the hand of the PL or UK Government into coming to a settlement. The aim is to also paint Man City as victims in all of this. To continue the sportswashing of the blue side of Manchester.

And whilst the bullying will not be successful, we are seeing the PR side of the project become a success. City fans from Manchester to Lagos, and across Asia are ignoring the facts and trying to paint City and ADUG as victims. 

Abu Dhabi, and by extension the UAE, basically now have millions of online warriors who will go out to battle for them, who will defend them no matter what they do. And that is what sportswashing is all about. 

We have also seen the success of this sportswashing already in the way UK Primer Minister Andy Burnham came out swinging for Man City’s owners. He has since had his wings clips, although there could now be political ramifications followings calls to investigate the Labour leader’s relationship with the Manchester City owners.

Having triggered the appeal, it must now take place in 12 weeks. The verdict must be delivered within 30-days of the appeal ending.

Regardless of the verdict, Man City’s online warriors will continue to fight for their owners. They will paint City and ADUG as the victims. They will claim it was always the goal to take the PL to the High Court, Supeme Court, The Hague, Nuremberg, the Earth Supreme Court or Wizengamot. And that this is all part of the bigger plan to spend millions dragging the reputation of their club through the mud.

And my final point of all this is all this posturing only deals with the sponsorship related charges. 

The claim that sponsors funding came from AD, and not ADUG, does not defend the PSR breaches, nor the lack of cooperation charges. And these alone can lead to huge point deductions, life bans for the officers and executives who failed to cooperate, and even the expulsion of Manchester City.

January 2027 will be huge. 

Keenos

Manchester City right to issue cease and desist letters

3 Replies

Luckily for She Wore, I have a legal background so when we set up the blog I was already upskilled on what we can and can not write. Unfortunately, it seems like other platforms have not learned over the years about what content they are allowed to publish without fear of reprisals.

It was no surprise to me that Manchester City have issued numerous blogs with cease and desist letters in the last few weeks.

For those unaware on UK law, a cease and desist letter is used to stop alleged or actual infringements, such as copyright, trademark or libel. They are often used by bigger companies against “smaller” companies or individuals as an initial warning.

Their aim is to encourage the receiver to halt their activities without the need of costly (to both sides) more formal legal action. If the receiver does not halt their activities, the fact that they received the letter will be frowned upon in court as they were fully aware what they were doing might infringe copyright or be libellous.

The letters from Manchester City would have by sent out to inform the receivers of potential libellous comments.

In the UK, you are innocent until proven guilty. If you accuse someone in public of being something (such as a nonce), and they decide to take you to court of the comments, you then have to prove that your statement was correct. Impossible if it was untrue.

Thousands on Twitter make libellous comments everyday, not realising that they are potentially opening themselves up to civil proceedings. Former actor turns activist Lawrence Fox was recently told to pay £180,000 in libel damages following comments on the social media platform.

To put it simply, you can not say or write things that are untrue and might damage another reputation without infringing defamation law (the law that libel (writing) and slander (spoken) sit within).

Most of us get away with making these comments all day long because we are insignificant. A 17-year-old with 367 followers is not worth going after from these company’s point of view. The amount it will cost them to find out who the individual is, their address, issue the letter and so on just is not worth it.

But when you get big enough, with huge influence (or in terms of copywrite make big sales / have a product go viral), you will quickly end up on the radar of big businesses or individuals willing to pursue the matter.

AFTV, for example, were pressured to remove “Arsenal” from their name due to the damage they were doing to the club’s name. Many other clubs use Arsenal within their blog names, but they are deemed either not big enough, or not damaging enough to the club, for them to act.

The United Stand (TUS) are the highest profile company that have allegedly received a cease and desist letter from Manchester City with regards to their 115 charges.

TUS are basically Man U’s version of AFTV – like Robbie Lyle, Brent Di Cesare (AKA Mark Goldbridge), was not a boyhood fan of the club he talked about, and instead spotted an opportunity to make himself a lot of money. The former police officer then created a platform of hate and ridicule to profit from Man U’s demise. And for those wondering, this is not libellous. It is factual.

And that is the thing with libel. You are allowed to write the facts. And Manchester City’s cease and desist letter does not stop people talking about the case.

You will always notice that mainstream media outlets always have a different commentary to blogs and vlogs. They are more formal and do not speculate. That is because these institutions are aware of what they can and can not say, and that you can only report the facts that have been made public and are verified.

The simplest example of libellous comments made against City is calling them “cheats”.

As it stands, they are not cheats. They are innocent until proven guilty remember. They have been charged, but it has not yet been proven they have done anything wrong. So anyone that calls them a cheat right now would be making a libellous comment unless they can prove that City did cheat.

As the Premier League are currently trying to build a case to prove that City cheated, I would be highly surprised if any individual can defend their comments. They will be reliant on the Premier League winning their case which will be the concrete proof needed to label City cheats.

If City successfully defend the accusations leveled against them, we might see them step up their legal action against the likes of TUS, if they decide to continue with their comments.

Labelling a football club (or any sporting individual) a cheat is cleary damaging to reputation. This will be a lesson to those online that you can not just say anything you want without fear of repercussions. Stick to the facts and follow the law (and we have not even got onto injunctions yet).

A few City fans have said things like “the media have changed their tune” since the letters allegedly went out. This is incorrect. The media always acted within the law.

A quick Google of “Manchester City Cheats” shows that no media outlet ever accused them of cheating. They all merely said they had been charged, and what they have been charged with.

Whenever they spoke about Manchester City and “cheating” they always quoted another party such as Stan Collymore. This is not them calling Man City cheats, but them quoting an individual and reporting what that individual said. Still sticking to the facts!

Big fish often do not like strong-arming the little guy. It is bad and also frowned upon in court. That is why they will send a cease and desist letter first rather than going straight for legal action, so that in court they can at least say “we warned you”. It takes away the chance of the little guy presenting themselves as a victim.

Back in 2022, Manchester City sent a cease and desist letter to a 3rd division Chilean club over similarities to their badge.

For transparency, a company I am involved in (not SheWore.com), received a cease and desist letter from the club over the use of Mikel Arteta’s “Transparency, Energy, Clarity” drawing on t-shirts.

We went viral very quickly and were selling 1 a minute at one point. Within a week the club had sent us a letter asking us to stop selling the product. We complied but were also frustrated that others were still selling (and continue to do so). It is an example of how the clubs can not go after anyone, but will go after those who are bigger, or have gone viral.

Some will try and label all this as bullying, and claim Manchester City are trying to change the narrative. The truth is, you can not say anything that damages another reputation unless you can prove it is true. And those labelling City “cheats” can not prove that is is true.

Have a great Tuesday.

Keenos