So you are a Leeds fan. Thought so.





It's probably more to do with the fact that you come across as someone who doesn't stand out. Maybe that is because you don't say anything interesting.




Your post was poorly constructed. I had no idea what your post was stating. Hobbes' work is far easier to comprehend than some of your ramblings.

Maybe you are right, but then being insular and 'not interested in outsiders' is a bit of a Yawkshire trait.




Reading between the lines, you come across as a little Ingerlunder.





Maybe you are right, to a degree, about apathy in relation to oppsoition fans. It's not a great excuse though because I would bet that most neutrals know who the owners of clubs like Everton, Villa and Spurs.

However, the press have no excuse at all. They always referred to our previous owner by his name. Maybe they don't show as much respect to our owner because he is a Muslim.

As for the towels on the head business. It was all very sad. However, it's not racist. Maybe when you know as much as I do about the Race Discrimination Act and Race Relations (Amendment) Act, and when you have spent as much time as I have with community groups representing different faiths and ethnic groups, then I will be prepared to discuss this issue with you.

He will start posting again when the season kicks off I hope.

If you like. But in actual fact, not at all.



That's because they are well known clubs who people take an interest in. Should Man City actually break into the top 8 and consistently compete, I reckon it will be the same for you then. Until your takeover, nobody really cared, as with the likes of Bolton, Blackburn, Stoke, Hull City, Portsmouth, and West Ham. That's not to be antagonistic, it's just how it was to the neutral.



The press don't have an excuse, you're right. But to say it's racially driven is an assumption on your part, and one I don't see any credible evidence for. As I said, Al Fayed has never had the same treatment that I've seen.

If anything, it is down to either a genuine lack of interest, or simply jealousy manifested in a disrespectful determination to portray an image of such apathy. I suggest with the press it's almost certainly the latter.

But Citeh are the biggest story in English football right now. It doesn't take them finishing high in the league for them to be interesting, what is happening is interesting wherever they finish.

My opinion is that the reason citeh's owner isn't well known is because 1)There are a few rich Sheik's who are on spending sprees throughout sport/city building. 2)Citeh's Sheik has made no (or few) public comments and most (or all) of the takeover and player purchases have been conducted by his employees.

Has Citeh's owner even been to the ground or a match? I honestly don't know if he has.

I'm interested in what's happening at citeh. I welcome the increased competition. I think it's good for football. But even I would have had to guess at the name of citeh's owner.


Completely different situation though. Al Fayed was already nationally known because of Harrod's.

Al Fayed's also been on the receiving end of some pretty nasty press speculation as well. Part of the reason he was denied a British passport was a media campaign against him.

Some of the press action against him might because of his shady character, but there's a strong possibility that it was generated by racism as well.

That's my point. I'm interested/curious in what happens, but I couldn't care less about the details of who the money-man behind it is. It's the same for all clubs, the only reason I know who any of them are is because they are either well-known for other reasons or their name is regularly in the news.



Partly different, yes. My point was that his name is known, so therefore used, and he also a Muslim, but I've not seen a fuss made of it.

Any negative stuff I've seen has indeed been about his alleged shady side, along with a hint of the Princess Diana death casting a shadow, almost as if some hold it against him personally.

The jealousy does not extend to the likes of Liverpool, Arsenal and probably even Chelsea fans who have taken our good fortune with good grace and have welcomed the challenge. The jealousy statement is aimed at the fans of those who were at the second tier of the Premier League, who wished it had been them receiving the billions instead of us. Fans of a particular blue shirted club two miles away from where I am at the moment spring to mind immediately here and, let me tell you, you are displaying the symptoms more than a leprosy victim carrying his own leg.

If you think that I said I would like to be up there for ten years and then that I want it to go tits up then you are obviously dimmer than a one watt bulb. What I quite clearly stated was that I would rather have that scenario than have another thirty years of achieving nothing, or virtually nothing. Obviously, we would all like us to reach the top and sustain that till the day we die, I was merely pointing out which of the other two options I would prefer.

Unless Everton get the financial backing, something not too far off the level we have got now, then you can carry on dreaming. You will never be ready to break the big four and sustain it. Without bucket loads of cash, you cannot hope to achieve anything. That's a simple fact. You've probably already reached a plateau and the only way for Everton now is downhill.

I agree, it was more tragic than racist.

As an aside, there is no such piece of legislation as the Race Discrimination Act. I assume you mean the Race Relations Act, unless you're talking about Australia, I think they have a Race Discrimination Act.

We've reached a plateau of 5th? Devo'd at that.

Everton are a model club that every other time outside the top 4 should strive to be like. Proving that hard work gets results. Its not all about spedning big money. See Newcastle, Leeds, Tottenham et al.

Thing is, hard work has got us to were we are now and we have the ambition for greater things.

Man City needed £ for your ambition.

Thing is, i'd love us to have City's money, simple as. But we haven't. But that doesn't mean were spiraling out of control like you suggest.

Take your tongue out of his ar'se, he usually stops after a trophyless haul or a bad patch of form.

The initial Race Relations Act (1976) is often referred to as the 'Race Discrimination Act'. Has been for years. Many still refer to it as the Race Discrimination Act to avoid confusion with the Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000.