Match Thread POSTPONED: Everton v Manchester City - Preview only

[RomanReigns]

Was chuffed to bits when Yaya threw a tantrum over me back then. Memories....

I jest, of course, but actually do appreciate some of what you say even as a cry baby, obtuse minded City supporter foolish enough to come back here (with good intentions).

I also think it was the correct, and safety first minded decision (including for your players, staff and others in the community) to postpone the game given the risk of further spread that could have happened.

However, I also want to say again I completely see why your fans and club were upset over the way it was all communicated/decided by the PL and get why guidelines needed to be clearer to everyone to prevent what's happening now between our supporters, etc. which is depressing and taking away from the enjoyment of football.

The PL needed to do a better job of planning for and handling this type of situation as how it could not have been foreseen given the fixture congestion + COVID's state in the UK is beyond me and why I can see the reason for further frustration.

Now, do I again think the public statement by Everton was the BEST way to go about handling this? I think that question is not just asked by City supporters, as a United fan who writes in the Athletic about City posted this after the statement was published:



Can one see how it implies an aura of automatic suspicion of City as misleading the PL in some way or being complicit with the PL? Here's tbf a City fan/journalists recent post:



Thoughts on this?

Would genuinely appreciate responses that don't involve attempts at mockery, telling me to bugger off, questioning why I'm here, where I'm from, am I a real fan, etc. if that's at all possible. Hope it is.

Cheers and HNY.

Matches will NOT be off for Covid-19 if 14 players remain available

EXCLUSIVE BY MATT HUGHES: The Premier League's determination to get the congested games completed is such that clubs have been told postponement requests will be rejected.

www.dailymail.co.uk

did city have fewer than 14 players?

 

[Yaya’s Cake]

Well seems as tho you took it in good faith, I will answer.

I thought our statement showed a lack of class.

We always seem to do things correctly and with dignity, but that statement showed anything but.

By all means kick off behind the scenes, but that public statement has made us look like uncaring bellends and its not a great look for the club, IMO.

Did it? I genuinely thought you were being tongue-in-cheek mate.

I can answer, sure, but the "am I a real fan" seemed like a joke.

my apologies if I was wrong.

 

[Goat]

Did it? I genuinely thought you were being tongue-in-cheek mate.

I can answer, sure, but the "am I a real fan" seemed like a joke.

my apologies if I was wrong.

Wut?

 

[Yaya’s Cake]

Matches will NOT be off for Covid-19 if 14 players remain available

EXCLUSIVE BY MATT HUGHES: The Premier League's determination to get the congested games completed is such that clubs have been told postponement requests will be rejected.

www.dailymail.co.uk

did city have fewer than 14 players?

I saw this before, but you get that this isn't sensible if spread is a real risk?

There are false negatives in COVID tests that happen right after you contract it.

The spread had just happened so it's possible there were others who have it that no tests could reveal in time for the game to be played safely.

 

[RomanReigns]

I saw this before, but you get that this isn't sensible if spread is a real risk?

There are false negatives in COVID tests that happen right after you contract it.

The spread had just happened so it's possible there were others who have it that no tests could reveal in time for the game to be played safely.

i get that but do you get that if the prem makes a rule and then seemingly goes back on that rule then the affected club has the right to call out the prem and ask for transparency?

 

[roydo]

I saw this before, but you get that this isn't sensible if spread is a real risk?

There are false negatives in COVID tests that happen right after you contract it.

The spread had just happened so it's possible there were others who have it that no tests could reveal in time for the game to be played safely.

That has been my theory all along. You got the first set of results, were all d'fuq, tested everyone again, and until those results were in, there was no way a game could be played.

Trouble is, all Everton did was ask why the game was pulled. Cue light blue dummies out of state sponsored prams.

Will be interested in the indignation if these rumours are true.

 

[Yaya’s Cake]

Wut?

You asked me if "I'm a real fan," so that threw me off and sometimes better to just play along with humour if that's what you meant.

Also, yesterday I wasn't treated so kindly so to be honest (it's okay, I get it), so was treading lightly.

Also in sport and many other things, the question/test about what makes one "a real fan" is a bit of a loaded question at times.

I will say I am a VERY dedicated City fan for several years of my life who loves football and will gladly be around and stay by the club if we are rubbish again for some reason.

I actually can see why a true "plastic" fan, even with all the winning at City, whilst incredible to experience, would rather support a more respected non-"state owned" truly "big" club who don't play in nor have to hear about playing at the "Emptyhad" every day from nuetrals and journalists who call us complcit with human rights violations, cheating, and "sportswashing."

Certain feels we will never get same respect as the bigger clubs in England and Europe no matter what or anytime soon.

Not complaining though, really.

But for a "plastic" would sure be easier to just go and support Liverpool and live in a true world of delusion.

 

[Connor]

Alls Everton asked is why we were left out of the conversation, nothing more

City want to grow up

 

[Jim Hopper]

If that Walker story is true it changes the whole narrative of this. I don’t think the PL will do anything though except maybe enforce City to punish the player with a fine or something petty like that.

 

[Yaya’s Cake]

i get that but do you get that if the prem makes a rule and then seemingly goes back on that rule then the affected club has the right to call out the prem and ask for transparency?

I do and hear that as a real reason for being frustrated.

The PL did a poor job on this no doubt.

If City didn't do right I would be 100% ready to criticise btw.

I mentioned yesterday that I tried to raise this with City fans by asking questions about protocols to understand how this could happen.

I do think that the question however also is why are we assuming City are suspicious in the first place when it seems a bit difficult to see how or why there is evidene to support that.

Transparency is often great, but it also does not automatically mean there is malocious behaviour either.

Could Everton not have spoken to the PL privately? What was the reason for making it public?

The PL is beholden to the clubs as a group. Why not keep it quiet for now and then organise with other clubs concerns instead of throwing them and certainly City under the bus.

There is an aura of suspicion that City manipulated things somehow in their statement I think, no?

I have tried to understand how that could work. Really. And I'm trying to see how. Can someone show me how?

 

[Izzy1878]

Sorry that Walker story has me fuming. Give him a 10 game ban and us them 3 points so players can actually regret what they've done instead of a meaningless sorry tweet.

 

[roydo]

Sorry that Walker story has me fuming. Give him a 10 game ban and us them 3 points so players can actually regret what they've done instead of a meaningless sorry tweet.

I would wait till its not just on SM mate.

 

[JMT]

The statement was clearly directed more towards the PL than Man City, I'm really unsure what the issue City fans are having here, Everton seek clarity behind the conversation and information City have provided, That's it.
You cannot as a governing body be in talk with one team only when two teams are playing, That's where the issue is the PL not conversing with anyone at Everton at all until the match was cancelled, Not sure why it matters if they deal with it publicly or privately.

 

[RomanReigns]

I do and hear that as a real reason for being frustrated.

The PL did a poor job on this no doubt.

If City didn't do right I would be 100% ready to criticise btw.

I mentioned yesterday that I tried to raise this with City fans by asking questions about protocols to understand how this could happen.

I do think that the question however also is why are we assuming City are suspicious in the first place when it seems a bit difficult to see how or why there is evidene to support that.

Transparency is often great, but it also does not automatically mean there is malocious behaviour either.

Could Everton not have spoken to the PL privately? What was the reason for making it public?

The PL is beholden to the clubs as a group. Why not keep it quiet for now and then organise with other clubs concerns instead of throwing them and certainly City under the bus.

There is an aura of suspicion that City manipulated things somehow in their statement I think, no?

I have tried to understand how that could work. Really. And I'm trying to see how. Can someone show me how?

because the game was cancelled 4 hours before kick off and 2000 everton fans could not attend the game less than 48 hours after you had played newcastle

 

[Yaya’s Cake]

The statement was clearly directed more towards the PL than Man City, I'm really unsure what the issue City fans are having here, Everton seek clarity behind the conversation and information City have provided, That's it.
You cannot as a governing body be in talk with one team only when two teams are playing, That's where the issue is the PL not conversing with anyone at Everton at all until the match was cancelled, Not sure why it matters if they deal with it publicly or privately.

Fair statement.

I know it is difficult for some to understand, especially if you're not a City supporter, but there is a perception that City from the fans that the club are seen differently than everyone else.

We're "more likely" to:

- Cheat (although go ask Liverpool about when they hacked our scouting network after they hired some of our scouts)

- Pay off someone to do get away with "a crime" (That was even implied with the CAS ruling on the CL ban)

- Attempt something morally or ethically wrong because of our owner.

These feelings are embedded in City fans' thinking for the near future, so when we see statements by other clubs wishing players and families good health in a "similar" situation as we just had, and then see Everton post what they did and offer no well wishes to City players, etc. it caused a massive uproar of, "Here we go again!".

You can listen to this podcast if you are brave or curious to understand a bit:



Ahshan is smart and a great analyst often, but I do feel is a more biased/dug in at times than he likes to admit, if you ask me, but they do go over some of what you all are raising here and respond in the first half.

2nd half with Howard Hockin at 18 minutes in (he writes weekly opinion essays often on outside perception of City and football culture/journalism) is more about attitudes about City that fans feel I refer to.

Hockin talks about journalists and fans reactions to the news about 21 minutes into the pod.

At 25 minutes Ahshan speaks SPECIFICALLY about how City are treated differently in his view by journalists.