Paul Kelso, the Telegraph's steely Chief Sports Reporter has challenged United on David Gill's misleading comments to the Select Committee. The response he got was:
"they say David Gill referred to net spend excluding the Ronaldo cash (in bank). Glazers: £27.2m a year vs. £16.3m 99-05"
Two things strike me about that statement.
Firstly, since when does "net spend on players" mean "net spend on players except the sale of Cristiano Ronaldo"? Why exclude such a huge item from the calculation? Why not start excluding major sales from the plc era (Beckham's for example)? The answer of course is that excluding the Ronaldo money makes the numbers look better. But spin and truth are not synonymous....
Which brings me on to my second thought. The weird "ex-Cristiano" calculation may be what David Gill meant to say, but it is absolutely not what he actually said, as anyone can see from the video. How ironic to mislead during a rant about how well the club communicates....
LUHG
