@Keir_Starmer I love football and I'm all for this.
But why are you posting about football and not Henry Nowak???
Why haven't you mentioned Wayne Broadhurst?
Rhiannon Whyte??
But you'll comment on a Champions League final.
You utter, utter disgrace of a man😡😡
Pep Guardiola is one of only two managers in English top-flight history to manage in 10 seasons and finish in the top-four each season.
The other? Don Revie with Leeds United between 1964-65 and 1973-74. #lufc
A foreign billionaire just did the job the entire British press wouldn't.
@elonmusk asked the question every newsroom in this country should have been screaming for months. Who are the officers that handcuffed a dying boy and let him bleed out in the street? Who are they, and why are they still in a job?
Not the BBC. Not Sky. Not GB News. A bloke in Texas with no stake in this country.
They had the story. They let it die. He picked it back up, called it unconscionable, and offered to fund a wrongful death lawsuit.
The answer to his question? Silence. Still.
This is Henry Nowak. First year student. Walking home from a night out with his football team. A wounded teenager telling officers he couldn't breathe, and the response was handcuffs, not an ambulance.
A boy dies like this on a British street and it should never have left the front page. It should have been the reckoning that didn't stop until someone answered for it. Instead it took a man who owes us nothing to drag it back into the light.
Not one officer named. Not one suspended. The watchdog is investigating now, and only now, because the pressure came from a website and not a single news desk in this country.
Ordinary people never needed permission to care. They raised over £40,000 for Henry at a charity football match in his memory. That is the Britain that still has a pulse. The one that doesn't wait to be told who's allowed to matter.
When the richest man on earth has to do your journalism for you, what exactly is the British press for?
So let me ask you the question they wouldn't. Did you see Henry's name on the news? Or did you have to find it here?
Henry Nowak. 18 years old. Walking home. He should have made it.
There was a time when a European final belonged to the supporters who dragged their club there.
Not anymore.
When Aston Villa were handed roughly 11,000 tickets for a Europa League final in a 70,000-plus stadium, the number itself told the story. UEFA can package the event however it likes — “festival of football”, “European showpiece”, “global celebration” — but the modern European final is no longer built around supporters. It is built around clients.
The supporters fund the journey. The corporates inherit the destination.
Villa fans will have spent thousands following the club across Europe. Flights, hotels, time off work, loyalty schemes built over years. Yet when the final arrives, huge sections of the stadium are reserved for sponsors, hospitality guests, executives, delegates and “neutral” allocations that often end up on resale sites within hours.
And supporters are expected to accept it.
UEFA’s defence is familiar. Sponsors fund competitions. Broadcasters need space. Hospitality drives revenue. All true. But football crossed a line when the event surrounding the final became more important than the supporters inside it.
The optics are awful because fans can see it themselves.
A finalist gets 11,000 tickets while corporate packages costing thousands remain available. Genuine supporters scramble through ballots with lottery-like odds, while neutral areas fill with tourists taking photos during the warm-up.
And UEFA wonders why resentment grows.
Supporters are constantly called “the lifeblood of the game” until ticket allocations are discussed. Then they become an inconvenience to work around premium inventory.
Football did not become Europe’s dominant sport because sponsors created atmosphere. The noise, colour and emotion UEFA sells globally every season is generated by match-going supporters — the same people increasingly pushed aside at the biggest games.
The “neutral fan” concept is perhaps the biggest fiction of all. In theory it promotes access. In reality it fuels resale markets, inflated prices and thousands travelling ticketless out of desperation.
UEFA could change it tomorrow. Finalists could receive 70 per cent of the stadium combined. Corporate sections could shrink. Hospitality would still exist.
But that would mean sacrificing revenue.
And modern football has shown repeatedly which side wins that argument.
#AVFC #scfreiburg
Before Anyone Crowns Burnham, Ask Him About Operation Augusta.
The Westminster commentary has settled on its preferred narrative. Andy Burnham is the answer. The King of the North. The popular, relatable, effective politician who can reconnect Labour with the voters it has lost. Union leaders are backing him. MPs are championing him. The NEC has cleared his path. Nobody is asking the question his own record demands.
Operation Augusta was a Greater Manchester Police investigation into a grooming gang of up to 100 members who abused at least 57 children, some as young as 12, all in the care of Manchester social services. The operation was shut down. The official reason was lack of resources, despite Greater Manchester Police having gained over 1,000 additional officers in the preceding years. Of 97 individuals identified as suspects, three were imprisoned. That was recorded as a success.
When the subsequent review was published and MPs wrote to Burnham challenging him on the failures, his response was described in Hansard as supine. He accepted the lack of resources argument without challenge. MPs noted there was no sense of injustice in his reply. The minutes from the meeting where the decision to end Operation Augusta was taken had disappeared. The minutes from Manchester City Council had disappeared at the same time.
The Rochdale review, which Burnham also commissioned, identified 96 men still deemed a potential risk to children who remained at large. That review covered failures between 2004 and 2013, documenting multiple failed investigations and apparent institutional indifference to the plight of hundreds of girls, mainly white, from poor backgrounds. Burnham described it as a lamentable strategic failure. He expressed anger. He called for a duty of candour on public servants. What he did not do was explain what his mayoralty had done to locate and prosecute the 96 men still identified as dangers to children.
To be precise, Burnham commissioned these reviews. But commissioning a review of institutional failure is not the same as confronting it. The reviews documented failures that occurred both before and during his mayoralty. His response to parliamentary challenge on those failures was judged inadequate by MPs who examined it.
Now the same political class that failed to press him on those questions is preparing to hand him the keys to Downing Street. Union leaders who represent workers in the communities where these failures occurred are backing him without condition. MPs who sat through the Hansard debate on Operation Augusta are championing him as the clean candidate. The media is treating his popularity as a sufficient qualification.
The parallel with the Mandelson affair is not superficial. The central argument of this affair has been that institutional accountability has been systematically avoided by a political class more concerned with managing consequences than confronting them. The grooming gang failures in Greater Manchester represent exactly that pattern applied to the most vulnerable children in the country. Girls in care were failed. Suspects were identified and not prosecuted. Evidence disappeared. The response was described as supine.
A political culture that cannot ask these questions of its preferred successor has not learned anything from the crisis that is forcing the current Prime Minister out. Changing the leader without changing the culture of institutional evasion simply reproduces the problem with a more popular face attached.
Before anyone in Westminster, in the unions or in the media decides that Andy Burnham is the answer, they should read the Hansard record of Operation Augusta. They should ask what happened to those 96 men. And they should require a better answer than the one he gave the last time he was asked.
"Operation Augusta was a Greater Manchester Police investigation into a grooming gang of up to 100 members who abused at least 57 children, some as young as 12"
A big thank you to Wealdstone FC for the hospitality yesterday, opening the ground up for parking, and the club house for some beers and some decent burgers and hot dogs, didn’t try to fleece us either all beers £5 a pint hope you made a Bob or two, hosted City day before as well
🚨HELP IF YOU CAN PLEASE🚨 Yesturday one of the lads had hung our team Flag up at wembley on level5 (Area 542) When he went to collect it at Full Time it had already been taken by someone 😡 If anyone can help us find where it went that would be great THANK YOU
#lufc
🚨BOMBSHELL EXPOSÉ: TREVOR PHILLIPS RIPS LID OFF LABOUR'S GROOMING GANGS COVER-UP 💣
Keir Starmer and the Labour Party Sabotaging National Inquiry to Hide Racial Targeting of White Girls and Decades of Failure in Their Own Councils
In a devastating intervention, Sir Trevor Phillips has blown the whistle on what he calls a deliberate political cover-up at the heart of Britain's grooming gangs scandal.
The former Equality and Human Rights Commission chair accuses Labour of sabotaging the national inquiry because of its explosive racial implications — and because so much of the abuse took place under Labour-controlled councils that did nothing to stop it.
“The government clearly never wanted these two things to be put together,” Phillips declared. He points to Labour's efforts to downplay “the intersection of race and sexual predation,” insisting the perpetrators deliberately targeted victims because they were white and outside the groomers' community.
“These children are chosen because of their race. They are chosen because they are white and because they’re outside the community of the groomers.”
Phillips highlights the chilling uniqueness of these crimes: unlike typical child abuse kept hidden, grooming gangs operate in plain sight — with perpetrators knowing they are shielded.
“The other thing is these people know that they are protected. They’re protected politically, they’re protected by social workers, they’re protected by local police. That is the scandal here.”
He pulls no punches on why a full reckoning has been avoided: “Much of this took place in local Labour councils and the authorities who were supposed to be watching over this, stopping it, monitoring it and all the rest of it were controlled by those councils and they did nothing.”
This is not just institutional failure — it's a politically motivated shield thrown over horrific, racially aggravated sexual exploitation that went on for years under Labour's watch.
Right now, they deserve justice — and Britain deserves the full, fearless national inquiry that has been denied for far too long.
Complete and utter nonsense and smokescreens by @MayorofGM I’m sad to say! Even based on what myself and 3 ex senior GMP colleagues alone personally gave him, the evidence of gross criminal neglect was overwhelming!! He ignored it all, failed to act.
https://t.co/Zt1KRsVmqu
Stop hiding behind a keyboard @AndyBurnhamGM. Just name the time and place. Let's have this debate in the open. I'll say to your face exactly what I've said here.
By the time I'm done with you, even your South Manchester metropolitan elite block vote will be forced to acknowledge your role in the cover up of the industrial scale gang rape of working class White girls by Pakistani men.
There is no ambiguity to my position. Your Assurance Review in Oldham was a whitewash. You are part of the cover up. What exactly have I shared that is misleading?
Name the time and place lad. Let's see what the would be Prime Minister is made of.