Media Thread 2017/18

  • Thread starter Thread starter mat
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Just clicked on the link about Sterling daring to celebrate us winning and can't believe other shit on the page.
It's a report about City but every story on the page is about Rags, Dippers or Chelski and a headline of how Lpool fans are slamming the FA for the player in today's game only getting a yellow for his "Mane like tackle"
There's another headline of how Sergio is considering leaving in the Jan Window!
It's a f**** joke, when are our lawyers gonna nail these bias, bent snakes.
Come on City
 
Just watching the highlights of the game on skygo. Fuck my life gary neville and tyler cudnt be more biased against us.... both of those ****s wanking over the fact the united cud do sumthing in the league this year..... sad bastards.grow the fuck up you pair of sad old bastards.....


FUCK SKY SPORTS FUCK NIAL QUINN FUCK GARY NEVILLE
 
blueinsa said:
Pardew on Sky with the Ritchie high kick in todays game v Swansea where he leaves the floor with both feet and kicks the lad in the arm only to get a yellow card. He says its worse than Mane who shouldnt have got a red card and that its reckless and endangering his opponent because and i quote, "unlike Mane, he is off the ground and not in control"

Has he actually seen the fucking mane challenge where not only is he flying in the air, both feet off the ground, he also kicks Ederson in the fucking head, not his arm ffs!

Fucking laughable the shite that these ****s come out with.
Click to expand...


Ignore him mate he's just a Phillip scofield wanna be
 
All the ex-strikers seem to think it was a red. All referees and ex-refs know it's an unquestionable red. The latter is valid.
 
Get ready for tomorrow's headlines

G. Jesus in nazi salute storm

a1a3fc9cf3bebc6601cf260c4a1d2c75.png
 
I avoid the news like the pague, nothing to do with a city agenda or anything but more that I studied Journalism at university and, as far as I am concerned, this put hte fail nail in the coffin that proves the entire media - from the BBC to the Sun - Are nothing but money grabbing, audience pleasing, hysteria creating cretins and I will have nothing to do with them.

I did however break my tradition after our win against liverpool because I wanted to see just exactly how bad they are reacting to it. With all this in mind I was honestly flabbergasted by the reaction to the Red Card.
"Never a red Card" They scream "He's not that sort of player" They plead "he's got every right to go for it" They 'inform' "Ederson lowered his head!" They point out - The last one being my favourite as this implies that Ederson ( A keeper who cannot use his hands) deserved to be kicked in the face because he went for the ball as any normal player with any decency and proper awareness would do.
*Quick Note:* I have spoilered parts of the post because I realise I went on a rather Loquacious post.

It's interesting because we have ex-pros telling us they would have gone for it, and had they in the same way mane did, they would have been sent off as well.
Ederson has his head down, slightly. But he is taller than Mane (6'2", 5'9" Respectively) and naturally needs to in order to head the ball and yet he still recieved studs straight into the side of his face. The bending over argument is fine if the player in question has bent fully at the waist to obviously play for the foul - Something not uncommon in football - but Ederson had lowered his height slighty to head it as this was the safest way to deal with the balls trajectory, and I'm assuming he would think that Mane will go in for the head as well.

The other thing they all say is It's unintentional Which has about as much relevence to how this incident should be governed as what colour my socks are to what I will be eating for dinner. The oft' quoted rule is that intentional or not endangerouring an opponent with reckless behaviour is serious foul play and will, inevitably, lead to a red card. Rightfully so I'm sure anyone who has played football will agree. And I cannot think of anything more reckless than essentially karate kicking at a ball around your head height with an opposing player also approaching, in fact a case could be made for severe negligence or even intent from Mané, although to be honest I doubt the intent, it was obviously a misjudgement of edersons speed, starting position and desire to win that ball - But this is not a defence. You are responsible for others safety as much as you are. Hence putting rules like this one into play.
But then why was he trying to get his foot to it. If you have played football you can see mane was trying to nudge the ball away around Ederson which implies he's knows Ederson is there. If he doesn't Know Ederson is there, why lead with the foot in such a way that Close control is impossible? Doesn't add up.

There is only one place that this is not a red card and that's the world of the media. Far be it from them to insinuate to their loyal markets and biggest source of revenue/clicks that their team did something wrong. No, they are in fact the victims because that's what people who read the news want to be told, they want to be told that everything is against them and people will read and pay for what they agree with. (Any one who disagrees with this can take it up with the human conciousness rather than me as I have little time to waste replying on it's behalf) and a Mane red card earlish into a game that was 1-0 and ended up 5-0 is the perfect way to perpetuate this illusiion and so the die was cast and once again Liverpool were hard done to. Nothing is made of Liverpools failure to adapt tactics, nothing is made of the way even though it was an attacker they lost Liverpools Back 4 were still split easier than a Kinder-egg and Mignolet didn't do himself any favours.But who would pay to read that? Definitely not the antiquated fans who yern for a time where Red ruled Football.

Last night a Newcastle player called ritchie performed a foul that was oddly familiar and only recieved a yellow card. Conviently just a day after a faux media outrage erupted because a player was rightly sent off for kicking an opposing player in his face. Before I continue I will state I am not trying to say this was planned or anything, I'm not crazy. However, the media caught on and are now questioning why was this one different, what made them different etc. etc. Truly great timing for a profession that thrives on conflict, disinformation and hatred.

It is interesting that in the past two league games city have had controversial red cards given against them. There were a few whispers when Walker was sent of for "glancing menancingly at an opponent who then fell over". Followed by cries of indifference when Sterling was given his marching orders after celebrating with some fans who had gotten access to the pitch. But then what followed this? A Sky news Poll on what the fuck was the ref thinking/Were City the victim of a horrible, tragedy of a ref decision? Columns and columns of ex-professionals with clearly defined aligences and about the same brain-capacity as the chair I'm currently sat on? No, they were forgotten, city told to suck it up - "These things even up eventually" (although I'm sure many agree we are still waiting for our decisions to even out and I'm not sure a very blatent red card decision for what would amount to an assault of the playing field warrents a decision "In our favour" And sterling once again vilified for just doing his job
What's the upshot of this? Well, Moss made a damn good decision and in the heat of the moment, in a huge game early on, remarkable credit for that and what is his reward? he is hounded because people want it to be the wrong decision, it's played on repeat, he's told he's essentially ruining the games with his anal aplication of the rules. How dare he? The question we then need to ask is why should he bother in the future? Why should any of them? Why should they risk being demoted because the occupational equivalant of the dunking stool, hound him and his employers for making the 'wrong' decision? I strongly believe, and would argue that it's basic human psyche, that it's not worth the hassle for them. Why should they apply laws properly when a lackidasical application of basic rules gets far less coverage as long as they are to an outlier of the circle of media darlings and no-one questions their decisions for longer than Gary neville can bother talking about? There's no reason unless you are a pillar of virtue. And, I apologise to any professional refs reading this, I highly doubt any of them exist. Prove me wrong Anthony Taylor.

It honestly astounds me that people believe there's no agenda in the press and come on here and argue to that point. In fact I find it harder to believe people actually feel this way than there is an inherent bias in the press, and this entire red card situation has once again reinfornced my beliefs. And as for the hatred and bile Sterling gets, well it leaves me speechless.

When the sole reason to create news is to make money you know the press is dead.
 
Last edited:
Excellent post but you know as well as I that nothing will change. The media are a fucking disgrace, they know it, and they couldn't give a fuck.
 
Why do the BBC and BT share so many of the same pundits? Are there any actual links between the two companies?

Anyway I made a point in the comments to this video:

The uk sports media bias in full effect, complete damage control from them, take note of who jumped on board with this lie(and question their integrity from this day forth), that this was anything other than an easy decision for Moss. The biggest tell that they are lying are the contradictions in the arguments they give... tell me BT if he's trying to "nick the ball" how can you then say "he didn't see the keeper" those two statements contradict each other or else who's he trying to pinch it from??? Are they lying to sell papers/make money or is someone paying them to lie? Is what I take from this reaction.
 
Last edited:
Metalartin said:
Why do the BBC and BT share so many of the same pundits? Is there any actual links between the two companies?

Anyway I made point in the comments to this video:

The uk sports media bias in full effect, complete damage control from them, take note of who jumped on board with this lie(and question their integrity from this day forth), that this was anything other than an easy decision for Moss. The biggest tell that they are lying are the contradictions in the arguments they give... tell me BT if he's trying to "nick the ball" how can you then say "he didn't see the keeper" those two statements contradict each other or else who's he trying to pinch it from??? Are they lying to sell papers/make money or is someone paying them to lie? Is what I take from this reaction.
Click to expand...

Jenas "thats half the problem with referees they live their lives by the book " Its called the rules of football you ignorant fecker else why bother having a ref on the pitch ffs ?
 
Blueknows said:
Jenas "thats half the problem with referees they live there lives by the book " Its called the rules of football you ignorant fecker else why bother having a ref on the pitch ffs ?
Click to expand...
Blind arrogance isn't it... that was a total "what do refs know" statement.
 
Metalartin said:
Blind arrogance isn't it... that was a total "what do refs know" statement.
Click to expand...
Im still amazed that we're having a conversation whether it was a red or not , and some say there is no bias/agenda against our club , there would be no discussion if it was the other way round or indeed one of our players did the same against the favoured clubs in this country Arse , Rags , Blue and red dippers , spurs
 
Blueknows said:
Im still amazed that we're having a conversation whether it was a red or not , and some say there is no bias/agenda against our club , there would be no discussion if it was the other way round or indeed one of our players did the same against the favoured clubs in this country Arse , Rags , Blue and red dippers , spurs
Click to expand...
I've just watched the Premier League Tonight from saturday with Hoddle, Owen and Ferdinand and they all agreed it was easily a red... two shows on the same network where they unanimously side for or against the same decision. They are just deliberately toying with us, generating debate, milking it for all it's worth so they have something to talk about.
 
There are two important points:

1.) One player kicked another in the side of the face above standing head height.

2.) Anyone who finds a red card in that instance to be even remotely harsh, is either a rag, or hates our club.

That's all there is to it. We had two players sent off in the first three matches, neither of which were valid sendings off, but not nearly as much debate on those. If you think there isn't a media bias against the club, you're a fucking rag. End of.
 
I think this controversy is to sway attention away from the result. The papers don't want to be talking about Liverpool struggling this season and especially don't want to be talking (positively) about our title ambitions.
And by the way, when a scouser says it was never going to be easy when a goal down with 10 men and so long to play - agree and then remind them it happened to us against Everton. Luckily we had Sterling to help us out ;-)
 
Another reason this has been getting so much press isn't just the debate of whether or not one of these pundits thinks it was a red or "if they would have done what Mane does" (which would also see them getting red, dumb twats), it's that it takes the attention away from Liverpool getting absolutely battered. I don't think the scoreline would have been quite as lop-sided, but scoring the first goal was crucial and we looked clinical enough to win that game something like 3-0.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top