Media persecution of Raheem Sterling

The Spectator's joined in the bandwagon today https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2018/...le-is-brilliant-but-did-he-actually-write-it/

Headline:
Raheem Sterling’s article is brilliant but did he actually write it?

It starts with a dig: "England’s Raheem Sterling has underwhelmed so far at the World Cup."
Although it does, at least, also take a dig at CFC's report on the 3-0.

Glad to see F365 Mediawatch have written about it.https://www.football365.com/news/raheem-sterling-and-the-control-freakery-of-telling-his-own-story
 
As always on Bluemoon, many have "jumped the shark" on this topic.

We know Sterling is treated harshly, by much of the media, in particular certain red tops, but i think some are trying to find this bias everywhere, where even sometime, its just a general criticism of a player who didn't play well.

I think Sterling seems a really nice fella, and think he will be a top top player. I have spent a few years defending him against other blues, who have been critical of him (Whether this was influence by aforementioned red tops, i cannot say) and had a couple of bets in favour of Sterling with pals, but when he has a poor game, we just must hold our hands up and admit it, else you sound like a daft conspiracy theorist, rather than someone with an actual valid point (Which there is).

I know football is partisan, but give your heads a little wobble, and realise, while there are some who have it out for young Raheem, that doesn't mean everyone does.
 
Clubber said:
As always on Bluemoon, many have "jumped the shark" on this topic.

We know Sterling is treated harshly, by much of the media, in particular certain red tops, but i think some are trying to find this bias everywhere, where even sometime, its just a general criticism of a player who didn't play well.

I think Sterling seems a really nice fella, and think he will be a top top player. I have spent a few years defending him against other blues, who have been critical of him (Whether this was influence by aforementioned red tops, i cannot say) and had a couple of bets in favour of Sterling with pals, but when he has a poor game, we just must hold our hands up and admit it, else you sound like a daft conspiracy theorist, rather than someone with an actual valid point (Which there is).

I know football is partisan, but give your heads a little wobble, and realise, while there are some who have it out for young Raheem, that doesn't mean everyone does.
Click to expand...

It's not some random online football fanpage, it's the likes of the BBC et al, and the likes of SKY and Talkshite (So I'm told, I refuse to sully my ears with such filth) Who seem to continue with the agenda of pointing out Sterling as performing poor, not doing his job, and needing to be replaced by Rashford if he as much as puts a pass wrong. This filters down to the sheep, who then repeat it ad nauseam without engaging any thought processes of their own, which then feeds back into 606 callers and those calling in and e-mailing Sky Talkshite. It's not our heads that need a wobble it's the media's, and that's exactly what we are attempting to do, by calling out those in the media who persist with this miss-information.
 
Tom_mcfc said:
Rashford did get criticised. Most notably by Shearer who was in favour of him having a chance ahead of Sterling, that wasn't received well in here because apparently Shearer said it in a certain tone. Crazy talk. Sterling would have got more granted.
Click to expand...

It's not "crazy" my old mate. I wish you'd listened to it

When criticising Sterling, Shearer is glowing with enthusiasm (like a little kid saying "told ya, told ya"). When it was Rashford's turn he sounded like someone had died..... BUT, at least Rashford came into the firing line

I suppose what really pissed me off is that both Sterling's and Rashford's biggest weapon is that they both possess great pace and can run at and commit defenders, but pundits such as Shearer don't point this out to the masses and just say "didn't play well"

With what Southgate is asking from that position, Sterling is by far the better option than Rashford for linking play with his back to goal

Personally with the players England have available, I'd be playing a system similar to the one we were successful with for the majority of last season, with Rashford left and Sterling right
 
Clubber said:
As always on Bluemoon, many have "jumped the shark" on this topic.

We know Sterling is treated harshly, by much of the media, in particular certain red tops, but i think some are trying to find this bias everywhere, where even sometime, its just a general criticism of a player who didn't play well.

I think Sterling seems a really nice fella, and think he will be a top top player. I have spent a few years defending him against other blues, who have been critical of him (Whether this was influence by aforementioned red tops, i cannot say) and had a couple of bets in favour of Sterling with pals, but when he has a poor game, we just must hold our hands up and admit it, else you sound like a daft conspiracy theorist, rather than someone with an actual valid point (Which there is).

I know football is partisan, but give your heads a little wobble, and realise, while there are some who have it out for young Raheem, that doesn't mean everyone does.
Click to expand...
I definitely find bias when he performs as well if not better than a fair few of those around him but then is singled out for criticism. I reject the idea that he didn't play well against Panama, he did alright in a team where the forwards see virtually none of the ball in open play. Yet afterwards all the talk was about how he had had his chance and should be dropped. You may think that makes me some kind of mad conspiracy theorist, I think it is just highlighting what a bunch of spiteful ****s the media and the majority of England fans are.
 
Bewar3them00n said:
It's not some random online football fanpage, it's the likes of the BBC et al, and the likes of SKY and Talkshite (So I'm told, I refuse to sully my ears with such filth) Who seem to continue with the agenda of pointing out Sterling as performing poor, not doing his job, and needing to be replaced by Rashford if he as much as puts a pass wrong. This filters down to the sheep, who then repeat it ad nauseam without engaging any thought processes of their own, which then feeds back into 606 callers and those calling in and e-mailing Sky Talkshite. It's not our heads that need a wobble it's the media's, and that's exactly what we are attempting to do, by calling out those in the media who persist with this miss-information.
Click to expand...

I know some parts of the media have persecuted him, that's what i put in my post pal, but my point is that some seem to think that he should now not be criticised on his performances, when it is fair to do so. He was poor against Tunisia, and for us to point fingers saying, well don't have a go as so were others, doesn't make it wrong for people to say he didn't play well.

Worse, it undermines our argument, when he is actually targets for something in his personal life or when he incorrectly accused of under performing, as we are seen as blinkered, for defending him at all costs.
 
Is Sterling actually a striker? Sick of hearing this 2 goals in 40 appearance stat, not sure how long he has been playing "up front", but besides that stat is there actually anything else wrong with his game for England? I mean he has best assists rate, motm performances, best passing rate of any of the attacking midfielders... Seems to me the only stick to beat him with is not scoring enough. He has scored the same as Alli, albeit with more games but also with x2 the amount being subbed off.

Fucks me off that Shearer exclaims this stat a few times, it isnt even newsworthy, instead look at his assists or contribution because I am sure Southgate isnt playing sterling as a Vardi or Kane goal scorer type.
 
Lancet Fluke said:
I definitely find bias when he performs as well if not better than a fair few of those around him but then is singled out for criticism. I reject the idea that he didn't play well against Panama, he did alright in a team where the forwards see virtually none of the ball in open play. Yet afterwards all the talk was about how he had had his chance and should be dropped. You may think that makes me some kind of mad conspiracy theorist, I think it is just highlighting what a bunch of spiteful ****s the media and the majority of England fans are.
Click to expand...

I don't think it does, as i agree he is unfairly on many occasions, and more than many other players, but I think some on here, are looking to find it in places it doesn't exist, rather than awaiting (As we know it will happen again) blatant bias against him. This is what detracts from the argument, in my view, as slight things that can be brushed off or seen as "debatable", allows someone to say, "you're blinkered, and always say that, look what you said about...." . That's is my concern.
 
Sky running a "Who should take the penalties"... Sterling a massive no, even the goal keeper got less No votes. LOL Absolute hatred instigated by the press and swallowed by the sheep.

Best English attacking midfielder and we hate him. Crazy fkin hatred levels.
 
I've never seen Sterling take a penalty. And deciding who should take penalties when you have seen most of the players take one is stupid anyway.

Harry Kane, Jamie Vardy and after that, no-one knows.
 
Clubber said:
I know some parts of the media have persecuted him, that's what i put in my post pal, but my point is that some seem to think that he should now not be criticised on his performances, when it is fair to do so. He was poor against Tunisia, and for us to point fingers saying, well don't have a go as so were others, doesn't make it wrong for people to say he didn't play well.

Worse, it undermines our argument, when he is actually targets for something in his personal life or when he incorrectly accused of under performing, as we are seen as blinkered, for defending him at all costs.
Click to expand...

I am not sure where people get this myth that Sterling is not criticised by City fans you only have to look at his player thread and match threads to know that is not true. What is different with Sterling is that it does not matter how he plays as far as the media and now following the media lead the public. Was he worst player on the pitch against Panama and Tunisia yes according to the BBC player rater website? Was there any of the clamour for any other players to be dropped after those games? I have no problem saying he did not play well but he is playing in a team that does not suit his or Kane's style its just that Kane has had that bit of good fortune in front of goal

But we now have the media stating Kane is world class I have heard that quite a bit on Radio 5 Live and Sterling is under threat. I have said previously that Sterling had a target on his back and the media had him in their sights nothing that has happened in this World Cup has shown this not to be the case
 
I'm With Stupid said:
I've never seen Sterling take a penalty. And deciding who should take penalties when you have seen most of the players take one is stupid anyway.

Harry Kane, Jamie Vardy and after that, no-one knows.
Click to expand...

You must have missed the 6-0 win against Watford last season when he scored
 
The Spectator are now questioning whether Sterling actually wrote the acclaimed piece that appeared on the Players Tribune website recently.

To be honest I assumed that, as with most things like this, it would have been ghost written by a journalist based on an interview with the player. I doubt the players themselves sit down and type out the piece. And it surely doesn't even really matter that much in the scheme of things. But why pick Sterling's article out of all the numerous sports stars to appear on that website?

 
Ric said:
The Spectator are now questioning whether Sterling actually wrote the acclaimed piece that appeared on the Players Tribune website recently.

To be honest I assumed that, as with most things like this, it would have been ghost written by a journalist based on an interview with the player. I doubt the players themselves sit down and type out the piece. And it surely doesn't even really matter that much in the scheme of things. But why pick Sterling's article out of all the numerous sports stars to appear on that website?

Click to expand...


Why indeed?
 
Ric said:
The Spectator are now questioning whether Sterling actually wrote the acclaimed piece that appeared on the Players Tribune website recently.

To be honest I assumed that, as with most things like this, it would have been ghost written by a journalist based on an interview with the player. I doubt the players themselves sit down and type out the piece. And it surely doesn't even really matter that much in the scheme of things. But why pick Sterling's article out of all the numerous sports stars to appear on that website?

Click to expand...

Most footballers & manager columns aren't written just named as legit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top