Media persecution of Raheem Sterling

Watching it again on BBC repeat and Sterling had them purring. Player of the game up until went off.

Lingard was fkin terrible. missed chances, bad final balls, the yellow he got was fkin ridiculous, his dive was even ridiculouser he looked like a rider falling off his horse.

Alli was even worse, all the way through.
 
cleavers said:
That's not the media, its the public.

Rashford had 5 meaningful touches of the ball, and that is including his penalty in the shoot out.
Click to expand...

It's actually the BBC sportswriter Phil Mcnulty who gave those ratings, the public as usual and once again rated him the worst England player on the pitch with a 4.56.
 
SiMCFC said:
Absolute shit stain of a 'newspaper', wish it and it's racist undertones would just fuck off. Can't believe anyone still buys the heap of shite tbh.
Click to expand...
It doesn't matter whether people buy it, as long as people on here and other sites are clicking on the link, whether it is to moan or not they still get paid.

I am not quite sure why Ric would post the link, unless he gets a slice of it.
 
I don't really understand, other than inherent bias, why people would rate Sterling's performance so poorly. He brought others into the game and did well against a bunch of giant fouling bastards: we lost direction when he went off.

Not to criticise others, but Alli was completely ineffectual as he clearly wasn't fit, adding nothing at all. Why is that not represented?
 
Shearer was quoted during the match as thinking it was Sterling's best match for England.
I thought he started brightly, but England were pretty lousy in attack after halftime, so not many showed up.
 
Sterling will get the country and media off his back when he scores the winner in any game between now and the final (if we get that far). Up to him now to bang one in.
 
Brendan110_0 said:
Sterling will get the country and media off his back when he scores the winner in any game between now and the final (if we get that far). Up to him now to bang one in.
Click to expand...
It would help if the midfield actually created a decent chance for him, which definitely didn't happen last night despite Sterling making his usual excellent runs off the ball..
 
YaYa's Left Peg said:
Well I watched it in Venice in a bar full of Colombians...and every time Raz touched the ball they had their head in their hands with fear. To call Sterling useless tonight shows how little you and some people know about football.

Maybe you should try another sport?
Click to expand...
Wow wow tiger. You’ve totally miss understood my post. I’m sterling’s biggest fan and have got in many many arguments sticking up for him. My point was how thick people are that they just go with what the tv or papers say. The fact that I think he didn’t do anything spectacular last night doesn’t mean I now need to watch netball or tennis. My comment about being useless was totally tongue in cheek. His work off the ball was again fantastic as usual. Anyway, keep sticking up for the boy :))))
 
Shirley said:
It's actually the BBC sportswriter Phil Mcnulty who gave those ratings, the public as usual and once again rated him the worst England player on the pitch with a 4.56.
Click to expand...

It’s not rocket science. There are more armchair rags and dippers across the globe than all the other clubs combined. They’re only ever going to give Sterling a shite mark no matter how well he plays. Stones was ranked 2nd lowest and he never put a foot wrong! As to the BBC, Media City is right on the doorstep of the Swamp and is infested with rags
 
england lost the grip on the game once raheem went off last night, his general hold up play was excellent, without a goal the inherent bias the whole country has on him will shine brighter than todays sun.

radio this morning to a man saying replace raheem with rashford

the lad needs a goal from somewhere
 
He played well, made some good runs off the ball and contributed a lot. When it went to penalties I was quite releaved that he'd been taken off. We all know the stick he'd suffer if he'd missed. We need him to score the winner in one match, preferably, in the 90th minute. That would shut them up.
 
Lingard was obviously better against Panama but last night he missed a vital chance Sterling carved out for him, missed the chance to put Sterling through on and then missed the chance to put Kane through on goal with a simple pass, after sterling had put him through into the box.

Yet he gets a higher rating.

The British public are sheep.
 
Ban-jani said:
Lingard was obviously better against Panama but last night he missed a vital chance Sterling carved out for him, missed the chance to put Sterling through on and then missed the chance to put Kane through on goal with a simple pass, after sterling had put him through into the box.

Yet he gets a higher rating.

The British public are sheep.
Click to expand...

This is so, so true. Sadly.
 
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