Whoscored are calling you - the unbiased company that make a living from accurately compiling match data.Specsavers are calling you
So you're saying that before the match was finished, he would have planned an article slating Sterling for not scoring ready to go on full time in case nothing else happened in the game?
He included lines about how Sterling was "hooked on 88 minutes" and bailed out by his heroic teammates, so obviously the piece was submitted after the penalty shootout.
To be fair Dom, Lawton is a quite brilliant sports news reporter, as his pieces on Team Sky have exposed.
There's a difference between a scapegoat and being accused of racism, and IMO there is no racist undertone to the 'runner' as it is called, in terms of a first edition.
Sterling has had his issues and hasn't helped himself at times (I actually squarely blame Liverpool fans for most of that), but I see it here as nothing more than lazy journalism- most reporters are already prepared for matches with a couple of potential lines, certainly makes the job easier when on deadline and a game can change in a dying second (even some of it written in advance)
It was reported the day before that it would by 999 days without a Sterling goal for England, so it's an easy one to have in the can on the laptop, should it be easy to top and tail it.
A lot of confirmation bias is now going on with regards Raheem, it has seeped into the public conscious and unites tribal footballing loyalties and becomes topical enough for lazy media narratives.
I used to see the bad in everything Richard Edgehill did in a City shirt - I never looked at his race - it was me convincing myself that he was shit at everything.
On a slightly different tangent, the public get what they deserve. They have created the driving down of journalistic standards across the world, based on nothing more than laziness created through a dependence on the internet.
The media are giving them what they want because of the commercial reality to exist.
Whoscored are calling you - the unbiased company that make a living from accurately compiling match data.
I'm sorry did Vardy miss an open net? No, he then didn't miss a header from a few yards out which he should have buried against bin men.
Why do you only go in on me when I am talking about his performances in here? I came on and MANY were discussing the match. I then had my input. It is odd you pick and choose my posts to pull up, my first post was saying what a disgrace that article was. Ignore that though if you want.
Hardly, if it is saying he attempted zero dribbles I recall at least three when he ran into a defender. Not to mention when he ran it out for a goal kick. With these stats that are used to suit arguments it is worth researching how they work them out. Like Rolee obsessing over chances missed but not knowing if that counts when he is clean through and allows a defender tackle him etc. I prefer to watch a game and judge, I watched him show glimpses of class along with losing the ball quite often too.
To be fair Dom, Lawton is a quite brilliant sports news reporter, as his pieces on Team Sky have exposed.
There's a difference between a scapegoat and being accused of racism, and IMO there is no racist undertone to the 'runner' as it is called, in terms of a first edition.
Sterling has had his issues and hasn't helped himself at times (I actually squarely blame Liverpool fans for most of that), but I see it here as nothing more than lazy journalism- most reporters are already prepared for matches with a couple of potential lines, certainly makes the job easier when on deadline and a game can change in a dying second (even some of it written in advance)
It was reported the day before that it would by 999 days without a Sterling goal for England, so it's an easy one to have in the can on the laptop, should it be easy to top and tail it.
A lot of confirmation bias is now going on with regards Raheem, it has seeped into the public conscious and unites tribal footballing loyalties and becomes topical enough for lazy media narratives.
I used to see the bad in everything Richard Edgehill did in a City shirt - I never looked at his race - it was me convincing myself that he was shit at everything.
On a slightly different tangent, the public get what they deserve. They have created the driving down of journalistic standards across the world, based on nothing more than laziness created through a dependence on the internet.
The media are giving them what they want because of the commercial reality to exist.
So you think he was more than ok? Sterling wasn't in the heart of everything how fucking deluded can you be? We also created very little to be fair but we controlled the game. If you are happy to ignore the countless times he lost the ball, countless times he couldn't control it that's fine. I can happily say there was glimpses of good play from him but due to having eyes and not a biased head I can see when he balls up to. He wasn't the worst out there by any stretch but to have the balls to try and claim he is one of the best performers is beyond me. It seems Sterling is the only player in the world who is judged on here without the ball, his running and movement is great which is where there are no arguments but then you all completely disregard what he does when he actually has the ball. You may as well just have an athlete out there if you aren't arsed how they play with a ball. Be balanced, be fair. He is a starter, doesn't deserve to be dropped and I am hoping he can make a significant difference in the next game(s) and I would love that to ram it down the medias throats.
Walker fucked up on that chance, nothing to do with not expecting it he had the ball and took far too much time to pass it.
Attempted 0 dribbles, dispossessed twice, level with Walker, better than Trippier, Young, Lingard and Alli to name a few.
You see what you want to see.
So you think he was more than ok? Sterling wasn't in the heart of everything how fucking deluded can you be? We also created very little to be fair but we controlled the game. If you are happy to ignore the countless times he lost the ball, countless times he couldn't control it that's fine. I can happily say there was glimpses of good play from him but due to having eyes and not a biased head I can see when he balls up to. He wasn't the worst out there by any stretch but to have the balls to try and claim he is one of the best performers is beyond me. It seems Sterling is the only player in the world who is judged on here without the ball, his running and movement is great which is where there are no arguments but then you all completely disregard what he does when he actually has the ball. You may as well just have an athlete out there if you aren't arsed how they play with a ball. Be balanced, be fair. He is a starter, doesn't deserve to be dropped and I am hoping he can make a significant difference in the next game(s) and I would love that to ram it down the medias throats.
Walker fucked up on that chance, nothing to do with not expecting it he had the ball and took far too much time to pass it.
No Tom, you prefer to judge and then watch the game applying confirmation bias as you go, that's fairly clear. You've accused someone on here of having a strong opinion for asking about Vardy's miss, but you live on this thread solely to slag off Sterling.Hardly, if it is saying he attempted zero dribbles I recall at least three when he ran into a defender. Not to mention when he ran it out for a goal kick. With these stats that are used to suit arguments it is worth researching how they work them out. Like Rolee obsessing over chances missed but not knowing if that counts when he is clean through and allows a defender to tackle him etc. I prefer to watch a game and judge, I watched him show glimpses of class along with losing the ball quite often too.
No Tom, you prefer to judge and then watch the game applying confirmation bias as you go, that's fairly clear. You've accused someone on here of having a strong opinion for asking about Vardy's miss, but you live on this thread solely to slag off Sterling.
You accused him of giving the ball away 'countless times'.
The stats, those unbiased figures, say that only Walker and Stones gave it away less often. Your response to that was a personal attack "Specsavers are calling you". That is you getting emotionally upset because the actual fact based measures of what happened put the lie to a POV you've long ago arrived at and entrenched yourself in.
Now you're trying to disagree with how the stats are arrived at, when they're clear and objective, because they disagree with your entrenched POV. Another emotional/irrational reaction.
Maybe you just went to watch the match last night already convinced Sterling was going to play poorly and were looking for anything that would confirm that?
Wow that's a big chip your carrying on your shoulder..I beg to differ with you on the brilliant.
But the DM has always been renown for its racist undertones always has always will. Barely a day goes by that this vile little rag isn't stirring up some shit on migrants that they can dig up. That's what it is all about keeping those right white middle class happy.
Raheem is a an easy target and the son of an immigrant, black, a Labour supporter and someone who is earning a lot of money boom! So he is always going to get it at every opportunity from the DM.
He was our only link between defence and attack last night, the minute he went off it went to shit, no outlet, no link up. It's not his fault Lingard fucked up when he was put in and that Lingard couldn't thread a simple cross back to him when he was free. Lingard greatest attribute is running without the ball as he makes intelligent runs and frees players up, something that only these 2 seemed to do at all last night.
As for his balls up, not a lot he can do when he's no movement around him when he has it off at least 5 players who are static and watching.
Also players spend 90% of a game or more without the ball, it's vital that their movement is good without it!!
You, me and at least a dozen others on here are wasting our breath, anyone with any level of football knowledge can see that he's one of our main threats, that he's playing in a position he's not ideally suited to and that our inferior to non-existent midfield is making things harder for him, and Kane in that regard, we haven't created a single opportunity for Kane apart from a couple of 1 yard tap ins( Which were rebounds) and 3 penalties.
So you're saying that before the match was finished, he would have planned an article slating Sterling for not scoring ready to go on full time in case nothing else happened in the game?
He included lines about how Sterling was "hooked on 88 minutes" and bailed out by his heroic teammates, so obviously the piece was submitted after the penalty shootout.
I'm just struggling to see how that isn't evidence of an agenda against Sterling. If England had lost yesterday and not forced a hasty re-write, the lead article on England's exit, from the Daily Mail's Chief Sports Writer would have been a premeditated attack on Sterling, decided on before the event.
That's what I am saying. He will have had a couple of separate lines open and then will have put a nose intro on it - previously before online - that report would have been seen by one man and his dog in Plymouth and never seen again.
Most of the body is already written throughout the course of the match 'the runner' it even used to get sent down in stages at half-time, then 3/4.
All that is left is the top and tail - dependent on what he already had written in the body. Sterling getting hooked on 88 minutes is perfect intro fodder at the final whistle and after a bit of cut and paste - Bob's your uncle - he's able to send it right on the final result (will have been midnight then in Russia) allowing the writer to concentrate on the more 'considered rewrite.
As I say, par for the course in terms of how match reporting is done (a lot more complicated that it would appear - I was just not joining the pack mentality of accusations of racism.
It’s amazing how the bias and drivel quoted in the media has seeped into general opinion though. I had numerous mates on various text groups all slaughtering Sterling saying how he was the worst player on the pitch last night. I defended his corner but it was fucking pointless as their minds are made up, the cûnts have won. Lol.No Tom, you prefer to judge and then watch the game applying confirmation bias as you go, that's fairly clear. You've accused someone on here of having a strong opinion for asking about Vardy's miss, but you live on this thread solely to slag off Sterling.
You accused him of giving the ball away 'countless times'.
The stats, those unbiased figures, say that only Walker and Stones gave it away less often. Your response to that was a personal attack "Specsavers are calling you". That is you getting emotionally upset because the actual fact based measures of what happened put the lie to a POV you've long ago arrived at and entrenched yourself in.
Now you're trying to disagree with how the stats are arrived at, when they're clear and objective, because they disagree with your entrenched POV. Another emotional/irrational reaction.
Maybe you just went to watch the match last night already convinced Sterling was going to play poorly and were looking for anything that would confirm that?
Completely disagree mate and with respect, thats you just circling the wagons so to speak with a fellow journo.
As for blaming the public and the internet for shit journalistic standards?
Give over.
I wouldn't (and didn't) accuse him of racism, in fact what I see is that the stuff which is often perceived to have a racial undertone comes from the non-footballing side of the tabloids, the stories about him spending too much, being cheap, being lazy, not being sad when he should be etc.
Then what people like Lawton do is feed off that fury whipped up by the main newspaper by doing things like the pre-planned article attacking him to go out and lead the paper's coverage on full time.
He was our only link between defence and attack last night, the minute he went off it went to shit, no outlet, no link up.
You, me and at least a dozen others on here are wasting our breath, anyone with any level of football knowledge can see that he's one of our main threats, that he's playing in a position he's not ideally suited to and that our inferior to non-existent midfield is making things harder for him, and Kane in that regard, we haven't created a single opportunity for Kane apart from a couple of 1 yard tap ins( Which were rebounds) and 3 penalties.
No Tom, you prefer to judge and then watch the game applying confirmation bias as you go, that's fairly clear. You've accused someone on here of having a strong opinion for asking about Vardy's miss, but you live on this thread solely to slag off Sterling.
You accused him of giving the ball away 'countless times'.
The stats, those unbiased figures, say that only Walker and Stones gave it away less often. Your response to that was a personal attack "Specsavers are calling you". That is you getting emotionally upset because the actual fact based measures of what happened put the lie to a POV you've long ago arrived at and entrenched yourself in.
Now you're trying to disagree with how the stats are arrived at, when they're clear and objective, because they disagree with your entrenched POV. Another emotional/irrational reaction.
Maybe you just went to watch the match last night already convinced Sterling was going to play poorly and were looking for anything that would confirm that?
He was our only link between defence and attack last night, the minute he went off it went to shit, no outlet, no link up. It's not his fault Lingard fucked up when he was put in and that Lingard couldn't thread a simple cross back to him when he was free. Lingard greatest attribute is running without the ball as he makes intelligent runs and frees players up, something that only these 2 seemed to do at all last night.
As for his balls up, not a lot he can do when he's no movement around him when he has it off at least 5 players who are static and watching.
Also players spend 90% of a game or more without the ball, it's vital that their movement is good without it!!
You, me and at least a dozen others on here are wasting our breath, anyone with any level of football knowledge can see that he's one of our main threats, that he's playing in a position he's not ideally suited to and that our inferior to non-existent midfield is making things harder for him, and Kane in that regard, we haven't created a single opportunity for Kane apart from a couple of 1 yard tap ins( Which were rebounds) and 3 penalties.