Media Thread 2020/21

Status
Not open for further replies.
Manchester United = clicks for sports news and social media from this country and abroad.

The Daily United have an average of 5 articles about Manchester United every day.

The Daily Express is worse, and has endless articles about Manchester United every day. United currently have 30 articles on their main sports page. Liverpool currently have more articles. Can’t be arsed counting them. City have 2 articles.
 
Can anyone remember the number of continual Manchester United FA Cup games that were televised? It went on for years. In the end it was a running joke. It only ended when United drew a really s*** team at home, and for whatever reason, the TV companies finally decided not to show it.
 
Rosler's Mullet said:
Must admit, the way footballers are perceived, the way they act, the money involved, has all dimmed my view of them and football in general, don't ask me exactly why (maybe it's my old school upbringing, you know, common decency and basic manners), but those video's (inside City ?) where I saw staff, people with families, just trying to earn a crust, opening doors for players and most just waltzing through without a thank you, kiss my arse or nothing really really pissed me off, and was probably the start of my falling out of love with football, but will I still support the club, will I still defend their honour, of course I will, it's in the blood, or not in some cases.
Click to expand...
Yes it's changed beyond imagination over recent decades but I see us as still a decent club in the grand scheme. Football is tribal and I can't really understand these people saying they no longer support city, we've been through the thin, now it's time for the thick!
 
Put Sky news on last night at eleven o clock, assumed Liverpool game had been called off as not mentioned. Last item on sports news , if they lose it seems the match never happened. I remain fascinated as to what will happen if it's a two horse race between them and the rags for the title ( god forbid ). Who will they favour, hopefully we will solve the problem for them.
 
blue cigar said:
Yes it's changed beyond imagination over recent decades but I see us as still a decent club in the grand scheme. Football is tribal and I can't really understand these people saying they no longer support city, we've been through the thin, now it's time for the thick!
Click to expand...
Oh I agree mate, and to be frank (not Sinatra) to any decent fan, we'd still follow City if it had continued being thin.
 
BringBackSwales said:
Really? I found him very dislikable
Click to expand...
He was very combative, which wasn't really appropriate for where we were then. Probably wouldn't meet the requirements of the current ownership but sometimes I wish he was still here. No way Rob Harris would have got away with that post-FA Cup Final question unscathed if Paul had been our Press Officer.
 
johnevans said:
Similar to your memory, some time ago I posted about an e-mither conversation trail I had with a football writer after his 'quality' Sunday paper had printed an article ahead of the 2008 'Munich 50th Remembrance Derby' at Old Trafford, which, in effect, expected City supporters attending the game to display poor behaviour when the memorial took place.

I took issue with this dreadful piece of 'journalism' (and was subsequently proven correct in my belief that the memorial would be observed perfectly by City supporters), writing in to the newspaper's editorial desk to say so. The correspondence that took place over a few e-mithers with the football writer concerned touched upon the way Manchester United were (and continue to be) treated by the media, emphasising the power that club held (and continues to hold) over the media specifically and football in general.

The football writer agreed with everything I said or offered in defence of City supporters for the upcoming derby game, whilst also agreeing about the power held/wielded by Manchester United. However, he did say that neither he nor any of his media colleagues would ever challenge this power as, and I quote, 'If you think any journalist is ever going to risk his career by taking on United or Sir Alex Ferguson, think again. It would be professional suicide.'

'Q.E.D.' as Spinoza might have put it (..the Dutch philosopher, not the Colombian midfielder..)
Click to expand...
It was Daniel Taylor at the Guardian who wrote that pathetic article
 
johnevans said:
Similar to your memory, some time ago I posted about an e-mither conversation trail I had with a football writer after his 'quality' Sunday paper had printed an article ahead of the 2008 'Munich 50th Remembrance Derby' at Old Trafford, which, in effect, expected City supporters attending the game to display poor behaviour when the memorial took place.

I took issue with this dreadful piece of 'journalism' (and was subsequently proven correct in my belief that the memorial would be observed perfectly by City supporters), writing in to the newspaper's editorial desk to say so. The correspondence that took place over a few e-mithers with the football writer concerned touched upon the way Manchester United were (and continue to be) treated by the media, emphasising the power that club held (and continues to hold) over the media specifically and football in general.

The football writer agreed with everything I said or offered in defence of City supporters for the upcoming derby game, whilst also agreeing about the power held/wielded by Manchester United. However, he did say that neither he nor any of his media colleagues would ever challenge this power as, and I quote, 'If you think any journalist is ever going to risk his career by taking on United or Sir Alex Ferguson, think again. It would be professional suicide.'

'Q.E.D.' as Spinoza might have put it (..the Dutch philosopher, not the Colombian midfielder..)s
Click to expand...
The stories about the 'hairdrier treatment' to players and journos made me laugh. Its only a bollocking after all and easy to let go over your head by fixing your own gaze at the wall 6 inches above the one doing the bollocking.
I have spoken to Ferguson on a number of occasions at Piccadilly and on the train and there is nothing scary about him at all.
I remember that rumour about City fans disrupting that derby started appearing in the October and the media were treating it as a fact soon afterwards but 3 months before the actual match.
Ferguson's power came mainly on the threats to deny access and information to the club himself and players. Perhaps City should use that sanction on a whole organisation not just one person as we did with Roan.
 
Last edited:
M12Blue said:
Yep 40 years, since the bastards made me cry as a boy over city. Not for the last time either
Click to expand...
Pissed off that year they held the replay at Wembley making it virtually a home game for those bastards. The only precedent was 1970 when the replay was at OT rightly sparing the Leeds fans another journey to London and denying Chelsea a home fixture. First time but not the last I remember City being shafted by the FA.
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
He was very combative, which wasn't really appropriate for where we were then. Probably wouldn't meet the requirements of the current ownership but sometimes I wish he was still here. No way Rob Harris would have got away with that post-FA Cup Final question unscathed if Paul had been our Press Officer.
Click to expand...
I accept he was more of a fighter than VK (Kloss, not Kompany) but most gobby scousers are
 
Seen Daniel Taylor mentioned here. That guy seems and looks like such an arrogant weasel who is nowhere near as knowledgeable as he thinks he is.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top