Media discussion - 2024/25

Status
Not open for further replies.
I see the little scamps at media city have been busy during the fallow international period, they have concocted a set of metrics to decide which team is the biggest and bestest in Britain. Well you won’t be shocked at the results.
They have 659 million followers who voted no doubt or is it now one billion!
 
I see the little scamps at media city have been busy during the fallow international period, they have concocted a set of metrics to decide which team is the biggest and bestest in Britain. Well you won’t be shocked at the results.
Another excuse for the BBC to publish hundreds of defamatory comments about City from racist fans of other clubs. No one is making any attempt to check those comments at present.
 
I see the little scamps at media city have been busy during the fallow international period, they have concocted a set of metrics to decide which team is the biggest and bestest in Britain. Well you won’t be shocked at the results.

Another excuse for the BBC to publish hundreds of defamatory comments about City from racist fans of other clubs. No one is making any attempt to check those comments at present.
They haven't concocted any set of metrics at all, they have canvased peoples opinions and they are very open about how the table was formulated and are very clear on the fact it is merely opinion.
The article then goes on to share some metrics on how a club could be considered "big" many of which we get a positive mention for and in some cases are indeed top of.

People will always judge seize of club on history beyond the last 10 years so I was pleased to see us 4th, that's some achievement given that nobody would have considered us at all 15 years ago. I was also pleasantly surprised to see us as 2nd on the social media table.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/c337xrmr5keo

Screenshot 2025-03-26 111758.png
 
Another excuse for the BBC to publish hundreds of defamatory comments about City from racist fans of other clubs. No one is making any attempt to check those comments at present.
They are a disgrace of an organisation,or at least their sports online department is,full of giddy rags living on past glories which apart from,renders them irrelevant nowadays..
 
They haven't concocted any set of metrics at all, they have canvased peoples opinions and they are very open about how the table was formulated and are very clear on the fact it is merely opinion.
The article then goes on to share some metrics on how a club could be considered "big" many of which we get a positive mention for and in some cases are indeed top of.

People will always judge seize of club on history beyond the last 10 years so I was pleased to see us 4th, that's some achievement given that nobody would have considered us at all 15 years ago. I was also pleasantly surprised to see us as 2nd on the social media table.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/c337xrmr5keo

View attachment 151017
On the point about us not being considered 15 years ago...I vividly remember being in a pub in Highbury—where I was living at the time—watching the FA Cup quarter-final against Reading in 2011. I recall the barman asking, “Which side of Manchester are you from?” and him replying with a condescending “aww, poor you,” or something similar. It’s mad how perceptions have changed in such a relatively short time.
 
They are a disgrace of an organisation,or at least their sports online department is,full of giddy rags living on past glories which apart from,renders them irrelevant nowadays..
There's not much wrong with the story but the online comments are not being moderated. There are numerous defamatory comments about City stating as fact that we have committed fraud. The BBC are responsible for whatever they publish (including the comments). The staff there seem to have no knowledge of media law. It is amateurish like so much of the website content. They are not being held accountable for their actions. One issue is that Ofcom has been overwhelmed by complaints about the BBC. They are not even replying to some of the complaints because the backlog is so huge. The problems are much wider than just stories about City. The organisation has become too politicised.
 
They haven't concocted any set of metrics at all, they have canvased peoples opinions and they are very open about how the table was formulated and are very clear on the fact it is merely opinion.
The article then goes on to share some metrics on how a club could be considered "big" many of which we get a positive mention for and in some cases are indeed top of.

People will always judge seize of club on history beyond the last 10 years so I was pleased to see us 4th, that's some achievement given that nobody would have considered us at all 15 years ago. I was also pleasantly surprised to see us as 2nd on the social media table.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/c337xrmr5keo

View attachment 151017
Theres nothing pleasant about that article , just another fawning piece about keeping the red cartel relevant "please look at me I used to be famous you know"
 
IIRC it was Martin Edwards who pushed for this, reasoning that as United had the biggest ground, they stood to lose the most.

I remember the stink at the time about this. The red shite of dipperland and Trafford argued that, when team like Notts County etc played at their shit holes, crowds would be about 40 -50,000 (yea, right). With the reverse fixtures, there would be something between 18 and 25,000. It just wasn't fair, they argued, that the "smaller clubs" should benefit.

This was when the toilet peeper came up with: "These smaller clubs are strangling us. The sooner they die, the better."
 
I remember the stink at the time about this. The red shite of dipperland and Trafford argued that, when team like Notts County etc played at their shit holes, crowds would be about 40 -50,000 (yea, right). With the reverse fixtures, there would be something between 18 and 25,000. It just wasn't fair, they argued, that the "smaller clubs" should benefit.

This was when the toilet peeper came up with: "These smaller clubs are strangling us. The sooner they die, the better."
Mr Manchester United indeed
IMG_8535.jpeg
 
How would the mail survive without Neville and carragher. They’re obsessed. Every other statement they make is a separate article. Talk about click bait
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top