Media bias against City

Status
Not open for further replies.
That wanker Chris Bevan on the BBC. 19.43 on commentary with headline "empty seats at the Etihad" same last week against Sevilla. This twat is clearly a rag who is as blatant as they come yet the bbc continue to publish his shite.
Hopefully he'll get hit by the City team bus on his way home.
 
Channel 5's commentary was a refreshing change from the agenda wasn't it, not! Commentator's opening gambit I quote " Well it's hardly a full house at the Etihad Stadium..." It wasn't a full stadium at any of the league cup games tonight and it wasn't mentioned. Why do Man City warrant special attention in that respect?
 
I'm the first to slang the media off, BBC this morning started the sports section with gymnastics we were the throwaway mention right at the end.

Local BBC news just as I got home frJoe m the match last night made me laugh, the guy said there'd been traffic chaos earlier, we'd won and that the rags were doing there bit to ease traffic congestion by still playing.
 
Just checked the telegraph mobile site to see our match report but scrolled down their long list of football 'top stories' and we are not there.

Neither are Middlesbrough or the rags...
 
I'd give the Mail a miss this morning. Checked in my dad's copy to see if they had anything good to say but wasn't surprised that the first sentence of the match report mentioned "£350,000 signing" Nacho and gave the cost of every player mentioned thereafter. Stat of the day is along the lines that we were the only club this season not to feature an English player in a Carling Cup starting 11. Not "ever", you'll note, just this season. Didn't have time to read the rags report but i'll wager there's no mention of the £58m Martial cost.
 
Just checked the telegraph mobile site to see our match report but scrolled down their long list of football 'top stories' and we are not there.

Neither are Middlesbrough or the rags...

Strangely, City and Everton aren't on the football website page either. They are on the general sport page. Poor old Ogden, having to be meanspirited about 5-1.
 
I'd give the Mail a miss this morning. Checked in my dad's copy to see if they had anything good to say but wasn't surprised that the first sentence of the match report mentioned "£350,000 signing" Nacho and gave the cost of every player mentioned thereafter. Stat of the day is along the lines that we were the only club this season not to feature an English player in a Carling Cup starting 11. Not "ever", you'll note, just this season. Didn't have time to read the rags report but i'll wager there's no mention of the £58m Martial cost.

They do mention the shite's £200m bench and Martial's fee is mentioned at £58m
 
Adebayor, Kompany, De Jong, Ballotelli ? We do get media coverage. Wonder if they get the same with bogbrush and now Lingard .
 
I'm the first to slang the media off, BBC this morning started the sports section with gymnastics we were the throwaway mention right at the end.

Local BBC news just as I got home frJoe m the match last night made me laugh, the guy said there'd been traffic chaos earlier, we'd won and that the rags were doing there bit to ease traffic congestion by still playing.



6.30 general BBC news, mentioned United losing, Liverpool winning, showed the goals, gymnastics, etc, If I hadn't been at the match wouldn't have known we played. Just mentioned on the local news later. I could understand it if we were further down, but top of the table in the league and 5 -1 result, it really is poor media coverage
 
6.30 general BBC news, mentioned United losing, Liverpool winning, showed the goals, gymnastics, etc, If I hadn't been at the match wouldn't have known we played. Just mentioned on the local news later. I could understand it if we were further down, but top of the table in the league and 5 -1 result, it really is poor media coverage

Haaaa, just had a friend who phoned me and he said the very same. It's laughable I also think the BBC is worse than Sky if that's possible.
 
That's not the report from the paper, that's the online report. The write up in the paper was half about trying to find negatives than praising us for battering Palace, not to mention that the last 4 goals got about 2 sentences between them. It was about as negative as a report of a crushing 5-1 victory could be imo.

Is it still be this Jolly hack?
 
Really difficult times for the media arseholes. With the dippers still in it they can't start saying it's not a proper cup. All the klopp fan boys will be willing him to victory. Taste the bitter tears and enjoy the ride.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top