Media bias against City

[chesterbells]

And then there's this pile of shit written by Adrian Durham:

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2956610/Manchester-City-shovelling-money-Stevan-Jovetic-s-bank-account-cost-Manuel-Pellegrini-job.html?ITO=1490&ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/footba ... paign=1490</a>

Manchester City are shovelling money into Stevan Jovetic's bank account for nothing... and it could cost Manuel Pellegrini his job

The new TV deal is huge, and there are a lot of people – pundits and ex-professionals - earning a fortune off the back of football who somehow perch themselves on the moral high ground and declare the modern game and the Barclays Premier League all about greed.
They pay lip service to the need to reduce ticket prices and invest in grass roots football, but never do anything concrete about it. It wins them friends and paints a somewhat unbelievable picture that they are in touch with real fans.
It doesn't address the reality though: football is a business. It is supply and demand and whether any of us like it or not, if there are people who will pay thousands of pounds for a season ticket, then clubs will charge that much.

The real absurdity of the fortunes sloshing around at the top end of the game has been highlighted by Manchester City, which is a shame because there are so many good things their wealthy owners have brought to the club, the local area and English football.
But having signed international footballer Stevan Jovetic for £22million just 18 months ago, and agreeing to pay him a huge wage – believed to be more than £6m a year – they now find themselves in a situation where they cannot use that player for the Champions League.
If it was because of injury, you could have some sympathy.
But it isn't. It is because City decided instead to buy Wilfried Bony, for £25m, and pay him £100,000 a week, plus a bonus of £20,000 for every game he plays.
From a financial point of view it's a breathtaking decision. Manchester City are shovelling tons of money into the bank account of a player who they cannot use in the Champions League. Lots of money for nothing – literally.
In every sense it is a total waste of money.

I feel some sympathy for the player. He has stayed with the club instead of leaving in the January window, yet not only is he ineligible for Europe, he has to work with a manager who clearly doesn't believe in him.
And this is why it is a decision that could cost Manuel Pellegrini his job. Surely only success on the pitch will save the Chilean, he now needs to overturn Chelsea's lead at the top of the table, or go all the way in the Champions League.
The decision to leave Jovetic out of the squad for Europe is one that has angered and upset the player, and it may well come back to haunt Pellegrini.
Of course the rules need to be followed and Pellegrini had a tough decision to make. Jovetic hasn't been a stand-out performer for City, but he did play in five of the six group games. He made a significant contribution in the final game in Rome, and the vital victory over Bayern Munich, when he came on with City trailing 2-1.
But with Bony arriving, someone had to be left out, and Jovetic was the fall guy. And he's gone public with his feelings. 'The manager has killed me with this decision,' the Montenegro international said. Jovetic even went to discuss the matter with his manager, but according to the player: 'He wouldn't listen.'

This kind of treatment of a player never goes down well with his mates in the dressing room.
Whether Jovetic is a vital player or not is irrelevant, his fellow professionals will know he has been hurt by what has happened, and the knowledge that the manager refused to even listen to Jovetic when he went to discuss it will compound the problem.
It's another issue for Vincent Kompany, a brilliant captain and leader, to deal with. He's already busy trying to stay fit and deal with the shortcomings of his centre half partners at the club.
It would be a surprise if Kompany had anything but total sympathy for Jovetic. The Belgian will know he and any other professional wouldn't want to be treated in this way. Those City players who are on Jovetic's side – and I suspect privately it is all of them – won't be rushing to the chairman's office in support of the manager if City win nothing come the end of the season.
Why should they? This is a boss who has the ability to treat one of their mates with contempt in the middle of a season. The City dressing room turned on Roberto Mancini for far less than this.
From a football point of view, Bony for Jovetic is understandable. But morally and financially it's a dreadful decision. And it's one that could cost Pellegrini his job.

What a fucking thundercvnt.

When Brennan took him to task about this article earlier, this was the bit he picked on to basically justify the whole piece.
Where did he pick that info up from anyway? - Jovetic or his agent perhaps?

 

[Didsbury Dave]

Sorry but I completely disagree. The way the two stories are framed isn't evidence of bias so much as it's more evidence of two different approaches. The first report is purely City-centric and will only appeal to blues. Why would a fan of any other club bother reading how great Pellegrini is? Would you read an article saying Fat Sam is a genius? No. The second approach allows them to frame City's achievement in a way that will also draw in readers with a penchant for United, Liverpool and the others, as well as City readers. If it was your job to attract as many eyeballs as possible to a story would you try and draw in supporters of all the top clubs or write a puff piece for City? If you're honest, and assuming you aren't writing for a City blog, you'd probably take the former.

And if the situations were reversed ... if United reached a milestone that we had long since surpassed ... wouldn't we be pissing and moaning that the first article was evidence of a bias against our club? How we had nearly double that points tally and no mention of the great achievement, etc., etc?

As to the Ivory Coast article ... why should it mention Yaya? He did bugger-all in the final.

Yes, there are plenty of media figures who aren't besotted with us. Neville, Carragher, Owen, a chunk of press hacks ... but then you have the likes of Daniel Taylor, who obviously has a huge soft spot for us, or City fan David Conn or Martin Samuel railing against the FFP rules. To my mind, you could take coverage of any Premier League club and easily construct evidence of a bias against their club ... and most of their fans already do!!!

Newspapers are there to sell newspapers. Puff pieces don't typically do that ... an article saying how great Silva is will likely only appeal to City fans. But Mancini and Mario scrapping ... or Tevez and Mancini falling out on the touchline ... or Jovetic getting the hump ... or City getting fined by UEFA ... that will attract readers of all stripes.

The nightly news is full of doom, destruction and death ... and then at the end , they throw in the skateboarding dog or the school bus driver with no arms or the two old farts celebrating 95 years of marriage. That's because if the news was all happy clappy, no fucker would tune in.

Fanzines are where you will get blinkered, adoring coverage ... newspapers will seize on anything that will help them sell papers/attract the maximum number of readers. Twas ever thus ...

Haha. A voice of reason in this thread.

Good luck mate. They'll eat you alive.

 

[Bill]

i do wish the rags in this thread would fuck off.

not even subtle.

 

[bluwes]

i do wish the rags in this thread would fuck off.

not even subtle.

Seems Dismal thinks they're the voice of reason though.

 

[stevemcgarry]

A rag? I'm not sure what your criteria might be for ragdom, then. Perhaps you can clarify?

On the one hand, it is 55 years since I went to my first game ... and I did attend every home game, first team one week, reserves the next, all through my early teens ... and I was such big mates with Rob Gretton that they feature a picture of the two of us as the promo for his book ...and admittedly, I did lie about my age at 14 to get a job selling On The Ball tickets in the Kippax ... and I hitchhiked up and down the country all through the sixties, leaving on Friday nights and hitching south, time after time, to watch City ... although I invested in luxury when took a coach from Fitton's newsagents to go to Wembley in 1970 ... and I suppose having my own pen portraits of the players illustration series every week in the City program in the 1980s, the one where fans got the chance to win the original art every week counts just a little ... I suppose the fact that I'm even listed on Wikipedia as a "famous" City supporter, right there next to Kevin Cummins might carry just a little weight. And all of this is easily verifiable with a simple Google search ...

On the other hand, I don't buy into this "9-11 truth is out there, the towers was an inside job" line about how the media is colluding against City ... so, yes, on balance, obviously I'm a rag and in on the conspiracy.

Rag? You gormless sod :)

 

[JoeMercer'sWay]

Sorry but I completely disagree. The way the two stories are framed isn't evidence of bias so much as it's more evidence of two different approaches. The first report is purely City-centric and will only appeal to blues. Why would a fan of any other club bother reading how great Pellegrini is? Would you read an article saying Fat Sam is a genius? No. The second approach allows them to frame City's achievement in a way that will also draw in readers with a penchant for United, Liverpool and the others, as well as City readers. If it was your job to attract as many eyeballs as possible to a story would you try and draw in supporters of all the top clubs or write a puff piece for City? If you're honest, and assuming you aren't writing for a City blog, you'd probably take the former.

And if the situations were reversed ... if United reached a milestone that we had long since surpassed ... wouldn't we be pissing and moaning that the first article was evidence of a bias against our club? How we had nearly double that points tally and no mention of the great achievement, etc., etc?

As to the Ivory Coast article ... why should it mention Yaya? He did bugger-all in the final.

Yes, there are plenty of media figures who aren't besotted with us. Neville, Carragher, Owen, a chunk of press hacks ... but then you have the likes of Daniel Taylor, who obviously has a huge soft spot for us, or City fan David Conn or Martin Samuel railing against the FFP rules. To my mind, you could take coverage of any Premier League club and easily construct evidence of a bias against their club ... and most of their fans already do!!!

Newspapers are there to sell newspapers. Puff pieces don't typically do that ... an article saying how great Silva is will likely only appeal to City fans. But Mancini and Mario scrapping ... or Tevez and Mancini falling out on the touchline ... or Jovetic getting the hump ... or City getting fined by UEFA ... that will attract readers of all stripes.

The nightly news is full of doom, destruction and death ... and then at the end , they throw in the skateboarding dog or the school bus driver with no arms or the two old farts celebrating 95 years of marriage. That's because if the news was all happy clappy, no fucker would tune in.

Fanzines are where you will get blinkered, adoring coverage ... newspapers will seize on anything that will help them sell papers/attract the maximum number of readers. Twas ever thus ...

Haha. A voice of reason in this thread.

Good luck mate. They'll eat you alive.

just a point, the first article is the Premier League OS, the second the Express. Thus, it's not really framing one piece in 2 different approaches, just one reporting it factually, the other putting a negative spin on it for its readership, demeaning us in the process.

 

[Ric]

It's a sorry state of affairs when one of the more rational posts on this thread sees the poster dismissed as a "rag", when he is quite clearly a Blue.

 

[Len Rum]

Sorry but I completely disagree. The way the two stories are framed isn't evidence of bias so much as it's more evidence of two different approaches. The first report is purely City-centric and will only appeal to blues. Why would a fan of any other club bother reading how great Pellegrini is? Would you read an article saying Fat Sam is a genius? No. The second approach allows them to frame City's achievement in a way that will also draw in readers with a penchant for United, Liverpool and the others, as well as City readers. If it was your job to attract as many eyeballs as possible to a story would you try and draw in supporters of all the top clubs or write a puff piece for City? If you're honest, and assuming you aren't writing for a City blog, you'd probably take the former.

And if the situations were reversed ... if United reached a milestone that we had long since surpassed ... wouldn't we be pissing and moaning that the first article was evidence of a bias against our club? How we had nearly double that points tally and no mention of the great achievement, etc., etc?

As to the Ivory Coast article ... why should it mention Yaya? He did bugger-all in the final.

Yes, there are plenty of media figures who aren't besotted with us. Neville, Carragher, Owen, a chunk of press hacks ... but then you have the likes of Daniel Taylor, who obviously has a huge soft spot for us, or City fan David Conn or Martin Samuel railing against the FFP rules. To my mind, you could take coverage of any Premier League club and easily construct evidence of a bias against their club ... and most of their fans already do!!!

Newspapers are there to sell newspapers. Puff pieces don't typically do that ... an article saying how great Silva is will likely only appeal to City fans. But Mancini and Mario scrapping ... or Tevez and Mancini falling out on the touchline ... or Jovetic getting the hump ... or City getting fined by UEFA ... that will attract readers of all stripes.

The nightly news is full of doom, destruction and death ... and then at the end , they throw in the skateboarding dog or the school bus driver with no arms or the two old farts celebrating 95 years of marriage. That's because if the news was all happy clappy, no fucker would tune in.

Fanzines are where you will get blinkered, adoring coverage ... newspapers will seize on anything that will help them sell papers/attract the maximum number of readers. Twas ever thus ...

But that is what the media do to maximize their audience i.e. write purely centric United/Liverpool/Chelsea/Arsenal reports and the second type of report about City.
Welcome new Agendista!

 

[EastStandLower]

A rag? I'm not sure what your criteria might be for ragdom, then. Perhaps you can clarify?

On the one hand, it is 55 years since I went to my first game ... and I did attend every home game, first team one week, reserves the next, all through my early teens ... and I was such big mates with Rob Gretton that they feature a picture of the two of us as the promo for his book ...and admittedly, I did lie about my age at 14 to get a job selling On The Ball tickets in the Kippax ... and I hitchhiked up and down the country all through the sixties, leaving on Friday nights and hitching south, time after time, to watch City ... although I invested in luxury when took a coach from Fitton's newsagents to go to Wembley in 1970 ... and I suppose having my own pen portraits of the players illustration series every week in the City program in the 1980s, the one where fans got the chance to win the original art every week counts just a little ... I suppose the fact that I'm even listed on Wikipedia as a "famous" City supporter, right there next to Kevin Cummins might carry just a little weight. And all of this is easily verifiable with a simple Google search ...

On the other hand, I don't buy into this "9-11 truth is out there, the towers was an inside job" line about how the media is colluding against City ... so, yes, on balance, obviously I'm a rag and in on the conspiracy.

Rag? You gormless sod :)

The best put down ever from "Steve McGarry Legendary Cartoonist And City Fan". I love you art by the way!

 

[Thenumber1blue]

A rag? I'm not sure what your criteria might be for ragdom, then. Perhaps you can clarify?

On the one hand, it is 55 years since I went to my first game ... and I did attend every home game, first team one week, reserves the next, all through my early teens ... and I was such big mates with Rob Gretton that they feature a picture of the two of us as the promo for his book ...and admittedly, I did lie about my age at 14 to get a job selling On The Ball tickets in the Kippax ... and I hitchhiked up and down the country all through the sixties, leaving on Friday nights and hitching south, time after time, to watch City ... although I invested in luxury when took a coach from Fitton's newsagents to go to Wembley in 1970 ... and I suppose having my own pen portraits of the players illustration series every week in the City program in the 1980s, the one where fans got the chance to win the original art every week counts just a little ... I suppose the fact that I'm even listed on Wikipedia as a "famous" City supporter, right there next to Kevin Cummins might carry just a little weight. And all of this is easily verifiable with a simple Google search ...

On the other hand, I don't buy into this "9-11 truth is out there, the towers was an inside job" line about how the media is colluding against City ... so, yes, on balance, obviously I'm a rag and in on the conspiracy.

Rag? You gormless sod :)

Hitchiking to matches,I bet that was absolute class,quality !