Media bias against City

[franksinatra]

Mail and BBC, the 2 biggest biased piles of crap around.
The BBC report is even worse than the mails and is laughable:

Ours (they predicted 2nd we came 2nd, note that):
MANCHESTER CITY 2nd (prediction 2nd)
Manager: Manuel Pellegrini 5 Players: 5 Season: 5

Manchester City made a lame attempt at defending the title - especially after the turn of the year when Chelsea moved into the distance and manager Manuel Pellegrini seemed unable to inspire his side - and there was even a worry at one stage that they would not make the top four.

Eventually finished second but a poor season by their standards and by the standards of the players in their squad. Yaya Toure, usually City's key performer, was pedestrian so expect City's driven and ambitious Abu Dhabi-based owners to put matters right this summer.

So 5's all round despite us doing as well as they thought.

Now, Utds, remember the most expensive team and squad ever in the PL who won it the season before last. Spending that much money they should be expected to make a title bid, not limp in 4th place.

MANCHESTER UNITED 4th (prediction 3rd)
Manager: Louis van Gaal 7 Players: 7 Season: 7

The idea of United finishing in the top four was greeted by scorn before the start of the season, but with a proven manager of Louis van Gaal's ilk in place and quality still in the squad it was always a realistic possibility.

Van Gaal shuffled his resources, £59.7m signing Angel Di Maria and on-loan striker Falcao were big disappointments, but he got it right during a golden spell that brought big wins against Spurs, Liverpool and Manchester City. No trophies but a season that will have satisfied Old Trafford's powerbrokers.

So 7's all round despite them finishing lower where BBC thought they would and only being in 2 competitions most of the season.

As I said, so predictable and laughable really

I would not agree with the figures. But yes our defence, particularly after Christmas was lame, It was a poor season by recent standards and based on the strength of the squad and money spent. Yes many people on here thought we would struggle to make the top four at one stage. Yaya did not have his greatest season and many have stated he does not track back and looks slow on this forum.

Also we do have driven and ambitious and I expect them to put it right. You may not agree with it but the negatives match many peoples opinions on this forum. Do they have an agenda also?

 

[Graceyboy]

Things need to be looked at in perspective.

Are we worried we came second? I'm certainly not following the seasons performance we had.

If we would of had a wonderful season form wise and only lost a few games and still lost the prem to Chelsea, I would be worried as to what the hell can/do we do.

But seeing as there is so much room for improvement, I know that next year we will crack on and win again


I felt sorry for Pellers when he was RM manager and had a terrific season but still lost to Barca and lost his job as The cunty one was appointed

 

[Chris in London]

Mail and BBC, the 2 biggest biased piles of crap around.
The BBC report is even worse than the mails and is laughable:

Ours (they predicted 2nd we came 2nd, note that):
MANCHESTER CITY 2nd (prediction 2nd)
Manager: Manuel Pellegrini 5 Players: 5 Season: 5

Manchester City made a lame attempt at defending the title - especially after the turn of the year when Chelsea moved into the distance and manager Manuel Pellegrini seemed unable to inspire his side - and there was even a worry at one stage that they would not make the top four.

Eventually finished second but a poor season by their standards and by the standards of the players in their squad. Yaya Toure, usually City's key performer, was pedestrian so expect City's driven and ambitious Abu Dhabi-based owners to put matters right this summer.

So 5's all round despite us doing as well as they thought.

Now, Utds, remember the most expensive team and squad ever in the PL who won it the season before last. Spending that much money they should be expected to make a title bid, not limp in 4th place.

MANCHESTER UNITED 4th (prediction 3rd)
Manager: Louis van Gaal 7 Players: 7 Season: 7

The idea of United finishing in the top four was greeted by scorn before the start of the season, but with a proven manager of Louis van Gaal's ilk in place and quality still in the squad it was always a realistic possibility.

Van Gaal shuffled his resources, £59.7m signing Angel Di Maria and on-loan striker Falcao were big disappointments, but he got it right during a golden spell that brought big wins against Spurs, Liverpool and Manchester City. No trophies but a season that will have satisfied Old Trafford's powerbrokers.

So 7's all round despite them finishing lower where BBC thought they would and only being in 2 competitions most of the season.

As I said, so predictable and laughable really

This is what Martin Samuel wrote in the Mail recently:

Let me explain why Manchester United, or sometimes Barcelona and Real Madrid, get more space than Everton. It’s because people want to read about them

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/fo...ek-s-way-stop-don-t-pay-it.html#ixzz3bQtVRkTD

Once that simple truth is understood, it is a short step to understanding that positive stories about United generate more clicks/ad revenue than negative stories, and vice versa for City.

Whether you call that an Agenda or not, it is undoubtedly the explanation for the fact that we are given a much rougher ride in the press than the rags or dippers.

 

[tom99]

This is what Martin Samuel wrote in the Mail recently:



Once that simple truth is understood, it is a short step to understanding that positive stories about United generate more clicks/ad revenue than negative stories, and vice versa for City.

Whether you call that an Agenda or not, it is undoubtedly the explanation for the fact that we are given a much rougher ride in the press than the rags or dippers.

This is correct, on comment sections on sites such as Daily Mail when someone says even something slightly good about City and even if it dosen't hint or mention United, sad fucks downvote it beacuse they have nowt better to do. We will have the last laugh.

 

[franksinatra]

This is what Martin Samuel wrote in the Mail recently:



Once that simple truth is understood, it is a short step to understanding that positive stories about United generate more clicks/ad revenue than negative stories, and vice versa for City.

Whether you call that an Agenda or not, it is undoubtedly the explanation for the fact that we are given a much rougher ride in the press than the rags or dippers.

Also they get a lot more negative exposure also as people like to read about them. Louis Van Gaal has been the most criticised manger this year. Not buying defenders, long ball football, playing rooney out of position, playing three at the back and similarly last year Moyes was the most criticised.

Agreed we get less coverage though as quite understandably we are not as newsworthy. Also based on your formula pretty much all the smaller clubs below us would get a rougher ride than us using your sliding-scale analogy

 

[Chris in London]

Also they get a lot more negative exposure also as people like to read about them. Louis Van Gaal has been the most criticised manger this year. Not buying defenders, long ball football, playing rooney out of position, playing three at the back and similarly last year Moyes was the most criticised.

Agreed we get less coverage though as quite understandably we are not as newsworthy. Also based on your formula pretty much all the smaller clubs below us would get a rougher ride than us using your sliding-scale analogy

You are confusing quantity with quality.

Carlisle and Doncaster don't get much attention full stop. It's the way the world works.

We have had huge amounts of attention, the majority of it negative. The rags have had some negative comment, but (a) the extent of negative commentary pales into insignificance in comparison to the way other clubs (us for instance) would have been treated if they had acted the same way (can you imagine the slating we'd have got had we signed Di Maria and Falcao and ended up putting him on the bench?) and (b) the extent of their negative commentary is vastly outweighed by the positive coverage that they get.

And if you think Van Gaal is the most criticised manager this season, you have probably spent the entire season without having read a single article about Brendan Rodgers.

 

[bluemc1]

i do and always have got that its just the way it is, its the being denied the individual awards thats pisses me off, 2 out of the 3 managers that haven't got MOTY in last 14 or something years being OUR managers and the very next season when its not us back to normal both times, the PL leading GS who did so even missing a lot of games not making shortlist even for POTY and not getting in team of the year, all unheard of before, being told Gerrard was better than Toure last year when Toure scored more goals from MF last year than Costa did upfront for the Champions this year, fucking ridiculous
ill sound like my dad now but you can't make a case or excuse for these things, ill go as far as saying its a FACT if LVG had come in this year even after spending 250 million and won PL CC double in his first year even if Bruce finished 6th with hull LVG WOULD have got MOTY and if Rooney was top GS also getting hat trick v Munich he would have nailed on been in shortlist for POTY and without question in TOTY
i know people will say don't let it bother you but it does

 

[Ric]

Once that simple truth is understood, it is a short step to understanding that positive stories about United generate more clicks/ad revenue than negative stories, and vice versa for City.

Whether you call that an Agenda or not, it is undoubtedly the explanation for the fact that we are given a much rougher ride in the press than the rags or dippers.

Many of us, myself included, tend get bogged down in the semantics of the term "agenda" but that sums it up pretty succinctly.

 

[franksinatra]

You are confusing quantity with quality.

Carlisle and Doncaster don't get much attention full stop. It's the way the world works.

We have had huge amounts of attention, the majority of it negative. The rags have had some negative comment, but (a) the extent of negative commentary pales into insignificance in comparison to the way other clubs (us for instance) would have been treated if they had acted the same way (can you imagine the slating we'd have got had we signed Di Maria and Falcao and ended up putting him on the bench?) and (b) the extent of their negative commentary is vastly outweighed by the positive coverage that they get.

And if you think Van Gaal is the most criticised manager this season, you have probably spent the entire season without having read a single article about Brendan Rodgers.

So I think LVG was the most criticised manager and you think Brendan Rodgers was the most criticised. Interestingly those two managers manages clubs which this forum repeatedly states the media have a bias towards due to their millions of fans.

If anything that further reinforces my point the larger clubs do receive more exposure both positive and negative than refutes my assertion.

 

[eversince 76]

Also they get a lot more negative exposure also as people like to read about them. Louis Van Gaal has been the most criticised manger this year. Not buying defenders, long ball football, playing rooney out of position, playing three at the back and similarly last year Moyes was the most criticised.

Agreed we get less coverage though as quite understandably we are not as newsworthy. Also based on your formula pretty much all the smaller clubs below us would get a rougher ride than us using your sliding-scale analogy

Not sure Van Gaal has been the most criticised manager. He has been critised, and rightly so for reasons you mentioned, but he has been put on a completely different scale than when Pellegrini made his debut in the PL. Moyes was criticised rightly so ... I mean come on, 7th? Battered by us and Liverpool?
I don't think many fans on here care about the amount of attention City has. It's about what's been written and said about us, and often that is so far besides the truth one tend to think there is an agenda. Even though some suggestions are far fetched. To get the right judgement and attention, if that is what people are searching for, we need to do well on the pitch, get results, win silverware and do well in the CL. Maybe even attrack the next Messi or Ronaldo. Except for the CL we have lived up to that and our fanbase worldwide is steadily growing. We will be ok in the CL sooner or later.