Chelsea's negative press coverage has been largely mollified by the widespread sycophancy towards Mourinho since he returned. Plus, don't underestimate the London effect upon the written press in particular.Great post. Would caveat though that whilst our media coverage is very poor & has improved, I would liken it to how Chelsea were pilloried when they first starting splashing the cash. 10-15 years on & they still get a pretty poor press. Our rotten Media is full of fans & ex players turned pundits who are still obsessed with the original Sky4 ManUre Liverpool Arse & Spuds.
Agreed, this is also in part the London media, click bait as they are now more globally popular than they were & the infestation of their fanboys in the press. It will change for us but we will never get the sycophantic press ManUre & Liverpool getChelsea's negative press coverage has been largely mollified by the widespread sycophancy towards Mourinho since he returned. Plus, don't underestimate the London effect upon the written press in particular.
The voting in football writers' awards consistently underlines this.
Even this country's press wouldn't fail to report this, if it were true. It isn't.if this is true city are being very kind to the lad, but that's what we expect from us say nowt let the media print any lies they want
The few, remaining flat earthers have been pretty conspicuous by their absence these last two weeks or so when the palpable and egregious inbalance in the sports media has been there for all to see, as former Liverpool players have been tag-teaming to take thinly veiled swipes at our club, without any meaningful reply. Free hits at something most on here hold dear.
Our lack of representation in the media is shocking and I feel the club must bear some responsibility for this. There are articulate former players who should have been promoted and developed more proactively in that field within the last half decade. Paul Lake springs to mind. Instead we have the likes of Danny Mills and Niall Quinn who for different reasons clearly find vocally supporting the club to be an uncomfortable experience.
It's seven years since the takeover and I feel we've not dealt with our media management effectively enough in that time.
Banning people wholesale isn't going to be on the agenda, so people need to move past that, but there needs to be a serious rethink about the club's media strategy as it's currently not fit for purpose.
Unchallenged. They've been allowed to spout their bile without being challenged in any meaningful way.Touching on the Sterling situation without doubt ex-liverpool players have rallied around their club and the press have widely reported it.
Nailed itCity have lack of English players: 'Disgraceful, one of our top clubs with no faith in the talent this country produces.'
City try to sign English players: 'Disgraceful, simply trying to sign players in order to fill a quota and sit them on their bench, ruining the game.'
Unchallenged. They've been allowed to spout their bile without being challenged in any meaningful way.
There hasn't been a single dissenting voice, as far as I'm aware.
Your use of words is tendentious in the extreme. You talk of the ex-Liverpool players' hegemony in the media as if it's an immutable law of the universe, rather than a self-perpetuating racket.
It has not been challenged by anyone, press or presenters alike, never mind anyone associated with City. It is now received wisdom in the media that Sterling would be making a mistake moving to City. I'm not aware of a single journalist who's suggested it would be a good move for him. It would be astonishing in any other area of sports for such a view to subsist so commonly, given all that City can offer.Yes you are right it has not gone unchallenged by us. If a City player/manager took a swipe at Liverpool you and I both know it would make the back page of every paper.
We do not challenge it so nothing is reported. It is a failing in our PR machine.