Why Always Ste
Well-Known Member
Lol this had me puzzled as well... I scrolled through the whole page it linked to, to see where it referenced Robinho... couldn't find it.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Media bias against City
- Thread starter JoeMercer'sWay
- Start date
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
George Hannah
Well-Known Member
BBC Sport is inhabited by the contents of a Toxteth taproom, it is truly sad.Anyone seen the BBC Sport webpage? The link to the summer transfers and news page has a photo of Robinho in a City shirt. FFS!
Blueknows
Well-Known Member
"he chances became limited" ? played a big part in our first title and cup winning seasons then couldn't get over a couple of bad injuries , lost his place to Zab the rest is hstoryI was pretty surprised to see the piece in the Guardian (I won't link to it, but I've tweeted the author about it) which claimed that Micah Richards had 'failed to establish' himself at City. Just had to respond with - "he made more England appearances than Mike Summerbee; won more medals than Dennis Tueart and appeared more times for City than Dave Watson". If that's failing to establish himself then I don't know what he'd have had to do to become established. To be fair to the journalist (apparently a Liverpool fan but whether that's relevant who knows?) he replied along the lines of 'his chances became limited' after the takeover. Well, that may be true (to an extent) but that's not what was written. All we expect is balance and fair, fact based reporting. Is it too much to ask? Some journalists really do try to get balance (and there are plenty I respect and have helped along the way), but others find a theme and decide to keep pushing it despite the evidence. Ah well! I guess it generates readers for them.
It will be interesting to see how other journos deal with the idea of Liverpool spending £32m on Benteke...
Here's Paul Wilson in The Guardian:
The spectre of Andy Carroll looms large over Liverpool’s proposed deal for Christian Benteke, not so much because the Aston Villa striker is likely to be as uncomfortable and out of his depth as the record signing of four years ago, but because the swoop with the proceeds from the Raheem Sterling sale is similar to the almost indecent haste with which the club parted with the income from Fernando Torres.
There are differences. Benteke is a player Brendan Rodgers has admired for some time and Liverpool were attempting to persuade Villa to sell for less than the £32.5m buyout price, though assuming alleged interest from Manchester United was a red herring – Louis van Gaal is thought to have his sights set on Edinson Cavani or Robert Lewandowski – it is hard to avoid the conclusion that what triggered the Merseyside club’s policy change was the Sterling money landing in the bank account.
Given that Queens Park Rangers have earned in the region of £10m from Sterling’s £49m sale to Manchester City, it could be argued Liverpool will spend virtually their entire chunk on a replacement, leading to inevitable questions about whether Rodgers might use the money more wisely. This is an argument the manager can never win. Rodgers was criticised a year ago for spending the Luis Suárez proceeds piecemeal, on a number of players, few of whom proved instant hits. Now the manager is under attack for blowing all the money on one player, seemingly the best he can afford.
The real problem is that Sterling, like Suárez before him, is almost impossible to replace on a like-for-like basis. There is no one else like him around, and although Benteke ought to be a considerable improvement on Carroll, whether he turns out to be an improvement on the player he is replacing is another matter entirely. Some Liverpool supporters have the feeling that once again they are having to settle for what is left on the market, when other, richer clubs are buying up the best talent around.
Rodgers said that this would be a quiet summer of spending after the £116m outlay of last year, though that was before he realised he would be losing Sterling. He also said when moving Carroll out that Liverpool did not play in a way that suited an old-fashioned big man up front, and although Benteke is not quite that, he may find it as difficult as Mario Balotelli to fit into the way Rodgers wants his side to play.
Balotelli is surplus to requirements now, along with Rickie Lambert and Fabio Borini, and Daniel Sturridge is not expected to be fit until September at the earliest. Liverpool need a proven goalscorer – that much is obvious – though they have bought Roberto Firmino for a price that could rise to £29m, as well as Danny Ings for a fee to be decided by tribunal and have Divock Origi returning from loan at Lille.
If Benteke is able to reproduce the best of the form shown at Villa, he will be a reliable goalscorer and an asset to the side, though with Firmino likely to play a support striker role alongside him, it appears Ings and Origi are most likely to lose out in terms of game time.
Ings is probably not naive enough to imagine he could go from being Burnley’s attacking spearhead to performing the same job for Liverpool, though he must have expected to be given enough games to prove his worth and if Benteke arrives, he might be disappointed. Similarly, given that James Milner has been promised more games than he got at Manchester City and Liverpool still have Philippe Coutinho, one wonders where some of last year’s acquisitions such as Adam Lallana and Lazar Markovic are going to fit into the new look attack.
Spending north of £30m on Benteke would take Liverpool’s summer outlay to more than £80m and put Rodgers on the spot as much as the Villa player. Benteke is unquestionably a useful striker; most Premier League clubs would be glad to have him. But largely because of the calibre of the players they are having to replace – imagine losing Torres, Suárez and Sterling in the space of five years – new recruits at Liverpool come under more intense scrutiny. That process is taking place on a wide platform of social media sites right now, with Manchester United supporters taking credit for bluffing Liverpool into paying full price, Chelsea fans pointing out that they got Diego Costa for fractionally less, and no shortage of neutrals expressing the view that Benteke is not worth anywhere near as much.
It will be up to the striker to prove otherwise if and when the deal goes through, but Sterling might have company as the player under most pressure to produce this season.
Here's Paul Wilson in The Guardian:
The spectre of Andy Carroll looms large over Liverpool’s proposed deal for Christian Benteke, not so much because the Aston Villa striker is likely to be as uncomfortable and out of his depth as the record signing of four years ago, but because the swoop with the proceeds from the Raheem Sterling sale is similar to the almost indecent haste with which the club parted with the income from Fernando Torres.
There are differences. Benteke is a player Brendan Rodgers has admired for some time and Liverpool were attempting to persuade Villa to sell for less than the £32.5m buyout price, though assuming alleged interest from Manchester United was a red herring – Louis van Gaal is thought to have his sights set on Edinson Cavani or Robert Lewandowski – it is hard to avoid the conclusion that what triggered the Merseyside club’s policy change was the Sterling money landing in the bank account.
Given that Queens Park Rangers have earned in the region of £10m from Sterling’s £49m sale to Manchester City, it could be argued Liverpool will spend virtually their entire chunk on a replacement, leading to inevitable questions about whether Rodgers might use the money more wisely. This is an argument the manager can never win. Rodgers was criticised a year ago for spending the Luis Suárez proceeds piecemeal, on a number of players, few of whom proved instant hits. Now the manager is under attack for blowing all the money on one player, seemingly the best he can afford.
The real problem is that Sterling, like Suárez before him, is almost impossible to replace on a like-for-like basis. There is no one else like him around, and although Benteke ought to be a considerable improvement on Carroll, whether he turns out to be an improvement on the player he is replacing is another matter entirely. Some Liverpool supporters have the feeling that once again they are having to settle for what is left on the market, when other, richer clubs are buying up the best talent around.
Rodgers said that this would be a quiet summer of spending after the £116m outlay of last year, though that was before he realised he would be losing Sterling. He also said when moving Carroll out that Liverpool did not play in a way that suited an old-fashioned big man up front, and although Benteke is not quite that, he may find it as difficult as Mario Balotelli to fit into the way Rodgers wants his side to play.
Balotelli is surplus to requirements now, along with Rickie Lambert and Fabio Borini, and Daniel Sturridge is not expected to be fit until September at the earliest. Liverpool need a proven goalscorer – that much is obvious – though they have bought Roberto Firmino for a price that could rise to £29m, as well as Danny Ings for a fee to be decided by tribunal and have Divock Origi returning from loan at Lille.
If Benteke is able to reproduce the best of the form shown at Villa, he will be a reliable goalscorer and an asset to the side, though with Firmino likely to play a support striker role alongside him, it appears Ings and Origi are most likely to lose out in terms of game time.
Ings is probably not naive enough to imagine he could go from being Burnley’s attacking spearhead to performing the same job for Liverpool, though he must have expected to be given enough games to prove his worth and if Benteke arrives, he might be disappointed. Similarly, given that James Milner has been promised more games than he got at Manchester City and Liverpool still have Philippe Coutinho, one wonders where some of last year’s acquisitions such as Adam Lallana and Lazar Markovic are going to fit into the new look attack.
Spending north of £30m on Benteke would take Liverpool’s summer outlay to more than £80m and put Rodgers on the spot as much as the Villa player. Benteke is unquestionably a useful striker; most Premier League clubs would be glad to have him. But largely because of the calibre of the players they are having to replace – imagine losing Torres, Suárez and Sterling in the space of five years – new recruits at Liverpool come under more intense scrutiny. That process is taking place on a wide platform of social media sites right now, with Manchester United supporters taking credit for bluffing Liverpool into paying full price, Chelsea fans pointing out that they got Diego Costa for fractionally less, and no shortage of neutrals expressing the view that Benteke is not worth anywhere near as much.
It will be up to the striker to prove otherwise if and when the deal goes through, but Sterling might have company as the player under most pressure to produce this season.
Similarly, given that James Milner has been promised more games than he got at Manchester City.
I know I'm quoting the article you've posted not you but....
So he's definitely going to get more than the 45 appearances last season then. Barely used, obviously. Do they actually check these things?
TFC
Well-Known Member
Suppose this one is for the agenda thread, but I can only assume its some kind of elaborate pisstake?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/fo...tml?ITO=1490&ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/fo...tml?ITO=1490&ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490
@BluePhil8
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 4 Jan 2009
- Messages
- 13,425
So City sign Sterling from Liverpool and the Mail use it as an excuse to suck pisscan's flacid cock and to trumpet United as the bastion of hope. What does any of this have to do with the scum?Suppose this one is for the agenda thread, but I can only assume its some kind of elaborate pisstake?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/fo...tml?ITO=1490&ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490
EpicMaineBro
Well-Known Member
All we expect is balance and fair, fact based reporting. Is it too much to ask?
Will that ever happen or are you asking too much of a click bate driven rag infested, dipper loving, chelski licking wank fest media?
Had to edit as I got over excited about this topic - appologies
- Status
- Not open for further replies.