Media bias against City

Status
Not open for further replies.
Just seen this on Sky Sports, sorry Ric, can't post the link.

Premier League Rule changes ahead of new season

2nd August 2015


As reported by Sky Sports News, following moneybags Manchester City's appalling 4-0 loss to minnows Stuttgart,the Premier League has just announced a shock rule change ahead of the new season. Matches will now finish at half-time if Manchester City is losing.

"We just feel that with the money they have spent on players, they should be winning every game at half-time so it would be unfair to allow them the second half to get back into the match" said Richard Scudamore, head of the Premier League. "It's about delivering the product our consumers want. This will help our broadcasters deliver the best possible entertainment to their viewers."

Talks have also begun to reintroduce the rule, last in place in 2013, which stipulates a mandatory extra 10 minutes in each match in which Manchester United is losing.


Other stories

Real Madrid B 4 Manchester City 1

Man United new kit launch, how did Addidas get away with paying only £750m?

Man United 3 Barcelona 1, Young guns point the way against European champs

City scrape past Roma on penalties
 
Last edited:
yeah whatever !! said:
A pre season has never been nor ever will be a true reflection of how a team performs during the season.. Its a bit like taking practice penalties and then taking one in an important game...different kettle of fish altogether...
Click to expand...

It is scary though how far from fitness our players (deemed professionals) really are, for a numer of seasons in a row.
 
For the first time in years, I tuned in to talkshite yesterday. Jason cunty was talking about guardiola. Apparently, if united offered him the job, we wouldn't even get a look in. If someone has a straight choice of us and them, we lose out. I seem to remember shaky bob saying the same thing about Nasri.
Then that bird piped up with some shit about pep might choose a year off rather than come to City and what a terrible kick in the teeth it would be for us.
Oh and di maria is a fantastic player but joined in a period of transition, so it's nobody's fault.
And Sterling should be a game changer for £49m but he isn't. They went on to say his passing isn't good, his finishing isn't either and he's inconsistent .
Just a quick report to save anyone else being tempted to tune in .
 
2sheikhs said:
For the first time in years, I tuned in to talkshite yesterday. Jason cunty was talking about guardiola. Apparently, if united offered him the job, we wouldn't even get a look in. If someone has a straight choice of us and them, we lose out. I seem to remember shaky bob saying the same thing about Nasri.
Then that bird piped up with some shit about pep might choose a year off rather than come to City and what a terrible kick in the teeth it would be for us.
Oh and di maria is a fantastic player but joined in a period of transition, so it's nobody's fault.
And Sterling should be a game changer for £49m but he isn't. They went on to say his passing isn't good, his finishing isn't either and he's inconsistent .
Just a quick report to save anyone else being tempted to tune in .
Click to expand...
If anyone needs to hear sommat positive about City then talkshite is the wrong destination, as is most of all media outlets...

blessed are the cheesemakers.
 
The media will always print what they believe their readership want to see, even more so nowadays in the days of online articles where it really is all about he clicks.

A negative piece about us up to this point is likely for them to generate as much interest as a positive one simply because we don't have the fanbase of a United where they feel the need to pander to it. Neither are they particularly interested in building a long term relationship with us in order to be in prime position to get the scoop (with a few exceptions, like Henry Winter) as the interest isn't there as much with a couple of other clubs.

We have two options really. Go on a charm offensive with them or say nothing. As a club, we seem to stick with the latter and I'm absolutely fine with that. It means that fans from other clubs perceptions of us might not change as quickly as they should do, but I don't really care in all honesty.

Long term, the only time a bias will fully change and we get the equivalent reporting is when we are of a similar fanbase to United. Given the choice, I'd rather the bias remain, ignore it, and we don't lose our identity to that extent.
 
meltonblue said:
The media will always print what they believe their readership want to see, even more so nowadays in the days of online articles where it really is all about he clicks.

A negative piece about us up to this point is likely for them to generate as much interest as a positive one simply because we don't have the fanbase of a United where they feel the need to pander to it. Neither are they particularly interested in building a long term relationship with us in order to be in prime position to get the scoop (with a few exceptions, like Henry Winter) as the interest isn't there as much with a couple of other clubs.

We have two options really. Go on a charm offensive with them or say nothing. As a club, we seem to stick with the latter and I'm absolutely fine with that. It means that fans from other clubs perceptions of us might not change as quickly as they should do, but I don't really care in all honesty.

Long term, the only time a bias will fully change and we get the equivalent reporting is when we are of a similar fanbase to United. Given the choice, I'd rather the bias remain, ignore it, and we don't lose our identity to that extent.
Click to expand...
Given the choice, I'd rather the bias remain, ignore it, and we don't lose our identity to that extent
Just this.
 
Let's say that there is an established clothes shop in a town centre. It's been there for generations.
A new shop opens up selling clothes. The local paper doesn't like this new competitor. It starts to run articles that they buy their stock from a third world sweat shop with terrible worker abuse. The established shop uses the same supplier but that doesn't get mentioned. After enough negative articles are printed, the public deem it to be a bad place and not a good employer to work for etc.
Bad publicity affects income, morale and perception.
If it was the truth, I'd accept it but not be happy if too much was made of it. You can't take action against someone for reporting the truth.
I object to them LYING about us and going completely unchallenged.
 
Well lying is slightly different and should always be challenged by the club. A lot of the issue is down to opinion based reporting rather than factual though and the narrative used. That is what I was referring to. I don't see too many out and out lies, at least not many more than I imagine most clubs have to deal with. It's negative narrative instead.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.