Media bias against City

[moomba]

Really surprised at that Martin Samuel piece. Think he's a really good journo, but would expect to read that on a Leicester fan forum, not a national newspaper.

 

[dasein]

Sad that, I thought the game spoke for itself, a good battle between two good teams, they had a few chances but I never felt scared we would concede and I thought our chances were OK and they were just throwing themselves into the ball to stop the goals, really great game,

 

[MillionMilesAway]

Really surprised at that Martin Samuel piece. Think he's a really good journo, but would expect to read that on a Leicester fan forum, not a national newspaper.

Very Un-Samuel too.

 

[mad4city]

If you are not convinced by the media bias read that match report and you'll be converted. The biggest pile of shit I have ever read.

Whatever about the match report (which is an embarrassment to Samuel), the headline had absolutely no bearing on what Samuel reported.

 

[Cityfan]

The match report was basically showing a bit of support for the underdog, something we will have to get used to and I don't mind.
The headline bore no resemblance to the match report and was a complete disgrace. Utterly contemptible.

 

[Ric]

Is that photoshopped?

If not, can one of the non-agendaists explain such cockwomblery?

I agree that the headline is ridiculous. The article is pretty one-sided (the suggestion that Mangala and Otamendi "struggled" is particularly fanciful), but it hardly constitutes an agenda. Samuel has been one of our staunchest defenders over the last few years. Or does that get disregarded on the basis of a critical report of a 0-0 draw?

I think some people need to develop a thicker skin. Little point in complaining about every article that isn't complimentary about our club. The bigger we get the more negative coverage we will get, until we're eventually accepted as part of the "elite". Personally, I can tolerate that. It's a trade-off I would've taken 8 years ago.

 

[YaYa's Left Peg]

Sorry Ric, but I have to disagree that Samuel has been a staunch defender of City - he has been a staunch critic of FFP, but is as much of a cockroach as his other mates in the written press. Tonight's piece came as no surprise to me.

And I really don't think it is about having a thick skin. The drip drip of negativity is both caustic and draining at the same time.

 

[citymad]

Cant really argue with article. TBF Leicester have been fantastic so far and tonight there wasn't alot between the two sides. Money can buy you sublime skill but its a pity theres not a guarantee of heart and passion that comes with it.

 

[We're not really here]

Sorry Ric, but I have to disagree that Samuel has been a staunch defender of City - he has been a staunch critic of FFP, but is as much of a cockroach as his other mates in the written press. Tonight's piece came as no surprise to me.

And I really don't think it is about having a thick skin. The drip drip of negativity is both caustic and draining at the same time.

Absolutely this. They have all printed photos of Otamendi's tackle and Sagna's 'high foot' neither of which was even a foul! No photo of the high studs up and dangerous tackle on Sagna! Sorry Ric but they deliberately print constant negativity and it does stink into people's heads.

 

[john@staustell]

Of the commentary I thought Hoddle was pretty fair. Hargreaves not so much but he did give Sterling mom. Usually when we press someone really hard the daft twats ignore all the good play and give it to a defender in a team with about 20% possession.