Read two Guardian match reports today. Arsenal and City. Different reporters I acknowledge. Arsenal won when playing badly which was the stuff of champions. City showed they 'can scrap' but the performance left a lot to be desired. All seems fair.
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.
The perfect fumble
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 3 Jun 2012
- Messages
- 24,449
Read two Guardian match reports today. Arsenal and City. Different reporters I acknowledge. Arsenal won when playing badly which was the stuff of champions. City showed they 'can scrap' but the performance left a lot to be desired. All seems fair.
Same kind of thing on MOTD.
moenchengladbach blau
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 1 Oct 2006
- Messages
- 1,188
Read two Guardian match reports today. Arsenal and City. Different reporters I acknowledge. Arsenal won when playing badly which was the stuff of champions. City showed they 'can scrap' but the performance left a lot to be desired. All seems fair.
The Telegraph didn't even give us that credit and the report had obviously been written before our two goals for the print edition, hardly mentioning the goals amongst the criticisms. It did a slight addition online two hours later about Sergio's winner but amongst the pre-written shite it has a go about Sagna talking the Mangler through games. If that is a fault, Vinnie must be a master criminal for acting as a captain.
stonerblue
Well-Known Member
Same kind of thing on MOTD.
motd was shockingly anti-City last night.
gordondaviesmoustache
Well-Known Member
Shockingly?motd was shockingly anti-City last night.
B
B
blueinsa
Guest
City deserved all the negative press yesterday they were shite and Watford deserved to win.
Why did Watford deserve to win?
We scored more goals than them its that simple.
We had more possession and more chances.
I know us Brits love a plucky under dog but it gets a bit ridiculous when you win a game of football and all you ever hear is we didn't deserve it.
Of course we did and being shit for 80 mins by our own high standards doesn't alter that.
According to the general press (TV included) all our players cost too much, only care about their pay packet, and are rubbish; however with the team we have we should have won the league already although as a team we can't play without VK who is always injured. Makes me wonder how we are still fighting for four trophies.
They outplayed us and out fought us for st least 70 minutes.Why did Watford deserve to win?
We scored more goals than them its that simple.
We had more possession and more chances.
I know us Brits love a plucky under dog but it gets a bit ridiculous when you win a game of football and all you ever hear is we didn't deserve it.
Of course we did and being shit for 80 mins by our own high standards doesn't alter that.
Watford were the better team. Feel free to paper over the cracks but I won't.
manimanc
Well-Known Member
The rags did this for years and got high fived for showing mental strength and it being the sign of champions.Why did Watford deserve to win?
We scored more goals than them its that simple.
We had more possession and more chances.
I know us Brits love a plucky under dog but it gets a bit ridiculous when you win a game of football and all you ever hear is we didn't deserve it.
Of course we did and being shit for 80 mins by our own high standards doesn't alter that.
To be fair the guy doing our match on sky did say the same but these two bit nerds writing for the papers fuckin hate us, absolutely hate us with a passion hence we get a negative press.
Fuck em.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.