Media discussion - 2024/25

[thismeansfour]

You know I can’t remember that one so who scored or missed it? I know I’ve tried to block out the Pearce years but for the life of me can’t remember.

So do you reckon we’ve had a fair return in penalty decisions versus the Rags?

Vassell took it and he missed it. The same game of the lovely Ball stamp if I remember rightly. It isn't about how many for or against, I put in my original reply to you that we haven't been awarded pens against them, even quoting one! The point about our pen there, and at Chelsea last year was they was very soft in my eyes and both awarded at 0-0. I hate the world is against us attitude, which it is on some fronts but we blindly and biasedly ignore the things that go for us too.

 

[thismeansfour]

Wish it was one of the good posters who came back from 2004..
My moneys on worsley having a new name. :-)

Sorry, nothing exciting from me. Under the radar more than anything. I stopped coming on years ago and forgot my details so set a new one up. Bluemoon detectives out in force!

 

[Phil1]

Sorry, nothing exciting from me. Under the radar more than anything. I stopped coming on years ago and forgot my details so set a new one up. Bluemoon detectives out in force!

Passes a few minutes of the day. :-)

 

[mexico1970]

Sorry, nothing exciting from me. Under the radar more than anything. I stopped coming on years ago and forgot my details so set a new one up. Bluemoon detectives out in force!

Beware of the bluemoon massive.

 

[thismeansfour]

You were dismissive of opinions that contradicted your own when you said "it was a terrible decision, nothing more, nothing less" (paraphrased). I think that's what set people against you.

FWIW, it wasn't the most blatant red card ever seen, and could quite easily have been awarded a yellow card. But the referee thought it was a red, and the VAR didn't strongly disagree with him. People who also agree with the original decision are entitled to do so, and that doesn't imply their bias.

Other opinions about other teams not having similar red cards rescinded are also worthy of discussion, as is the perceived influence of Sky and other media.

Apologies in that case, terrible was a stretch then. In my opinion it was wrong then and a panel has agreed since who will have reviewed it thoroughly. The bias is claiming nobody else would have it overturned (Calvert Lewin last year) nobody else would have been able to talk about it in an interview after the game (Rice only a few weeks earlier) Nobody applies logic when discussing them. I get it, they are horrible and maybe I should have just ignored it and will do moving forwards to avoid the pile on and rag accusations. Thanks for the normal response

 

[oakiecokie]

Sniff.....

Stands out like a sore bellend.

 

[ballbag]

I'll be honest, I didn't think the rat should have got a red. Well, that's not technically true; I want him to get sent off every time I see those fucking teeth. But I thought it was a yellow.
I agree that if it had been Rodri getting that red, it wouldn't have been overturned.

 

[Phil1]

Stands out like a sore bellend.

I don’t think he/she is a rag tbf.

 

[cheekybids]

Vassell took it and he missed it. The same game of the lovely Ball stamp if I remember rightly. It isn't about how many for or against, I put in my original reply to you that we haven't been awarded pens against them, even quoting one! The point about our pen there, and at Chelsea last year was they was very soft in my eyes and both awarded at 0-0. I hate the world is against us attitude, which it is on some fronts but we blindly and biasedly ignore the things that go for us too.

The thing is the game is about numbers. The more goals you score you win so the fact is us getting 1 or 2 soft decisions versus fucking loads for them means they benefit more. I don’t think the world is against us but it would be ridiculous to try & say that the Rags & Dippers haven’t benefited more than any club & that the media doesn’t influence decisions.

Ogden admitted in ESPN last year that the media all thought they could get Haaland banned if they made a big issue of him shouting at the ref after Spurs. Again it didn’t work that time but doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen. There’s a reason companies spend a fortune on PR because it works.

 

[thismeansfour]

The thing is the game is about numbers. The more goals you score you win so the fact is us getting 1 or 2 soft decisions versus fucking loads for them means they benefit more. I don’t think the world is against us but it would be ridiculous to try & say that the Rags & Dippers haven’t benefited more than any club & that the media doesn’t influence decisions.

Ogden admitted in ESPN last year that the media all thought they could get Haaland banned if they made a big issue of him shouting at the ref after Spurs. Again it didn’t work that time but doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen. There’s a reason companies spend a fortune on PR because it works.

Of course they have, or at least it feels that way to us. The best part is though, if you asked a United fan, they would tell you how they feel they never get decisions. It's what we do as fans and we can be quite blinkered. I don't think the media influence decisions, I think they may try to but apparently the whole system is corrupt anyway, so why would they need the media to influence them......
I will happily backtrack as I don't want abuse from fellow blues for simply stating I didn't think it was a red.