franksinatra
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 25 Nov 2008
- Messages
- 10,710
why is that particular article centred around us?
Sorry mate not sure what question you are asking?
why is that particular article centred around us?
There is lots more to come. On the podcast, Mo Salah is elevated to God hood. Aparantly all Liverpool have to do is turn up.Just read that load of old bollocks. Didnt like the way it was worded as if City is some pantomime baddie and i quote......
"Jordan Henderson is a dependable presence but lacks the mobility needed against the scheming of David Silva and Kevin De Bruyne."
Fucking "scheming", who uses that word to describe two of the best players ever to grace the league, like they are some type of underhanded cheats. What next calling Guardiola, machiavellian, because he uses his brain ?
Really thought the Telegraph was above all that shit, but clearly not the case.
Why do you find it strange? I thought you would be familiar with the way some people’s minds are wired by now. You’ve had enough exposure!
I agree, certainly even years ago it was the proud boast of those within that industry that you should never let the truth get in the way of a good story.
Editors still decide what will sell via expensive research so they publish or present accordingly. Sensible really from a financial point of view.
Some people will simply always look for negatives, as they enjoy feeling indignant.It is true, but thought with all the positive coverage this year I thought people may start to view things differently.
The figures are based on GMP estimates. A couple of years ago there was a version of this story in which the GMP estimated a crowd of 55, 000 at the toilet, when MU gave a figure of 75,000.The police figures are just estimates based on guesswork as opposed to tickets sold. The figures are obviously wrong because anyone who attends matches knows that at most there have been a few thousand no shows. The Sun claims we had less than 30,000 for Stoke last season which means there were apparently two empty stands of "no-shows". Anyone at the match, including myself, can see that is absurd.
All clubs have no shows. At this year's Derby match at the swamp there were a few empty rows in the top tiers opposite us clearly visible from the City section. This is probably a block of corporates or perhaps a travel agency which has not sold all its packages to overseas Rags. There is no such thing as a totally full-house anywhere in the world. What I find annoying is that we should be singled out for this. A lot of the idiots who work for the Sun website are not qualified journnalists. It is essentially fake news.
Cheers for the reply mate, I think it will always be thus, people tend to use forums to vent and since there's not much justifiable venting in regards the playing side of things at the minute this is their best opportunity.
The figures are based on GMP estimates. A couple of years ago there was a version of this story in which the GMP estimated a crowd of 55, 000 at the toilet, when MU gave a figure of 75,000.
GMP on this occasion must have given the Sun figures for the rags, so why is that not mentioned?
Thanks for that. Plot thickens.I posted a few days ago that a Blue I know contacted the GMP a couple of years ago with a Freedom of Information request asking for updated police attendance figures for the rags. They replied that they don't keep separate figures and their figures agree with the club's. Neither he nor I believe this for a second but the GMP were embarrassed in 2013 when an FOI request from United fan group Reds Away resulted in full details of true OT attendances with 10,000-30,000 empty seats for games they claimed were full houses made public so I assume they're not prepared to give out similar information any more.
The question therefore is how did the Sun obtain these 'police figures' when the GMP no longer release this information because they deny it even exists? The only possible answer is that the Sun has made all this shit up.