Media Thread 2017/18

Status
Not open for further replies.
Hello all - I have been watching ESPN football segments a bit and I kind of like the way they have Craig Burley in there that causes chaos.

When watching UK pundits - many just agree with each other - or make a case , then another makes a different but diplomatic case and no debate goes on..
If you think I’m that dopey that I don’t know that clickbait is about money, then heaven fucking help us. Of course I know a lot of it’s about money rather than an inbuilt loathing of all things City, but the upshot is the same whether the bias is by design or accidental. These last 2 weeks notwithstanding - when the media appears to have offered up a complete volte face - it’s us on the receiving end far more often than not.

As to who I’d want as a pundit, I’m not even bothered if it’s an ex-City player, just as long as they’re fair, and indeed being an ex-Blue is no guarantee of impartiality one way or the other. Trevor Sinclair, the Dunney Monster and the criminally underused Paul Lake, are clearly in our camp, whereas Trevor Francis and Danny Mills are two of the bitterest anti-City bastards ever to have held a mike.
As to non-City commentators I’ve no real beef with Lineker & Co on MOTD, and most of Sky’s pundits provide decent insight, most notably Souness, Carragher and, yes, Neville. Same goes for the papers. If Martin Samuel or Henry Winter, neither of whom is a City fan, writes an article about us then I’ll read it knowing that whether I agree with it or not, the author is worth listening to. What I can’t bear are the “cor blimey” merchants, old skool pros too thick to do anything other than regurgitate the ill informed opinions they hear on the Stretford End or at Klanfield or the Emirates. Cnutymore, Groves, Gale, Nicholas, Cow Pat (Crerand), Aldridge, Camelgob and the rest of the “not like in my day” crew. I also detest those organisations who eschew fair and credible reporting in favour of pandering to what they perceive to be the largest demographic, from the drip drip drip of snide digs courtesy of the BBC social media feed (the bulk of that particular team having been recruited from the rags PR department - literally), to the absolute mother lode, which was BT Sport actively setting up its 2015/2016 coverage of the Chimps League in the hope that City would lose, on the basis that there would be more gloating rags tuning in than disgruntled Blues - an incredible state of affairs given that they were a British broadcaster ostensibly covering a British team.

Just to help you get a flavour of the shit we’ve had to put up with since we started to impact the income streams of the old Sky 4, here’s a couple of bitter Chavski and Gooner journalists pedalling the lie that Mancini was hidden in the ground before we’d even told Mark Hughes he was being sacked, and using that as a starting point for slagging the club off on a myriad of fronts.....




I dont think you are dopey - I do not know you.

But i think things are chilling out now on BT sport. They can not ignore your quality.
 
Perhaps one of the few who say there is no agenda can,
a) Explain why every media outlet you read has a headline 'Silva Escapes Punishment.'
b) Find one article that addresses the decision of the panel in any other way.
If a Prem. League panel look at every penalty to ensure no one dived and indeed after looking, conclude that no one did dive, how do you 'Escape Punishment'. If I do not steal £5 from church funds it cannot be described that I have escaped punishment.
This constant negative slant on what City do gets into the minds of neutrals and fans alike. How many football fans will have read a newspaper or watched TV and decided that he did dive but got away with it because it would not have been reported otherwise.


(MOTD)

Phil neville said (yes Phil Neville)

was it a penalty , yes
was there contact , yes
was it theatrical , yes

He also said if he was involved at city and that situation happened he would drill it into the players to win the penalty as there was clear contact.

all the panel also agreed that it was a penalty
 
It was an obvious penalty, the fact that the media are still talking about it says it all. They have a negative City agenda because it plays to the Neverpool and disunited fans.
 
It was an obvious penalty, the fact that the media are still talking about it says it all. They have a negative City agenda because it plays to the Neverpool and disunited fans.


well MOTD made it very clear. the most watched medium in the UK on football. Didnt the problem start from Dyces comments on it that it wasnt a penalty? not any pundits.
 
we knew all the bullshit this week was coming united need to hide in a dark corner and liverpool will be used to make the scum fans feel a little better also anything to pin city 5 point lead on anything dodgy will be highlighted forget the great football we play it was getting a pen when the game was so called tight hahahaha the ref bent over and give city a soft pen in a game but sadly the so called soft pen was on video replay and clearly contact was made in full motion by the keeper end of story
 
well MOTD made it very clear. the most watched medium in the UK on football. Didnt the problem start from Dyces comments on it that it wasnt a penalty? not any pundits.

Richard Keys - Bein sport
Talksport suggested it was controversial
Jim Whyte at Sky ran a poll on it
Sky had Gallagher saying it was debatable
Poll called it a "modern penalty", apparently back in the good old days it was OK to trip someone in the box
Numerous online newspapers posted images of the alleged dive with images that didn't show the contact

Have a look at the thread discussing it and you'll find other examples of the media putting Bernardo on trial
 
(MOTD)

Phil neville said (yes Phil Neville)

was it a penalty , yes
was there contact , yes
was it theatrical , yes

He also said if he was involved at city and that situation happened he would drill it into the players to win the penalty as there was clear contact.

all the panel also agreed that it was a penalty


I accept a number of pundits, including MOTD said it was a penalty. So why, 2 days later are all the media outlets saying Silva Escaped. The question I asked was now the decision has been made is there any other headline than that ?
 
Richard Keys - Bein sport
Talksport suggested it was controversial
Jim Whyte at Sky ran a poll on it
Sky had Gallagher saying it was debatable
Poll called it a "modern penalty", apparently back in the good old days it was OK to trip someone in the box
Numerous online newspapers posted images of the alleged dive with images that didn't show the contact

Have a look at the thread discussing it and you'll find other examples of the media putting Bernardo on trial


ta Rosie.

Talksport just love the controversial, i listen to it purely for the crack.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

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.