But this completely ignores the fact that The Athletic report on every other club differently to the way they report on City.
Every other top 6 club has multiple reporters - not all are clowns like Pearce - but experienced writers that know the club inside out with experiences as a reporter and a fan.
They would NEVER put a City fan in to write about Utd - even amongst the 4 journalists that cover them.
And they certainly wouldn’t have any of their reporters spend the week trying to wind up the supporters of the club they write about.
And they certainly wouldn’t have any of their reporters spend the week trying to wind up the supporters of the club they write about.
Tbh, I couldn’t even tell you who covers Chelsea, Spurs or Arsenal for
The Athletic so not sure if they have multiple reporters or not. There’s no doubt that they pander hugely to United and Liverpool though, which is an understandable gripe, but not really different to most media outlets. As frustrating as that is, it’s presumably purely economic and I can live with that. I can largely ignore the nauseatingly sycophantic pieces from Pearce, Hughes, Mitten et al if I wish.
What grates though is when it crosses over into their City coverage, as with many of their CAS/FFP articles (where they largely called everything wrong) and the Crafton piece the other week. Sam Lee’s City stuff is usually pretty good, but some of the other City features leave a lot to be desired. I had hoped that
The Athletic would be different and leave behind some of the institutional biases of the traditional press, but they’re driven by the same market forces I guess.
Agree though that you probably wouldn’t have seen the sort of Twitter spat that we saw this week between their correspondents and fans. As I said earlier, it all seemed a bit unnecessary. Not sure anyone really came out of it well.