Media thread 2022/23

[Alan Harper's Tash]

I do also call out good refereeing when I see it.

Hmm, I must have missed that post in 2014….

 

[Trevor Morley's Tache]

Hmm, I must have missed that post in 2014….

His positioning was pretty bad at times. Kept getting in the way of the ball as we tried to pass it across their box and out to the left wing. It meant we had to look to play inside and gave their defenders chance to get into position.

He also gave one or two poor decisions, but overall pretty decent and better than most PL ref's which isn't that difficult.

Well... I nearly praised the guy ;-)

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

Well... I nearly praised the guy ;-)

Lovely backhanded compliment :-)

 

[stonerblue]

The elbow on Jesus not shown on motd2.

Weird.

I also spotted a punch/slap by 'hendo' to the back of an Arsenal player that was ignored. Think that's what set off the melee

 

[Onholiday(somemightsay)]

Probably a genuine error again?

 

[laserblue]

The Guardian hates us for our wealth and the Mail hates us for our owner’s ethnicity.

The Liverpool Echo hates us because we make their readership cry.

 

[stonerblue]

All a matter of opinion, I guess, but my view would be Samuel aside - who is excellent, granted - their coverage of City is about as bad as it gets.

It’s awful enough when taken in isolation, but when you stand it next to the endless reams of fawning, openly propagandist drivel they churn out on both United and Liverpool it looks even more ridiculous and lacking in basic objectivity by comparison.

Sundays match report was good.

 

[Exeter Blue I am here]

All a matter of opinion, I guess, but my view would be Samuel aside - who is excellent, granted - their coverage of City is about as bad as it gets.

It’s awful enough when taken in isolation, but when you stand it next to the endless reams of fawning, openly propagandist drivel they churn out on both United and Liverpool it looks even more ridiculous and lacking in basic objectivity by comparison.

The back pages of the Mail are no different to the front. Every article comes with a comments section and provocative headlines to harvest clicks, the rationale being to appeal to its core readership demographics wherever and whenever possible. As regards the front pages this means endless, grotesquely distorted, hate-pieces about Prince Harry, Meghan Markle, Jeremy Corbyn, Gary Lineker, 'lefties', public servants, teachers, Joe Biden, woke culture, 'remoaners', asylum seekers, Macron, the French, Benedict Cumberbatch and just about anyone else it can think of that will get its foaming, red faced readers all revved up. On the back pages, it seeks to appeal to United and Liverpool fans because they have far and away the biggest fanbases in this country, so provocative nonsense about City, a carefully cultivated enemy of both clubs, is always on the agenda, from Haaland's 'disgusting' wage packet, to 'net spend' graphs, to empty seats, to anything and everything it can think of to cast us in the role of 'no class' arrivistes and massage the egos of the rags and the dippers in the process

 

[its grim up north]

It looks like the £950k a week Haaland is supposed to be earning is now gospel , every media outlet is now regurgitating this garbage , even the Dipper Echo is now using it as an excuse that the Dipshits cannot compete with

I fail to understand how one of our players wages can result in the Dipps not beating Fulham, Palace, Everton and Brighton, and losing to the rags, Napoli and Arsenal.

 

[daveoswald]

The Guardian hates us for our wealth and the Mail hates us for our owner’s ethnicity.

Think there is a slight flaw in your argument, Utd, Liverpool and Chelsea are all very wealthy, the guardian doesn't seem to hate them.