Mike Summerbee you are legend

[Sugarloaf]

Here's my letter:

I am writing to express my complete and utter condemnation of the treatment given to a true English Legend such as Mike Summerbee during your coverage of the Manchester Derby on 12/2/2011.

It seems very obvious to me that every attempt was made to belittle, ridicule and demean every positive comment the former Manchester City winger made, by his fellow pundits Redknapp and Yorke and of the main presenter.

The most telling was their attempt to portray Mr Summerbee as someone who was not in complete possession of the facts of the game by revealing the stats which showed Man Utd had a 54%-46% possession advantage over Manchester City.

However the TRUE faces as stated on your OWN website and various other websites shows that Mr Summerbee was actually correct in his assumption that Manchester City possessed a greater period of possession (51%-49% in favour of Manchester City)

I would like to know whether or not it is the general practice of Sky Sports football coverage to present inaccurate facts and to demean past legends of the game just so you can present a positive and superior image of Man Utd over Manchester City.

I also noticed the bias concerning Mr Tyler in his commentary, went beyond the realms of the acceptible and a blatant example of a lack of impartiality.

For someone like myself who has subscribed to Sky Sports for 7 years, i have noticed this trend for a while but it is only after today that it has become glaringly obvious that, for a self confessed impartial sports broadcaster, today's events and spiteful, playground demeaning of Mr Summerbee leads me and indeed others, to believe this is anything but the case for Sky Sports, and as a result i am seriously considering my subscription as a viewer, i don't expect to see a one-sided viewpoint from the presenters and indeed the network for such high profile games such as this.

I expect at least a reply from someone at Sky Sports to explain why the programme had an obvious bias towards Man Utd and the dispicable attempt of demeaning a long serving former English footballer using inaccurate or misinterpreted statistics which have since shown Mr Summerbee's comments to be wholly accurate in their delivery.

Fella, they're printing this letter on T-shirts over at rag cafe. Leave it alone now, the games over. Have some dignity and man up.

 

[cleavers]

Correct, ignore the other shit, and how the worst player on the pitch gets man of the match for one piece of genius, its called luck in the real world, because 99 times out of 100 he would not have scored, and probably 75/100 not even connected with the ball.

Watch the Rooney goal again carefully....came off the middle of his shin.

Thought I was being biased until my lad rang up saying the same thing.

I know, and he only got the ball courtesy of a deflection off Zaba from the cross, and Kompany slipping at the same instance, however the "genius" was attempting it in the circumstances, you can't knock that. Lucky bastard we all know that, and for ever more "one of the greatest sporting moments" just like Giggs "best ever ever ever goal" in that semi final at Villa Park.

Just ignore the bias, one day we'll rise way above it, and the pill will be very very bitter for those that lick the arse of the devil.

 

[Metal Biker]

Here's my letter:

I am writing to express my complete and utter condemnation of the treatment given to a true English Legend such as Mike Summerbee during your coverage of the Manchester Derby on 12/2/2011.

It seems very obvious to me that every attempt was made to belittle, ridicule and demean every positive comment the former Manchester City winger made, by his fellow pundits Redknapp and Yorke and of the main presenter.

The most telling was their attempt to portray Mr Summerbee as someone who was not in complete possession of the facts of the game by revealing the stats which showed Man Utd had a 54%-46% possession advantage over Manchester City.

However the TRUE faces as stated on your OWN website and various other websites shows that Mr Summerbee was actually correct in his assumption that Manchester City possessed a greater period of possession (51%-49% in favour of Manchester City)

I would like to know whether or not it is the general practice of Sky Sports football coverage to present inaccurate facts and to demean past legends of the game just so you can present a positive and superior image of Man Utd over Manchester City.

I also noticed the bias concerning Mr Tyler in his commentary, went beyond the realms of the acceptible and a blatant example of a lack of impartiality.

For someone like myself who has subscribed to Sky Sports for 7 years, i have noticed this trend for a while but it is only after today that it has become glaringly obvious that, for a self confessed impartial sports broadcaster, today's events and spiteful, playground demeaning of Mr Summerbee leads me and indeed others, to believe this is anything but the case for Sky Sports, and as a result i am seriously considering my subscription as a viewer, i don't expect to see a one-sided viewpoint from the presenters and indeed the network for such high profile games such as this.

I expect at least a reply from someone at Sky Sports to explain why the programme had an obvious bias towards Man Utd and the dispicable attempt of demeaning a long serving former English footballer using inaccurate or misinterpreted statistics which have since shown Mr Summerbee's comments to be wholly accurate in their delivery.

Fella, they're printing this letter on T-shirts over at rag cafe. Leave it alone now, the games over. Have some dignity and man up.

Then i'd say they're the sad bastards with no dignity.

This is aimed at Sky Sports, not United.

Have some dignity, and realise your paranoia is hilariously misguided. Not everything is about them.☺

 

[Balti]

Fella, they're printing this letter on T-shirts over at rag cafe. Leave it alone now, the games over. Have some dignity and man up.

Then i'd say they're the sad bastards with no dignity.

This is aimed at Sky Sports, not United.
Have some dignity, and realise not everything is about them.☺

$ky sports and man yew have a joint venture called mutv
they are in bed together
they share business goals and objectives

I think we need to wake up to this fact. Sky are rags.

 

[Villan10]

Don't know but Summerbee said City had 60% possesion and had more chances than Utd though.

Highest posession was 55%-45%, but overall both the BBC and Sky have the overall possession at 49% to United and 51% to Manchester City.

Not exactly 60% but neither was it 54% to Man Utd. They did it to make him look foolish, whereas Summerbee, without the advantage of cameras, computers and stats boards, was still able to use logic to determine that the match was NOT as one sided as his fellow pundits and the presenter were making out at the time.

Had Sky Sports given the 'impartial' and 'unbiased' sports coverage they claim to do, then Summerbee would not have felt so frustrated. He felt like his views were being attacked and that his assumption that City played well and matched United were being ridiculed as nonsense, when the stats ACTUALLY show, that Summerbee was right.

City and United had an equal number of chances, again Summerbee, with 30 years over his fellow prsenters and lack of game statistics equipment called it right, yet they ridiculed him on that too.

No, having watched it back. Never once did they say United were the better team or deserved it. They were talking about the goal, what a great goal it was, which given the circumstances, is pretty obvious but then Summerbee sort of went on a mini rant, looked a bit sad to me as a neutral. No one actually said United deserved it or whatever but Summerbee decided to start saying how City had more chances and more possesion, again valid points and the only comments against that by Yorke was basically 'it's the chances you take that matters'...which is nothing wrong with that comment either.

It was the manner in way he approached it for me. Again, I've already said, no points he made were ever really bad one's, but it was all a little desperate of a man who was basically gutted. Just overly angry for no reason and it come across a little badly.

I guess as a fan it's nice to see someone care so much and show passion but on live TV, I think it was a little childish.

Not what was said but how it was said. He ranted about points that could of been discussed....he was getting visibily angry and wound up by nothing really.

 

[Metal Biker]

Then i'd say they're the sad bastards with no dignity.

This is aimed at Sky Sports, not United.
Have some dignity, and realise not everything is about them.☺

$ky sports and man yew have a joint venture called mutv
they are in bed together
they share business goals and objectives

I think we need to wake up to this fact. Sky are rags.

Looks like i'm saving myself £18 quid then! ☺

 

[HellasLEAF]

Well today analysts are supposed to be well dressed, white teeth robots with not passion for any club so when they see a bit of pride well up in a former player (this is the key you see, it's hard to quiet the fires inside a man that's played the game at the level Summerbee has) then everyone cries foul, points a finger, shakes their head and starts to look down on the man.

SHAME. Summerbee was only saying what everyone was thinking.

 

[dave_blue12]

It was not a great goal !

Spectacular yes Great no

The cross was deflected, the ball was behind Rooney and he had a go the only way possible. He caught it on his shin and it flew in the net. The other 99 times out of 100 he tried it the ball ends up in the crowd.

Very very lucky !!!

But Sky and the rest of the media will wank on about it ad nauseum. Goals of great quality and skill will be ignored and the myth of the white Pele will continue.

It's all bollocks !

 

[Villan10]

It was not a great goal !

Spectacular yes Great no

The cross was deflected, the ball was behind Rooney and he had a go the only way possible. He caught it on his shin and it flew in the net. The other 99 times out of 100 he tried it the ball ends up in the crowd.

Very very lucky !!!

But Sky and the rest of the media will wank on about it ad nauseum. Goals of great quality and skill will be ignored and the myth of the white Pele will continue.

It's all bollocks !

I don't get the theory behind this.

99 times out of 100, it ends up in the crowd....exactly, that's why it's a great goal because it's so hard to do, when you do do it, it's sublime. It's not done often because it's an incredible skill.

Although I guess it's where you stand in a hole in one shot. Luck or skill. Well skill for me, luck is something comes to something without intention or something that comes with the help of external factors.

In the way the ball got to Rooney, that's luck. The skill isn't.

Having a shot going well wide, smashing off the backside of a defender and into the top corner, that's luck.

In reality, if that goal is lucky, so are most great goals because usually great goals are 1/100 things whether it's a volley from 25 yards into the top corner or a run where you go past 4/5 players. Hence the reason it rarely ever happens.

Although he certainly isn't 'back' and nor is he in good form.

 

[friend]

I'm sorry. If you can not agree that was a great goal, you have never seen a great goal.

This isn't me gloating. It was a great goal and is odds on to win goal of the season. Fwiw Rooney was never MOM. Smalling was our best player. Kompany was MOM.

You must have been one hell of a player.