Premier League Years 2013/14

[kaz7]

They only showed one goal for the 6-3 because the images for that game are owned by BT Sports and can't show any more than they did.

And they did that with a number games, not just ours. They only showed one Liverpool goal against Arsenal in the 5-1 win.

I did expect more to be made of our huge wins but overall it was an ok review,like i said i don't expect any more from sky.I am in the bias rather than full on agenda camp.
I have decided that i will ignore the media this coming season,it's a waste of energy

You wont be able to, all the arguments will be on here ;-)

That's true lol

 

[Blue Is the Opposite of Blue]

For those complaining, which Liverpool goals would you have replaced with ours? Because I can't think of any.

I'm 15 minutes in and would so far say they could have shown Aguero's volley in the 4-1 derby as well as Nasri's and cut Liverpool's 2-1 win at Sunderland down to one goal.

So far, we've scored 4 on the opening day and 4 in a Manchester derby and they've shown 2 of the 8 goals but both of Liverpool's in a 2-1 win at Sunderland.

They did show Aguero's volley in the show's introduction, to be fair - and I think they showed two goals of Liverpool's 3-1 win against Sunderland because it was Suarez's first game back after his ban and he scored the two goals they showed.

 

[Cellarite]

For those complaining, which Liverpool goals would you have replaced with ours? Because I can't think of any.

I'm 15 minutes in and would so far say they could have shown Aguero's volley in the 4-1 derby as well as Nasri's and cut Liverpool's 2-1 win at Sunderland down to one goal.

So far, we've scored 4 on the opening day and 4 in a Manchester derby and they've shown 2 of the 8 goals but both of Liverpool's in a 2-1 win at Sunderland.

They did show Aguero's volley in the show's introduction, to be fair - and I think they showed two goals of Liverpool's 3-1 win against Sunderland because it was Suarez's first game back after his ban and he scored the two goals they showed.

Now they've just shown 2 of Suarez's goals in a win against West Brom. I've turned it off because I'm going to watch a film but will report back with more findings tomorrow.

 

[kaz7]

I have decided that i will ignore the media this coming season,it's a waste of energy

But reading opposing points of view is a good thing to do. Some articles are plain bitter, like that "match review" about our friendly against Dundee, but most of the articles about us which take a negative slant aren't bitter or rooted in bias. Some are totally fair. They don't always paint us in a good light, but we're not a perfect club. I'm yet to see any newspaper hit us hard in the way some of our own fans have about the horrendous ticket price increases for the Liverpool & Stoke games. It's good to read other perspectives even when you don't agree with them.

The daily mirror the last 6 days has had a double page rag section EVERY day,several one pages for chelsea and same for liverpool
Not a single word or even just the friendly scores about city except alf's injury
everyone else's friendlies have had a write up,explain that for me please

 

[HelloCity]

I take it 'Blue Is the Opposite of Blue' is Pidginho?

 

[pudge]

I have watched the first 45mins and it seems ok to me except the 6-3 win against the arses mentioned in a couple of secs and only showed yaya's penalty,that is odd given it was one of the games of the season
In answer to which other goals of ours they could have shown,well there was 6 there for a start and 3 in the derby at home they didn't show
Certainly they are not making much of the thrashings we handed out
I didnt really expect much more from sky

They only showed one goal for the 6-3 because the images for that game are owned by BT Sports and can't show any more than they did.

And they did that with a number games, not just ours. They only showed one Liverpool goal against Arsenal in the 5-1 win.

They showed 2 goals of the Spurs 5-1, that was on BT. Showed 3 goals of the Merseyside derby at Goodison, also on BT...

Showing one of the 7 against Norwich was poor, think they showed all 4 of United's in Gigg's first match against the same team. Mentioning that Liverpool had a wrongfully disallowed goal against us at the Etihad was poor, as it wasn't a disallowed goal at all just a wrong offside decision.

The Fulham game, with us 2-0 up then 2-2, then winning 4-2 would have been nice to see, especially with goals like Yaya's free kick, Navas' go ahead goal or Jimmy's after THAT Negredo pass, ah well I preferred seeing Liverpool beat West Ham with an O.G. and two deflected shots anyway...

 

[Blue Is the Opposite of Blue]

I have decided that i will ignore the media this coming season,it's a waste of energy

But reading opposing points of view is a good thing to do. Some articles are plain bitter, like that "match review" about our friendly against Dundee, but most of the articles about us which take a negative slant aren't bitter or rooted in bias. Some are totally fair. They don't always paint us in a good light, but we're not a perfect club. I'm yet to see any newspaper hit us hard in the way some of our own fans have about the horrendous ticket price increases for the Liverpool & Stoke games. It's good to read other perspectives even when you don't agree with them.

The daily mirror the last 6 days has had a double page rag section EVERY day,several one pages for chelsea and same for liverpool
Not a single word or even just the friendly scores about city except alf's injury
everyone else's friendlies have had a write up,explain that for me please

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/manchester-city-ease-4-1-friendly-3906338" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/ ... ly-3906338</a>

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/live-sporting-kansas-city-v-3904151" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/ ... -v-3904151</a>

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/pre-season-friendlies-premier-league-2014-15-3787408" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/ ... 15-3787408</a>

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/watch-live-manchester-city-vs-3850798" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/ ... vs-3850798</a>

And just for fun:

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/row-zed/manchester-united-fan-managed-define-3905313" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/row-zed/m ... ne-3905313</a>

 

[Deleted member 58619]

This program has just reiterated what a complete twat Tyler is, it's so obvious in his voice esp the win at the swamp sums him up.

this

The same can be said about his commentary of the Liverpool game at anfield. Shouting when Liverpool score and whispering when we score!

Yeah this angered me

Also not sure why we never got to see more of the 4v1 game against rags, especially Aguero volley!

 

[kaz7]

But reading opposing points of view is a good thing to do. Some articles are plain bitter, like that "match review" about our friendly against Dundee, but most of the articles about us which take a negative slant aren't bitter or rooted in bias. Some are totally fair. They don't always paint us in a good light, but we're not a perfect club. I'm yet to see any newspaper hit us hard in the way some of our own fans have about the horrendous ticket price increases for the Liverpool & Stoke games. It's good to read other perspectives even when you don't agree with them.

The daily mirror the last 6 days has had a double page rag section EVERY day,several one pages for chelsea and same for liverpool
Not a single word or even just the friendly scores about city except alf's injury
everyone else's friendlies have had a write up,explain that for me please

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/manchester-city-ease-4-1-friendly-3906338" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/ ... ly-3906338</a>

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/live-sporting-kansas-city-v-3904151" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/ ... -v-3904151</a>

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/pre-season-friendlies-premier-league-2014-15-3787408" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/ ... 15-3787408</a>

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/watch-live-manchester-city-vs-3850798" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/ ... vs-3850798</a>

And just for fun:

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/row-zed/manchester-united-fan-managed-define-3905313" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/row-zed/m ... ne-3905313</a>

I'm not clicking onto those,i am talking about the newspaper i have had in my hands this last week

 

[carlos tevez is a blue]

For those complaining, which Liverpool goals would you have replaced with ours? Because I can't think of any.