so this agenda thing.

[jimmygrimblesboots]

can anyone explain why twitchers lad despises us so much ? Perhaps Louise is getting her back doors smashed in by a city fan ? , He really does have issues with our club , and he appears to revelling in our current plight.

And yet he's on our end-of-season DVD.

and i was so looking forward to buying this televisual feast.

 

[everythingchangesbutblue]

you need to take a chill pill mate,
i asked you a simple question and yes you don't need to answer but also does not preclude me from asking the question either
and as for the rest of the cobblers you have replied with about me justifying ex-rags and press and and other forms of media
i think you need to re read this thread

nah pal, you are always asking for people to explain there views like their controversial because there different to yours and you are always condescending to fellow blues. you and youe ilk defend anything too, bad decisions, rags slaggin off our club but mostly you just ignore evidence. but you never know saying things like "take a chill pill" may discredit my opinion.

once again you are saying things that are patently not true, no matter how many times you say it. reread the thread
why are you so averse to me asking a question? if i don't agree with something why shouldn't i ask for reasons why you think otherwise
not so unreasonable.
its like its sacrilege to have a differing view

"you and your ilk" now who's being condescending, you want it both ways

yourself, de niro, george hannah, think there is more to the media bias(pro utd, liverpool, to which if you had read the thread will know i wholeheartedly agree with) than meets the eye, where as myself and quite a few others think otherwise

therefore there is a debate to be had, if you think that it condescending so be it.

Hit a nerve have i eh? pure bollocks that post mate. You defend everything but disregard what you want. At the end of the day you rule out the 100s of examples that blues provide yet you try to use 1 or 2 examples of your proof. Who does that and expects to be taken seriously.

 

[Blue Mooner]

nah pal, you are always asking for people to explain there views like their controversial because there different to yours and you are always condescending to fellow blues. you and youe ilk defend anything too, bad decisions, rags slaggin off our club but mostly you just ignore evidence. but you never know saying things like "take a chill pill" may discredit my opinion.

once again you are saying things that are patently not true, no matter how many times you say it. reread the thread
why are you so averse to me asking a question? if i don't agree with something why shouldn't i ask for reasons why you think otherwise
not so unreasonable.
its like its sacrilege to have a differing view

"you and your ilk" now who's being condescending, you want it both ways

yourself, de niro, george hannah, think there is more to the media bias(pro utd, liverpool, to which if you had read the thread will know i wholeheartedly agree with) than meets the eye, where as myself and quite a few others think otherwise

therefore there is a debate to be had, if you think that it condescending so be it.

Hit a nerve have i eh? pure bollocks that post mate. You defend everything but disregard what you want. At the end of the day you rule out the 100s of examples that blues provide yet you try to use 1 or 2 examples of your proof. Who does that and expects to be taken seriously.

Nail on the head, they discount the hundreds of examples and then jump on 'anything' and I mean 'anything' that might suggest the contrary view.

There was a positivity thread not so long ago and I literally begged for the nay Sayers to keep the thread going with positive stuff about the blues and guess what, it died a miserable death. I actually wanted to be proven wrong, for the weight of evidence to demonstrate that I was only viewing things through blue tinted specs. Sadly, it only served to reinforce my belief.

It's not whether there is an agenda, it's how deep and far rooted it is that is up for debate.

Take our start to the season, I said at the start of the season that it was set up for us to make a poor start, that allied to the champions league draw, and that this would play into the negativity amongst the fans and a lack of momentum. It's playing out perfectly, with our fans now talking about root and branch restructuring of the squad, replacing the manager and even Txiki and ferret being questioned, we are simply playing to their tune.

No consideration of the mitigating circumstances, losing in the last minute against Bayern, a penalty given in the last 5 minutes against CSKA and the the debacle of decisions against us vs CSKA. Without this our start in the champs league would have been pretty decent.

The hysteria is frankly ridiculous, but it's exactly what the authorities would want, teams don't play well low on confidence and when their own fans are slagging them, it's not rocket science.

I'm hoping that the run of fixtures now will give us an opportunity to turn it round but that will be in spite of the fans rather than because of them.

 

[bernabias home shirt]

Aint it funny that on RAWK and Sad Cafe they think there is an agenda against them...

Every club going mate, and every forum think they are hard done by..............

Go and have a look at Arsenal, Southampton and Newcastle's forums too.

I think we have a fair few followers of David Icke :)

 

[Bill]

once again you are saying things that are patently not true, no matter how many times you say it. reread the thread
why are you so averse to me asking a question? if i don't agree with something why shouldn't i ask for reasons why you think otherwise
not so unreasonable.
its like its sacrilege to have a differing view

"you and your ilk" now who's being condescending, you want it both ways

yourself, de niro, george hannah, think there is more to the media bias(pro utd, liverpool, to which if you had read the thread will know i wholeheartedly agree with) than meets the eye, where as myself and quite a few others think otherwise

therefore there is a debate to be had, if you think that it condescending so be it.

Hit a nerve have i eh? pure bollocks that post mate. You defend everything but disregard what you want. At the end of the day you rule out the 100s of examples that blues provide yet you try to use 1 or 2 examples of your proof. Who does that and expects to be taken seriously.

Nail on the head, they discount the hundreds of examples and then jump on 'anything' and I mean 'anything' that might suggest the contrary view.

There was a positivity thread not so long ago and I literally begged for the nay Sayers to keep the thread going with positive stuff about the blues and guess what, it died a miserable death. I actually wanted to be proven wrong, for the weight of evidence to demonstrate that I was only viewing things through blue tinted specs. Sadly, it only served to reinforce my belief.

It's not whether there is an agenda, it's how deep and far rooted it is that is up for debate.

Take our start to the season, I said at the start of the season that it was set up for us to make a poor start, that allied to the champions league draw, and that this would play into the negativity amongst the fans and a lack of momentum. It's playing out perfectly, with our fans now talking about root and branch restructuring of the squad, replacing the manager and even Txiki and ferret being questioned, we are simply playing to their tune.

No consideration of the mitigating circumstances, losing in the last minute against Bayern, a penalty given in the last 5 minutes against CSKA and the the debacle of decisions against us vs CSKA. Without this our start in the champs league would have been pretty decent.

The hysteria is frankly ridiculous, but it's exactly what the authorities would want, teams don't play well low on confidence and when their own fans are slagging them, it's not rocket science.

I'm hoping that the run of fixtures now will give us an opportunity to turn it round but that will be in spite of the fans rather than because of them.

another very good post.

 

[tonea2003]

nah pal, you are always asking for people to explain there views like their controversial because there different to yours and you are always condescending to fellow blues. you and youe ilk defend anything too, bad decisions, rags slaggin off our club but mostly you just ignore evidence. but you never know saying things like "take a chill pill" may discredit my opinion.

once again you are saying things that are patently not true, no matter how many times you say it. reread the thread
why are you so averse to me asking a question? if i don't agree with something why shouldn't i ask for reasons why you think otherwise
not so unreasonable.
its like its sacrilege to have a differing view

"you and your ilk" now who's being condescending, you want it both ways

yourself, de niro, george hannah, think there is more to the media bias(pro utd, liverpool, to which if you had read the thread will know i wholeheartedly agree with) than meets the eye, where as myself and quite a few others think otherwise

therefore there is a debate to be had, if you think that it condescending so be it.

Hit a nerve have i eh? pure bollocks that post mate. You defend everything but disregard what you want. At the end of the day you rule out the 100s of examples that blues provide yet you try to use 1 or 2 examples of your proof. Who does that and expects to be taken seriously.

No nerves mate you are mistaking me from someone else
You really haven't read the thread have you?
I have never ruled anything out ,I watch each and everyone of our games but yet to be convinced that there is a collection of bent refs giving decisions against us on purpose
Poor reffing yes but that's about it
You can get as irate as you like saying bollocks this bollocks that but until otherwise that is the case

Perfect example of the flawed logic was the derby last week
If what you are saying is true zabba and clichy could and should have booked before blind was
If Oliver was part of the ref agenda he would have been flashing cards like confetti
Of course your retort would be the lack of pens and I would concede it looks iffy not to give one but still think that is an individual making errors rather than him remembering to implement a agenda dictate.

Sorry it upsets so to have different viewpoint

 

[everythingchangesbutblue]

once again you are saying things that are patently not true, no matter how many times you say it. reread the thread
why are you so averse to me asking a question? if i don't agree with something why shouldn't i ask for reasons why you think otherwise
not so unreasonable.
its like its sacrilege to have a differing view

"you and your ilk" now who's being condescending, you want it both ways

yourself, de niro, george hannah, think there is more to the media bias(pro utd, liverpool, to which if you had read the thread will know i wholeheartedly agree with) than meets the eye, where as myself and quite a few others think otherwise

therefore there is a debate to be had, if you think that it condescending so be it.

Hit a nerve have i eh? pure bollocks that post mate. You defend everything but disregard what you want. At the end of the day you rule out the 100s of examples that blues provide yet you try to use 1 or 2 examples of your proof. Who does that and expects to be taken seriously.

No nerves mate you are mistaking me from someone else
You really haven't read the thread have you?
I have never ruled anything out ,I watch each and everyone of our games but yet to be convinced that there is a collection of bent refs giving decisions against us on purpose
Poor reffing yes but that's about it
You can get as irate as you like saying bollocks this bollocks that but until otherwise that is the case

Perfect example of the flawed logic was the derby last week
If what you are saying is true zabba and clichy could and should have booked before blind was
If Oliver was part of the ref agenda he would have been flashing cards like confetti
Of course your retort would be the lack of pens and I would concede it looks iffy not to give one but still think that is an individual making errors rather than him remembering to implement a agenda dictate.

Sorry it upsets so to have different viewpoint

bloody hell pal you're still doing it, using a handfull of decisions as proof all the while discounting 100s and 100s of examples of bias/agenda.

 

[everythingchangesbutblue]

Every club going mate, and every forum think they are hard done by..............

Go and have a look at Arsenal, Southampton and Newcastle's forums too.

I think we have a fair few followers of David Icke :)

"David Icke" again putting down fellow blues, why do that. Do you think insults give your views more creedence? can't think of another reason you would do it.

 

[Millwallawayveteran1988]

Hit a nerve have i eh? pure bollocks that post mate. You defend everything but disregard what you want. At the end of the day you rule out the 100s of examples that blues provide yet you try to use 1 or 2 examples of your proof. Who does that and expects to be taken seriously.

No nerves mate you are mistaking me from someone else
You really haven't read the thread have you?
I have never ruled anything out ,I watch each and everyone of our games but yet to be convinced that there is a collection of bent refs giving decisions against us on purpose
Poor reffing yes but that's about it
You can get as irate as you like saying bollocks this bollocks that but until otherwise that is the case

Perfect example of the flawed logic was the derby last week
If what you are saying is true zabba and clichy could and should have booked before blind was
If Oliver was part of the ref agenda he would have been flashing cards like confetti
Of course your retort would be the lack of pens and I would concede it looks iffy not to give one but still think that is an individual making errors rather than him remembering to implement a agenda dictate.

Sorry it upsets so to have different viewpoint

bloody hell pal you're still doing it, using a handfull of decisions as proof all the while discounting 100s and 100s of examples of bias/agenda.

I think it's more than a handful and less than 100's and 100's.

These extremes make the argument weaker but I agree that overall we get the worst of it. Yesterday however we got the best of it.

 

[Anonymous]

The champion's league is bent. You could see that at this years draw for the groups.

It's obvious the set up and format (seeding, coefficient points etc.) benefits the usual suspects.

Domestically I think it's becoming ABC (Anyone But City), this year the machine is throwing it's support behind Chelsea. Last year it was the dippers, the two previous years before that, the rags.

Historically they have always supported the rags but last season they had to change tactics because of the implosion at the swamp. Thus supporting the dippers (eulogising about their play, goals scored, Brenda winning LMA, etc. when we were better on every comparison).

This season despite the machine telling us they were in the title race after winning every cup on offer in pre season, they now realise the rags won't win it so they've had to change their focus to somebody else. Chelsea.

The two penalties the dippers didn't get yesterday proves it. Last season those would've been given, how many penalties were they awarded last season?, didn't Mourinho even moan about Suarez being a diver?.

Hazard's penalty against QPR is further proof they are being favoured, this to me is because this year they are the only team who the machine deems good enough to compete and possibly stop us from another title.

As poor as we have been, if it wasn't for favourable decisions for Chelsea against QPR and the dippers. They would only be four points clear. Notice how the machine isn't mentioning this fact.

Invincibles my arse, we were much better than them even down to ten men.