so this agenda thing.

[mancity dan]

That's not unusual
The Times podcast looked into this last season, of course the Times are Agenderistas too, and the average number of fouls committed before getting a yellow card was about six, whereas for Manchester City it was about three.

So if you play in the sky blue of Manchester City you are twice as likely to get booked
We must have some vicious thugs playing for us

We do. Did you see that vicious brute Silva laying into all and sundry ;-)

it was a cynical little foul though, had no complaints when he got booked

interesting little stat never the less

God knows how Kompany got a yellow either.

 

[Blue Is the Opposite of Blue]

So now we're on to Red Button headlines and yellow card averages?

 

[Len Rum]

The agenda is to sell stuff. The greater a readership number the more papers can charge for advertising space, so although Manchester United finished 7th last season there is no way that 6 other teams will get more exposure the ManYoo.

There is always a big lead in story on the back of the paper which pulls the potential reader in. If this is a splash about 'them' the great unwashed who follow Manchester United will be far more liable to stick there hands in their pockets.

They will also create villains & heros to fit a narrative, if you look back on the title run in the media as a whole backed the Liverpool push, telling everyone that Liverpool deserved it with their exciting attacking play. Awards were handed out and the only thing missing was they ultimately failed. The coverage of the City run in and the incredible string of results we gained despite playing catch up was not given much attention. City won a double last year and you would hardly know over the summer. We don't sell papers yet in the same league as Liverpool or Manchester United, this same theory could be applied to TV shows, podcasts, radio, magazines etc....

Citysmith. Excellent post.
I like your first sentence "The agenda is to sell stuff".
As you point out, Dippers and United stories for example will increase revenue more than City stories because of the sizes of the target markets (fan base).
And it doesn't require much lateral thinking to realise that pro Dipper/United stories and anti City stories will increase revenues even further.
So we have an agenda of 'revenue increase', the means of achieving which is to be biased in the reporting of the affairs of the different clubs.
Agenda and bias combined in one.
And yet there are still some who seek to deny it.

 

[city2]

They can have the headlines in the papers while we collect more trophies, works for me.

 

[pantalon violet again]

It's becoming a parody of itself this thread .
Fucking lunatics the lot of you



It's like the UFO phenomenon , there are genuine questions to be asked but far too many spotty geeks with time on their hands who dilute serious debate with fake videos and making shit up

Therefore ridicule ensues .

Bias is evident but this thread has gone way over the line and now is it's own joke

 

[Deleted member 58678]

Just been looking at all the games over the weekend with the yellow card to fouls committed ratio and (correct me I'm wrong) but no one is near as high as ours 5 yellows to 11 fouls committed.

Don't want to add to the paranoia but...

That's not unusual
The Times podcast looked into this last season, of course the Times are Agenderistas too, and the average number of fouls committed before getting a yellow card was about six, whereas for Manchester City it was about three.

So if you play in the sky blue of Manchester City you are twice as likely to get booked
We must have some vicious thugs playing for us

I think we're the most physical team in the Prem. We have the ball a great deal and when we lose it we've usually got a lot of players up the pitch and it's usually a breakway by the opposition so we often bring them down by stopping their attack which is a booking.

 

[Crab Paste!]

It's becoming a parody of itself this thread .
Fucking lunatics the lot of you



It's like the UFO phenomenon , there are genuine questions to be asked but far too many spotty geeks with time on their hands who dilute serious debate with fake videos and making shit up

Therefore ridicule ensues .

Bias is evident but this thread has gone way over the line and now is it's own joke

Correct.

You're all a bunch of fucking lunatics!


Has this none existent agenda stopped us winning shit loads of trophys over the last few years?



I'll answer that myself if I may Jeff, no, it most certainly has not!


So what's the chuffing problem?

In the words of Denim clad, Irish pop strumpets (only one of whom was fit), Bewitched......

'Get a life'!


[video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UvjLgjtJKsc[/video]

 

[squirtyflower]

So now we're on to Red Button headlines and yellow card averages?

wow what a superb cogent comeback, clearly expressed well written and full of the evidence for us all to pack up and go home

you want facts, you get facts, no narrative, but still you are an hypocritical spoilt brat

 

[squirtyflower]

Just been looking at all the games over the weekend with the yellow card to fouls committed ratio and (correct me I'm wrong) but no one is near as high as ours 5 yellows to 11 fouls committed.

Don't want to add to the paranoia but...

That's not unusual
The Times podcast looked into this last season, of course the Times are Agenderistas too, and the average number of fouls committed before getting a yellow card was about six, whereas for Manchester City it was about three.

So if you play in the sky blue of Manchester City you are twice as likely to get booked
We must have some vicious thugs playing for us

I think we're the most physical team in the Prem

more than Stoke?
more than Moyes Everton?
more than any Bruce team?
more than Allardyce's teams?

fair enough

 

[SilverFox2]

Thank heavens for the last few posts.

Just before that I thought for an awful moment that the thread was about to stutter into a consensus of balanced views.

 

[sir baconface]

Citysmith. Excellent post.
I like your first sentence "The agenda is to sell stuff".
As you point out, Dippers and United stories for example will increase revenue more than City stories because of the sizes of the target markets (fan base).
And it doesn't require much lateral thinking to realise that pro Dipper/United stories and anti City stories will increase revenues even further.
So we have an agenda of 'revenue increase', the means of achieving which is to be biased in the reporting of the affairs of the different clubs.
Agenda and bias combined in one.
And yet there are still some who seek to deny it.

Saying the same thing over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over again doesn't make something an indisputable fact.

Over and out.

 

[Big Blue Swede]

Citysmith. Excellent post.
I like your first sentence "The agenda is to sell stuff".
As you point out, Dippers and United stories for example will increase revenue more than City stories because of the sizes of the target markets (fan base).
And it doesn't require much lateral thinking to realise that pro Dipper/United stories and anti City stories will increase revenues even further.
So we have an agenda of 'revenue increase', the means of achieving which is to be biased in the reporting of the affairs of the different clubs.
Agenda and bias combined in one.
And yet there are still some who seek to deny it.

Saying the same thing over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over again doesn't make something an indisputable fact.

Over and over and over and over and over and out.

Fixed.

 

[sir baconface]

Citysmith. Excellent post.
I like your first sentence "The agenda is to sell stuff".
As you point out, Dippers and United stories for example will increase revenue more than City stories because of the sizes of the target markets (fan base).
And it doesn't require much lateral thinking to realise that pro Dipper/United stories and anti City stories will increase revenues even further.
So we have an agenda of 'revenue increase', the means of achieving which is to be biased in the reporting of the affairs of the different clubs.
Agenda and bias combined in one.
And yet there are still some who seek to deny it.

Saying the same thing over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over again doesn't make something an indisputable fact.

Over and over and over and over and over and out.

Fixed.

:-)

 

[Len Rum]

Thank heavens for the last few posts.

Just before that I thought for an awful moment that the thread was about to stutter into a consensus of balanced views.

Foxy - there is a consensus on the thread that there is a media agenda of maximising revenue and the anti City biased reporting forms part of the achievement of that agenda.
There remain however a few individuals who believe either:
1. There is bias but no agenda (without explaining why, but probably on the mistaken impression that agenda involves collaboration ,which it doesn't).
2. There is no bias or agenda (no specific explanation given).

There you are I've said it again.

The debate went quiet towards the middle of last season but what kick started it back into life was the Liverpool 'love in' towards the end of the season, and the general media disregard for City's eventual title win. This media coverage (or lack of it) is never mentioned by the few non agendarists left, nor is there any attempt by them to explain or justify it.

 

[Len Rum]

Citysmith. Excellent post.
I like your first sentence "The agenda is to sell stuff".
As you point out, Dippers and United stories for example will increase revenue more than City stories because of the sizes of the target markets (fan base).
And it doesn't require much lateral thinking to realise that pro Dipper/United stories and anti City stories will increase revenues even further.
So we have an agenda of 'revenue increase', the means of achieving which is to be biased in the reporting of the affairs of the different clubs.
Agenda and bias combined in one.
And yet there are still some who seek to deny it.

Saying the same thing over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over again doesn't make something an indisputable fact.

Over and out.

At the risk of boring everyone, could you state your counter argument not over and over again because I don't believe you've ever put one forward in the first place.

 

[Cellarite]

It's becoming a parody of itself this thread .
Fucking lunatics the lot of you



It's like the UFO phenomenon , there are genuine questions to be asked but far too many spotty geeks with time on their hands who dilute serious debate with fake videos and making shit up

Therefore ridicule ensues .

Bias is evident but this thread has gone way over the line and now is it's own joke

Deary me.

 

[Deleted member 58678]

Thank heavens for the last few posts.

Just before that I thought for an awful moment that the thread was about to stutter into a consensus of balanced views.

Foxy - there is a consensus on the thread that there is a media agenda of maximising revenue and the anti City biased reporting forms part of the achievement of that agenda.
There remain however a few individuals who believe either:
1. There is bias but no agenda (without explaining why, but probably on the mistaken impression that agenda involves collaboration ,which it doesn't).
2. There is no bias or agenda (no specific explanation given).

There you are I've said it again.

The debate went quiet towards the middle of last season but what kick started it back into life was the Liverpool 'love in' towards the end of the season, and the general media disregard for City's eventual title win. This media coverage (or lack of it) is never mentioned by the few non agendarists left, nor is there any attempt by them to explain or justify it.

I don't think there is all that much anti-City biased reporting. There are little digs here and there from the same culprits, then the odd strange article every now and again...overall it's more pro-certain-other-clubs than anti-City.

Some people say that is pro-old "Sky Four". But the amount of derogatory stuff about Arsenal in the media must double what we get and it is far more damning of that club. And did you stay tuned in to Monday Night Football last year when Liveprool threw that 0-3 lead away at Palace when Carragher and Neville ripped Liverpool and Rodgers to shreds live on air. I've not seen then level of negativity towards any City manager since the takeover.

The media did get very carried away with Liverpool from March onwards last season, certainly, but they weren't particularly anti-City as an industry in my eyes at all.

But where there are some negative things about us, there is also a huge amount that a lot of our fanbase is far too oversensitive about and the same people pay absolutely no attention to all the positive things about us in the media, as if it doesn't exist, or they don't want to believe it does so they choose to ignore it.

I also pop into this thread to provide many examples of this positive stuff in the media.

Again, "the media disregard for City's eventual title win". I bought the papers (it's the only time i ever do) the day after and also watched back the extensive amount of time Sky spent talking about City at the end of the final game - with Quinn Souness and even Redknapp fawning over us and especially Quinn and Souness talking positively about our future. Then there was the coverage of the open top bus tour. Over the Summer, while other clubs whore themselves out to the media, City purposely kept a closed door to them. We didn't want to engage with them too much, by our own choice. We didn't allow anyone to come on tour with us from the media other than the people from our own official website. Then just two days ago there was The Race For The Title on Sky - an hour long programme on the final month of last season. Sky didn't have to make or show that programme, but they did and it was a joy to watch! (it was better than our DVD we put out, mainly due to the fact it didn't have crap music playing throughout it, but i am a bit picky when it comes to music...anyway...)

I'm not saying there is nothing there, because there is. But it's certainly nowhere near as anti-City as people make out and even the ones that are negative about us aren't as bad as people make out.

 

[Hamann Pineapple]

How come that MNF graphic showing United's huge net spend hasn't featured heavily in today's sports pages, surely that would be worth a few hits

 

[George Hannah]

It's becoming a parody of itself this thread .
Fucking lunatics the lot of you
It's like the UFO phenomenon , there are genuine questions to be asked but far too many spotty geeks with time on their hands who dilute serious debate with fake videos and making shit up
Therefore ridicule ensues .
Bias is evident but this thread has gone way over the line and now is it's own joke

Deary me.

it's chewing its own teeth

 

[George Hannah]

I don't think there is all that much anti-City biased reporting. ...

this fiction is simply remedied - just read more