The Agenda (Merged)

[Phil1]

Re: so this agenda thing.

No I am happy to discuss anything. Firstly I did not see the list of 20 I had just flicked on when discussing the merits of the two contenders. Personally I would have expected Silva's and Aguero's at Sunderland comfortably within this list. I am surprised they were not. I would be interested to know who the twenty were now.

Reasons for the glaring oversight? I can only think personal preference or like you say a shocking oversight. Not quite sure what Sky would gain by not including them? Why do you think they are not included?

I could add the Aguero goal v QPR, which would make it THREE glaring oversights. Interesting that these three omissions were all scored by City players. The strange thing is, SKY are usually shit hot on these sort of montages.

It must be a succession of unfortunate co-incidences. That's probably the most logical explanation.

Silva goal was a BT Saturday lunchtime game and presumably there are no goals from BT coverage in the selection.

Aguero goal at QPR was brilliant but probabbly shouldn't have been allowed.

That second line is priceless.

 

[Blue Mist]

Re: so this agenda thing.

First I do believe their is an agenda by the media but that agenda is to run a positive angle on anything that is favourable towards the old top four.

Anyone that listened to the $ky commentary last night, Liverpool v Southampton must surely agree. At nil-nil Liverpool were 'resurgent', 'their recent run shows Liverpool back to their best'.
Every time a Southampton attack broke down it was because of excellent defending by the dippers, when it was the other way around it was bad luck, so nearly, etc etc.
I don't know whether a Southampton fans forum has an agenda thread but if they do it will have exploded last night.


So it is not just us.

Think it might have, apart from not playing last night, it was swansea

Ooooops, think before I type, I must think before I type.

 

[Blue Punter]

Re: so this agenda thing.

Typically you only quoted the narrative which suits your argument, failing to quote the later post where I wholeheartedly agreed those two goals should have been part of the best 20.

Similar to 'Aguero finally gets a mention' which suggests he was discussed as a side issue not proclaimed by both pundits as the only world class player in the Premiership and the best player in the Premiership.

I dont think there is an agenda but can see that those two goals should have made the top twenty. I do not have a fixed position like yourself and I an happy to have a balanced debate rather than yourself who just dismisses people who do not agree with the agenda as reds.

Im still waiting for a reporter to speak more offensively about a City player than you have about Yaya.

Quoting a narrative that suits your argument is exactly what you have done. I wrote "Aguero finally gets a mention" because the feature had been on for some time, showing in excess of 20 goals of the season and not a mention of Sergio. He was spoke about towards the conclusion of the review. Do you see the link there? "Conclusion" and "Finally".

I never commented on the content, just the timing of it. Despite me pointing out the context of my quote, you then attempt to portray it as a criticism from me that they spoke about Aguero as an afterthought. Again not true, but it suits your narrative. Something you're all too happy to accuse others of.

I've highlighted the relevant quotes for you if that helps.

Yes and why did you not comment on the context of it? Because you posted on the Agenda thread, highlighting that 2 city goals (Which I agreed should have been listed) were not included in the top twenty, inferring, by the nature of the title of the thread, was relevant to the agenda but was not prepared to offer as a counter balance they described a City player as World Class, would get in a world eleven, and was the best player in the Premiership.

If you are honest 'Aguero finally gets a mention' to anyone not watching the show would suggest he was a side issue, an afterthought not two pundits eulogising over what a wonderful player he was. But if you cannot see that their is little further to debate.

When you say "anyone not watching the show" do you include yourself in that? By your own admission, you conveniently switched channels at the time they were eulogising about Aguero. I was watching from the start and it to me it seemed a long time until he got a mention.

At the risk of repeating myself, it was said towards the conclusion of the feature. After 20+ goals had been shown. You would have known this if you would have been watching from the start. However you wasn't, so you have absoloutely no idea. I'm baffled why you're labouring the point. Is it because you was forced to answer the simple question as to why these three goals were omotted in the first place?

 

[chris85mcfc]

Re: so this agenda thing.

BT have a new Christmas advert with Carol singers singing 'lets all do the Poznan'

Just thought I would mention this after someone was getting a bit upset last week about the 'My old man said be a City fan' advert

 

[franksinatra]

Re: so this agenda thing.

Quoting a narrative that suits your argument is exactly what you have done. I wrote "Aguero finally gets a mention" because the feature had been on for some time, showing in excess of 20 goals of the season and not a mention of Sergio. He was spoke about towards the conclusion of the review. Do you see the link there? "Conclusion" and "Finally".

I never commented on the content, just the timing of it. Despite me pointing out the context of my quote, you then attempt to portray it as a criticism from me that they spoke about Aguero as an afterthought. Again not true, but it suits your narrative. Something you're all too happy to accuse others of.

I've highlighted the relevant quotes for you if that helps.

Yes and why did you not comment on the context of it? Because you posted on the Agenda thread, highlighting that 2 city goals (Which I agreed should have been listed) were not included in the top twenty, inferring, by the nature of the title of the thread, was relevant to the agenda but was not prepared to offer as a counter balance they described a City player as World Class, would get in a world eleven, and was the best player in the Premiership.

If you are honest 'Aguero finally gets a mention' to anyone not watching the show would suggest he was a side issue, an afterthought not two pundits eulogising over what a wonderful player he was. But if you cannot see that their is little further to debate.

When you say "anyone not watching the show" do you include yourself in that? By your own admission, you conveniently switched channels at the time they were eulogising about Aguero. I was watching from the start and it to me it seemed a long time until he got a mention.

At the risk of repeating myself, it was said towards the conclusion of the feature. After 20+ goals had been shown. You would have known this if you would have been watching from the start. However you wasn't, so you have absoloutely no idea. I'm baffled why you're labouring the point. Is it because you was forced to answer the simple question as to why these three goals were omotted in the first place?

No mate again you are twisting the story. Last night we discussed the merits of Di Maria's and Jagielka's two goals which preceded the bit about Aguero. Also I told you this two pages back when I stated

"Firstly I did not see the list of 20 I had just flicked on when discussing the merits of the two contenders". So can you please state where I, by my own admission I conveniently switched channels at the time they were eulogising about Aguero?

Secondly you did not force me into anything. My opening post last night I stated I thought the team was a joke and later added Silva should have been included I also agreed Aguero's and Silva's should have been in the top twenty. Those two points do not suit my belief that there is not an agenda but I would rather have a balanced debate than leave elements out to suit my narrative.

 

[Lemon7277]

Re: so this agenda thing.

Just check out the sky sports football app section today...as you scroll down to near the bottom there are 4 links to top 5 moments for 4 teams....scum...bin dippers....arsenal and Chelsea....no agenda my arse

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Re: so this agenda thing.

BT have a new Christmas advert with Carol singers singing 'lets all do the Poznan'

Just thought I would mention this after someone was getting a bit upset last week about the 'My old man said be a City fan' advert

Have they done the one where united go the Rome to see the Pope yet?

 

[Blue Punter]

Re: so this agenda thing.

Yes and why did you not comment on the context of it? Because you posted on the Agenda thread, highlighting that 2 city goals (Which I agreed should have been listed) were not included in the top twenty, inferring, by the nature of the title of the thread, was relevant to the agenda but was not prepared to offer as a counter balance they described a City player as World Class, would get in a world eleven, and was the best player in the Premiership.

If you are honest 'Aguero finally gets a mention' to anyone not watching the show would suggest he was a side issue, an afterthought not two pundits eulogising over what a wonderful player he was. But if you cannot see that their is little further to debate.

When you say "anyone not watching the show" do you include yourself in that? By your own admission, you conveniently switched channels at the time they were eulogising about Aguero. I was watching from the start and it to me it seemed a long time until he got a mention.

At the risk of repeating myself, it was said towards the conclusion of the feature. After 20+ goals had been shown. You would have known this if you would have been watching from the start. However you wasn't, so you have absoloutely no idea. I'm baffled why you're labouring the point. Is it because you was forced to answer the simple question as to why these three goals were omotted in the first place?

No mate again you are twisting the story. Last night we discussed the merits of Di Maria's and Jagielka's two goals which preceded the bit about Aguero. Also I told you this two pages back when I stated

"Firstly I did not see the list of 20 I had just flicked on when discussing the merits of the two contenders". So can you please state where I, by my own admission I conveniently switched channels at the time they were eulogising about Aguero?

Secondly you did not force me into anything. My opening post last night I stated I thought the team was a joke and later added Silva should have been included I also agreed Aguero's and Silva's should have been in the top twenty. Those two points do not suit my belief that there is not an agenda but I would rather have a balanced debate than leave elements out to suit my narrative.

Fair enough about the exact time you switched over. My point remains that you didn't see the montage of goals and what preceded it. Perhaps if you had, you would have thought it strange why these were omitted. In fact when specifically asked you seemed quite ambivalent about the omission of goals from Silva & Aguero.

"If I had an opinion on that I would have done so in my initial response".

I never debated the merits of the Di Maria or Jagielka goals. You brought that into the discussion when I asked you why you thought the City goals were omitted. Which didn't really answer my question.

 

[Pablo ZZZ Peroni]

Re: so this agenda thing.

I could add the Aguero goal v QPR, which would make it THREE glaring oversights. Interesting that these three omissions were all scored by City players. The strange thing is, SKY are usually shit hot on these sort of montages.

It must be a succession of unfortunate co-incidences. That's probably the most logical explanation.

Silva goal was a BT Saturday lunchtime game and presumably there are no goals from BT coverage in the selection.

probabbly shouldn't have been allowed.

You presume wrong. The Sanchez goal Vs City was shown and that was a 12.45 kick off on BT Sport.

Aguero goal at QPR was brilliant but probably shouldn't have been allowed.

Wow, there's some straw clutching going on here.

Any reason why the Aguero one vs Sunderland (a) wasn't shown? Was it scored in the wrong minute?

Fair enough m8 if they included goals from BT games.

Just watched the playback from MNF last night. I would have included Silva in the top goals of the season so far but no complaints about the goals they did show as all very good. Difficult to narrow down to 20 or so when nearly 500 to select from. I did like the cameo of Aguero goals they showed when saying his is the only truly world class player in the League.

The team of the year is a funny one with so many Chelsea players included. I looked back to last year when MNF did the same thing at the end of 2013. City had 2 players in that one (YaYa and Aguero) which was more than Chelsea, United or Liverpool. Surprisingly (now) Everton were the best represented with 5 players following their good 1st half of the season and conceeding few goals.

 

[franksinatra]

Re: so this agenda thing.

When you say "anyone not watching the show" do you include yourself in that? By your own admission, you conveniently switched channels at the time they were eulogising about Aguero. I was watching from the start and it to me it seemed a long time until he got a mention.

At the risk of repeating myself, it was said towards the conclusion of the feature. After 20+ goals had been shown. You would have known this if you would have been watching from the start. However you wasn't, so you have absoloutely no idea. I'm baffled why you're labouring the point. Is it because you was forced to answer the simple question as to why these three goals were omotted in the first place?

No mate again you are twisting the story. Last night we discussed the merits of Di Maria's and Jagielka's two goals which preceded the bit about Aguero. Also I told you this two pages back when I stated

"Firstly I did not see the list of 20 I had just flicked on when discussing the merits of the two contenders". So can you please state where I, by my own admission I conveniently switched channels at the time they were eulogising about Aguero?

Secondly you did not force me into anything. My opening post last night I stated I thought the team was a joke and later added Silva should have been included I also agreed Aguero's and Silva's should have been in the top twenty. Those two points do not suit my belief that there is not an agenda but I would rather have a balanced debate than leave elements out to suit my narrative.

Fair enough about the exact time you switched over. My point remains that you didn't see the montage of goals and what preceded it. Perhaps if you had, you would have thought it strange why these were omitted. In fact when specifically asked you seemed quite ambivalent about the omission of goals from Silva & Aguero.

"If I had an opinion on that I would have done so in my initial response".

I never debated the merits of the Di Maria or Jagielka goals. You brought that into the discussion when I asked you why you thought the City goals were omitted. Which didn't really answer my question.

Well you have answered you own question then. As you have pointed out I did not see the montage of goals and so I believed your question related to Silva's omission form the top two hence I discussed the merits of those goals. Also the response you have quoted was prior to my knowledge of those goals being omitted from the top twenty.

When made aware of the preceding twenty I wrote this.

"Personally I would have expected Silva's and Aguero's at Sunderland comfortably within this list. I am surprised they were not. I would be interested to know who the twenty were now".

Nothing ambivalent about that. Anyway lets not derail the thread any further. I have no issue with your point of view, I do not agree with it but we both support the same team and ultimately want the same thing.