mancityvstoke
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 15 Apr 2009
- Messages
- 22,047
- Location
- Vintage terraced Kippax
- Team supported
- The only football team to come from Manchester
5948947 said:
some crackers on here...totally missed by me
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Villa post match thread
- Thread starter taleofbluehalves
- Start date
some crackers on here...totally missed by me
TueartsOHK
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 26 Oct 2011
- Messages
- 2,521
- Location
- Denton to West Midlands
- Team supported
- Citizens of Hope and Glory
I know it's a pointless task but I complained to Sky about the after match analysis...
I am writing to complain about the completely one sided after match analysis following yesterday's match. As a City fan I have no problem with any comments that Villa were unlucky not to get something from the game - both teams were guilty of defensive errors but Villa had the better possession and played some good football.
If Sky Sports choose to employ a pundit such as Petrov who is an ex Villa player, they need to make sure that the after match debate is balanced and it wasn't. Immediately after the final whistle the talking point was the off side decision when Benteke was through on goal - of course it was plain to see that the officials had got it wrong and it was obvious why this was a big talking point. But where was the analysis of the incorrect decisions regarding the 2 penalties - both of which were described by the commentators as stone wall penalties that Villa were very lucky to get away with? Where was the analysis of Villa's first goal where Benteke was clearly off side in an active position (the ball into the box clearly aimed at him)? Even after the interview with Pellegrini when the penalty incidents were mentioned there was still no mention of either incident in the studio. Unfortunately this is becoming a regular feature when watching City games - so much so that I normally turn the TV over after the final whistle (even when we've won)
I'm sure you get many complaints of this nature but I urge you to take a look at this analysis and ask yourself if the debate was balanced and impartial.
I am writing to complain about the completely one sided after match analysis following yesterday's match. As a City fan I have no problem with any comments that Villa were unlucky not to get something from the game - both teams were guilty of defensive errors but Villa had the better possession and played some good football.
If Sky Sports choose to employ a pundit such as Petrov who is an ex Villa player, they need to make sure that the after match debate is balanced and it wasn't. Immediately after the final whistle the talking point was the off side decision when Benteke was through on goal - of course it was plain to see that the officials had got it wrong and it was obvious why this was a big talking point. But where was the analysis of the incorrect decisions regarding the 2 penalties - both of which were described by the commentators as stone wall penalties that Villa were very lucky to get away with? Where was the analysis of Villa's first goal where Benteke was clearly off side in an active position (the ball into the box clearly aimed at him)? Even after the interview with Pellegrini when the penalty incidents were mentioned there was still no mention of either incident in the studio. Unfortunately this is becoming a regular feature when watching City games - so much so that I normally turn the TV over after the final whistle (even when we've won)
I'm sure you get many complaints of this nature but I urge you to take a look at this analysis and ask yourself if the debate was balanced and impartial.