When is this bias going to end?

[We're not really here]

https://twitter.com/skysportsnews…/status/628071382321074176
Just read this and imagine that we had signed a player for £59 million. He flops badly, only scores 3 goals and then is sold after a year at a £15 million loss. The blindingly obvious bias is incredible! It would be funny but frankly it is getting ridiculous now!

 

[Sir peace frog]

when are these agenda threads going to end ? , there are two threads, agenda and media bias

 

[We're not really here]

It will end when there is no agenda anymore. So not any day soon mate I'm afraid! Stick this in the other thread if you want mods, I just found this one really hard to believe. How you spin this into a positive is beyond me!

 

[blueinsa]

I'm far more concerned and disillusioned by the remarks and attitudes of members on here to the club, its management team and players than I am by the media right now.

 

[franksinatra]

Another complete non-story and of course no balance has been added like the Sunday Express piece titled 'How United have wasted 100 million'.

So a player made a positive difference and United have sold him? How is that positive for United? They are a set of stats.

Im sure if Milners stats were put up when he left and it was evidenced he made a positive difference would you be crying bias for City or saying Sky have stitched us up highlighting we have lost a player who improved us?

There are many valid arguments about bias, worthy of debate but I do not think this is one.

 

[bugsyblue]

You could argue that it's sky trying to show how United have lost an important player thus leading them to flap. So in fact the agenda is against them...

 

[Deleted member 58678]

You could look at it as them saying "why the fuck are United getting rid of Di Maria?! Stupid fuckers!"

With barely playing last season, he was still joint third in assists for the whole league behind Fabregas and Cazorla. I have to say myself "why the fuck are United getting rid of Di Maria?! Stupid fuckers!"