Will there be an apology from the media ?

I got it from some rag prick who works for me this morning. Straight away - "lots of empty seats" and shows me a picture of the Colin bell 3rd tier on some wank Facebook page. I simply said - when did you last go, when you have been to an average of 20 games a season for 35 years come back and see me. Oh and by the way there were 50000 people there. And comments like that show a sheep like mentality and evidence you are a thick cont and I am your boss. Shut the door on your way out. Not sure how he got through the net!!
 
A Manx dipper tried to take the piss out of our attendance on Facebook last night, until it was pointed out that we had a shade under 7,000 more than them for their 2nd leg v Stoke.

I then pointed out that the back of the "WORLD FAMOUS KOP" empty for a midweek Europa tie v Sion last October.
 
7000 more saw our game than watched Liverpool v Stoke.

More City fans watched their team that did Liverpool.
 
Ps...respectfully I'm suprised last night was a record. I would've guessed the LC games against United and Boro in the 1970s had a bigger attendance...but hey ho
 
Manx Blue said:
A Manx dipper tried to take the piss out of our attendance on Facebook last night, until it was pointed out that we had a shade under 7,000 more than them for their 2nd leg v Stoke.

I then pointed out that the back of the "WORLD FAMOUS KOP" empty for a midweek Europa tie v Sion last October.
Click to expand...

Link please?
 
Manx Blue said:
Ps...respectfully I'm suprised last night was a record. I would've guessed the LC games against United and Boro in the 1970s had a bigger attendance...but hey ho
Click to expand...
It wasn't a record the semis against the vermin in 69 and 75 were higher league cup attendances.
 
Gaudion M said:
I find threads like this embarrassing. The media will look to take digs because we are on the top, what would you rather loads of sympathy stories as we languish at the bottom of the table. We all know their wrong and they will think twice about using the poor attendance line in future given their pre-emptive digs yesterday were proven to be groundless. Dignified silence is the correct way to deal with this sort of thing.
Click to expand...

I agree totally .

Who gives a f*ck what rubbish the media spout, and threads like this wont stop them spreading their nonsense .

We should just ignore the idiots and let them get on with sucking up to the Rags, Dippers and every one else.

The sh*t they have spun following last night's game proves that they only have one agenda !
 
unexpected item said:
This extract is from the Daily Post, a North Wales newspaper which is part of the Mirror Group (surprise)

cSKA5zZ.png


Full story here..

http://www.dailypost.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/travelling-everton-fc-fans-deserved-10801202
Click to expand...
Those 8000 travelling toffee's who are always there, must be the 8000 that were missing from the home game against Norwich in the league cup.
 
worsleyweb said:
I got it from some rag prick who works for me this morning. Straight away - "lots of empty seats" and shows me a picture of the Colin bell 3rd tier on some wank Facebook page. I simply said - when did you last go, when you have been to an average of 20 games a season for 35 years come back and see me. Oh and by the way there were 50000 people there. And comments like that show a sheep like mentality and evidence you are a thick cont and I am your boss. Shut the door on your way out. Not sure how he got through the net!!
Click to expand...
I'd say being a thick cont is a sackable offence in most lines of work...
 
Am I correct in saying if we were to minus the 8000 travelling supporters from our 50000 gate we'd still have nearly as many blues(c42,000) in the ground as there was for the total(c43,000) attendance at Anfield the previous evening?
Now if we were to say minus c6000 travelling Stoke from the 43,000...then we're really only looking at 37,000 loyal to the cause. Just sayin', la.
 
i think all the shit the club and fans get just gives the players a bit more fight ,so keep the abuse coming its making us stronger,
 
I tried to get an answer last night as to why the old media bias thread had been locked but as yet no mods have been able to supply an answer so I suppose this thread will have to do instead.
I was talking to an arse season ticket holder recently ( a very educated professional ) and I was amazed that even he was still labouring under the misapprehension that we were the proverbial "rich man's plaything" and that City's finances were reliant solely on the sheik's largesse ( on his own admittance , he knew nothing about ADUG's aggressive business plans and expansion) and that he was eventually going to get bored etc. etc.and it struck me that this view was fuelled almost exclusively by the things he read in the sports media, who have ploughed this furrow of ignorance and untruths.
This got me to thinking further, that the vast majority of non-City fans were also lapping up this narrative, propounded by a press more concerned with preserving the status quo ,and demonising our owner and his motives, to the point where it had become an accepted 'truth'
This also got me to thinking that an unintended consequence of this 'reporting' had actually been ,bizzarely, to City's benefit , in that the consumers of this mythology had swallowed the whole thing as fact , and had been severely wrong footed on many levels by their own gullibility
It seems to me that the doomed FFP was aimed at the wrong target. They actually believed the idea that the sheik was financing the club out of his own pocket , and that was the reason that their bent rules concentrated on owner investment rather than debt ( which had been Platini's hobby horse for some time) and by the time the truth dawned on them , it had become too late to stop the inevitable rise of City. They had never bothered to ask the right people the right questions and had merely carried on believing the orthodoxy as laid out in the press, and look what has happened to FFP!
That great "not on my lifetime" line from the pisscan summed up the complacency with which the situation was being treated by not only the press , but their willing partners amongst the 'elite' clubs. I think the almost total lack of forward planning by the scum (amongst others) to counter the rise of City was prompted by the lazy complacent attitude in the media which was consumed and digested by those who couldn't, or wouldn't , see the facts before their very eyes. The press ran us down and propped them up , telling them that upstarts like Ickle City could never knock them off their perches, and the suckers actually believed it!
Well , it has happened and it is still happening, and the open mouthed amazement that a manager such as Pep Guardiola could even consider coming to work at City, has opened a few eyes - too little , too late for some.
 
Gaylord du Bois said:
Am I correct in saying if we were to minus the 8000 travelling supporters from our 50000 gate we'd still have nearly as many blues(c42,000) in the ground as there was for the total(c43,000) attendance at Anfield the previous evening?
Now if we were to say minus c6000 travelling Stoke from the 43,000...then we're really only looking at 37,000 loyal to the cause. Just sayin', la.
Click to expand...
Think there were actually 5,000 Stoke fans so 38,000 home fans (and Anfield wasn't full) but apart from that you'd be right.
 
Someone on this forum said that the only thing the media had left to beat us with was empty seats at the stadium. That's not far from the truth, but it doesn't stop them trying. As I watched the semi final on Sky, I became more & more irritated by the constant references to City's poor defence to the extent that they appear to be incapable of complimenting any City defender on anything during before, during or after the game. Now I'm not going to pretend that our defence has been great all season or that there haven't been some bad mistakes, but surely that shouldn't colour every comment about a player. Otamendi made some outstanding one-on-one tackles in that game but the nearest thing to praise was "no-nonsense" by the commentators whereas Leighton Baines was described as "brilliant" for something I missed altogether.

Now Sergio's back & scoring, he "came to City's rescue -AGAIN" & "where would City be without Sergio Aguero?",the main topic of conversation on City's upcoming game with Villa on Gillette Soccer Saturday after City's awful defending. Earlier in the week City were even described as being "lucky to have him" like we don't deserve to have a player of that ability.So I'd just like to share some stats.

City have conceded 23 goals in the Premier League this season in 23 games. That's 4 more than Spurs, 2 more than the rags, 1 more than Arsenal & better than every other team in the PL. Does that really justify Jamie Redknapp saying city "can't defend"? To be fair he did at least say the same about Everton who have conceded 34 goals. City also have the joint top goals difference in the PL (with Spurs) - 6 better than Leicester, 7 better than Arsenal, 15 better than the rags & 24 better than both Liverpool & Chelsea.

As for City's reliance on Kun, he's scored less than 27% of City's goals in the PL this season. So how does that compare?

Player Team Goal percentage
Kun City 27
Vardy Leicester 38
Lukaku Everton 38
Ighalo Watford 52
Kane Spuds 32
Mahrez Leicester 31

I don't get it. Of course Sergio is a great player but this constant battering of the majority of the team seems OTT & disrespectful. Might be time to cancel the Sky subscription.

It's great to have a forum to get it all out of your system
 
Last edited:
Bodicoteblue said:
I tried to get an answer last night as to why the old media bias thread had been locked but as yet no mods have been able to supply an answer so I suppose this thread will have to do instead.
I was talking to an arse season ticket holder recently ( a very educated professional ) and I was amazed that even he was still labouring under the misapprehension that we were the proverbial "rich man's plaything" and that City's finances were reliant solely on the sheik's largesse ( on his own admittance , he knew nothing about ADUG's aggressive business plans and expansion) and that he was eventually going to get bored etc. etc.and it struck me that this view was fuelled almost exclusively by the things he read in the sports media, who have ploughed this furrow of ignorance and untruths.
This got me to thinking further, that the vast majority of non-City fans were also lapping up this narrative, propounded by a press more concerned with preserving the status quo ,and demonising our owner and his motives, to the point where it had become an accepted 'truth'
This also got me to thinking that an unintended consequence of this 'reporting' had actually been ,bizzarely, to City's benefit , in that the consumers of this mythology had swallowed the whole thing as fact , and had been severely wrong footed on many levels by their own gullibility
It seems to me that the doomed FFP was aimed at the wrong target. They actually believed the idea that the sheik was financing the club out of his own pocket , and that was the reason that their bent rules concentrated on owner investment rather than debt ( which had been Platini's hobby horse for some time) and by the time the truth dawned on them , it had become too late to stop the inevitable rise of City. They had never bothered to ask the right people the right questions and had merely carried on believing the orthodoxy as laid out in the press, and look what has happened to FFP!
That great "not on my lifetime" line from the pisscan summed up the complacency with which the situation was being treated by not only the press , but their willing partners amongst the 'elite' clubs. I think the almost total lack of forward planning by the scum (amongst others) to counter the rise of City was prompted by the lazy complacent attitude in the media which was consumed and digested by those who couldn't, or wouldn't , see the facts before their very eyes. The press ran us down and propped them up , telling them that upstarts like Ickle City could never knock them off their perches, and the suckers actually believed it!
Well , it has happened and it is still happening, and the open mouthed amazement that a manager such as Pep Guardiola could even consider coming to work at City, has opened a few eyes - too little , too late for some.
Click to expand...
Only just seen this.

Great post
 
Bodicoteblue said:
I tried to get an answer last night as to why the old media bias thread had been locked but as yet no mods have been able to supply an answer so I suppose this thread will have to do instead.
I was talking to an arse season ticket holder recently ( a very educated professional ) and I was amazed that even he was still labouring under the misapprehension that we were the proverbial "rich man's plaything" and that City's finances were reliant solely on the sheik's largesse ( on his own admittance , he knew nothing about ADUG's aggressive business plans and expansion) and that he was eventually going to get bored etc. etc.and it struck me that this view was fuelled almost exclusively by the things he read in the sports media, who have ploughed this furrow of ignorance and untruths.
This got me to thinking further, that the vast majority of non-City fans were also lapping up this narrative, propounded by a press more concerned with preserving the status quo ,and demonising our owner and his motives, to the point where it had become an accepted 'truth'
This also got me to thinking that an unintended consequence of this 'reporting' had actually been ,bizzarely, to City's benefit , in that the consumers of this mythology had swallowed the whole thing as fact , and had been severely wrong footed on many levels by their own gullibility
It seems to me that the doomed FFP was aimed at the wrong target. They actually believed the idea that the sheik was financing the club out of his own pocket , and that was the reason that their bent rules concentrated on owner investment rather than debt ( which had been Platini's hobby horse for some time) and by the time the truth dawned on them , it had become too late to stop the inevitable rise of City. They had never bothered to ask the right people the right questions and had merely carried on believing the orthodoxy as laid out in the press, and look what has happened to FFP!
That great "not on my lifetime" line from the pisscan summed up the complacency with which the situation was being treated by not only the press , but their willing partners amongst the 'elite' clubs. I think the almost total lack of forward planning by the scum (amongst others) to counter the rise of City was prompted by the lazy complacent attitude in the media which was consumed and digested by those who couldn't, or wouldn't , see the facts before their very eyes. The press ran us down and propped them up , telling them that upstarts like Ickle City could never knock them off their perches, and the suckers actually believed it!
Well , it has happened and it is still happening, and the open mouthed amazement that a manager such as Pep Guardiola could even consider coming to work at City, has opened a few eyes - too little , too late for some.
Click to expand...

great post mate.
 
adeinchessy said:
Someone on this forum said that the only thing the media had left to beat us with was empty seats at the stadium. That's not far from the truth, but it doesn't stop them trying. As I watched the semi final on Sky, I became more & more irritated by the constant references to City's poor defence to the extent that they appear to be incapable of complimenting any City defender on anything during before, during or after the game. Now I'm not going to pretend that our defence has been great all season or that there haven't been some bad mistakes, but surely that shouldn't colour every comment about a player. Otamendi made some outstanding one-on-one tackles in that game but the nearest thing to praise was "no-nonsense" by the commentators whereas Leighton Baines was described as "brilliant" for something I missed altogether.

Now Sergio's back & scoring, he "came to City's rescue -AGAIN" & "where would City be without Sergio Aguero?",the main topic of conversation on City's upcoming game with Villa on Gillette Soccer Saturday after City's awful defending. Earlier in the week City were even described as being "lucky to have him" like we don't deserve to have a player of that ability.So I'd just like to share some stats.

City have conceded 23 goals in the Premier League this season in 23 games. That's 4 more than Spurs, 2 more than the rags, 1 more than Arsenal & better than every other team in the PL. Does that really justify Jamie Redknapp saying city "can't defend"? To be fair he did at least say the same about Everton who have conceded 34 goals. City also have the joint top goals difference in the PL (with Spurs) - 6 better than Leicester, 7 better than Arsenal, 15 better than the rags & 24 better than both Liverpool & Chelsea.

As for City's reliance on Kun, he's scored less than 27% of City's goals in the PL this season. So how does that compare?

Player Team Goal percentage
Kun City 27
Vardy Leicester 38
Lukaku Everton 38
Ighalo Watford 52
Kane Spuds 32
Mahrez Leicester 31

I don't get it. Of course Sergio is a great player but this constant battering of the majority of the team seems OTT & disrespectful. Might be time to cancel the Sky subscription.

It's great to have a forum to get it all out of your system
Click to expand...

Mate. every word is bang on the button. so glad someone else has taken the time to articulate the truth. i am sick to death of it.i wont have sky or bt subscriptions .ever, they are not taking my hard earned . all i want is fair commentary.balanced. not gonna get it. not got time to vent my anger in full, but for example, where the fuck was leighton baines when kdb assisted sergio on wed night..not quite "brilliant" there were u , and why did the experts not pick up on the everton defenders kicking lumps out of our players and tackling from behind? not a single word siad. fuck everton. fuck sky sports,fuck BT, and fuck the dream merseyside wembley final.i am sick of the agenda, and almost as sick of the deluded folk on here who say there isn,t one.
open your eyes.
 
adeinchessy said:
Someone on this forum said that the only thing the media had left to beat us with was empty seats at the stadium. That's not far from the truth, but it doesn't stop them trying. As I watched the semi final on Sky, I became more & more irritated by the constant references to City's poor defence to the extent that they appear to be incapable of complimenting any City defender on anything during before, during or after the game. Now I'm not going to pretend that our defence has been great all season or that there haven't been some bad mistakes, but surely that shouldn't colour every comment about a player. Otamendi made some outstanding one-on-one tackles in that game but the nearest thing to praise was "no-nonsense" by the commentators whereas Leighton Baines was described as "brilliant" for something I missed altogether.

Now Sergio's back & scoring, he "came to City's rescue -AGAIN" & "where would City be without Sergio Aguero?",the main topic of conversation on City's upcoming game with Villa on Gillette Soccer Saturday after City's awful defending. Earlier in the week City were even described as being "lucky to have him" like we don't deserve to have a player of that ability.So I'd just like to share some stats.

City have conceded 23 goals in the Premier League this season in 23 games. That's 4 more than Spurs, 2 more than the rags, 1 more than Arsenal & better than every other team in the PL. Does that really justify Jamie Redknapp saying city "can't defend"? To be fair he did at least say the same about Everton who have conceded 34 goals. City also have the joint top goals difference in the PL (with Spurs) - 6 better than Leicester, 7 better than Arsenal, 15 better than the rags & 24 better than both Liverpool & Chelsea.

As for City's reliance on Kun, he's scored less than 27% of City's goals in the PL this season. So how does that compare?

Player Team Goal percentage
Kun City 27
Vardy Leicester 38
Lukaku Everton 38
Ighalo Watford 52
Kane Spuds 32
Mahrez Leicester 31

I don't get it. Of course Sergio is a great player but this constant battering of the majority of the team seems OTT & disrespectful. Might be time to cancel the Sky subscription.

It's great to have a forum to get it all out of your system
Click to expand...


You're quiet right. All we hear is as you say, is the usual lazy questions.

Defending, our defence is frequently described as comical, shambolic many other similar descriptive words. This same defence could cost us the title. If our defence was going to cost us the league, would another team not have to have a much better defence? Surely the experts can only mean we'd lose the league to Arsenal or Leicester? How can that possibly make sence?
United's defence is widely regarded as solid. Their great defensive record is blamed for their attacking weaknesses, their great defence is a whole two goals tighter than ours. How are they solid and we're shambolic? Again, utter shite.

I agree, our defending should and could be better. But fuck me, they don't half go on about it.

And yes, surprisingly our first choice striker does score some of our goals. Is he carrying us? No, he's doing his job. He's the focal point of our attack and is supposed to score our fucking goals. Haven't we had more players score goals than any other team? Why is that never mentioned?


The Soccer Saturday orecles were also asking how dependant we were on our keeper. Is this a joke? Yes, yes you fucking fuck tards, our players are resposible for our results. Yes, MANCHESTER City do rely on their players to do their job. What next week? City would be wearing no shirts without their kit man?

Yes Sky, we recruit good players and rely on them being good at their fucking job?

I may email in and ask where Soccer Saturday would be without the nonsensical ramblings of some ex footballers and the cheeky chappie cringeworthy idiocy from a sun bed addict. My guess, they'd pay others to do the job.

They do realise if we didn't have Aguero we'd have another great striker, if we didn't have Hart we'd have another keeper, a fucking good one, not the fat kid who owned gloves.

We always have a player carrying us. We are never a team.

Today's game may see the times start to change.

Looks like we're going through, against a Villa side who are unbeaten in 5 games. No Aguero, no Ya Ya, no Silva, no De Bruyne, no Kompany, no Hart.

Perhaps, just maybe we have a good squad. I imagine the reporting will all be about a poor Villa performance. A young lad will score at least a double, I fancy a hatrick, credit will be used sparingly and a shit Villa defence will be to blame. Any clean sheet will be down to a off form Villa.

We will have to wait a good few years till we get some credit.

Flowers is however sucking Iheanacho off, calling him an outstanding talent.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top