The mancityfans.net football forum

CuteMancs wrote:Just found this on the BBC match day thread... Fair and unbiased as always... How much is the licence fee again?

In fact, all is not well at City. All of a sudden, Manuel Pellegrini is making excuses about injuries, lack of player availability and fixture congestion.

The club will write to the Football Association to complain about the scheduling of their FA Cup fifth-round match at Chelsea.

The tie will be shown on BBC One on 21 February, three days before City face Dynamo Kiev in the Champions League.

City are chasing four trophies, and a source said the club were "furious".

The BBC and FA tried to find a way to screen the game on Saturday but said "conflicting fixtures and safety concerns" made it impossible.

Pellegrini had suggested he would play a weakened side if his team were made to play on the Sunday.

Well, that's fair enough, we are criticising them and they are fighting back. It's their job to put programmes on TV, not make our season easier. The PL/FA take the money and the clubs share in it but take the consequences. If anyone is to blame it is the authorities for agreeing deals that allow the TV companies so much power.

Yes indeed, i stand corrected. I looked at the City website and their reference to the Kiev game was for the Tuesday home game, My mistake. So three days is ok for the players. Pity the fans who now have to pay higher prices for not booking earlier enough to go.

On the day the draw was made i could have flown , return cost of only 300 Francs and was about to book a flight until someone on here pointed out that the game was to be played in an empty Stadium because of the ban. So i organised my work accordingly. Flight prices now are too high !

Anyone seen the latest article on the Beeb. "Are man Utd about to rule the world?"

Wtf they can't event make the top four!

london blue 2 wrote:Anyone seen the latest article on the Beeb. "Are man Utd about to rule the world?"

Wtf they can't event make the top four!

Well according to talkshite they have got £350 million to spend in the summer

walshawblue wrote:

london blue 2 wrote:Anyone seen the latest article on the Beeb. "Are man Utd about to rule the world?"

Wtf they can't event make the top four!

Well according to talkshite they have got £350 million to spend in the summer

will 350million guarantee a shot on target?...awfully expensive boredom if it doesnt

Bianchi on Ice wrote:

walshawblue wrote:

london blue 2 wrote:Anyone seen the latest article on the Beeb. "Are man Utd about to rule the world?"

Wtf they can't event make the top four!

Well according to talkshite they have got £350 million to spend in the summer

will 350million guarantee a shot on target?...awfully expensive boredom if it doesnt

£350m war chest, rumours about talking to Mourinho.... must be season ticket renewal time coming up.

I don't think I'll watch an English language broadcast again if avoidable. I'd rather not understand anything that the commentators are saying than having to listen to the crap of Quinn, Tyler, Owen and Hoddle again.

- Tottenham defend with everyone bar Kane: Look at the energy, teh devotion, the TEAM effort.

- City defending with everyone bar Agüero: Look at how far back they're forced to defend by Tottenham.

- West Ham (deservedly, you do what you have to, I'm no snob) winnig by scoring two and then defending for most of the game = Playing City of the park.

- City, in any game, retaining the majority of possession but failing to utilize = They've had loads of the ball but have failed to do anything with it. Been largely unthreatening and lethargic

- Tottenham, doing exactly the same and hitting a (well organized, for the first time since ever) brick wall besides one shot from Eriksen = They're clearly dominating the game thanks to their energy and City haven't had a chance (despite x chances and x corners in the first half).

- Talking about our last game against Leicester: Agüero's goal was offside. Oh ok, nothing else in that game that stood out, like when Huth climbed on his defender and headed in the goal that killed the game? Fine. My opinion about that game is that we lost it anyway, wouldn't have mattered what the refs did, but to only mention the offside is fucking awful. And it was the same at the actual game. "Well he's climbing but what a goal."

- When Tottenham scores two clear offside goals at White Hart Lane and Hoddle says: Well yes, but they're great goals and that's what you get for playing a high back line. So, in a nutshell, Hoddle's dislike of the offside trap justifies the poor reffing decision.

And I could go on. I get that as a fan of any team you have to take a few harsh truths about your team, and you can't have everyone on your side. But this is fucking ridiculous. I'm bitter. A lot.

Cocacolajojo wrote:I don't think I'll watch an English language broadcast again if avoidable. I'd rather not understand anything that the commentators are saying than having to listen to the crap of Quinn, Tyler, Owen and Hoddle again.

- Tottenham defend with everyone bar Kane: Look at the energy, teh devotion, the TEAM effort.

- City defending with everyone bar Agüero: Look at how far back they're forced to defend by Tottenham.

- West Ham (deservedly, you do what you have to, I'm no snob) winnig by scoring two and then defending for most of the game = Playing City of the park.

- City, in any game, retaining the majority of possession but failing to utilize = They've had loads of the ball but have failed to do anything with it. Been largely unthreatening and lethargic

- Tottenham, doing exactly the same and hitting a (well organized, for the first time since ever) brick wall besides one shot from Eriksen = They're clearly dominating the game thanks to their energy and City haven't had a chance (despite x chances and x corners in the first half).

- Talking about our last game against Leicester: Agüero's goal was offside. Oh ok, nothing else in that game that stood out, like when Huth climbed on his defender and headed in the goal that killed the game? Fine. My opinion about that game is that we lost it anyway, wouldn't have mattered what the refs did, but to only mention the offside is fucking awful. And it was the same at the actual game. "Well he's climbing but what a goal."

- When Tottenham scores two clear offside goals at White Hart Lane and Hoddle says: Well yes, but they're great goals and that's what you get for playing a high back line. So, in a nutshell, Hoddle's dislike of the offside trap justifies the poor reffing decision.

And I could go on. I get that as a fan of any team you have to take a few harsh truths about your team, and you can't have everyone on your side. But this is fucking ridiculous. I'm bitter. A lot.

I'm relieved when I get a stream in a foreign language as that allows me to just enjoy the game as I haven't a clue what the commentators are saying.

agree with everything previous post said I was stunned by the lack of any comment about Huth climbing all over Demi. also Ferna1 fouled in the box becomes just strong arming. Carragher comment yesterday about its embarrassing that City rely so heavily on Kompany. Oh so his lot didn't rely on Gerrard then. Also isn't it funny how they have all forgotten their hatred of Pochettino when he was recruited as Southampton manager, what a disgrace poor old Nigel Adkins blah blah blah, yet everytime we play Stoke the treatment of Hughes is dragged up

cartesr wrote:agree with everything previous post said I was stunned by the lack of any comment about Huth climbing all over Demi. also Ferna1 fouled in the box becomes just strong arming. Carragher comment yesterday about its embarrassing that City rely so heavily on Kompany. Oh so his lot didn't rely on Gerrard then. Also isn't it funny how they have all forgotten their hatred of Pochettino when he was recruited as Southampton manager, what a disgrace poor old Nigel Adkins blah blah blah, yet everytime we play Stoke the treatment of Hughes is dragged up

Not sure that it was different in other streams but in PLP they seemed to show a shot of Pochettino at least every 30 seconds. I can only recall seeing the Count and Ruben on a couple of occasions

dave watson's perm wrote:

cartesr wrote:agree with everything previous post said I was stunned by the lack of any comment about Huth climbing all over Demi. also Ferna1 fouled in the box becomes just strong arming. Carragher comment yesterday about its embarrassing that City rely so heavily on Kompany. Oh so his lot didn't rely on Gerrard then. Also isn't it funny how they have all forgotten their hatred of Pochettino when he was recruited as Southampton manager, what a disgrace poor old Nigel Adkins blah blah blah, yet everytime we play Stoke the treatment of Hughes is dragged up

Not sure that it was different in other streams but in PLP they seemed to show a shot of Pochettino at least every 30 seconds. I can only recall seeing the Count and Ruben on a couple of occasions

I also thought the PLP commentary team weren't too bad (Champion and Beglin). Called the penalty straight away for what it was (or wasn't?)

dave watson's perm wrote:

dave watson's perm wrote:

cartesr wrote:agree with everything previous post said I was stunned by the lack of any comment about Huth climbing all over Demi. also Ferna1 fouled in the box becomes just strong arming. Carragher comment yesterday about its embarrassing that City rely so heavily on Kompany. Oh so his lot didn't rely on Gerrard then. Also isn't it funny how they have all forgotten their hatred of Pochettino when he was recruited as Southampton manager, what a disgrace poor old Nigel Adkins blah blah blah, yet everytime we play Stoke the treatment of Hughes is dragged up

Not sure that it was different in other streams but in PLP they seemed to show a shot of Pochettino at least every 30 seconds. I can only recall seeing the Count and Ruben on a couple of occasions

I also thought the PLP commentary team weren't too bad (Champion and Beglin). Called the penalty straight away for what it was (or wasn't?)

Don't normally like listening to Beglin for a city game. He's to in love with Liverpool still. But, to be fair to him, he stayed impartial as much as he could and called the non-penalty as he saw it. Also with the non-offsides, although we didn't see enough replays of them. Both commentators thought we were on the ascendancy and our change of tactics second half was making us the most likely winners......until we screwed up....again.

The problem is that the british sports media are the mouthpiece for the powers that be.
That includes the commentators and pundits.

It's like the twilight zone most of the time and yesterday was truly bizarre. If you weren't watching the match yourself, you'd swear we were a joke that had the pleasure of sharing the pitch with a truly great footballing side.
We were however, a "little bit unlucky" with the penalty decision, but "take nothing away from spurs".

The truth is they looked good in periods of the first half and once we stepped it up we looked far more like winning it.

But not one media person saw any of that. Isn't that weird?

They're there to ensure we all know that everything is correct and proper and that the emperor's clothes are, in fact quite stunning

Original Dub wrote:The problem is that the british sports media are the mouthpiece for the powers that be.
That includes the commentators and pundits.

It's like the twilight zone most of the time and yesterday was truly bizarre. If you weren't watching the match yourself, you'd swear we were a joke that had the pleasure of sharing the pitch with a truly great footballing side.
We were however, a "little bit unlucky" with the penalty decision, but "take nothing away from spurs".

The truth is they looked good in periods of the first half and once we stepped it up we looked far more like winning it.

But not one media person saw any of that. Isn't that weird?

They're there to ensure we all know that everything is correct and proper and that the emperor's clothes are, in fact quite stunning

That's the truth of it OD.
Whether there is a conspiracy amongst referees or not the media establishment are there to legitimize what we can all see is blatantly wrong.
The more they are told they are right the more they do it, and are rewarded for doing so. We are told there is nothing wrong here, nothing to see. The rest of football top six or so don't mind, suits them and the general public are fed the party line.
It's all intertwined. I don't doubt it's having a negative effect on us, but I don't think it's just one thing like a corrupt ref, or refs on his/their own.

iwasthere2012 wrote:

Original Dub wrote:The problem is that the british sports media are the mouthpiece for the powers that be.
That includes the commentators and pundits.

It's like the twilight zone most of the time and yesterday was truly bizarre. If you weren't watching the match yourself, you'd swear we were a joke that had the pleasure of sharing the pitch with a truly great footballing side.
We were however, a "little bit unlucky" with the penalty decision, but "take nothing away from spurs".

The truth is they looked good in periods of the first half and once we stepped it up we looked far more like winning it.

But not one media person saw any of that. Isn't that weird?

They're there to ensure we all know that everything is correct and proper and that the emperor's clothes are, in fact quite stunning

That's the truth of it OD.
Whether there is a conspiracy amongst referees or not the media establishment are there to legitimize what we can all see is blatantly wrong.
The more they are told they are right the more they do it, and are rewarded for doing so. We are told there is nothing wrong here, nothing to see. The rest of football top six or so don't mind, suits them and the general public are fed the party line.
It's all intertwined. I don't doubt it's having a negative effect on us, but I don't think it's just one thing like a corrupt ref, or refs on his/their own.

Well that's just it. I can't say I know for a fact why there is bias. It could be because of several reasons. None of them warranted of course...

But biased officiating wouldn't last long without the same biased media. Together they are extremely powerful.

We all know if the media decide to heavily highlight wrong doing, they can change things for the better. If they choose not to and in fact report the opposite, it snowballs and becomes an immovable Mountain.

Here's a nice little example. Not a bad piece for what it suggests and no bile which is a start.

However, it's what it fails to mention I have the problem with. And this is a typical piece that looks nice on the outside.

There is no mention of the overwhelming amount of injuries to over half of our first team players. Or a mention of any poor officiating whatsoever.

It makes sure to mention that we have spent lots of money and also that we should be running away with the league.

Instead they leave the reader with questions and no answers.
A real head scratcher.

Why not just report the various real reasons? Don't get me wrong, some of those reasons lie with decision making and poor form.
Anyway. ..


http://thecomeback.com/32flags/england/ ... ester-city

Original Dub wrote:Here's a nice little example. Not a bad piece for what it suggests and no bile which is a start.

However, it's what it fails to mention I have the problem with. And this is a typical piece that looks nice on the outside.

There is no mention of the overwhelming amount of injuries to over half of our first team players. Or a mention of any poor officiating whatsoever.

It makes sure to mention that we have spent lots of money and also that we should be running away with the league.

Instead they leave the reader with questions and no answers.
A real head scratcher.

Why not just report the various real reasons? Don't get me wrong, some of those reasons lie with decision making and poor form.
Anyway. ..


http://thecomeback.com/32flags/england/ ... ester-city

Ronan get yer arse over for a game and we can talk about this over a few jars ok buddy?

gillie wrote:

Original Dub wrote:Here's a nice little example. Not a bad piece for what it suggests and no bile which is a start.

However, it's what it fails to mention I have the problem with. And this is a typical piece that looks nice on the outside.

There is no mention of the overwhelming amount of injuries to over half of our first team players. Or a mention of any poor officiating whatsoever.

It makes sure to mention that we have spent lots of money and also that we should be running away with the league.

Instead they leave the reader with questions and no answers.
A real head scratcher.

Why not just report the various real reasons? Don't get me wrong, some of those reasons lie with decision making and poor form.
Anyway. ..


http://thecomeback.com/32flags/england/ ... ester-city

Ronan get yer arse over for a game and we can talk about this over a few jars ok buddy?

Was just gonna message you pal.

I'm over for the Derby :)

We're all paranoid apparently, they don't hate us or have any kind of running agenda against us.

Like fuck they don't, vermin every last one of 'em.

Lovely little gem here

Can you spot anything odd with this little piece?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/footba ... paign=1490