Page 1 of 2
MOTD
Posted:
Sat Feb 27, 2010 11:40 pm
by Bojinov's left foot
IMO not enough credit given to City at all. Did we not score 4 and end Chelsea's long unbeaten home record??
Apologies if already covered.
Re: MOTD
Posted:
Sat Feb 27, 2010 11:53 pm
by Somerset Blue
Hansen said we were awful for the first 44 minutes, don't agree with that.
Re: MOTD
Posted:
Sat Feb 27, 2010 11:57 pm
by King Kev
Somerset Blue wrote:Hansen said we were awful for the first 44 minutes, don't agree with that.
We weren't great but we certainly weren't awful!
Why do they have to focus on the negatives?? We are the first team to beat Chelsea for 100 years, we are the first to score at Stamford Bridge for 400 years but they want to talk about the first 44 minutes!??
Cunts
Re: MOTD
Posted:
Sat Feb 27, 2010 11:58 pm
by Somerset Blue
Oh, and the top 4 now seems to be a top 3!
Re: MOTD
Posted:
Sun Feb 28, 2010 12:00 am
by avoidconfusion
I am really starting to hate MOTD... I was SO looking forward to this and then they spent all this time talking about Bridge and Terry and then analyze how shit Terry was and do not spend a minute talking about how good we played in the second half.
In all fairness Hansen said in the 2nd half we could have had 5.
Re: MOTD
Posted:
Sun Feb 28, 2010 12:00 am
by Mark (Blue Army)
Bojinov's left foot wrote:IMO not enough credit given to City at all. Did we not score 4 and end Chelsea's long unbeaten home record??
Apologies if already covered.
And it didn't even get a mention...fuckin joke.
Re: MOTD
Posted:
Sun Feb 28, 2010 12:25 am
by Tokyo Blue
Sauce for the goose, lads.
Re: MOTD
Posted:
Sun Feb 28, 2010 1:38 am
by JonnyAsh
And at the end of season review when 4th place is achieved, it will all be about how the Scouse have imploded, no credit to us, we have to get used to it and earn respect the hard way
Re: MOTD
Posted:
Sun Feb 28, 2010 3:02 am
by Ted Hughes
I didn't hear one word of credit on the radio either, yet when Everton scored 3 utter fluke goals to get a stuffy point there a few weeks ago, the communal wanking session that followed was worse than on Bluemoon when they thought we'd signed Kaka.
I don't give a shit what some people on here say about paranoia etc; we are definitely not getting an even handed deal from the media. Imagine if the rags had scored 4 there today, would anyone be talking about Chelsea being shite?
Re: MOTD
Posted:
Sun Feb 28, 2010 4:12 am
by john68
If your expecting any of the TV companies to give city any credit or respect, you'd better pack a lot of sandwiches, cos you'll be waiting a long time.
I have mentioned before that when we won the League in 1968, the MOTD cameras were at the swamp and we were ignored.
nowt has changed.
Re: MOTD
Posted:
Sun Feb 28, 2010 8:56 am
by Spurge
Don't forget this is the same BBC that gave George Best a 'lifetime achievement award' in Sports Personality of the Year awards - a better example of somone less desrving of such an award you will not find.
More recently on 5 Live they had someone on from the News of the World and took the moral high ground with him for continually making Cherly and Ashley Cole headline news and it was then pointed out by a listener that 5 Live themselves had the this as their leading story on their news bulletin not an hour before!
So lets be clear here, the BBC, who like think of themselves as an unbiast quality boradcaster are nothin more than a bunch of arse licking hyporcrites and we really shouldn't be surprised or indeed bothered about what they do or don't say in my opinion
Re: MOTD
Posted:
Sun Feb 28, 2010 8:57 am
by Patrick
The final summary mentioned everything apart from city beating chelsea!
I was gobsmacked
Re: MOTD
Posted:
Sun Feb 28, 2010 9:18 am
by King Kev
john68 wrote:If your expecting any of the TV companies to give city any credit or respect, you'd better pack a lot of sandwiches, cos you'll be waiting a long time.
I have mentioned before that when we won the League in 1968, the MOTD cameras were at the swamp and we were ignored.
nowt has changed.
Am I right in saying that our ECWC victory was pretty much ignored by the British press too? I seem to recall being told that the scum had won something (a corner?) and all the back-pages were about them?
Re: MOTD
Posted:
Sun Feb 28, 2010 9:20 am
by bluej
Patrick wrote:The final summary mentioned everything apart from city beating chelsea!
I was gobsmacked
Me too - I thought they were just saving it until last because it was the biggest result of the day but they just didn't say anything.
Re: MOTD
Posted:
Sun Feb 28, 2010 9:21 am
by john@staustell
Dont you lot know that it must have been Chelsea/JT's fault, not City playing well?
Dont you know that strangling Chelsea at home for the first 40 minutes with barely any threat from them is not an achievement?
Dont you know that we haven't (sorry hadn't) scored at Chelsea for x hundred minutes?
Dont you know we haven't (sorry hadn't) done the double on them since 1957?
Funny thing is that apart from this inbred failure to recognise us, there is a pervading feeling that City are unstoppably on the march, and journalists were expecting a decent contest yesterday (unlike us!). When they talk of who teams still have to play, City now always get a mention. It's slowly coming.
If only we could rid TV punditry of the red mafias and put in a few of our old lads, but that's one of the penalties of 30 years of crap.
But tick tock.
Re: MOTD
Posted:
Sun Feb 28, 2010 9:24 am
by Wooders
this is the same bbc that has finally managed to make a decent radio station in 6music and then choose it to be the one they close down to cut costs
add to that the recent friday night telly slot at 9 o'clock on bbc 2 being a programme about thatching fucking roofs
bunch of cunts imo I'm seriously considering fucking off paying the liscence fee at the mo because BBC are the worst channel/programme maker out of all of them
fuck I hate the BBC
Re: MOTD
Posted:
Sun Feb 28, 2010 9:59 am
by sandman
I was actually very impressed with the BBC's coverage of the match, I half expected them just to show the handshake that never was, undeservedly slag off bridge, show the goals, show some missed shots by chelsea, blame the ref for sending two players off for the wrong side, mention the word "millions", then sum it all up by saying we got lucky and Chelsea are hard done by.
Re: MOTD
Posted:
Sun Feb 28, 2010 10:03 am
by King Kev
sandman wrote:I was actually very impressed with the BBC's coverage of the match, I half expected them just to show the handshake that never was, undeservedly slag off bridge, show the goals, show some missed shots by chelsea, blame the ref for sending two players off for the wrong side, mention the word "millions", then sum it all up by saying we got lucky and Chelsea are hard done by.
I think the only reason they avoided that particular cliché is because Chelsea's team actually cost more than ours.
Re: MOTD
Posted:
Sun Feb 28, 2010 10:04 am
by Beefymcfc
Fella's, fella's, fella's. We were up first again which we are regularly nowadays. Remember the days when we used to get the finishing slot where we got about 2 minutes air time and even less punditry?
The times are a'changing my friends and so will the pundits. Praise the day when we have an ex-City player permanently on Soccer Saturday and hosting MotD.
The Future's Bright, The Future's Blue!!!
Re: MOTD
Posted:
Sun Feb 28, 2010 10:04 am
by mr_nool
The post match interview with Shay was a fucking joke. Shay was professional and didn't want to talk about Bridge, but rather about us beating Chelsea, but the interviewer just kept putting a Bridge slant on every fucking question. I would've walked away if I were Shay.