Page 1 of 5

Media Watch

PostPosted: Sun Nov 03, 2013 1:41 pm
by Original Dub
As most of you know, I love nothing more than a good rant at the biased media.

I just thought I'd make a seperate thread so that the one or two who think the rest of us are paranoid can live in peace and tranquillity by simply avoiding the thread.

Anyway, here is a little gem from the a front runner for no.1 rag paper, the mirror.

The usual crap that our best players will all leave of course and this time it's aguero... but if that's not bad enough it's the price tags associated every time.

"City would want a staggering fee for the player, even as much as £40m".

It's so obvious that the dick that wrote this did it solely as a dig at the club.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/ ... io-2670902

Re: Media Watch

PostPosted: Sun Nov 03, 2013 1:54 pm
by freshie
Original Dub wrote:As most of you know, I love nothing more than a good rant at the biased media.

I just thought I'd make a seperate thread so that the one or two who think the rest of us are paranoid can live in peace and tranquillity by simply avoiding the thread.

Anyway, here is a little gem from the a front runner for no.1 rag paper, the mirror.

The usual crap that our best players will all leave of course and this time it's aguero... but if that's not bad enough it's the price tags associated every time.

"City would want a staggering fee for the player, even as much as £40m".

It's so obvious that the dick that wrote this did it solely as a dig at the club.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/ ... io-2670902


The only thing that would be staggering about a £40m fee would be how low it is and a clear undervaluation of the player by a long, long way. Cheeky twats

Re: Media Watch

PostPosted: Sun Nov 03, 2013 1:57 pm
by Bridge'srightfoot
Wouldn't sell him for anything with the way he's playing.
Form of his life.

Re: Media Watch

PostPosted: Sun Nov 03, 2013 2:05 pm
by nottsblue
Would actually charge them £5m just to speak to him. An actual transfer fee would be in excess of £60m, more if he has a great World Cup

Re: Media Watch

PostPosted: Sun Nov 03, 2013 2:09 pm
by Green & Blue
Good idea Dub.

I'm partial to a good old fashioned whinge about the clubs media treatment myself.Anyone who thinks it's paranoia needs to stop kidding themselves.

Check out the below article.The headline alone is enough to convince me it was scribed by some scum bag based in a back office at Old Trafford.

http://www.football365.com/faves/900099 ... y-Reliance

Re: Media Watch

PostPosted: Sun Nov 03, 2013 2:57 pm
by Original Dub
Green & Blue wrote:Good idea Dub.

I'm partial to a good old fashioned whinge about the clubs media treatment myself.Anyone who thinks it's paranoia needs to stop kidding themselves.

Check out the below article.The headline alone is enough to convince me it was scribed by some scum bag based in a back office at Old Trafford.

http://www.football365.com/faves/900099 ... y-Reliance


I can't open that link. That happens me quite a lot. Fucking head wrecker.

Re: Media Watch

PostPosted: Sun Nov 03, 2013 3:02 pm
by Green & Blue
Original Dub wrote:
Green & Blue wrote:Good idea Dub.

I'm partial to a good old fashioned whinge about the clubs media treatment myself.Anyone who thinks it's paranoia needs to stop kidding themselves.

Check out the below article.The headline alone is enough to convince me it was scribed by some scum bag based in a back office at Old Trafford.

http://www.football365.com/faves/900099 ... y-Reliance


I can't open that link. That happens me quite a lot. Fucking head wrecker.


Strange not sure why it's not working.Anway here it is in all it's glory


City Should Be Embarrassed By Kompany Reliance

That one player remains so important in a squad that cost so much to assemble is an embarrassment to Manchester City. It's time they remedied the Kompany conundrum...


"United will find it hard to defend the title since they have a new manager and are really struggling."

After Manchester City suffered their third Premier League defeat of the season at Chelsea to slip just two points above their rivals, it wasn't Yaya Toure's best idea to fire a shot over the parapet this week. The champions are certainly struggling to defend their title as they adjust to David Moyes' methods, but City are struggling to defend full stop, with only eight teams possessing a leakier defence than the Blues at this juncture.

At his unveiling in the summer, Manuel Pellegrini spoke of his intention for City to play 'attractive and attacking football' during his reign, but the manager appears to be finding it difficult to balance this aim with maintaining the resolve that saw the Blues record the best defensive record in the top flight in each of the last two seasons.

While Joe Hart's latest error on Sunday has reportedly caused Pellegrini to ponder replacing his number one, he should be equally concerned about the men in front of the keeper after watching his team manage just a single clean sheet in the last seven matches. City's inconsistent form points mainly to the absence of one man, as Vincent Kompany continues to train alone at Carrington in his bid to return to full fitness.

It has been reported that the captain will miss the next two matches owing to his troublesome thigh injury, leaving Pellegrini with an ongoing headache over his centre-back partnership. The Chilean has experimented with six different combinations so far, but both Martin Demichelis and Javi Garcia represent a sharp drop in quality while Joleon Lescott has been frozen out in the Premier League.

Given City's embarrassment of riches, the extent to which they rely on Kompany is quite absurd. United were forced to play without Nemanja Vidic for most of last season but still marched to the title in emphatic fashion; if City were robbed of Kompany for an extended period of time the same would be unthinkable. "I'm sure we have the best squad in the Premier League," said Pellegrini in the summer. "We have wonderful players and we can reach important titles in the next three or four seasons here." Not without Kompany, it seems.

Although the Belgian featured in City's shambolic loss to Aston Villa and the 3-1 humbling at the hands of Bayern Munich, the captain's influence was clearly visible in September's 4-1 win over United. Wayne Rooney wasn't given a sniff on that afternoon - scoring his consolation strike direct from a set-piece - with Kompany claiming that the derby "meant a little bit more to us than to them".

That City have recorded a top-flight win percentage of 69% with Kompany since the start of 2011/12 compared to 58% without the captain underlines his impact on performances and results. The Blues concede fewer goals and score more when Kompany is in the team, with the back-line largely in lockdown when the Belgian is present.

As Eden Hazard said before Chelsea's 2-1 victory at Stamford Bridge last week: "Kompany is really important for City because when he plays they win and when he doesn't play they often lose." If opposition players have made a mental note of this, then why haven't the City hierarchy, who splashed £4million on Demichelis in the summer and thought that was that with regards to strengthening the defence?

Perhaps this costly oversight in the transfer window was entirely predictable owing to the influence of Txiki Begiristain, who struggled to improve Barcelona's defence in his later years as director of football at the Nou Camp. It's no wonder that a man who sanctioned the €25million signing of Dmytro Chygrynskiy from Shakhtar Donetsk - only to see the centre-back return whence he came just ten months later - might be afraid to splash out on defenders.

But it has now become abundantly clear that City need to spend again in January to plug the enormous gap caused by Kompany's injuries. Writing in The Telegraph after City's title win in 2012, Alan Hansen referred to the captain as "arguably the best transfer market buy of all time", adding that "he has shown why he is on course to become the best defender of the Premier League era." With Kompany costing just £6million, Hansen may have a case, and City must look to repeat their shrewd acquisition if they are to avoid slipping any further down the table in the captain's absence.

Re: Media Watch

PostPosted: Sun Nov 03, 2013 3:27 pm
by Beefymcfc
Just read (well, not really) a piece in the MEN and am still trying to understand what the point of it is. There's no story, just a list of our players and what they cost. To me, it looks like they're trying to say this is why we beat Norwich 7-1, somehow putting a dampener on our day. As fans, we already know what the team costs so who is this aimed at?

Manchester City player transfer fees
3 Nov 2013 14:00

Ever wondered how much City paid out for their current squad players. See the full list arranged by year.

Check out how much City paid for each member of the first-team squad (club they were signed from in brackets):

2013

Fernandinho (Shakhtar Donetsk): £30m

Martin Demichelis (Atletico Madrid): £3.8m

Stevan Jovetic (Fiorentina): £22m

Alvaro Negredo (Sevilla): £16.4m

Jesus Navas (Sevilla): £14.9m

2012

Richard Wright (Preston North End): Free

Scott Sinclair (Swansea): £8m

Costel Pantilimon (Politechnica Timisoara): £3m

Javi Garcia (Benfica): £15.8m

Matija Nastasic (Fiorentina): £12m (plus Stefan Savic)

Jack Rodwell (Everton): £12m

2011

Gael Clichy (Arsenal): £7m

Sergio Aguero (Atletico Madrid): £38m

Edin Dzeko (Wolfsburg): £27m

Samir Nasri (Arsenal): £22m

2010

James Milner (Aston Villa): £26m

Yaya Toure (Barcelona): £24m

David Silva (Valencia): £24m

Aleks Kolarov (Lazio): £16m

2009

Joleon Lescott (Everton): £22m

Gareth Barry (Aston Villa): £12m

2008

Vincent Kompany (Hamburg): £6m

Pablo Zabaleta (Espanyol): £6.5m

John Guidetti (MCFC Academy)

2007

Dedryck Boyata (MCFC Academy)

2006

Joe Hart (Shrewsbury Town): £100,000

2005

Micah Richards (MCFC Academy)

Re: Media Watch

PostPosted: Sun Nov 03, 2013 3:41 pm
by Hutch's Shoulder
Beefymcfc wrote:Just read (well, not really) a piece in the MEN and am still trying to understand what the point of it is. There's no story, just a list of our players and what they cost. To me, it looks like they're trying to say this is why we beat Norwich 7-1, somehow putting a dampener on our day. As fans, we already know what the team costs so who is this aimed at?


I must have missed Norwich scoring.

Re: Media Watch

PostPosted: Sun Nov 03, 2013 3:49 pm
by Beefymcfc
Hutch's Shoulder wrote:
Beefymcfc wrote:Just read (well, not really) a piece in the MEN and am still trying to understand what the point of it is. There's no story, just a list of our players and what they cost. To me, it looks like they're trying to say this is why we beat Norwich 7-1, somehow putting a dampener on our day. As fans, we already know what the team costs so who is this aimed at?


I must have missed Norwich scoring.

Good spot and I can't even say it was my sausage fingers ;-)

Re: Media Watch

PostPosted: Sun Nov 03, 2013 3:49 pm
by Dameerto
Hutch's Shoulder wrote:
Beefymcfc wrote:Just read (well, not really) a piece in the MEN and am still trying to understand what the point of it is. There's no story, just a list of our players and what they cost. To me, it looks like they're trying to say this is why we beat Norwich 7-1, somehow putting a dampener on our day. As fans, we already know what the team costs so who is this aimed at?


I must have missed Norwich scoring.


Me too.

Re: Media Watch

PostPosted: Sun Nov 03, 2013 3:54 pm
by branny
Yeah we're that reliant that with him in the team we'd have won six out of the last six instead of just the five.

Re: Media Watch

PostPosted: Sun Nov 03, 2013 4:00 pm
by Ted Hughes
A better piece would have been a series of weekly articles: 'Ever wondered why Fellaini cost more than....Part 1: David Silva ?'

Next week's could have ' Part 2: Samir Nasri ?'

The week after could be ' Part 3: Yaya Toure ?'

Re: Media Watch

PostPosted: Sun Nov 03, 2013 4:05 pm
by Original Dub
Ted Hughes wrote:A better piece would have been a series of weekly articles: 'Ever wondered why Fellaini cost more than....Part 1: David Silva ?'

Next week's could have ' Part 2: Samir Nasri ?'

The week after could be ' Part 3: Yaya Toure ?'


When it's put like that... it's beautiful.

Re: Media Watch

PostPosted: Sun Nov 03, 2013 4:09 pm
by nottsblue
Ted Hughes wrote:A better piece would have been a series of weekly articles: 'Ever wondered why Fellaini cost more than....Part 1: David Silva ?'

Next week's could have ' Part 2: Samir Nasri ?'

The week after could be ' Part 3: Yaya Toure ?'


Chuckling at that. A dogshit signing if ever there was one. A panic buy at best. Even the local paper writes shit about us.

Re: Media Watch

PostPosted: Mon Nov 04, 2013 1:32 pm
by Bianchi on Ice
Beefymcfc wrote:
Hutch's Shoulder wrote:
Beefymcfc wrote:Just read (well, not really) a piece in the MEN and am still trying to understand what the point of it is. There's no story, just a list of our players and what they cost. To me, it looks like they're trying to say this is why we beat Norwich 7-1, somehow putting a dampener on our day. As fans, we already know what the team costs so who is this aimed at?


I must have missed Norwich scoring.

Good spot and I can't even say it was my sausage fingers ;-)


That was Joes excuse ;-)
Anyway good thread Dub...
Old ground?...no
It just shows us the truth.
Im surprised the players havent handed back those rolex watches the sheik gave them..such is their embarrasment of being paid so much or being transferred for so much money as all the other teams pay their players with luncheon vouchers and travel to away games in hired fiats.

Re: Media Watch

PostPosted: Mon Nov 04, 2013 1:49 pm
by Cocacolajojo1
Ted Hughes wrote:A better piece would have been a series of weekly articles: 'Ever wondered why Fellaini cost more than....Part 1: David Silva ?'

Next week's could have ' Part 2: Samir Nasri ?'

The week after could be ' Part 3: Yaya Toure ?'


Hadn't thought about that. Amazing when you think about it.

Re: Media Watch

PostPosted: Mon Nov 04, 2013 1:49 pm
by Alioune DVToure
Negredo for 16 is ace business.

Re: Media Watch

PostPosted: Mon Nov 04, 2013 2:05 pm
by Bianchi on Ice
Alioune DVToure wrote:Negredo for 16 is ace business.


Yeh but for another £11,000,000 we could have signed felliaini. If we are ruining football we need to get serious about it

Re: Media Watch

PostPosted: Mon Nov 04, 2013 2:09 pm
by Alioune DVToure
Bianchi on Ice wrote:
Yeh but for another £11,000,000 we could have signed felliaini. If we are ruining football we need to get serious about it


The fact that the going rate for players is so high makes him an even more impressive purchase. Cavani or Falcao would've cost three times as much and Negredo has been nothing short of brilliant for us.

As for Fellaini, I still think he's a good player. If those knobs had paid the £23m buyout clause, it would probably have just about been good business. I think he will do well there eventually and is a definite upgrade in what they had at CM previously (Zinedine Cleverly and Pamela Anderson).