The mancityfans.net football forum

Dear SKY

So once again the programme is massively overloaded against City.

Past-it Martin Tyler may as well be 15 when he says at 2-0 'but remember United are still in the CL' and 'United have won the title xx times'. The man was nearly crying when City scored after 40 seconds, mumbling something about City scoring. If the same had been done by his beloved United he'd have been screaming his head off. He just cant help himself with his bias. What IS he going to do as United plummet down the leagues? Retire him to save his sanity.

'Experts' - Gary Neville (United but sensible), Paul Scholes (Biased and inexperienced, United), Jamie Rednapp (Liverpool), Jamie Carragher (Liverpool), Graham Souness (Liverpool). Whilst Neville and Souness are objective, all of these would have wanted a United win.

Which brings us to the City-hating Niall Quinn, presumably put in to try and balance everybody else, at least on paper. This guy hates City these days as we are no longer a'homely' club or something ridiculous. Predicting a 1-1 draw should see him retired from punditry forever. What neutral in their right mind thought City wouldn't win.

Pure, unadulterated bias and I look forward to the day when SKY have proper competition so we can vote with our feet.

Yours sincerely

John @ St Austell

Your middle name is @?

Slim wrote:Your middle name is @?

TW he likes to ignore.

Slim wrote:Your middle name is @?

It's my thorn-in-the-side name in many places. Since they closed SKYTEXT it's my only way to get at them.

Wouldn't want to get confused with anyone else. :-)

This is how it is.
We win and its because money has been spent
We lose and its how can they lose when all that money has been spent
Unlike liverpool who have god as manager and do everything organically, and scum who seemingly have a divine right to win all the time.
I could accept these views if they were actually based in reality, but they arent.
All i can do is not buy newspapers, click on links to their websites, pay for subscriptions to sky, bbc etc and take part in any form of monetary transaction to these said establishments.
They can change their tune if they like, but its too late
Its not about the fucking "price tag" sky...you cunts

Hazy2 wrote:

Slim wrote:Your middle name is @?

TW he likes to ignore.

And we LOL.

john@staustell wrote:Dear SKY

So once again the programme is massively overloaded against City.

Past-it Martin Tyler may as well be 15 when he says at 2-0 'but remember United are still in the CL' and 'United have won the title xx times'. The man was nearly crying when City scored after 40 seconds, mumbling something about City scoring. If the same had been done by his beloved United he'd have been screaming his head off. He just cant help himself with his bias. What IS he going to do as United plummet down the leagues? Retire him to save his sanity.

'Experts' - Gary Neville (United but sensible), Paul Scholes (Biased and inexperienced, United), Jamie Rednapp (Liverpool), Jamie Carragher (Liverpool), Graham Souness (Liverpool). Whilst Neville and Souness are objective, all of these would have wanted a United win.

Which brings us to the City-hating Niall Quinn, presumably put in to try and balance everybody else, at least on paper. This guy hates City these days as we are no longer a'homely' club or something ridiculous. Predicting a 1-1 draw should see him retired from punditry forever. What neutral in their right mind thought City wouldn't win.

Pure, unadulterated bias and I look forward to the day when SKY have proper competition so we can vote with our feet.

Yours sincerely

John @ St Austell

I very much suspect sky will face a make or break battle with BT backed by BeIN Sports over the next deal, and that they will either lose, or pay so far over the odds it will cripple them.

But BT wouldn't be much different, the out of work pundits will just move from sky to BT

Im_Spartacus wrote:

john@staustell wrote:Dear SKY

So once again the programme is massively overloaded against City.

Past-it Martin Tyler may as well be 15 when he says at 2-0 'but remember United are still in the CL' and 'United have won the title xx times'. The man was nearly crying when City scored after 40 seconds, mumbling something about City scoring. If the same had been done by his beloved United he'd have been screaming his head off. He just cant help himself with his bias. What IS he going to do as United plummet down the leagues? Retire him to save his sanity.

'Experts' - Gary Neville (United but sensible), Paul Scholes (Biased and inexperienced, United), Jamie Rednapp (Liverpool), Jamie Carragher (Liverpool), Graham Souness (Liverpool). Whilst Neville and Souness are objective, all of these would have wanted a United win.

Which brings us to the City-hating Niall Quinn, presumably put in to try and balance everybody else, at least on paper. This guy hates City these days as we are no longer a'homely' club or something ridiculous. Predicting a 1-1 draw should see him retired from punditry forever. What neutral in their right mind thought City wouldn't win.

Pure, unadulterated bias and I look forward to the day when SKY have proper competition so we can vote with our feet.

Yours sincerely

John @ St Austell

I very much suspect sky will face a make or break battle with BT backed by BeIN Sports over the next deal, and that they will either lose, or pay so far over the odds it will cripple them.

But BT wouldn't be much different, the out of work pundits will just move from sky to BT

very true, with all the streaming we've watched over the years across all the channels.. its essentially just a merry go round of the same pundits getting recycled across the different nations/networks. Well.. apart from the Aussies who seem to forgo "ex division 1 English footballer" and instead have what sounds like the 2 blokes sat on the couch in the fosters ads!

In Canada we had Jim Beglin, who delighted in observing that we weren't exactly inspired except for the opening ten minutes, that Hernandez could be just the spark that the scum needed to get them a goal, and in the 88th minute decided to talk for 30 seconds or so about the delightful goal that Ivanovic scored to "embarrass" us at the Etihad.

I'm getting to the stage with commentators where I really don't give a flying one how bias they are. City are usually bias on the pitch winning games so feck em

Chinners wrote:I'm getting to the stage with commentators where I really don't give a flying one how bias they are. City are usually bias on the pitch winning games so feck em

Me too, i prefer to spend my time admiring what i see not getting worked up about what the commentators are saying.

Chinners wrote:I'm getting to the stage with commentators where I really don't give a flying one how bias they are. City are usually bias on the pitch winning games so feck em

i actually like swearing at them
plenty of "fuck off tyler"'s in my house last night

I thought Scholes was superb, but he is a Utd fan, as is Ne***e, Tyler is an 'old guard' fan, then we have several Liverpool.

Not one of them is 'on our side'. Most were honest, & were fulsome in their praise, but the fact that Sky don't even make the slightest effort to produce a balanced panel when City play ANYONE is basically disrespectful to the club.

They don't do this to anyone else, just City. Even top 8 clubs get their own man on there. We rarely do.

I have no problem with Scholes being on there, if he's sat next to Uwe Rosler.

I thought Scholes was brilliant. His comments about Arsenal were fucking hilarious & I don't think I've ever agreed with anyone more about anything, especially Jack Wilshire; honesty at last rather than lies & bullshit.

But he is a Utd fan who refers to them as 'we'. No way should he be on there without a City counterpart; that is just an insult.

Ted Hughes wrote:I thought Scholes was superb, but he is a Utd fan, as is Ne***e, Tyler is an 'old guard' fan, then we have several Liverpool.

Not one of them is 'on our side'. Most were honest, & were fulsome in their praise, but the fact that Sky don't even make the slightest effort to produce a balanced panel when City play ANYONE is basically disrespectful to the club.

They don't do this to anyone else, just City. Even top 8 clubs get their own man on there. We rarely do.

I have no problem with Scholes being on there, if he's sat next to Uwe Rosler.

I thought Scholes was brilliant. His comments about Arsenal were fucking hilarious & I don't think I've ever agreed with anyone more about anything, especially Jack Wilshire; honesty at last rather than lies & bullshit.

But he is a Utd fan who refers to them as 'we'. No way should he be on there without a City counterpart; that is just an insult.

What did he say about Wiltshire Ted? I missed that last night

gmercer1 wrote:

Ted Hughes wrote:I thought Scholes was superb, but he is a Utd fan, as is Ne***e, Tyler is an 'old guard' fan, then we have several Liverpool.

Not one of them is 'on our side'. Most were honest, & were fulsome in their praise, but the fact that Sky don't even make the slightest effort to produce a balanced panel when City play ANYONE is basically disrespectful to the club.

They don't do this to anyone else, just City. Even top 8 clubs get their own man on there. We rarely do.

I have no problem with Scholes being on there, if he's sat next to Uwe Rosler.

I thought Scholes was brilliant. His comments about Arsenal were fucking hilarious & I don't think I've ever agreed with anyone more about anything, especially Jack Wilshire; honesty at last rather than lies & bullshit.

But he is a Utd fan who refers to them as 'we'. No way should he be on there without a City counterpart; that is just an insult.

What did he say about Wiltshire Ted? I missed that last night

That he's no better now than he was when he was 17.

Ted Hughes wrote:I thought Scholes was superb, but he is a Utd fan, as is Ne***e, Tyler is an 'old guard' fan, then we have several Liverpool.

Not one of them is 'on our side'. Most were honest, & were fulsome in their praise, but the fact that Sky don't even make the slightest effort to produce a balanced panel when City play ANYONE is basically disrespectful to the club.

They don't do this to anyone else, just City. Even top 8 clubs get their own man on there. We rarely do.

I have no problem with Scholes being on there, if he's sat next to Uwe Rosler.

I thought Scholes was brilliant. His comments about Arsenal were fucking hilarious & I don't think I've ever agreed with anyone more about anything, especially Jack Wilshire; honesty at last rather than lies & bullshit.

But he is a Utd fan who refers to them as 'we'. No way should he be on there without a City counterpart; that is just an insult.

Thats the key word for me Ted..."disrespectful"
I think thats what they show the club on a regular basis....disrespect. Ok, we are biased because we support the club and it could be said its easy to rise above it all but as ive said earlier any praise for City is almost grudging. I dont see why it should be.

gmercer1 wrote:

Ted Hughes wrote:I thought Scholes was superb, but he is a Utd fan, as is Ne***e, Tyler is an 'old guard' fan, then we have several Liverpool.

Not one of them is 'on our side'. Most were honest, & were fulsome in their praise, but the fact that Sky don't even make the slightest effort to produce a balanced panel when City play ANYONE is basically disrespectful to the club.

They don't do this to anyone else, just City. Even top 8 clubs get their own man on there. We rarely do.

I have no problem with Scholes being on there, if he's sat next to Uwe Rosler.

I thought Scholes was brilliant. His comments about Arsenal were fucking hilarious & I don't think I've ever agreed with anyone more about anything, especially Jack Wilshire; honesty at last rather than lies & bullshit.

But he is a Utd fan who refers to them as 'we'. No way should he be on there without a City counterpart; that is just an insult.

What did he say about Wiltshire Ted? I missed that last night

Arrr right. Cheers.

gmercer1 wrote:

Ted Hughes wrote:I thought Scholes was superb, but he is a Utd fan, as is Ne***e, Tyler is an 'old guard' fan, then we have several Liverpool.

Not one of them is 'on our side'. Most were honest, & were fulsome in their praise, but the fact that Sky don't even make the slightest effort to produce a balanced panel when City play ANYONE is basically disrespectful to the club.

They don't do this to anyone else, just City. Even top 8 clubs get their own man on there. We rarely do.

I have no problem with Scholes being on there, if he's sat next to Uwe Rosler.

I thought Scholes was brilliant. His comments about Arsenal were fucking hilarious & I don't think I've ever agreed with anyone more about anything, especially Jack Wilshire; honesty at last rather than lies & bullshit.

But he is a Utd fan who refers to them as 'we'. No way should he be on there without a City counterpart; that is just an insult.

What did he say about Wiltshire Ted? I missed that last night

Jack Wilshere hasn't improved at Arsenal since he was a 17-year-old, Paul Scholes said Tuesday.

Scholes was passing his judgement on Arsenal after their 2-2 draw against Swansea in his role as Sky Sports pundit, with his comments on the abilities of Wilshere likely to be the subject of much debate in the coming days.

Many observers have suggested that Arsenal's 22-year-old playmaker was the most gifted midfielder England have produced since Scholes was in his pomp for Manchester United and on the international stage, but the 11-time Premier League title winner begs to differ.

"When Jack Wilshere came on the scene, what a top young player he looked," suggested Scholes. "Injuries haven't helped him, but his development from 17 years of age, he doesn't look any better player now than he did when he was 17.

"He needs people like [Patrick] Vieira, characters like that, to take him on to the next level. Characters and leaders are important. You play Arsenal now, get stuck in about them and you've won the game."

The outspoken Scholes was equally forthright in condemning Arsenal manager Wenger and his team, in a week when they have lost 6-0 to Chelsea and saw their title hopes fade further with a 2-2 home draw against Swansea. "It's probably a typical week for Arsenal really," said Scholes. "They capitulated at Chelsea and it seems to be a similar theme that happens when they play the top teams. It happened at Liverpool, they conceded six at [Manchester] City and for one reason or another, players just seem to go missing.

"[Mikel] Arteta, [Santi] Cazorla, [Tomas] Rosicky, [Mesut] Ozil, it seems like they go on the pitch with no discipline. It's almost as if [the manager says] you four, five midfielders go out there and do what you want. Try and score us a goal, a few nice one-twos. Tippy-tappy football, don't bother running back. "I don’t know if it is what the manager does, but there is no discipline, there is no leader for them. There is no Patrick Vieira, no [Tony] Adams, no [Martin] Keown.

"If they go 2-0 down, they just carry on what they are doing. Ah I'll walk up front, lose the ball, play a nice little one-two and you wonder why they are in the position they are in.

"It’s Arsenal fans you feel sorry for. They seem to get the same thing every year. Maybe a little hint of the title for a few weeks and then they go to Chelsea, they go to City, they go to Liverpool and just do nothing.

"Fans expect Arsenal to be going for the league title and I know they are in third or fourth place or whatever, but they are a million miles away in my eyes.

I would nt mind them talking about money if it was truthful and without bias. For example, Mr Scholes could say "Do you realise Rio Ferdinand cost us more than City's back five cost in total."

i heard that Scholes was fantastic and slaughtered Arsenal and Fellaini