The mancityfans.net football forum

freshie wrote:

mr_nool wrote:And anyone questioning the red card because of Matt Ritchie only getting a yellow today is an idiot.
Mane was running at full speed towards Ederson – the risk for injury was huge. Any sane person would have pulled his both in, not to risk killing the opponent. Some ex-players, the MotD pundits included, say that Mane had to go for the ball. Yes, perhaps, but with his chest or his head. Putting his booth up was a cowardice thing to do. He chose risking to hurt Ederson, because he didn't want to be hurt himself.

I think Ritchie should also have received a red card. His actions were just as reckless as Mane's

Yes and no. The speed makes all the difference. Had Mane hit him full on at that speed, instead of just bracing him with his studs, Ederson could've fucking broken his neck.

This is very closely related to my pet hate n football: when a defender and an attacker are chasing a long ball at full pelt with the keeper coming out and the attacker giving the defender a push towards his oncoming keeper. That should always, always be a red in my book, but hardly ever even results in a yellow.

Justified logic wrote:

iwasthere2012 wrote:

Justified logic wrote:And all this fuss just to hand-hold the dipper fans.

That's a statement not a question JL.
Are you coming round to our kind of thinking?

All this fuss in the media is about consoling the dippers after that blasting, keeping them interested and clicking and watching for the advertising data. I don't see it as particularly anti-City.

I was thinking the same, had we won 2-0 it would have been different.

Justified logic wrote:

iwasthere2012 wrote:

Justified logic wrote:And all this fuss just to hand-hold the dipper fans.

That's a statement not a question JL.
Are you coming round to our kind of thinking?

All this fuss in the media is about consoling the dippers after that blasting, keeping them interested and clicking and watching for the advertising data. I don't see it as particularly anti-City.

You see there's the thing.
We actually totally agree about what is going on. However I see this pandering to the scousers and the Rags amongst others as being insidious and totally detrimental to what I would call in the interest of the game and a level playing field.

Saying it's not anti-City in my mind is not strictly true. It's anti whoever threatens the cozy money making racket that they have going and that happens to be us more than anyone who has ever come close.
There seems to be real vitriol this year and fear and self preservation above all.

The example of yesterday is a beautiful illustration of the stark contrast in how one team gets reported on and how another namely us, is treated even when we are in the right.

All about perspective JL.
I actually agree with what you say but draw a different conclusion on the consequences of it all. I think the consequences are anti-City.

Its quite simple, the media in general pander to Liverpool & the rags and to a certain extent Arsenal, because they have the largest fanbases, therefore the biggest markets to sell their products. Other clubs, City included are catching up but are still miles away from those 3 clubs and probably still will be for the next 20 years.

mr_nool wrote:

freshie wrote:

mr_nool wrote:And anyone questioning the red card because of Matt Ritchie only getting a yellow today is an idiot.
Mane was running at full speed towards Ederson – the risk for injury was huge. Any sane person would have pulled his both in, not to risk killing the opponent. Some ex-players, the MotD pundits included, say that Mane had to go for the ball. Yes, perhaps, but with his chest or his head. Putting his booth up was a cowardice thing to do. He chose risking to hurt Ederson, because he didn't want to be hurt himself.

I think Ritchie should also have received a red card. His actions were just as reckless as Mane's

Yes and no. The speed makes all the difference. Had Mane hit him full on at that speed, instead of just bracing him with his studs, Ederson could've fucking broken his neck.

This is very closely related to my pet hate n football: when a defender and an attacker are chasing a long ball at full pelt with the keeper coming out and the attacker giving the defender a push towards his oncoming keeper. That should always, always be a red in my book, but hardly ever even results in a yellow.

That last scenrio happened today in the EDS game v the Dippers. Danny Ings sort of gave up on a chase behind our defender buy just shoved him into Grimshaw at the last moment. Fortunately there wasnt much of a collision but nothing from the ref.

Immediately after Lattibeaudiere was fouled and fell a little awkwardly. The ref blew for the foul but a piece of red scum just kicked the ball fairly hard at Joel while he was on the ground hitting him in the face. Nowt again from the ref even thi players were really would up ( especially Matt Smith). Joel had to go off to stop his bleeding nose. Came back on but had to go off a second time.

Chinners wrote:Its quite simple, the media in general pander to Liverpool & the rags and to a certain extent Arsenal, because they have the largest fanbases, therefore the biggest markets to sell their products. Other clubs, City included are catching up but are still miles away from those 3 clubs and probably still will be for the next 20 years.

That's fine Chinners, targeting the biggest markets is sound business practice. What is wrong is the relentless lies, smears and negative reporting about us (and others) in order to promote their chosen brands. They are all disgusting parasites with zero integrity but that's nothing new.

Chinners wrote:Its quite simple, the media in general pander to Liverpool & the rags and to a certain extent Arsenal, because they have the largest fanbases, therefore the biggest markets to sell their products. Other clubs, City included are catching up but are still miles away from those 3 clubs and probably still will be for the next 20 years.

Thems the facts Chinners. No doubt.
Is it right though that the consequences of that are anti-City stories and non stories being printed and pundits ignoring the rules and making up their own rules when it comes to a City game.
A constant negative narrative is counterproductive to City and we are the main threat.
It's pure economics but it is anti-the main threat.

I don't think it is simply financial. The growth of revenues to watch the PL has been extraordinary despite the rag scum not being champions for years. It's about who gets his or her hands on the filthy lucre and that is the clubs who have established themselves (through fair means or foul) at the front of the queue for the handouts. The media are complicit in this and feed of the giant beast that is the PL through long-established ties to these teams. It stinks.

Douglas Higginbottom wrote:

mr_nool wrote:

freshie wrote:

mr_nool wrote:And anyone questioning the red card because of Matt Ritchie only getting a yellow today is an idiot.
Mane was running at full speed towards Ederson – the risk for injury was huge. Any sane person would have pulled his both in, not to risk killing the opponent. Some ex-players, the MotD pundits included, say that Mane had to go for the ball. Yes, perhaps, but with his chest or his head. Putting his booth up was a cowardice thing to do. He chose risking to hurt Ederson, because he didn't want to be hurt himself.

I think Ritchie should also have received a red card. His actions were just as reckless as Mane's

Yes and no. The speed makes all the difference. Had Mane hit him full on at that speed, instead of just bracing him with his studs, Ederson could've fucking broken his neck.

This is very closely related to my pet hate n football: when a defender and an attacker are chasing a long ball at full pelt with the keeper coming out and the attacker giving the defender a push towards his oncoming keeper. That should always, always be a red in my book, but hardly ever even results in a yellow.

That last scenrio happened today in the EDS game v the Dippers. Danny Ings sort of gave up on a chase behind our defender buy just shoved him into Grimshaw at the last moment. Fortunately there wasnt much of a collision but nothing from the ref.

Immediately after Lattibeaudiere was fouled and fell a little awkwardly. The ref blew for the foul but a piece of red scum just kicked the ball fairly hard at Joel while he was on the ground hitting him in the face. Nowt again from the ref even thi players were really would up ( especially Matt Smith). Joel had to go off to stop his bleeding nose. Came back on but had to go off a second time.

WTF they really are a fucking disgrace of a club
Thanks Doug

iwasthere2012 wrote:

Justified logic wrote:

iwasthere2012 wrote:

Justified logic wrote:And all this fuss just to hand-hold the dipper fans.

That's a statement not a question JL.
Are you coming round to our kind of thinking?

All this fuss in the media is about consoling the dippers after that blasting, keeping them interested and clicking and watching for the advertising data. I don't see it as particularly anti-City.

You see there's the thing.
We actually totally agree about what is going on. However I see this pandering to the scousers and the Rags amongst others as being insidious and totally detrimental to what I would call in the interest of the game and a level playing field.

Saying it's not anti-City in my mind is not strictly true. It's anti whoever threatens the cozy money making racket that they have going and that happens to be us more than anyone who has ever come close.
There seems to be real vitriol this year and fear and self preservation above all.

The example of yesterday is a beautiful illustration of the stark contrast in how one team gets reported on and how another namely us, is treated even when we are in the right.

All about perspective JL.
I actually agree with what you say but draw a different conclusion on the consequences of it all. I think the consequences are anti-City.

The consequences may be anti-City but the problem is with the intent, which I think is to pander to their audiences (the red teams with the big support plus the other big London clubs) and not specifically anti-City, by which I mean I don't think the editorial meetings are run along the lines "Now, let's see what shit we can say about City because we hate City." It seems to me that some people think that there is a specific anti-City 'agenda'. It is true that the media employ a lot of red & London supporters who are naturally anti-City but they were put there to promote stuff that panders to the red & London teams. It is also true that we are very much in the firing line with our rich Arab owners and location across town from the most successful red team but I don't buy into this anti-City paranoia which I think is a remnant of the inferiority complex brought about by decades of being dominated by United.

Business don't care about nothing except turning a profit and despicable as the media are in their treatment of us they will come around when our continued success on the field provides a big enough audience for them to pander to. It may indeed take 20 years, a generation, but like others here, I hope that when 'acceptance' happens our media bods are fairer to opponents than the current red & London bods - and, tbf, many on here - are. Hate is not a good look.

Justified logic wrote:MOTD2 with Clattenburg, the one ref who thinks it was a yellow, were angling for a one game ban or having it rescinded as it "wasn't malicious". Debatable as to whether it was malicious (I'm certainly not convinced it was) but it was dangerous, out of control, both feet off the ground, studs first play. I'm not sure that it would get rescinded or reduced if it had been at knee height and I don't think one can be killed by having studs smashed into your knee. Painful and potentially career-ending, whether done maliciously or not, but not a life-ender. But that's the BBC Anfield gang for you.

My mistake. It was Sutton, not Clattenburg. He was at it again on MOTD2 last night (after the midday one) and in today's Daily Mail.

Jurgen Klopp will be going bonkers when he sees the replay of Matt Ritchie’s high foot. Or maybe he will use it to get Sadio Mane’s red card overturned. He will surely think about an appeal today.

Ritchie’s high foot was a very similar incident, but there were two different decisions and two different punishments.

Newcastle’s Ritchie gets away with a yellow card and his team win 1-0 away from home — Mane gets a red, his team play with 10 men, then he gets a three-game ban! How is that correct?

You could argue that Ritchie’s was worse than Mane’s because it wasn’t in a goalscoring area. Mane made the challenge because he had to. His job is to score goals and this was a one-on-one opportunity against Manchester City.

The inconsistency is what infuriates everyone in the game.

If one is red — and I don’t believe it was — the other should be, too. Within 24 hours, we have seen the decision-making of referees exposed. Mike Jones didn’t see the Ritchie tackle in the same light, but how can that be fair to Mane and Liverpool?

What a dick.

Justified logic wrote:I don't buy into this anti-City paranoia which I think is a remnant of the inferiority complex brought about by decades of being dominated by United. Business doesn't care about anything except turning a profit and despicable as the media are in their treatment of us they will come around when our continued success on the field provides a big enough audience for them to pander to. ...

If you'll forgive the redaction, it's done to show my point of departure with your take on this subject. Recognition of the dishonest shared media agenda to diminish threats to the host brands of these parasites is neither a product of paranoia nor a lingering sense of inferiority. It is simply the obvious reality, shed the guilt JL, it's really not your fault.

johnny crossan wrote:

Chinners wrote:Its quite simple, the media in general pander to Liverpool & the rags and to a certain extent Arsenal, because they have the largest fanbases, therefore the biggest markets to sell their products. Other clubs, City included are catching up but are still miles away from those 3 clubs and probably still will be for the next 20 years.

That's fine Chinners, targeting the biggest markets is sound business practice. What is wrong is the relentless lies, smears and negative reporting about us (and others) in order to promote their chosen brands. They are all disgusting parasites with zero integrity but that's nothing new.

Yep it's definitely wrong as it will be in 20 years when all the new editors, reporters and newspaper owners support City and turn the tables .... but we won't mind then. A few Liverpool and Rag mates (sinc) think their clubs are subject to anti bias as well! They probably do get some anti reporting and articlewise this is probably more than we get but that is only because they get 20 times more coverage than we do. We won the league in 2012 & 2014 with press bias and I believe we will do it again this season .... Fucl them

Chinners wrote:

johnny crossan wrote:

Chinners wrote:Its quite simple, the media in general pander to Liverpool & the rags and to a certain extent Arsenal, because they have the largest fanbases, therefore the biggest markets to sell their products. Other clubs, City included are catching up but are still miles away from those 3 clubs and probably still will be for the next 20 years.

That's fine Chinners, targeting the biggest markets is sound business practice. What is wrong is the relentless lies, smears and negative reporting about us (and others) in order to promote their chosen brands. They are all disgusting parasites with zero integrity but that's nothing new.

Yep it's definitely wrong as it will be in 20 years when all the new editors, reporters and newspaper owners support City and turn the tables .... but we won't mind then. A few Liverpool and Rag mates (sinc) think their clubs are subject to anti bias as well! They probably do get some anti reporting and articlewise this is probably more than we get but that is only because they get 20 times more coverage than we do. We won the league in 2012 & 2014 with press bias and I believe we will do it again this season .... Fucl them

In twenty years or so this planet will probably be a lifeless smoking ember closing in on a convenient black hole but if not I'm sure you'll be right Chinners

johnny crossan wrote:

Justified logic wrote:I don't buy into this anti-City paranoia which I think is a remnant of the inferiority complex brought about by decades of being dominated by United. Business doesn't care about anything except turning a profit and despicable as the media are in their treatment of us they will come around when our continued success on the field provides a big enough audience for them to pander to. ...

If you'll forgive the redaction, it's done to show my point of departure with your take on this subject. Recognition of the dishonest shared media agenda to diminish threats to the host brands of these parasites is neither a product of paranoia nor a lingering sense of inferiority. It is simply the obvious reality, shed the guilt JL, it's really not your fault.

But my point was that the paranoia and lingering sense of inferiority is amongst those who think that only City is getting this treatment.

Justified logic wrote:

johnny crossan wrote:

Justified logic wrote:I don't buy into this anti-City paranoia which I think is a remnant of the inferiority complex brought about by decades of being dominated by United. Business doesn't care about anything except turning a profit and despicable as the media are in their treatment of us they will come around when our continued success on the field provides a big enough audience for them to pander to. ...

If you'll forgive the redaction, it's done to show my point of departure with your take on this subject. Recognition of the dishonest shared media agenda to diminish threats to the host brands of these parasites is neither a product of paranoia nor a lingering sense of inferiority. It is simply the obvious reality, shed the guilt JL, it's really not your fault.

But my point was that the paranoia and lingering sense of inferiority is amongst those who think that only City is getting this treatment.

To a large degree we are, well more than most anyway, simply because we're their biggest threat.

Foreverinbluedreams wrote:

Justified logic wrote:

johnny crossan wrote:

Justified logic wrote:I don't buy into this anti-City paranoia which I think is a remnant of the inferiority complex brought about by decades of being dominated by United. Business doesn't care about anything except turning a profit and despicable as the media are in their treatment of us they will come around when our continued success on the field provides a big enough audience for them to pander to. ...

If you'll forgive the redaction, it's done to show my point of departure with your take on this subject. Recognition of the dishonest shared media agenda to diminish threats to the host brands of these parasites is neither a product of paranoia nor a lingering sense of inferiority. It is simply the obvious reality, shed the guilt JL, it's really not your fault.

But my point was that the paranoia and lingering sense of inferiority is amongst those who think that only City is getting this treatment.

To a large degree we are, well more than most anyway, simply because we're their biggest threat.

Which is pretty much the point I made in response to Chinners, in one of these threads somewhere. We are the main threat. The agenda is anti-the main threat.
therefore the agenda is anti-us.

iwasthere2012 wrote:

Foreverinbluedreams wrote:

Justified logic wrote:

johnny crossan wrote:

Justified logic wrote:I don't buy into this anti-City paranoia which I think is a remnant of the inferiority complex brought about by decades of being dominated by United. Business doesn't care about anything except turning a profit and despicable as the media are in their treatment of us they will come around when our continued success on the field provides a big enough audience for them to pander to. ...

If you'll forgive the redaction, it's done to show my point of departure with your take on this subject. Recognition of the dishonest shared media agenda to diminish threats to the host brands of these parasites is neither a product of paranoia nor a lingering sense of inferiority. It is simply the obvious reality, shed the guilt JL, it's really not your fault.

But my point was that the paranoia and lingering sense of inferiority is amongst those who think that only City is getting this treatment.

To a large degree we are, well more than most anyway, simply because we're their biggest threat.

Which is pretty much the point I made in response to Chinners, in one of these threads somewhere. We are the main threat. The agenda is anti-the main threat. Therefore the agenda is anti-us.

Maybe JL has seen the light - hallelujah!

Chelsea had this sort of shyte 6-7 years before us .... and still do

Chinners wrote:Chelsea had this sort of shyte 6-7 years before us .... and still do

Nowhere near the intensity and longevity of the onslaught on us. You also need to remember the institutional attacks - FFP was designed to cripple us and succeeded.