motd

[aaron bond]

Have just seen the MOTD highlights. There was no agenda on there as some people are making out - it was a pretty fair analysis.

The actual highlights showed slightly more chances for us in the first half, and slightly more for them in the second half (their chances were more clear-cut in the second half), which is what happened.

Then in the post-match analysis they started by focusing on Liverpool's front 3, who were excellent and caused us lots of problems, and then they focused on our intricate passing, and gave us plenty of praise for being so impressive at home. They briefly mentioned the incorrect offside call, but didn't dwell on it, said that the ref generally got most decisions right, and said that if Suarez had been awarded a penalty for Lescott's shirt-pull then Skrtel should have had 2-3 awarded against him at the other end.

I know MOTD sometimes have a bit of a Liverpool love-fest when Hansen and Lawrenson are on there, but that was not the case last night.

[Blue Since 92]

Have just seen the MOTD highlights. There was no agenda on there as some people are making out - it was a pretty fair analysis.

The actual highlights showed slightly more chances for us in the first half, and slightly more for them in the second half (their chances were more clear-cut in the second half), which is what happened.

Then in the post-match analysis they started by focusing on Liverpool's front 3, who were excellent and caused us lots of problems, and then they focused on our intricate passing, and gave us plenty of praise for being so impressive at home. They briefly mentioned the incorrect offside call, but didn't dwell on it, said that the ref generally got most decisions right, and said that if Suarez had been awarded a penalty for Lescott's shirt-pull then Skrtel should have had 2-3 awarded against him at the other end.

I know MOTD sometimes have a bit of a Liverpool love-fest when Hansen and Lawrenson are on there, but that was not the case last night.

I'd have to agree with you on this. The post match analysis really wasn't bad at all imho.

[AG7]

Errr ... what's this?

@BBCMOTD: #MOTD tonight at 10.30pm: 1.Hull/Fulham, 2.ManCity/Palace, 3.Cardiff/Sunderland, 4.WestHam/WestBrom, 5.Norwich/ManUtd, 6.Villa/Swansea

Tides are turning? Times are changing? Our 1-0 win is second game after Hull's 6-0 ... while Scum too won 1-0 and won away, but find themselves 5th in that order?

Quite a few rags sprouting off bbc for this on Twitter and more incensed that we are second, lol.

[london blue 2]

Errr ... what's this?

@BBCMOTD: #MOTD tonight at 10.30pm: 1.Hull/Fulham, 2.ManCity/Palace, 3.Cardiff/Sunderland, 4.WestHam/WestBrom, 5.Norwich/ManUtd, 6.Villa/Swansea

Tides are turning? Times are changing? Our 1-0 win is second game after Hull's 6-0 ... while Scum too won 1-0 and won away, but find themselves 5th in that order?

Quite a few rags sprouting off bbc for this on Twitter and more incensed that we are second, lol.

I'm sure some will give a reason for this blatant favouritism towards hull. ;)

[Beefymcfc]

Errr ... what's this?

@BBCMOTD: #MOTD tonight at 10.30pm: 1.Hull/Fulham, 2.ManCity/Palace, 3.Cardiff/Sunderland, 4.WestHam/WestBrom, 5.Norwich/ManUtd, 6.Villa/Swansea

Tides are turning? Times are changing? Our 1-0 win is second game after Hull's 6-0 ... while Scum too won 1-0 and won away, but find themselves 5th in that order?

Quite a few rags sprouting off bbc for this on Twitter and more incensed that we are second, lol.

I'm sure some will give a reason for this blatant favouritism towards hull. ;)

Steve Bruce you see. It'll all be how good the Rags must've been to beat them with a brilliant Rag header ;-)

[AG7]

Steve Bruce you see. It'll all be how good the Rags must've been to beat them with a brilliant Rag header ;-)

On a serious note it does look like there is something in it ... as all other games with 3-3, 2-2, and even 1-1 games have more goals than us are slotted behind us ...

Not only here, on Sky game of the day is Scum (as expected) but at 10pm we will be on screen 1 which means in HD while all other games are behind the red button.

I think they (BBC, Sky et all) have realised our arrival at the top and now it's becoming clearer that Scum will be the next Liverpool over the next decade so all are starting to align themselves with us ... BT Sport, already we are their primary partner with our City Square being renamed and our fixtures page on OS now carrying their logo up top etc ...

[ashton287]

They just want to highlight the fact we only beat palace 1-0 at home and we had to bring on resting players to do it.

Show everyone we are not so great after all and talk about how palace were unlucky to lose and probably deserved a point and we are falling apart without aguero and were a 1 man team. Cunts.

[Beefymcfc]

Steve Bruce you see. It'll all be how good the Rags must've been to beat them with a brilliant Rag header ;-)

On a serious note it does look like there is something in it ... as all other games with 3-3, 2-2, and even 1-1 games have more goals than us are slotted behind us ...

Not only here, on Sky game of the day is Scum (as expected) but at 10pm we will be on screen 1 which means in HD while all other games are behind the red button.

I think they (BBC, Sky et all) have realised our arrival at the top and now it's becoming clearer that Scum will be the next Liverpool over the next decade so all are starting to align themselves with us ... BT Sport, already we are their primary partner with our City Square being renamed and our fixtures page on OS now carrying their logo up top etc ...

It was mentioned some time back that the media would start to sit-up and take notice. We're a real player and with the entertainment to boot it's got to be a no-brainer for them as people want to see it. The Palace game may not have been the most exciting in terms of goals but they can portray it has David and Goliath, David just coming up short after great resilience.

Even the written media are starting to come onboard in many ways, understanding that we are actually doing things the right way. Only certain ones will continue their petty sniping as they haven't quite understood that they are looking more and more like fools as each season passes.

[Twobob]

So Palace pummelled our goal, we only had a few efforts ...

Percentage of Palace efforts shown - c.100% ours c.5% seems fair

[london blue 2]

Analysis was fair, highlight predictable.

[Blue_Manc]

Pulis claims if he was manager of our team, he would be seated in the mangers chair with a cigar in his mouth every match.

[Mike J]

Pulis mentioning our spending again. Shock.

Cunt

[Beefymcfc]

Palace looked excellent there and those highlights do them proud. Another lucky win for us and the challengers will be very optimistic seeing us scrape the points against the run of play. Must've been 10 shots 1 in favour of them, they probably had a high % of possession as well by the looks of it.

Looked like the only shot on goal we scored. With Joe's performance in goal we've got to be happy with that.

[aaron bond]

So Palace pummelled our goal, we only had a few efforts ...

Percentage of Palace efforts shown - c.100% ours c.5% seems fair

You are clearly watching MOTD looking to find any fault with what they say.

Whilst we had plenty of possession against Palace, we didn't actually test their goalkeeper that much. The majority of our efforts were blocked or went over/wide. Palace's chances, on the other hand, tested Joe Hart and forced him into some excellent saves.

It's a television show, therefore, they are going to show the entertaining highlights from a match. Watching our defence and midfield repeatedly pass the ball around without much intent does not make good viewing for the average viewer. We didn't play too well today, and Palace caused us some problems in the second half - that's what the highlights reflected.

In the post-match analysis, they spent some time discussing how Palace were well organised and made life difficult for us - this is what happened. Then they talked about our squad depth, gave a positive viewpoint on Edin, and praised Hart's return to form.

Your comments about MOTD just make you sound bitter.

[Herb]

They just want to highlight the fact we only beat palace 1-0 at home and we had to bring on resting players to do it.

Show everyone we are not so great after all and talk about how palace were unlucky to lose and probably deserved a point and we are falling apart without aguero and were a 1 man team. Cunts.

Yes they are cunts but that's what the media are and that's how the media behave and I'm glad of it because the more they talk us down the less mentally prepared (at least subliminally) other teams will be to play against us . . and the more up for it our lads will be to prove a point.

You'll note how maureen (a twat but very astute in such matters) has been playing us up as being champions in waiting, well that's because he understands that if our lads get that thought then they'll relax that little bit and not be quite so good while other sides will focus on us and really prepare. The media running us down will be to our advantage so no worries.

[london blue 2]

You are clearly watching MOTD looking to find any fault with what they say.

Whilst we had plenty of possession against Palace, we didn't actually test their goalkeeper that much. The majority of our efforts were blocked or went over/wide. Palace's chances, on the other hand, tested Joe Hart and forced him into some excellent saves.

It's a television show, therefore, they are going to show the entertaining highlights from a match. Watching our defence and midfield repeatedly pass the ball around without much intent does not make good viewing for the average viewer. We didn't play too well today, and Palace caused us some problems in the second half - that's what the highlights reflected.

In the post-match analysis, they spent some time discussing how Palace were well organised and made life difficult for us - this is what happened. Then they talked about our squad depth, gave a positive viewpoint on Edin, and praised Hart's return to form.

Your comments about MOTD just make you sound bitter.

Good post which I imagine will be lost amongst the paranoia standard media motd posts.

[Twobob]

You are clearly watching MOTD looking to find any fault with what they say. Whilst we had plenty of possession against Palace, we didn't actually test their goalkeeper that much. The majority of our efforts were blocked or went over/wide. Palace's chances, on the other hand, tested Joe Hart and forced him into some excellent saves. It's a television show, therefore, they are going to show the entertaining highlights from a match. Watching our defence and midfield repeatedly pass the ball around without much intent does not make good viewing for the average viewer. We didn't play too well today, and Palace caused us some problems in the second half - that's what the highlights reflected. In the post-match analysis, they spent some time discussing how Palace were well organised and made life difficult for us - this is what happened. Then they talked about our squad depth, gave a positive viewpoint on Edin, and praised Hart's return to form. Your comments about MOTD just make you sound bitter.

Why? I want to see a fair reflection of the game not something weighted to the opposition, you believe we played badly today and yet Palace played brilliantly to keep us out (which they did) - so what was it - us being shit or Palace being great? - make your mind up- but we had as many chances as they on target with less shown which is a fair reflection? Really?

Thanks,
Bitter and twisted.

[aaron bond]

You are clearly watching MOTD looking to find any fault with what they say. Whilst we had plenty of possession against Palace, we didn't actually test their goalkeeper that much. The majority of our efforts were blocked or went over/wide. Palace's chances, on the other hand, tested Joe Hart and forced him into some excellent saves. It's a television show, therefore, they are going to show the entertaining highlights from a match. Watching our defence and midfield repeatedly pass the ball around without much intent does not make good viewing for the average viewer. We didn't play too well today, and Palace caused us some problems in the second half - that's what the highlights reflected. In the post-match analysis, they spent some time discussing how Palace were well organised and made life difficult for us - this is what happened. Then they talked about our squad depth, gave a positive viewpoint on Edin, and praised Hart's return to form. Your comments about MOTD just make you sound bitter.

Why? I want to see a fair reflection of the game not something weighted to the opposition, you believe we played badly today and yet Palace played brilliantly to keep us out (which they did) - so what was it - us being shit or Palace being great? - make your mind up- but we had as many chances as they on target with less shown which is a fair reflection? Really?

Thanks,
Bitter and twisted.

I didn't say we played badly, I said we didn't play too well.

Just because we had the same number of chances on target, does not necessarily mean they were good chances, so they don't need to show them all. For example, Fernandinho's volley in the first half or Edin's header at the end of the match were both 'off target' but warranted inclusion in the highlights because they were good chances. The only effort of ours not included which could have been was Silva's in the first half when he kept the ball from going out of play for a goal kick with a nice bit of skill, and then shot across the goal (but actually it wasn't very close).

For all our possession today, we didn't create many good chances. Palace, on the other hand, created some good chances with the limited amount of time they had on the ball. That's what they showed on MOTD.

You moaned about the MOTD highlights and analysis of the Liverpool game when that was very fair, so you clearly just like to moan about MOTD. I think that's a bit sad, but each to their own I suppose.

[AG7]

I didn't say we played badly, I said we didn't play too well. Just because we had the same number of chances on target, does not necessarily mean they were good chances, so they don't need to show them all. For example, Fernandinho's volley in the first half or Edin's header at the end of the match were both 'off target' but warranted inclusion in the highlights because they were good chances. The only effort of ours not included which could have been was Silva's in the first half when he kept the ball from going out of play for a goal kick with a nice bit of skill, and then shot across the goal (but actually it wasn't very close). For all our possession today, we didn't create many good chances. Palace, on the other hand, created some good chances with the limited amount of time they had on the ball. That's what they showed on MOTD. You moaned about the MOTD highlights and analysis of the Liverpool game when that was very fair, so you clearly just like to moan about MOTD. I think that's a bit sad, but each to their own I suppose.

I agree ... sometimes I find people moaning here when media isn't that biased either ... examples being mock analysis and sound bites coming out here (like today, and in this very thread) 'assuming this is what they'll say' when 'they' haven't even aired yet ...

[Peter Doherty (AGAIG)]

Pulis claims if he was manager of our team, he would be seated in the mangers chair with a cigar in his mouth every match.

At least if he was our manager he'd be able to afford a suit, instead of having to raid the club shop before every game.