The media are going overboard in informing us that Liverpool pipped us to the top of the Premier League earnings list by nearly £1m.
Liverpool £97,544,336
Man City £96,578,239
Chelsea £94,106,163
Arsenal £92,870,080
Apparently they clinched this title by being shown live 28 times on TV compared to City's measly 26 league appearances.
All we need now are figures from Capital One Cup, FA Cup and the European prize and TV money to give us the full picture.
http://www.express.co.uk/sport/football/475896/97m-haul-sees-Liverpool-BEAT-Manchester-City-in-the-Premier-League-earnings-table?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+daily-express-football-news+%28Daily+Express+%3A%3A+Football+Feed%29
Earnings.....So Far
posted on 16/5/14
comment by The Post Nearly Man. I just left Hotel Amnesia. Where it is I can't remember. (U1270)
posted 12 hours, 35 minutes ago
It was amazing the number of negative articles on United that you just wouldn't have got when Fergie was here. He had them terrified, completely manipulated them to his own and United's purpose.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This nonsense - but it'll become more believable as the years roll on.
In SAF's time, there were plenty of negative articles. Who can forget the times where the media were convinced that his management had run it's course, and it was time to set aside?
The idea that the press were only ever positive about United because they were scared of Ferguson is simply untrue.
Here's a suggestion why you've seen more negative articles about United this season...
... we were crap.
posted on 16/5/14
I don't remember too much negativity about Moyes either. It seemed to be a case of "Let's give the plucky fella a chance" or "Nothing's going right for him"
Compare that to the dogs abuse Mancini got in his last season despite finishing runners up.
posted on 16/5/14
I don't think anyone is saying the press only ever act in one way or the other, more that different clubs and people have varying influence over them.
You just need to talk to any journalist to know that.
posted on 16/5/14
comment by The Post Nearly Man. I just left Hotel Amnesia. Where it is I can't remember. (U1270)
posted 18 hours, 6 minutes ago
It was amazing the number of negative articles on United that you just wouldn't have got when Fergie was here. He had them terrified, completely manipulated them to his own and United's purpose
==================================
Arrant nonsense!
As i have oft-repeated before: every team perceives some sort of bias against their club. You can't all be right; ergo, you are all wrong.
Are there mitigating circumstances? Sure, but to assert such guff is baseless.
Where there a few hacks that had sympathy for Moyes? Yes. The likes of Martin Samuel and Patrick Barclay were noted in their earlier support and why wouldn't they?
But towards the end of Moyes tenure, there was avalanche after avalanche of criticism from all sections of the media.
posted on 16/5/14
There was indeed TRC, it was similar with Mancini. Now where do you think a lot of those stories came from...?
posted on 16/5/14
comment by Boris 'Inky' Gibson (U5901)
posted 42 minutes ago
I don't remember too much negativity about Moyes either. It seemed to be a case of "Let's give the plucky fella a chance" or "Nothing's going right for him"<br abp="433"><br abp="434">Compare that to the dogs abuse Mancini got in his last season despite finishing runners up.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yet many United fans were going on about how Moyes was subjected to more criticism in the media than any other manager.
I'm not saying either are right, only that you have a one-eyed view of it.
That's not meant as a dig, we all have a certain amount of bias.
posted on 16/5/14
Sadly Mr. Melton, to quote Sherlock (or summon Occam's Razor, whichever one's preference), one can only surmise it comes from individual clubs.
For e.g, i feel Man.City's negaive campaign against Mancini was evident - in fact, still is!
posted on 16/5/14
comment by meltonblue (U10617)
posted 41 minutes ago
I don't think anyone is saying the press only ever act in one way or the other, more that different clubs and people have varying influence over them.<br abp="296"><br abp="297">You just need to talk to any journalist to know that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think you should read his articles more closely!
posted on 16/5/14
Anyone who doesn't think Fergie had the press where he wanted them should talk to a Manchester journalist. It isn't a criticism ffs.
posted on 19/5/14
And anyone who thinks SAF had 'the press' where he wanted them should expand their reading material - not necessarily in terms of quality.
It's perfectly plausible that Ferguson had some journalists in the right position when he wanted a story to leak out.
I think you'll find most top managers have that as well.