Please.

The media love United, they would happily sit back and watch you win it every year and smile with glee.

The media love United, they would happily sit back and watch you win it every year and smile with glee.
__________________

Why do you seem to think that "the media" is one individual body?

I wasn't even talking about the media!
I was talking about idiots like you Bubbles , the rivals fans.

comment by Bubbles - Soon to be Don_chelsea (U7929)
posted 18 minutes ago

Please.

The media love United, they would happily sit back and watch you win it every year and smile with glee.

....................................

Bubbles

I guess you are totally unaware of the existence of Hansen, Lawro, Mike Summerbee, Jamie Redknapp, Phil Thompson, Phil McNulty, Alan Green and the Guardian and Daily Mail Newspapers.

The main difference between your examples, and the potential problem next season is you name ‘individuals’ that have left, where as some are saying an entire department (the midfield) could be weak. There’s a big difference.

I think it's a perfectly legitimate point to bring up. Our midfield was shown to be lacking on more than one occasion last season, and seeing as Scholes, Oshea and possibly Gibson have gone, you’d have to be remarkably red tinted to suggest we’ve not weakened at all in that area.

I for one am concerned that the midfield will be a problem, and feel we need to buy, but would love to be proved wrong. But what I won’t do is dismiss the problem behind some Neanderthalic, delusional placard of ‘support’ for the club, and suggest that anyone who feels different is a ‘……..’(insert generic 606 insult).

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

A lot of the media are 30-50 years old, so grew up in the era of Liverpool's dominance. Hence you'll find a fair few are Anfiled loving ABU's.

That said, Man United have had a strong following countrywide for 50 years, post Munich, so there is bound to be a good chunk of our lot in amongst them as well.

The BBC seems to have Hansen, Lawro etc all ex-pool players.

bloodred (U1222)

It is mostly controlled by one man, and they have their own agenda IMO. I don't think for one second all journo's are pro-United, but as a general consensus they are.

comeback-when-you-win-19-leagues (U5830)

Who wrote United off? I don't recall anyone having ever written them off apart from one time when it looked as though Chelsea would dominate English Football

Vidicschin (U3584)

Well given that all of the people you have listed are Liverpool and City affiliates, it stands to reason they would dislike United.

I could just as easily name any West Ham, Spurs, Liverpool, United or even Arsenal and QPR/Fulham affiliate

I guess you're exposed to all of them 'living' in America eh?

...................

Fortunately not.

However, I do get to see their comments via the internet and on football forums.

Next.

Well given that all of the people you have listed are Liverpool and City affiliates, it stands to reason they would dislike United

...........................

So your statement below is incorrect then isn't it, which is what I was pointing out.

...............................

The media love United, they would happily sit back and watch you win it every year and smile with glee.

.......................

Do you think the people I mentioned would hapilly sit back and watch us win with glee?

We_Are_All_Utd (U2259)

And Daily Mail anti-United?

You should try reading what they print about Chelsea and Arsenal or even Spurs.

If you want to see anti-club bias look no further than The Sun, Daily Mirror, Daily Mail and The Times in regards to Chelsea

It is mostly controlled by one man, and they have their own agenda IMO. I don't think for one second all journo's are pro-United, but as a general consensus they are.
_____________________

And what would that "agenda" be? If we were talking politics you may have a point, but do you honestly think Murdoch and other proprietors give a damn about their journos being pro/anti United?

Journo's have their own thoughts and opinions, some of which are bound to be in favour/against certain teams. To say that they are "generally" in favour of United is downright bizarre.

Vidicschin (U3584)

No because Murdoch (United fan) controls the main red tops.

Look at 09/10 and the uproar after Chelsea won the league, even now you still here journo's moaning about Drogbas offside despite the fact it technically had no real impact on the result, yet the match changing decisions that went for United vs West Ham, Stoke, WBA, Arsenal etc were seemingly swept under the carpet.

Generally speaking, the media are happy when United win. Once City start winning things they will be almost as despised by the media as Chelsea.

These days bitter Pool pundits hate Chelsea as much as United, if not more. Look no further than Hansen or Aldridge if you want to see what I mean.

Bubbles - Soon to be Don_chelsea
---------------------------------------------

I’ll take your word for it.

The only paper I read is the Metro, and the main sports writer in that has got his tongue well and truly planted in the rectoral of Chelsea...

bloodred (U1222)

Generally speaking, Journo's are happy when Northern clubs are winning things and doing well, football is traditionally a working mans sport and the working man is often associated with northern England (rightly or wrongly). The media don't like it when "southern softy" clubs like Chelsea and Arsenal clubs upset the cartel.

Ideally if the media could hand pick their top 4 it would be United, Liverpool, Leeds and Newcastle.

Don't get me wrong their are some-ABU journalists out there, but they are in the minority.

"...the ridiculous claim that we will fail to challenge for the title this season because our "central midfield is non-existant"."


I concur... unfortunately, it seems that a growing number of those pessimists seem to be among the ranks of our own "support"!

Broadly speaking, the media don't have affiliations to certain football clubs. They exist (BBC excepted) to make money by selling fans content they want to consume. Individual journalists may have club biases but they are appointed by senior management, who are accountable to boards of directors, who are accountable to shareholders, who are ultimately only interested in the bottom line. Therefore, individual biased journalists and commentators continue to work because there is demand for their work in the market. And what does the footballing public want to consume? I'd guess that two of the biggest things people like to consume are pro- and anti-Man Utd stories, because our club is both the most supported and most hated.

I don't think we need to take things so personally. It's nothing personal to the shareholders. The rational response to rubbish opinion pieces is to find yourself a higher quality media outlet.

As for the BBC, I don't think there is a deliberate bias, but there is a bit of a concentration of ex-Liverpool players. I think it's mainly a generational thing: they were big names when the recruitment cycle came around. Actually, I think the likes of Hansen often overcompensate and praise United to avoid being seen as sour rivals. What annoys me much more about the BBC is just the poor quality. Very superficial analysis, big wages to people like Shearer who don't seem to have a very deep understanding of the game and certainly don't have the ability to convey it to a viewer. There are hundreds of more articulate, more perceptive people out there writing about football who could make the BBC coverage much more entertaining and informative. Instead we get a smug lads' club of ex-footballers giggling at each other's inane jokes.

We_Are_All_Utd (U2259)

I don't read the metro these days as I don't travel by public as much these days, but I'll take your word for it as I don't ever recall reading an anti-Chelsea article in the Metro which makes a refreshing change.

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

"Generally speaking, Journo's are happy when Northern clubs are winning things and doing well, football is traditionally a working mans sport and the working man is often associated with northern England (rightly or wrongly). The media don't like it when "southern softy" clubs like Chelsea and Arsenal clubs upset the cartel."



What an absolute load of tosh! You are talking out of your backside mate

come back when you win 19
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
JESUS, someone hand him a tampon.

comment by Bubbles - Soon to be Don_chelsea (U7929)
posted 16 minutes ago

Vidicschin (U3584)

No because Murdoch (United fan) controls the main red tops.

..............................

Do you have any evidence that Murdoch is a United fan?

I don't like Murdoch. Hacking our voicemails and listening to our jibba jabba. CRAZY FOOL

Greatteamswinit4times (U6008)

We all know the media mainly consists of Spurs and West Ham fans hence why they don't want Arsenal or Chelsea to win anything. They would much rather align themselves to the Northern clubs because they know their clubs are gonna win Eff all

bloodred (U1222)

Truth

Vidicschin (U3584)

It is well reported that he is, and he also tried to buy them

Vidicschin (U3584)

It is well reported that he is, and he also tried to buy them

....................

As it is well reported, you should have no trouble trying to find me some links saying this. Off you go now.

Trying to buy us does not mean he suported us either.

Was Roman running round his back yard with a Kerry Dixon shirt on when he was a kid? I very much doubt it.