What's new

Race for the Top 4 - 2017/18

Everlasting Seconds

Well-Known Member
Jan 9, 2014
14,914
26,616
All very reasonable as an argument, however it doesn't address the point of bias.

Stories such as those you mention could be positive or negative, but so long as they feature a big club, they'll still be read. That'll sell papers.

Sonia there any bias toward reporting favourably on big clubs, or is it just that they are reported on more often?
What I'm trying to say is that whether it good or bad doesn't really matter. But if you can report something negative you'll print it because it sells better. If you lack negative storylines, then go with something positive about a big name because that will still sell. The only bias is how to generate the most money, good, bad or otherwise.

Take for instance Tottenham. "Kane is really good" won't sell anything. But if you can get a twat to go on record saying "Kane isn't really all that good yet, and he'll move anyway", now THAT sells loads. It's not anti Spurs. It's pro creating money from bull shit. Football news is the ultimate business plan. You make money off having nothing to sell whatsoever.
 
Last edited:

coys200

Well-Known Member
May 22, 2017
8,436
17,403
Amazing when you look at United squad I’d literally only take 5 or 6 if offered.

De gea > vorm
Bailly > foyth
Pogba>sissoko
Rashford>Nkoudou
Martial>lamela(only based on fitness)
Lukaku>Llorente

Couldn’t decide re matic dier/wanyama

Considering what they’ve spent 6 out of 25 is pretty astonishing.On the argument how many get in our best xi.De gea Maybe Rashford Maybe matic.
 

StartingPrice

Chief Sardonicus Hyperlip
Feb 13, 2004
32,568
10,280
City are beating teams the same way Chelsea did last season - before a ball is kicked.

We could and often do, do that but we can't stop City scaring the bejeezus out of their opponents. We can't educate them how to grow some bollocks and play them rather than just try to keep the score down.
What we need is to play them at white Hart lane asap. Get them now, beat them, show the others the way to do it and crack on.

That wasn't a mistake. Can we get some grass and some beer at the lane? I'd put trust in us doing them there.

Brighton weren't beat before they got onto the pitch. They put City under strong pressure and were unlucky not to score. They got plaudits for it. I watched the whole game.

Everton weren't beat before they got out onto the pitch - because they weren't beaten. They could easily have taken all three points. I watched the whole game.

Bournemouth really pushed them all the way in a hum-dinger of a game. They certainly didn't looked beat before the first whistle. City only got a winner in the 97th minute - and there seemed no reason to prolong the game that far. I watched the entire game.

The Dippers got around the back of the City defence repeatedly before Mane was (rightly) sent off. That killed the game - before then, it looked like the result could have been anything in either club's favour, or a draw. Liverpool certainly didn't look beaten before the kick off. I watched the entire game.

Watford were poor - and did look beaten psychologically fragile as soon as City put them under pressure and scored. They lost the corresponding fixture last season by five. I watched the entire game.

Palace at the time, where in one of the worst runs of form ever [sic.]. I think they would have looked bit before a ball had been kicked if they were at home to The Teddy Bear's Picnic FC, let alone away to City. I didn't see it, clashed with ours.

Chelsea didn't look beat at the first whistle. Morata was taken off injured early, however, which I think gave City an easier ride than they would have got if he had stayed on the pitch. I watched the entire match.

Gawd knows what happened with Stoke. They were well and truly shellacked. Don't know if they were psychologically beat before kick off, went gung ho after going a goal down or what. Didn't see the match, it clashed with ours.

Burnley did not look beat before kick off. They looked quite comfortable until City got given a penalty (a bit fortuitously). Burnley should have had a penalty, and were unfortunate not to get a free-kick in the build up to City's second. They went gung ho and got sucker punched straight after to make it 3 and kill the game. I watched the entire game.

There is so much mythologising about City already. They have a great team, but so do we. We would be right up there with them if Harry Kane could score in August rather than hitting the woodwork in three consecutive matches, and if the referee had given us one of the three penalty shouts we had against Swansea - of varying merit, but he was determined not to give us anything (for reference see the pathetic pen United were awarded against Everton on the same day).
 

TottenhamMattSpur

Well-Known Member
Aug 31, 2012
10,925
16,007
Brighton weren't beat before they got onto the pitch. They put City under strong pressure and were unlucky not to score. They got plaudits for it. I watched the whole game.

Everton weren't beat before they got out onto the pitch - because they weren't beaten. They could easily have taken all three points. I watched the whole game.

Bournemouth really pushed them all the way in a hum-dinger of a game. They certainly didn't looked beat before the first whistle. City only got a winner in the 97th minute - and there seemed no reason to prolong the game that far. I watched the entire game.

The Dippers got around the back of the City defence repeatedly before Mane was (rightly) sent off. That killed the game - before then, it looked like the result could have been anything in either club's favour, or a draw. Liverpool certainly didn't look beaten before the kick off. I watched the entire game.

Watford were poor - and did look beaten psychologically fragile as soon as City put them under pressure and scored. They lost the corresponding fixture last season by five. I watched the entire game.

Palace at the time, where in one of the worst runs of form ever [sic.]. I think they would have looked bit before a ball had been kicked if they were at home to The Teddy Bear's Picnic FC, let alone away to City. I didn't see it, clashed with ours.

Chelsea didn't look beat at the first whistle. Morata was taken off injured early, however, which I think gave City an easier ride than they would have got if he had stayed on the pitch. I watched the entire match.

Gawd knows what happened with Stoke. They were well and truly shellacked. Don't know if they were psychologically beat before kick off, went gung ho after going a goal down or what. Didn't see the match, it clashed with ours.

Burnley did not look beat before kick off. They looked quite comfortable until City got given a penalty (a bit fortuitously). Burnley should have had a penalty, and were unfortunate not to get a free-kick in the build up to City's second. They went gung ho and got sucker punched straight after to make it 3 and kill the game. I watched the entire game.

There is so much mythologising about City already. They have a great team, but so do we. We would be right up there with them if Harry Kane could score in August rather than hitting the woodwork in three consecutive matches, and if the referee had given us one of the three penalty shouts we had against Swansea - of varying merit, but he was determined not to give us anything (for reference see the pathetic pen United were awarded against Everton on the same day).

Chelsea played worse than United did at Liverpoool.
City have a +28 goal difference. Teams are getting twatted. They've dropped 2 points from 27.
I’m not that convinced by then personally and I think City would have dropped more points if teams just had a go at them.
Chelsea should have been able to manage at least a point but they sat back and played for a point.
 

am_yisrael_chai

Well-Known Member
Feb 18, 2006
6,409
10,931
Amazing when you look at United squad I’d literally only take 5 or 6 if offered.

De gea > vorm
Bailly > foyth
Pogba>sissoko
Rashford>Nkoudou
Martial>lamela(only based on fitness)
Lukaku>Llorente

Couldn’t decide re matic dier/wanyama

Considering what they’ve spent 6 out of 25 is pretty astonishing.On the argument how many get in our best xi.De gea Maybe Rashford Maybe matic.
I think you are a bit out of date on Pogba vs Sissoko :confused:
 

Adam456

Well-Known Member
Jul 1, 2005
4,453
3,117
A fit Kane for the whole season would surely see us yield more points.We are undoubtedly a better team/squad this season.Based on below.
Negatives:walker leaving
Wanyama injury
Dembele dodgy fitness
Wembley?

Positives:
Sanchez massive upgrade
Rose returning
Winks emergence
Davies progression
Kane another level
Lamela returning Hopefully
Llorente upgrade
General progression of most players Eriksen Son etc
Poch more tactical awarness

There are far more positives than negatives which hopefully should mean a greater points tally.In reality the title will most likely be won in the top 6 encounters.Poch seems to have found a system to play the top sides,which could be crucial.
You forgot Aurier

and Sissoko going from zero to...erm...more than zero
 

Adam456

Well-Known Member
Jul 1, 2005
4,453
3,117
I think what will decide it for them is how they cope after the first team that manages to 'find them out' and get a victory. The way they're looking at the moment though you never know they might not even lose.
Well whatever happens in the penalty shoot out, Wolves will have done a pretty decent job of informing the rest of us tonight. Pretty strong Citeh side and they brought KdB, Sane and Walker on and still couldn't find a goal.

Not seen it but I wonder what Wolves were doing
 

WiganSpur

Well-Known Member
Aug 31, 2012
15,974
32,682
Still think we are likeliest to finish 4th. If we are close with a couple of months left, you can bet the "powers that be" and Sky / BT Sport will arrange the fixtures to ensure we "bottle it" again.
The only thing holding us back this season was Wembley and it looks like we may have got over that. We still need a convincing win against a bus parking team though for me to be absolutely sure.

If City slip up, we've got a real chance, but I think we might need to beat them twice, too.
 

Spurger King

can't smile without glue
Jul 22, 2008
43,881
95,147
The only thing holding us back this season was Wembley and it looks like we may have got over that. We still need a convincing win against a bus parking team though for me to be absolutely sure.

If City slip up, we've got a real chance, but I think we might need to beat them twice, too.

I said before that CL qualification in the season before going to our new stadium would be a great achievement, but I actually think we’re good enough to win the league. We’re training on a replica of the pitch all the time, and have got past our psychological issues. We’ll beat most teams because we’re a better team.

Agreed that we might need to beat the Sheik Mansour team twice though.
 

coys200

Well-Known Member
May 22, 2017
8,436
17,403
You forgot Aurier

and Sissoko going from zero to...erm...more than zero
Yes on sissoko.Aurier not 100% yet.I’d say right now that he is a slight downgrade.But he’s had a tricky start.Also played out of position so don’t want to judge him yet.And Unfortunately he has already cost us goals and a result.Seems harsh to say but it is fact.West Ham comeback which fortunately amounted to nothing.Real Madrid pen.And I feel Walker would have matched salah for Liverpool goal.Asi said it’s a bit harsh and hopefully things will calm down a bit for him.
 

TheVoiceofReason

Well-Known Member
Feb 5, 2005
6,320
15,685
Only real downside to this season so far has been giving City exactly what they needed to push on and become a really dominant team.
 

coys200

Well-Known Member
May 22, 2017
8,436
17,403
Walker going to them is over done.If they didn’t buy him they’d have bought some other RB for £50m.
 

StartingPrice

Chief Sardonicus Hyperlip
Feb 13, 2004
32,568
10,280
Chelsea played worse than United did at Liverpoool.

They did. But they may not have if Morata hadn't been injured so early - or to be more exact, if he had stayed on the pitch Chelsea may have put the City defence under more pressure than they did. Failure to sign Llorente or any suitable cover, really, has put Conte at loggerheads with the Cheslea board. Morata going off clearly affected his confidence in getting something out of the game, because he doesn't trust the alternatives. 'Tis all I'm saying. city were fortunate against Chelsea because Morata went off so early, and against Liverpool because Mane was (rightly) sent off. Their two hardest matches to date - and their defence wasn't pressurized anywhere as much as it could, and should, have been.

Chelsea should have been able to manage at least a point but they sat back and played for a point.

That would be because Conte and his team are tossers :)

City have a +28 goal difference. Teams are getting twatted. They've dropped 2 points from 27.

They are a good team. I agree. My single point of disagreement is that I have seen seven of their nine league games in full, and Watford was the only team who looked beat pretty much from the off. The other six didn't look beat from the off at all.Chelsea and Liverpool had their challenges stunted by on field circumstances (sending off and injury), Brighton, Bournemouth and Burnley gave very good accounts of themselves, Everton got a draw and City didn't look that clever against them.

Please don't say twatting. Liverpool fans say twatting. Don't be like Liverpool fans...it is unbecoming :)

I’m not that convinced by then personally and I think City would have dropped more points if teams just had a go at them.

No, and I agree with you on that totally. I wasn't disagreeing with all your post, just the bit where you said other teams are coming out beat, because in the seven league matches I have seen that applies to one. I have been saying it since the summer, their defence still has frailties. Napoli exposed them. Burnley did up to a point.
 

Adam456

Well-Known Member
Jul 1, 2005
4,453
3,117
Yes on sissoko.Aurier not 100% yet.I’d say right now that he is a slight downgrade.But he’s had a tricky start.Also played out of position so don’t want to judge him yet.And Unfortunately he has already cost us goals and a result.Seems harsh to say but it is fact.West Ham comeback which fortunately amounted to nothing.Real Madrid pen.And I feel Walker would have matched salah for Liverpool goal.Asi said it’s a bit harsh and hopefully things will calm down a bit for him.

Well 2 things:

1. You put selling Walker in the negatives and so signing Aurier must go in the positives, unless you honestly think we would be better off playing with 10 when he is on the pitch. If you had said swapping Walker for Aurier in the negatives then fine

2. I have seen enough of Aurier to think he is at least as good as Walker and his potential is even greater. I think a lot would agree with me and that is genuinely not sour grapes
 

Lilbaz

Just call me Baz
Apr 1, 2005
41,363
74,893
Well 2 things:

1. You put selling Walker in the negatives and so signing Aurier must go in the positives, unless you honestly think we would be better off playing with 10 when he is on the pitch. If you had said swapping Walker for Aurier in the negatives then fine

2. I have seen enough of Aurier to think he is at least as good as Walker and his potential is even greater. I think a lot would agree with me and that is genuinely not sour grapes

Think there is a really good player in aurier. But he scares me. Does love to dive in.
Hopefully settles in and becomes great.
 

Luka Van der Bale

Well-Known Member
Jan 29, 2011
6,041
13,611
Amazing when you look at United squad I’d literally only take 5 or 6 if offered.

De gea > vorm
Bailly > foyth
Pogba>sissoko
Rashford>Nkoudou
Martial>lamela(only based on fitness)
Lukaku>Llorente

Couldn’t decide re matic dier/wanyama

Considering what they’ve spent 6 out of 25 is pretty astonishing.On the argument how many get in our best xi.De gea Maybe Rashford Maybe matic.
You genuinely think Pogba wouldn’t get into our team?
 
Top