Football365 Mediawatch and the AVB witch hunt

[jambreck]

Great to see Villas-Boas hitting back at the media today over their obvious agenda against him

Sean Custis and John Cross Talksport now still sticking the knife into him big time

What are they saying?

That they don't understand the word "we" either?

 

[tototoner]

What are they saying?

That they don't understand the word "we" either?

Custis said that he has seen a few Tottenham fans calling for Villas-Boas to be sacked on twitter, that was his only argument against a media agenda as he said it meant the fans were not 100% behind the manager, pathetic really

 

[nightgoat]

I bet there isn't a team in the league whose manager has 100% of their fans backing them.

 

[tototoner]

I bet there isn't a team in the league whose manager has 100% of their fans backing them.

Exactly

 

[tototoner]

Media linking Poyet with the Tottenham job today, you couldn't make this shit up

I think since we lost at Man Shitty the media have linked us to Bielsa, Laudrup, Pochettino, Yakin, Luis Enrique, Poyet, Hiddick, Capello, Hoddle, Klinsmann and Alex Ferguson

Anyone still think the media isn't trying to undermine Villas-Boas

 

[parklane1]

Media linking Poyet with the Tottenham job today, you couldn't make this shit up

I think since we lost at Man Shitty the media have linked us to Bielsa, Laudrup, Pochettino, Yakin, Luis Enrique, Poyet, Hiddick, Capello, Hoddle, Klinsmann and Alex Ferguson

Anyone still think the media isn't trying to undermine Villas-Boas

As i have said before i am amazed that a few fans have never seen the agenda.

 

[michaelden]

Is a Portuguese egg tasty?

taste better once they hatch and grow into a Nandos Hot chicken with perinayse and spicy rice

 

[michaelden]

Ugh, I can't stand that "most natural goal scorer in the league" shite you hear about Defoe.

By natural do we mean manure? If so, bang on! He sprays manure all over he pitch, usually from offside.

You are my new favourite journalist!

 

[spud]

Here is monday's quite long Mediawatch piece on the coverage of AVB's post-ManUre press conference:

AVBalls
The first thing Mediawatch would point out about The Daily Mail's coverage of Andre Villas-Boas' BLAST/RAGE/UERHEREHRHRHHHHGGGGGHHH is this, written by the...erm, what's the opposite of 'apple of his eye'? Actually, don't answer that.

Anyway, about Villas-Boas' critics, Neil Ashton writes: 'The Spurs manager accused them of...'

We'll stop you there chief. No need to be coy about this - it's you. He pointed you out in the press conference. It was on the telly. We saw it. Definitely you.

As much as anything it's remarkable that Villas-Boas - or 'the curious Portuguese egg', according to Jeff Powell - answering Ashton back is being treated as if he emerged for the press conference nude with the Mail's 'Hooray for the Blackshirts' headline tattooed on his chest, flinging his own excretions at the assembled press.

The Mail calls it a 'stunning attack', The Daily Mirror says he 'hit out', The Sun says he 'came out fighting with a swipe' etc and so on and so forth. We know this is what tabloid newspapers do, and without wishing to stray into 'Rafa's rant' territory here, it seemed to us that Villas-Boas fairly calmly responded to being dreadfully misquoted.

And he was perfectly right to be annoyed, too. Even leaving aside Ashton's column in which he claimed 'anyone' could have won the title with Porto that season (rather ignoring that they finished third behind Benfica and Braga the previous season), what the Mail did was completely change Villas-Boas' words, altering them from him taking responsibility along with his players for the 6-0 defeat to Manchester City, to him blaming his players and them alone. This of course formed the basis of Martin Samuel's column last week. A column which at the time of writing is still being promoted, uncorrected and without apology, on the Mail's website. Samuel wasn't at the press conference on Sunday, leaving Ashton as the logical target if Villas-Boas wanted a word.

Ashton is at it again with his 'riposte' to Villas-Boas, in which he writes:

'My online column wasn't a personal attack on AVB - how could it be when I don't even know the guy? Still, on with the press conference itself. He claimed that I 'attacked him, chased him', which cannot be true because I've only ever seen him about six times in my life.'

Gives the impression that Villas-Boas claimed it was indeed a personal attack, no?

Here's the exchange on that issue, as published by the Mail:

'Ashton: Surely you don't think there is a personal agenda?

'Villas-Boas: I don't think that...'

It's even quite weird that the Mail chose to publish the full exchange, as it gives the impression that Ashton doesn't really know what the word 'we' means:

'Ashton: Sorry, can you explain?

'Villas-Boas: I never told that the players should feel ashamed of themselves. We, that includes me.

'Ashton: But if you say we should feel ashamed of ourselves, you are including your group of players?

'Villas-Boas: Obviously.

'Ashton: So...'

At that point the hitherto reticent Spurs press officer stepped in, disappointingly not to say "SO...WHAT? SO WHAT? EH? COME ON ASHTON! COME AT ME WITH YOUR DISARMINGLY HANDSOME FACE AND PLEASANT COLLECTION OF KNITWEAR."

The exchange also featured a back-and-forth about opinions and who is entitled to them (summary: everyone), about which Ashton said to Villas-Boas, "But you are the one who has the problem with it, not me," and in the piece he comments that 'initially, Sunday's events at Tottenham barely made a mark with me', rather amusingly claiming he was driven to write his article by a few cretins on Twitter.

Writing a 900-word article on the subject is just the way to show it doesn't bother you, Neil.

 

[Metalhead]

It's a difficult one as newspapers are desperate to keep up their circulation (ever more so in the age of the internet) and will obviously be all over anything that will sell more papers. We have clearly struggled lately and AVB has never proven himself in the eyes of the english media since the chelsea job went wrong. Coupled with the style of football causing displeasure amongst sections of the Tottenham faithful (fair enough obviously), he is obviously ripe for focus by the media and especially the tabloids.

I don't see why any of them would have a personal agenda against him (unless they are still annoyed about Harry losing his job) but I can see why AVB was angry as I am sure that the newspapers have no problem with a coach/manager getting sacked in the interests of a good story and after all, this is the man's livelihood. Unfortunately, if he has upset Ashton/the media in general then there may well be even more scrutiny on AVB and any slip up will be pounced on. Hopefully, it will die down or perhaps the media team at Tottenham can try and build some bridges with the said paper.

 

[spud]

It's a difficult one as newspapers are desperate to keep up their circulation (ever more so in the age of the internet) and will obviously be all over anything that will sell more papers.

That is an economic fact of life, and I am sure that we can all understand it. The problem is when they refuse to let the truth interfere with a good story. In his City post-match interview, AVB clearly said that 'we' should be ashamed, adopting collective responsibility. Most - if not all - of the press so-called journalists chose not only to ignore this, but to claim that he had blamed his players and absolved himself of any responsibility. Even though writing a story based on the collective shame assumed by AVB would have sold just as many papers and/or gained just as many hits.

This is not only unprofessional, it is malicious. Although I make it a practice not to buy newspapers or read most of the tripe that they contain, I can't recall any manager being so wilfully misquoted and targetted for vitriol. It's no wonder that he, and many others, believe that there is a personal agenda against him.

 

[Wirral Spurs]

Biased journalism and commentary are the very worst thing about the game in this country. They are stopping my enjoyment of the whole thing.

 

[TheSecretNonFootballer]

Biased journalism and commentary are the very worst thing about the game in this country. They are stopping my enjoyment of the whole thing.

Although it's always dogshit, the in-game commentary isn't usually hugely biased. Although our game against Utd was rather eye opening.

Rooney punts the ball past Chiriches and buys a free kick by running through him. "Obvious foul".

Townsend punts the ball past Evra to buy a free kick. "Where was Evra meant to go?"

Also, Alan Smith should simply never be allowed to commentate on Spurs games.

 

[spud]

Biased journalism and commentary are the very worst thing about the game in this country. They are stopping my enjoyment of the whole thing.

You have a point. My current pet peeve about commentary is the way the commentator screams the name of the goalscorer as the goal is scored. Every single fucking time. Gets on my nerves.

 

[parklane1]

I don't see why any of them would have a personal agenda against him (unless they are still annoyed about Harry losing his job)

You have answered your own question.

 

[spud]

Wednesday's piece, featuring the odious Mr. Martin Samuel:

Agenda Issues

Martin Samuel (ghostwriter of Harry Redknapp's autobiography, lest we forget) writes in the Daily Mail that he believes Andre Villas-Boas 'gets relatively little criticism' because he is a young, foreign manager. Mediawatch would hate to think how he would be treated if he were English.

'If Harry Redknapp had fallen to ninth as Tottenham manager, he would have been decried as tactically inept,' writes Samuel.

Let's take a walk down memory lane, Martin. Back in 2010/11, Harry Redknapp's Tottenham picked up just 19 points from their opening 13 games. This season, Tottenham have 21 points from the same number of matches. Redknapp's Tottenham happened to be sixth; Villas-Boas' Tottenham are now in ninth despite having more points.

Mediawatch does not have perfect recollection but we're buggered if we can remember Samuel attacking Redknapp for losing to Wigan, West Ham and Bolton.

 

[Gassin's finest]

F365 is a brilliant website, and their Mediawatch is a terrific daily, highlighting how much bullshit gets "reported" in the sporting media.

My favourite recently was in their 16 conclusions from the Utd game:

Michael Owen, Oh dear.

After penalty claims for a handball on Antonio Valencia were turned down during the first half, Owen stated confidently, "Mike Dean has awarded a few penalties for handball this season."

Mike Dean had not yet awarded a penalty for handball this season. Mike Dean had not yet awarded a penalty this season of any kind.

Or is he a psychic?

 

[parklane_n17]

You do have a point i guess, but the sacking of the media golden boy Redknapp put the agenda in overdrive.

So if you could pick between redknapp or avb who would u pick ?? Are you a season ticket holder?

 

[parklane1]

So if you could pick between redknapp or avb who would u pick ?? Are you a season ticket holder?

AVB and yes i am.

 

[spud]

So if you could pick between redknapp or avb who would u pick ?? Are you a season ticket holder?

What's the relevance to your question of being a season ticket holder?