totally agree sit down Pinnochio (you tw*t)

couldn't agree with you more mate, although merson's still a twat, lol

Agree

Totally Agree I was well pissed off when I heard thompson in the background shouting "get in there" I knew we were 1 down.

Same when that gooner Alan Smith commentates he always seems to get the spurs games.

Sorry, can't agree with you there. It is all part of the fun on Sky sports. Liverpool got lucky yesterday, he can gloat.

I just wonder if he will keep working there if liverpool ever become a shit team, or if he would quit so we couldn't enjoy watching him.

Also, I have to say that you wrote positively about Le Tissier. He is the worst!

So don't watch it...They're all chumps in one way or another. It's a good laugh, but it's all fickle, old boys club, punditry. Mullery's the only one who's ever any good and that's because i'm bias.

yea, it riles me. I was shouting and ranting at him, calling him a big nose twat, evry time there was a biased strangled cry from his scouse gob. It pisses me off how 4 teams are represented in the media. Liverpool, Aresnal, Man Utd and West Ham, and all of those teams hate us. It leads to us getting either no recognition. Or just anti-spurs bias.

You've touched on a real bug bear of mine which is Sky sports so I apologise in advance for a longish response.

Sky is and has been almost since day one an anti-Spurs commercial organisation. The reasons are real and well documented and the effects are still present today.

It started with Alan Sugar and his company Amstrad in the earliest days of sky when they were desperate to get control of his dish / box manufacturer. Sugar said 'get lost' and the PR war began. This threatened Sky's expansion against the other option which was BSB (I believe).

Some time later when Sky thought they could control the EPL by buying large amounts of shares in the clubs. Again Sugar told them where to go so the war has continued. Infact it spread to Talksport where it is very evident that an anti-spurs attitude is in place due to their relationship with Sky. To this day it appears as if a number of decisions such as pundit choice, match choice and even kick-off times frequently give us bad PR and results. From the point of view of a youngster watching a game whilst listening to anti-Spurs comments this is very influential albeit somewhat sub-conscious. A good example this year was the Chelsea game where both Andy Gray and the commentator took over 15minutes to say anything positive about Spurs who where holding there own against the champions of England. Chelsea incontrast where praised at every opportunity.

Your examples of Pundits like Charlie Nicholas for a spurs game or for that matter the ommission of anyone that could be regarded as a real Spurs man from the saturday pundit spots eg a Gary Mabbutt says volumes. Furthermore, I am baffled to understand why these men actually get the job in the first place. Many are unable to speak in a coherent manner (eg Peter Reid) and a significant number are unable to offer anything that reasonably could be described as an objective view of the game that the viewers can't see themselves. eg Thompson, Nicholas, McClintock to name a few.

It is also true that some issues are more evident than others but a common Talksports trick (a partner of Sky Sports remember) during the UEFA cup is to mention all the games involving English teams (except us) then go to Rangers in Scotland. Only later do we get the mention as part of a news summary. Now, surely the story here is Spurs with their European pedigree and there return to European competition after years away and how well they have done in the toughest of the groups. Or is it Newcastle who had already qualified and last won something that still exists when Winston Churchill was PM (fact), Blackburn well they don't even have fans or Rangers when the larger audience is English?

Whilst I will say that this of course is my own opinion but one that is increasingly shared by those who have seen through what sky really is, which is a TV organisation that has done more than anyone to exclude fans from their games. Exhorbitant pricing and thereafter the retention of their clients by a strong hyping of the product that actually sustains the company like no other i.e. live English football. are damaging the game and making our national sport the privilage of those with money.

Like Football, Cricket and Rugby are other games that are now excluding the fans who can't or won't pay the sky high prices for sports on sky so we will see a decline in the future as fewer youngsters play sport.

During their somewhat dubious tenure of the rights to cover the game live via a number of 'auctions', I use the term loosely, the league has been dominated by two teams and now a third, in chelsea. Indeed for a number of seasons it was impossible to look past Manure as champions each new season. Yet Sky hyped a relatively weak product (due to a real lack of competition) by creating the so -called Big Four concept. I am still at a loss to understand on what basis there are given this tag as only our neighbours (I hate to say it though) and Manure have a history, and a present that includes success aswell as a historically above average supporter base. Those would by my criteria and those of many I have spoken too.

As such I don't include Liverpool as they are only a cup team these days winning a largely devalued European Cup a couple of years ago (A league of Champions it is not!) and league / FA cups in the last 15 to 20 years. On yesterdays showing it is also clear that they are as far away from winning the league as we are.

And chelsea have no history, a small supporter base and are only living a brief dream until the russian takes his money away with him. Oh but wait, a number of season ticket holders are the same Tories (ex MPs) that allowed Sky the rights to the game under such dubious circumstances all those years ago!

Perhaps the most important story of the last few years in our game has been not just the recovery of Spurs but how they are doing it and the resulting effect on the English game and national side. Yet this goes unmentioned far too often to be normal and not merely a coincidence. In contrast, the goons and their group of african francophones are treated as if they are the greatest propsects the world has seen. man for man are they really that much better than our youngsters?

Sky is little more than a TV organisation driven by marketing to promote a a weak product and a concept that doesn't really exist and attack those who don't fit in with their views. PR is powerful and somewhat under-estimated but believe me we have had years of anti-Spurs PR and it will continue as long as SKY run football on TV.

Merson seems an alright bloke but he struggles to put a straight forward sentence together everytime he opens his mouth......he's just a bit thick and it would be nice to listen to somebody more articulate.

The amount of ex-gooner pundits is incredible. Merson, Wright, Marwood, Smith, Winterburn and my least favourite Lee Fucking Dixon.
He was quite a dirty player player but as a pundit he comes across all holier than though. He really struggles to find anything positive to say about Spurs. Your right, it's unproffesional.

Have to agree with you there, Merson was on one Sat, and said with a laughter, "yeh spurs will lose this one at Three Point Lane", what a womble, does he not watch football, we mostly win at White Hart Lane. Now I watch the bbc, with Peacock, Ferdinand and Crooks, no bias from them

I shouldn't worry about it mate, it's all part of the "entertainment". If Sky wanted a professional approach they would give Thompson a non-Liverpool game. As it is they are happy for the bias to show. Personally I think that they are all a waste of space (although I did like Rod Marsh!).

What do you expect from nepotist twits.

There should always be neutrals when teams
are playing each other, but that makes sense,
doesn't it ?

Out with the old and in with the new,
Is it 2007 already !!

They were both crap players anyway.

Wicked post JuanRebelde "Happy new year".
I say f``k sky and stream them out of business,o' Yes.

I used to like 'The Game' that came with the monday Times newspaper. Reading it now though is just dull.
It's so 'big four' biased. Every headlining article is about either Man Utd, Chelski etc.

2 stories have particularly wound me up.
Firstly Zokoras admittedly blatant dive being blown out of all proportion compared to later match winning dives by Rooney and Ronaldo.
Secondly the defeat over Chelsea was all about Mourinho and Poll and nothing about the fact we played them off the park.

I've stopped buying it now, it's pish.

The idea that a collection of retired footballers, who are paid handsomely to witter on, unscripted and in real time, about football matches are under orders to be rude and dismissive about a large, but not dominant football club, because of a business dispute that happened 15+ years ago between their parent company and someone who no longer even runs the football club in question ... is hilarious. Well past paranoid. Into frothing at the mouth territory.

They have other things on their minds. Thompson is a native Scouser who played for Liverpool. How can you possibly hold it against him if he whoops spontaneously when his ex-club scores a scrappy goal?

This is such a silly thread that I can't be bothered to write any more.

The thought that the Sky corporation and the Prem "big four" are spending all their time working out how they can do down Spurs might be a tad unrealstic? Of course Chelsea get massive and positive coverage. That reflects Sky etc. trying to brown nose their fans (including the glory seekers who have latched on). If / when Spurs break into the top four the same thing will happen. Not fair but when was it ever.

ffs, its the best footie programme on match day! These guys add a fans perspective to it too. Thommo was honest the whole game. he said we were shit for spells, which we were. He said we had good opps, which we did....... but end of the day he a scouser and loves them and shows it. its part of the chemistry on the show. if spurs scored they would have ripped him or he would have cried.

i think its great.

Who the f...... does that davidmart.... thinks he is. Everytime someone makes their opinion knows, he comes along with this headmaster approach telling us the rights and the wrongs of it all.

Just as you have every right to your opinion, so are others! So step off mate!!

Two words....David Pleat...my nightmare.

ps: dev it's called 'decompensation' :wink: