The Footie Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted member 15344
  • Start date Start date
DPapas1982 said:
Agree re Rooneys. His against Newcastle was better.

Imo Di Canio is a fan fav of neutrals so gets higher up the list than should. His shove is more iconic imo
Click to expand...

Haven't fully looked but does anyone appear twice on the list of moments? I'e his shove costs him the goal appearing as you rightly say his shove was iconic

Btw thanks for JWP. Unreal performance

Let's hope downes performs
 
pauljames87 said:
Haven't fully looked but does anyone appear twice on the list of moments? I'e his shove costs him the goal appearing as you rightly say his shove was iconic

Btw thanks for JWP. Unreal performance

Let's hope downes performs
Click to expand...

Not people, but 5 of the moments are related to Arsenal if I have them correct?
 
SteveW86 said:
Beck hams was against Wimbledon. There have been better long range goals IMO, but that was the first wasn’t it, so by default the most iconic.
Click to expand...

Id say augero moment needs to be in here more than some of these

Far too many arsenal and manure moments when other teams are available like city
 
Don Barzini said:
The Big Six have enjoyed media bias in every aspect for so long, that it’s to be expected their fans react with incredulity whenever it’s called out.
Click to expand...

Did you not watch MOTD during the final months of Solskjaer’s tenure, or whilst Rangnick was in charge?

Throughout that period games involving United were invariably awful as spectacles, and as a consequence were screened during the last few minutes of the highlights packages, when the club barely warranted a mention. This despite still finishing in the top six and so, by definition, still being one of the so called “big six”. There was absolutely no pro United bias during that period.

Any regular MOTD viewer will surely acknowledge that their weekly schedule tends to push the most entertaining games towards the beginning of the package, with the poorer spectacles coming towards the end of the programme. It’s an entertainment programme first and foremost.

So if the likes of City, Liverpool, Arsenal and so on tend to feature early in the scheduling, that is not bias. It’s because, like it or not, they have a tendency, win, lose or draw, to be involved in the games the viewing public, especially neutrals, want to watch.

The United v Forest game was entertaining, and packed full of incident, hence its place in the scheduling. The post match analysis focused largely on the side which won the game, as it always does. Had Forest won then that focus would have been on them, and rightly so. And not a single United fan anywhere would ask why Danny Murphy and Co weren’t talking about them.

Forest did some really good things yesterday. But their goals owed more to United’s ineptitude than any flashes of Forest brilliance. And they still blew a two goal lead, barely troubling Onana for the last 85 minutes. So it has to surely follow that, in the limited time available to the producers and presenters of MOTD, they chose to focus primarily on United.

I fail to see how anyone can regard that as bias.
 
Billysboots said:
Did you not watch MOTD during the final months of Solskjaer’s tenure, or whilst Rangnick was in charge?

Throughout that period games involving United were invariably awful as spectacles, and as a consequence were screened during the last few minutes of the highlights packages, when the club barely warranted a mention. This despite still finishing in the top six and so, by definition, still being one of the so called “big six”. There was absolutely no pro United bias during that period.

Any regular MOTD viewer will surely acknowledge that their weekly schedule tends to push the most entertaining games towards the beginning of the package, with the poorer spectacles coming towards the end of the programme. It’s an entertainment programme first and foremost.

So if the likes of City, Liverpool, Arsenal and so on tend to feature early in the scheduling, that is not bias. It’s because, like it or not, they have a tendency, win, lose or draw, to be involved in the games the viewing public, especially neutrals, want to watch.

The United v Forest game was entertaining, and packed full of incident, hence its place in the scheduling. The post match analysis focused largely on the side which won the game, as it always does. Had Forest won then that focus would have been on them, and rightly so. And not a single United fan anywhere would ask why Danny Murphy and Co weren’t talking about them.

Forest did some really good things yesterday. But their goals owed more to United’s ineptitude than any flashes of Forest brilliance. And they still blew a two goal lead, barely troubling Onana for the last 85 minutes. So it has to surely follow that, in the limited time available to the producers and presenters of MOTD, they chose to focus primarily on United.

I fail to see how anyone can regard that as bias.
Click to expand...
Most popular teams tend to be successful and will have more interest in their games. Simple as that, isn’t it? But some people just like to show their inferiority complexes.
 
Aztecs27 said:
You mean like when Boly was shoved in the back and no one batted an eyelid? Colour me shocked.


I would never have given this as a penalty, and there was more contact than Danilo on Rashford. Neither are penalties because if you gave them for every single bit of contact there would be 10 penalties a game.

That’s what everyone (except United fans) have issue with.

There was another incident in a similar area yesterday (Arsenal vs Fulham? Or Maybe West Ham vs Brighton) where the attacking player was body checked into next week and nothing given.
Click to expand...
Regarding you last paragraph, it was a "foul" on the Brighton by West Ham. I to was surprised there didn't even see to be a consideration of a penalty, as he was clearly barged in back with no attempt to get ball. Not only that, not long later another West Ham player went into back of a Brighton player near throw in line, but with less force. Not only did referee give a free kick, he gave a yellow card.

It is no suprise there has been loads of moaning on here about a clear penalty for Utd, yet not a mention (until your post) of the one in Bright game. Always the same. No Brighton fans in here at least?
 
Don Barzini said:
You take it wrong then. The MOTD team’s post match analysis can be summarised thus:

Go immediately to Man Yoo’s three goals and spend a good chunk of time analysing everything they did well.

As an afterthought, then go and look at the two Forest goals. But analyse them from a Man Yoo point of view, not Forest’s. Discuss the stuff Man Yoo did wrong defensively, don’t bother praising Forest in any aspect of it whatsoever.

Don’t mention the fact that Taiwo Awoniyi absolutely skinned Rashford the entire length of the pitch, or that he made Onana look like an absolute clown by faking a shot. Certainly don’t mention that he’s now scored in seven consecutive PL games, even though they’d be creaming their pants if a Big Six striker was on a streak like that. Don’t mention Morgan Gibbs-White’s brilliant assist for the second or the cooly taken header by Boly - just talk about the Man Yoo players that were out of position.

Oh yes, they mentioned that Forest might lodge a complaint, but just dismissed any notion that the decisions could be wrong. For the Rashford dive, it’s guaranteed that if exactly the same incident occurred in the other box and a penalty was given to Forest, they’d have analysed it closely and concluded it was too soft to be given. But no, Rashford is “clever”. For the red card they agreed it was correct because they “weren’t sure” if Boly would get across in time, despite him being two steps away from getting in the way and already heading in that direction.

No, I agree there is no axe to grind by Murphy or Williams, but it’s the same from MOTD every week when it comes to Forest and anyone outside the Big Six. Everyone is just so used to it, they don’t notice it happening any more.

So yeah, I’ll agree to disagree with you.
Click to expand...
Forest were up 2 nil inside 5 minutes, against a Utd team that fans and pundits like to mock any chance they get. A team with a ridiculously leaky defence at times, no strong characters and a terrible captain apparently.

That Utd team then won 3-2. A weak minded Rashford skinning Forest players for 2 goals and a big Captain's performance from Bruno for 2nd 2 goals. Decent performance from Anthony as well. These good performances will generally be overlooked, with pundits and fans ready to pounce the next time there is a moment of weakness.

But, don't expect too much praise for Forest for losing 3-2 to a dodgy Utd side. Had Forest won, then they would have been given a bit more praise I'm sure.
 
City proving they didn't need both rodri and kov in the middle today. Soon as they change they score

Really not a game for those 2 , 1 of 2
 
Well that was like watching City 20 years ago, except would have probably lost. A tough three points gained today. Be gobsmacked to see Sheff Utd stay up this season.
 
Tashyboy said:
Well that was like watching City 20 years ago, except would have probably lost. A tough three points gained today. Be gobsmacked to see Sheff Utd stay up this season.
Click to expand...

The difference being we don't usually concede these days...today was a weird performance for sure. Thought Sheff Utd were agricultural at best.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Hobbit
Another footie thread
2
Replies
36
Views
1K
WorldHandicapSystem
W
road2ruin
Fantasy Footie 25/26
2 3 4
Replies
79
Views
3K
road2ruin
road2ruin
C
Weather apps
2
Replies
20
Views
435
jim8flog
jim8flog
SwingsitlikeHogan
Rental Rights Act
2
Replies
24
Views
2K
jim8flog
jim8flog
jim8flog
Golf or football
2
Replies
33
Views
6K
Voyager EMH
Voyager EMH
Top