Bluemoon interview Daniel Taylor

I found this one quite hilarious...

The perception amongst some Blues is that the majority of the Manchester press pack are "self-confessed United fans" (such as Mark Ogden, Ian Ladyman, Ian Herbert, David McDonnell) - disproportionately so, for a two club city.

DT: I often wonder where all this starts. You're telling me Ian Herbert - he's a Wrexham supporter by the way - is a “self-confessed United fan”? He's kept that from me all these years. David McDonnell, brought up watching West Ham, has owned up to supporting United? Mark Ogden, I'll give you (just as Simon Mullock is a self-confessed City fan and I've never heard any complaints about that via Bluemoon). But Ian Ladyman? He'll be amused by that one.
 
Daniel Taylor made him look a bit silly :lol: Especially with the 'self-confessed United fans' question.
 
Everything about that that club is small time.

Their mentality is why they will never become a medium sized club let alone a big one.
 
Pretty much everything Taylor said was the complete opposite of what that guy wanted to hear.
 
Some pretty good answers from Taylor there, made the guy interviewing him look like an idiot at times. One thing that's definitely true is that if some of the incidents like the Balotelli-Mancini one had happened at United there would have been way more made of it.

At times – as with all clubs – you have legitimate complaints about various articles. At other times – sorry to say this but I'm not going to sugarcoat it – it's rampant paranoia. People are looking to be offended as some kind of weird default setting. I've seen threads on Bluemoon where people have actually totted up the number of Sky Sports billboards around Manchester and if there is one more Rooney than Aguero it's all part of the mythical 'agenda.'
Click to expand...

:lol: Imagine if RAWK did one of these.
 
There wasn't so much wrong with the subject of the questions - you're speaking to a journalist, of course you're going to ask about your media portrayal and compare it to rival clubs. The person asking them was clearly deluded though and it reflected in his wording of the questions. The fact is most City fans need to accept things concerning United are a bigger story, and it works both ways. When City lost to Stoke at home this season, the back page of the Daily Mirror was taken up with a dig at United drawing with someone.
 
The recurring theme of 'its bigger news if its United' will no doubt reinforce the idea for some City fans that the media likes us or hates them. I think a lot of these people don't really understand how news works as a business.
 
The 'Agenda' thread on bluemoon is an amusing read. And by amusing i mean really sad and small time.
 
A bit embarassing really but this is Bluemoon we are talking about so not unexpected.
 
Enjoyable read, they're so obsessed. DT was telling them you're nowhere near as big as United without being too explicit throughout, must rankle and always will.

Still surprised he only mentioned the press love for Mancini once, as we all know DT has a burning desire to elope with Mancini.
 
Taylor is one of the better journalists out there for sure. Is he a City fan?
 
:lol:City fans :lol: They do realise that they're a laughing stock, don't they?
 
Daniel Taylor comes across really well, BM not so much.

I'm surprised by Taylor's view on FFP though, I mean I think everyone knows that it's been put together by the established clubs for self preservation, in a way, but... does that automatically make it a bad system? It seems like a pretty sensible approach to the whole thing, just spend as much as you earn.
 
Paranoia among football fans is nothing new, but if what the interviewer asked is representative of what most City fans feel their fans need to snap out of this.
 
Even from the first question which seems a reseaonable one he starts his defences against the agenda with, "Everyone has seen how poor United are that way this season – well, look at the table, United have conceded 21 goals, and City 22! It just hasn't had the same exposure (typical anti-City press!)".

This leaves me to believe and I could be wrong, but was he e mailed the questions to answer? The way he starts off just suggests he's read all the questions and he should lay his ground work early, if not then in guessing the guy asking the questions must have mentioned the agenda against City before the questions were asked.
 
Oh Manchester... said:
Even from the first question which seems a reseaonable one he starts his defences against the agenda with, "Everyone has seen how poor United are that way this season – well, look at the table, United have conceded 21 goals, and City 22! It just hasn't had the same exposure (typical anti-City press!)".

This leaves me to believe and I could be wrong, but was he e mailed the questions to answer? The way he starts off just suggests he's read all the questions and he should lay his ground work early, if not then in guessing the guy asking the questions must have mentioned the agenda against City before the questions were asked.
Click to expand...
Taylor mentions in his interview that he reads bluemoon and i saw someone mention that he knows Taylor laughs at the 'Agenda' thread they have on that site. So perhaps that is what led him to make that comment.
 
Cooksen said:
Everything about that that club is small time.

Their mentality is why they will never become a medium sized club let alone a big one.
Click to expand...
Before they were a 'massive' small club but now, thanks to sand oil billions and a support base oddly resistant to growth, they are a medium sized big club.
 
It's quite funny as Ogden can be quite harsh on United at times, partly, I suspect, because he's a frustrated fan and partly because it means people won't be as inclined to look for bias in everything he says.

Taylor's just a fantastic journo, IMO. I very rarely disagree with his columns.
 
Brophs said:
It's quite funny as Ogden can be quite harsh on United at times, partly, I suspect, because he's a frustrated fan and partly because it means people won't be as inclined to look for bias in everything he says.

Taylor's just a fantastic journo, IMO. I very rarely disagree with his columns.
Click to expand...
Taylor's a Forest fan at heart. It's not such a bad thing to be.
 
Mockney said:
Pretty much everything Taylor said was the complete opposite of what that guy wanted to hear.
Click to expand...
Yep, fair play to Taylor for not giving in a going along with it, saying the things he wants him to hear.

Interesting to see him say he used to regulary read bluemoon when he covered City. Goes to show that the media do indeed read these sites.
 
This one just goes to show how out of touch city fans are with reality, we were heavily critisized for the way we handled the Moyes situation, yet they some how seem to think we were praised!

I agree that some of the paranoia is bizarre, to say the least, but I’m not convinced the media are completely even-handed. For instance, contrast the press reaction to City sacking Mark Hughes and United sacking David Moyes. The narrative for the Hughes sacking was that City had acted rashly and hadn’t given a young, British manager a fair chance (Henry Winter, I recall, was apoplectic at Mancini’s press conference!) whereas Moyes’ sacking seemed to be portrayed as United acting swiftly and decisively. There was little outrage about the decision.

DT: But that isn't completely true, is it? Hughes's sacking was not portrayed as 'acting rashly and not giving a young, British manager a fair chance.' It was criticised because a) it was handled terribly, with him taking charge of a game when everyone knew he was a dead man walking b) City had told us categorically (and, naively, we believed them) that there was no way they would even contemplate replacing him and, as it turned out, they had been sounding out people since the previous summer. Don't get me wrong – every football club is economical with the truth sometimes, but when it is exposed you are going to get criticised.
 
Last edited:
Brophs said:
It's quite funny as Ogden can be quite harsh on United at times, partly, I suspect, because he's a frustrated fan and partly because it means people won't be as inclined to look for bias in everything he says.

Taylor's just a fantastic journo, IMO. I very rarely disagree with his columns.
Click to expand...
Didn't Taylor mention Ogden as another perceived United who doesn't support them?
 
Mitchell Nicholas said:
Paranoia among football fans is nothing new, but if what the interviewer asked is representative of what most City fans feel their fans need to snap out of this.
Click to expand...

Indeed, we have loads on here who always seem to think there is an agenda against Utd

Measuring commentators excitement in their voice is a big one
 
"Mangala for £32m? I think they will admit now you can add another £10m on to that." They paid £42m for Mangala?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.