Scored 2 v Juve in a CL final and a header v Barca to win their cup.
im sure there’s at least 1 more somewhere
I see the 'ABU' Media are back in full voice...
- Thread starter LawCharltonBest
- Start date
- Status
im sure there’s at least 1 more somewhere
Scored a penalty against Athletico Madrid too. He's scored in more finals than Kane's played in
I've pointed this out before regarding the "he's not the player he was", all I hear whenever Ronaldo is brought up is this line get thrown in pretty quickly and it just sounds stupid. Nobody is under any other illusion, it's just fecking obvious and not something I've seen with Messi, who also isn't the player he was when he was 27, but people don't feel the need to constantly mention that whenever he's brought up.
I also think it's a dumb bar to level at any player. Ronaldo at his absolute best is a player that arguably nobody can live with. Hitting 60 goals in a season, 3 CL in a row etc. You could literally follow any signing ever up with "he's not what Ronaldo was in his prime". But people don't, because that would be stupid.
Especially in America there’s always a vendetta that if we support Utd and haven’t been to England it must be just because the club is successful.
Always hear ABUs accusing us of spending similar sums to the likes of City and Chelsea too.
Always hear ABUs accusing us of spending similar sums to the likes of City and Chelsea too.
James was a logical signing for the time as we were light in the wingers department and he was available and affordable, but 2/3 years on and we're much improved in attack so need him less. The Leeds move makes sense for all parties now.
We don't need to keep players forever, no club does, and James certainly wasn't someone we signed to 'develop' - at least it never felt that way to me.
James was a punt at 15m and now has Greenwood and Sancho ahead of him. Ronaldo doesn’t even play in the same position as he does, now with Cristiano and Cavani through the middle it means we don’t have to move Mason inside when resting Cavani so he can stay on the right. It’s Greenwood that made Utd sell James.
Add to the fact that James simply wasn't developing either. The fans seem to get overly attached to players just because they've signed for United, they think once they've arrived they're here forever.
Again, the real point here though isn't what you or I think James is or could be, but rather what OGS and the club thought.
For my part I doubt they saw him as a "punt", or that he was seen simply a depth player on the strength of current abilities, with no real expectation of further major development. And I note again that having him leave the club seemingly only became an issue after Ronaldo was signed (before which rumours of a move out were consistently shot down by the club). Also, that it was only after that signing that he not only became available, but also went up for sale rather than loan. Both of these things point clearly in the direction of him being moved as a consequence of the Ronaldo signing's impact on squad depth and finances.
The contradictory and hypocritically scheming nature of the media is the bane of my life, tbh.
It's so frustrating to recognise the endless double standards and contradictory 180's the media constantly commit and yet get away with while being very effective in controlling what many see, hear and believe through the constant bombardment and agenda driven reporting.
In the greater scheme of things, them using it to twist football facts against United is one of the least important abuses of their huge power. But as an obsessive United fan, it's one of the more frustrating aspects to me just seeing how they continually manipulate the 'facts' to generate / exacerbate the anti-United agenda and so rarely get called out about it.
There's been some great examples highlighted in this thread, and, sadly, I'm sure there's many more to be found.
It's so frustrating to recognise the endless double standards and contradictory 180's the media constantly commit and yet get away with while being very effective in controlling what many see, hear and believe through the constant bombardment and agenda driven reporting.
In the greater scheme of things, them using it to twist football facts against United is one of the least important abuses of their huge power. But as an obsessive United fan, it's one of the more frustrating aspects to me just seeing how they continually manipulate the 'facts' to generate / exacerbate the anti-United agenda and so rarely get called out about it.
There's been some great examples highlighted in this thread, and, sadly, I'm sure there's many more to be found.
Okay, so maybe we shouldn't get all carried away here. I don't actually think it's reasonable to assume there's an anti-United hidden media agenda conspiracy out there. Quite a lot of journalists who don't personally like United and tend to feed off peer group prejudices and truisms (which is again something that is not usually created by design by someone with a plan) is quite sufficient.
And please Bertie old chap, do spare us the mainstream media agenda conspiracy bullshit. That's the sort of thing Spode would think, don't you know.
This one from Liverpool journalist.
^sorry btw mods
I absolutely guarantee that Mason will play more games and score more goals this season than ever before.
I'm sick of all these journalists pretending to give a shit about his development.
I absolutely guarantee that Mason will play more games and score more goals this season than ever before.
I'm sick of all these journalists pretending to give a shit about his development.
I am highly impressed with your finely tuned use of withering satire.
But I'm not sure what you mean about 'conspiracy' tbh. I'm one of the least 'conspiracy theorists' or 'politically motivated' (I vote Greens if I vote at all) people you could meet.
I was just stating that, as someone completely middle of the road (who loves to watch political free comedy like Tim Vine, and dramas that just tell a story not preach an agenda driven moral), most of what I see / hear on TV, the papers, etc, seems to very obviously be people coming from one side or another and to therefore have a bias that nullifies the validity of it somewhat. You get a lot of extremes, and therefore agenda driven, from both sides in the media - rather than dull middle of the road, sitting on the fence views (which is my general position).
As regards the anti-United stuff. I didn't say it was an organised conspiracy. I was saying the second part that you alluded to: that United are very much a team people love or hate rather than the majority of clubs who most are neutral about, and you get a lot of pundits / columnists who clearly dislike United and interpret anything negatively when they can. However disingenuous. And, as that 'love them or hate them' also applies to their audience, that's a further encouragement to do so and generate responses. And all that perpetuates the ABU stuff and never gets called out as being based on bias, not fact.
Last edited:
Are people not savvy to the fact that the media, no matter what sort or style, thrive on controversy and debate for their hits, clicks and likes?
The more polarizing and opinion piece is the more it is likely to a) rile up the supporters of the club/player in question and b) bring out the opposition fans to revel in an opinion piece that belittle their hated club.
Its' no more or little than that, theres no agenda against united - we are the biggest club in the world, so will automatically get a healthy amount of views, clicks etc, theres a reason why Burnley for example don't hvae as many opinion pieces created about them.
Theres no agenda, merely a way of getting people to generate debate in order to ascertain what brings the money in for these media 'hacks'.
The more polarizing and opinion piece is the more it is likely to a) rile up the supporters of the club/player in question and b) bring out the opposition fans to revel in an opinion piece that belittle their hated club.
Its' no more or little than that, theres no agenda against united - we are the biggest club in the world, so will automatically get a healthy amount of views, clicks etc, theres a reason why Burnley for example don't hvae as many opinion pieces created about them.
Theres no agenda, merely a way of getting people to generate debate in order to ascertain what brings the money in for these media 'hacks'.
Obviously, a lot of that is true.
A lot of the tabloid stuff is clearly for clickbait and controversy, and there's an obvious reason why the biggest football clubs, actors, musicians, etc, get talked about far more than the less important ones.
But it's not about how much is talked about United - of course that's because of our size and relevance. It's what is said - and how much of it is negative and from sources that clearly have a bias and yet don't announce those biases (City, Liverpool connections, etc) and so those views get read as professional opinion, not bias, unless you know the agenda they're coming from.
The recent articles linked here with negative views on Ronaldo since he joined United - some of whom were raving about him days / weeks earlier. That's clearly a bias. If they just want to report about the 'biggest club in the world' then report positively on the player you've just been raving about re-joining the club he had huge success at. There's a positive opinion piece in that. No need to completely contradict what you've just said unless you just want to be negative about United.
Same with the MOTD interpretations of the two 'fouls' for the Southampton goal v United, then United goal v Wolves. People are already watching. You're already talking about the incidents. There's no need for the show to gloss over one incident then spend 3 minutes the next week criticising the one that went United's way unless they're trying to push a particular narrative. Otherwise, if it's all just about 'talking about the biggest club because that's where the audience is' then why didn't they spend longer analysing the Southampton goal that went against United rather than just glossing over it?
Last edited:
Why don't they call out City's obvious sports washing then? Or Liverpool's diving, or Chelsea abusing the loan system.
Greenwood is still (just) 19 and Ronaldo is 36. Greenwood could have another 15 years at the club, Ronaldo 2 or maybe 3. Ronaldo's presence has absolutely no detrimental effect on Greenwood's development and is more likely to enhance it, if anything. Ronaldo loves United so I'm sure he will relish in the opportunity to assist in Greenwood's development.
Media contradict themselves all the time - someone posted a screenshot of two articles form the Guardian or paper of similar ilk whereby the journalist in question was discussing about how not to shame people not wearing masks, only to then write an article the week later doing just that!
It happens all the time!
News/media outlets generally don't tend to focus on uplifting or positive stories too often, I mean who would read a headline titled 'Ronaldo will win united the league as he is a born goalscorer, heres why...', certainly wouldn't get too many football fans other than United fans willing to give it a click. Where as a headline such as 'Ronaldo is a panic buy and will cause Greenwood to stagnate...heres why' will get a large proportion of United fans reading it as well as some of those other football fans who hate United, it will then generate the online banter that is usually so witty and informative in the 'comments' sections.
I am not going to deny that there is an element of Bias from certain journalists, but having known a sports journalist for a big national paper I can say that most of what they write is done to gain attention of readers.
As for MOtD, their poor excuse for punditry needs no explanation, your right, I think we both know that Shearer, Murphy et al are definitely harbouring a chip on their shoulder against United!!
There have been many articles regarding City's owners being painted in a negative light:
https://www.theguardian.com/comment...uman-rights-man-city-jailing-british-academic
https://www.express.co.uk/sport/foo...ity-owner-Sheikh-Mansour-manchester-city-news
Many many more,
Likewise Liverpool diving,
Chelsea are not abusing the loan system - they are using it within the rules to their advantage. If anything the rules regarding loans needs to be changed, there have been articles regarding Chelseas Loan system but nothing unholy negative because the players all adhere to the system and carry on singing contracts whilst going out on loan.
Exactly. I'm sure some of these journalists are afraid to think before they write. I mean, Greenwood would've watched, trained and played with Lukaku, Cavani, and Ronaldo all before the age of 20! How can that not be considered a good education for a striker?
But I'm not sure what you mean about 'conspiracy' tbh. I'm one of the least 'conspiracy theorists' or 'politically motivated' (I vote Greens if I vote at all) people you could meet.
I was just stating that, as someone completely middle of the road (who loves to watch political free comedy like Tim Vine, and dramas that just tell a story not preach an agenda driven moral), most of what I see / hear on TV, the papers, etc, seems to very obviously be people coming from one side or another and to therefore have a bias that nullifies the validity of it somewhat. You get a lot of extremes, and therefore agenda driven, from both sides in the media - rather than dull middle of the road, sitting on the fence views (which is my general position).
As regards the anti-United stuff. I didn't say it was an organised conspiracy. I was saying the second part that you alluded to: that United are very much a team people love or hate rather than the majority of clubs who most are neutral about, and you get a lot of pundits / columnists who clearly dislike United and interpret anything negatively when they can. However disingenuous. And, as that 'love them or hate them' also applies to their audience, that's a further encouragement to do so and generate responses. And all that perpetuates the ABU stuff and never gets called out as being based on bias, not fact.
And to think I went all Sir Roderick Glossop on you over that. I do apologise!
Tony Evans the most bitter of Liverpool journos.. wouldnt pee on him if he was on fire.
.And to think I went all Sir Roderick Glossop on you over that. I do apologise!
No need to apologise for speaking your mind. Don't let “I dare not?” wait upon “I would”, like the poor cat in the adage.
Not one of my own - one of Jeeves' gags. How he comes up with them I don't know.
Last edited:
I think its because hes not in the normal mold of a manager, who's been at other clubs and won things. Then he gets the OT job. It's a bit of the green eyed monster, and then wanting him to fall.
Love it! You know we’re becoming a real threat again when all these journo’s are spewing their ABU bile.
Obviously…. As we’ve seen in Kane’s two finals where he was completely anonymous… also people forget, or just conveniently ignore, that Spurs reached the CL final without Kane as he was injured for 6 or so months. And during that time many people, including Spurs fans, were actually saying that Spurs looked better without him.
United wouldn't have a fanbase outside of Manchester if it wasn't for the media. They deserve at least some credit for making us as big as we are. In fact, they're probably the reason that most people on the Caf are even aware of the club.
But the huge volume of coverage we get is inevitably going to include both good and bad. I don't see the point in getting upset about negative stories when they go hand-in-hand with the positive stories that brought United to the masses in the first place. You can't have one without the other. It's the price we pay for making our deal with the devil (the devil in this case being the newspapers and Sky).
But the huge volume of coverage we get is inevitably going to include both good and bad. I don't see the point in getting upset about negative stories when they go hand-in-hand with the positive stories that brought United to the masses in the first place. You can't have one without the other. It's the price we pay for making our deal with the devil (the devil in this case being the newspapers and Sky).
Good to see that the journos are s**t scared suddenly
Success is pretty much how most fans outside the country pick a club. Other reasons could be influence of peers, their favorite players moving to the club and such reasons.
What counts is do you continue to support the club in the tough times. That you continue to support the club when your favorite player moves to a different club.
Bizarre. MSM done fecking lost it over this transfer.
I mean I get it, I too question his credentials but its a stark contract from the say we lost 3-0 at Liverpool, not knowing the direction we are going, it was as if the team selections was purely based on the next game, not future plans, fans were losing interest, we were not getting shots on goal.
Obviously, Ole got the temporary job and done well.
Anyway, we are where we are, the atmosphere felt different this season and I really hope Ole delivers us silverware this season. It would be a special one.
I've had some spare time and gone through his records. Here's all the finals he's scored in:
Man Utd:
FA Cup - 03/04
League cup - 05/06
Champions league - 07/08
World club cup - 08/09
Real Madrid:
Copa del rey - 10/11
Supercopa de espana - 2012, 2020
Champions league - 13/14, 16/17
Uefa supercup - 2014
World club cup 2016, 2017
Juve:
Supercoppa italiana - 2018, 2020.
Total: 14 finals scored in.
I disagree with pretty much everything in this post.
You don't think that, maybe, our success under SAF had anything to do with the size of our fan base? The media you are talking about is Sky Sports showing the PL around the World, not the shit head pundits & 'journalists', which is what this thread is about.
Cristiano Ronaldo FC
When we were clear number one the ABUism was a lot worse in the 90's.
Today because of new money the bitterness is spread out over a number of clubs.
Today because of new money the bitterness is spread out over a number of clubs.
At this point it won't be far fetched to assume that these articles are being written due to some external influence. The premise of the above article is ridiculous. Players want to win on the pitch, for cuddling they have their partners at home. All those medals he has helped his team won should be the only thing that matters to his colleague. Why would anything else matter?
Less fans, smaller clubs equals less clicks and less general interest from non football supporters.
- Status