I see the 'ABU' Media are back in full voice...

[georgipep]

I pulled him up on his previous really disrespectful comments on Ole back in the summer and he was seemingly contrite and admitted he had said it in the heat of the moment but since the YB result he's been retreating further and further down the rabbit hole back to where he was before he signed up as Utd's correspondent at The Athletic.

The worst about Anka is that he claims to use data to back his opinions but his articles are so incredibly shallow... It's like watching the SkySports stats during the games... Only super high level, useless and trivial numbers.

And then there are dozens of brilliant football data analysts in twitter who'd kill to work for a media like The Athletic

 

[Tom Van Persie]

And here we see the bitterness. He has another rubbish article out today. Anka is a tactical mastermind.

 

[roseguy64]

Carl Anka is a bizarre one, he emerged from nowhere as a self-styled tactical authority even though he's spend most of his adult life writing (non-football) articles for Vice/Joe, or working in non-journalistic roles for the likes of Twitter.

That's not to say he can't have some interesting thoughts on the game, but it is a little bit like a vlogger has somehow landed a highbrow sports journalism job.

As journalists go he's more tolerable than a lot of them, and he does occasionally put out an article which is interesting - but I don't see how he's earned the right to criticise Solskjaer on tactics in a professional capacity.

As pointed out above, Ole has always been quite pleasant to Carl as he is quite a respectful, thoughtful questioner in the press conferences but it seems he's decided to throw his toys out of the pram and start pandering to the Twitter tactics mafia since Ole was a bit off with him in the West Ham press conference.

Which West Ham conference? What was the question?

 

[Hughie77]

The commentary on the MotD highlights and the editing of yesterday's game was a disgrace. They cut it to make it look like an even game by leaving out both Ronaldo one vs ones and Ronaldo's low, right-footed shot against Fabianski, which I thought was a very good save.

When West Ham scored with their first meaningful shot on target, which took a huge deflection off Varane, the commentator said "West Ham haven't had as much of the ball but have created the better chances and will feel they deserved that piece of luck"....what chances??? Did they create a chance all game?

Agree, I watched motd and it starts about 20 mins in when Bowen has a scuff shot. No as you said the Ronny efforts, it was cut very bad, if no-one saw the game just highlights there opinions differ from others. I was a bad highlight cut I thought as well. But then the stats are shown!

 

[Lentwood]

Another example of lazy narratives, fickleness and outcome-orientated journalism...

Open the Sky Sports app. and they are advertising their podcast with the headline "Brilliant Chelsea, Man United's slice of luck"

Now, I get Chelsea played well for periods against Spurs, but they were most definitely outplayed for the first 30-odd minutes and Spurs created a couple of really good chances. Chelsea then score a set piece and a hopeful pot-shot from Kante deflects in. Game over. Suddenly, Chelsea and Tuchel are brilliant.

Utd outplayed West Ham comprehensively for 90 minutes. We have two very good shouts for a penalty waved away. We dominate possession, we restrict West Ham to basically no chances, bar the penalty. The goal is another lucky deflection, as in the Southampton away game.

In reality, both teams deserved to win, but one got the breaks at the right time and one had to overcome setbacks. If you're looking at it objectively and are not outcome-orientated, you could easily argue Chelsea were "lucky" not to go behind and "lucky" to score a couple of goals out of not much. You could also argue Utd were "unlucky" to go behind and "unlucky" not to be out of sight by the time all the stoppage time penalty nonsense starts. Surely that means United deserve more credit? My summary would be "Chelsea overcome Spurs side who started brightly but faded after conceding two cheap goals" and "United overcome bad luck and poor refereeing decisions to win tough away game in good style".

I get that's never how sports journalism is going to work and you're always going to be either brilliant, lucky or terrible, with very little room for anything else. I just wish our own fans wouldn't swallow the narrative the media set so readily

 

[Baxter]

No idea who thought it would be a good idea to ask Melissa Reddy for unbiased views on unit.

 

[Amarsdd]

No idea who thought it would be a good idea to ask Melissa Reddy for unbiased views on unit.

you can only laugh looking at this level of football "journalism". And yet, some here still want to close their eyes and continue saying there's such thing as ABUs.

 

[Amarsdd]

Another example of lazy narratives, fickleness and outcome-orientated journalism...

Open the Sky Sports app. and they are advertising their podcast with the headline "Brilliant Chelsea, Man United's slice of luck"

Now, I get Chelsea played well for periods against Spurs, but they were most definitely outplayed for the first 30-odd minutes and Spurs created a couple of really good chances. Chelsea then score a set piece and a hopeful pot-shot from Kante deflects in. Game over. Suddenly, Chelsea and Tuchel are brilliant.

Utd outplayed West Ham comprehensively for 90 minutes. We have two very good shouts for a penalty waved away. We dominate possession, we restrict West Ham to basically no chances, bar the penalty. The goal is another lucky deflection, as in the Southampton away game.

In reality, both teams deserved to win, but one got the breaks at the right time and one had to overcome setbacks. If you're looking at it objectively and are not outcome-orientated, you could easily argue Chelsea were "lucky" not to go behind and "lucky" to score a couple of goals out of not much. You could also argue Utd were "unlucky" to go behind and "unlucky" not to be out of sight by the time all the stoppage time penalty nonsense starts. Surely that means United deserve more credit? My summary would be "Chelsea overcome Spurs side who started brightly but faded after conceding two cheap goals" and "United overcome bad luck and poor refereeing decisions to win tough away game in good style".

I get that's never how sports journalism is going to work and you're always going to be either brilliant, lucky or terrible, with very little room for anything else. I just wish our own fans wouldn't swallow the narrative the media set so readily

I honestly wouldn't give two shits about these sorta ABU journalism if it wasn't for the point of our own fans swallowing those narratives. It's so disappointing seeing those narratives seep into the fanbase and become like facts in real time.

 

[BusbyMalone]

Ignoring the fact whether you think it's "anti-United" or whatever, has football journalism always been so fecking snide and sarcastic as it is now. That excerpt above from that article is just terrible. Again, ignoring whether it's even part of the "ABU media" (which is something I don't necessarily subscribe to), it's just very poorly written, in my opinion. There just seems to be a trend amongst a certain gaggle of football journalists to try and outsmart-arse one another, in a weird competition to see who can be the most snarky and condescending.

Here's another example of it here: https://www.football365.com/news/this-england-ripe-ronaldo-nostalgia-john-nicholson

An article dripping in sarcasm and mockery. Jonathan Liew also has a penchant for this type of writing. A sort of hyper cynical, snide form of journalism which is no doubt the type of thing they decry in modern football fan culture, yet participate in it here to try and seem...cool and edgy?

And again, this whole "doing exactly what he's paid to do" has she put it in that article, has become a meme due to Roy Keane saying it all the time. The difference with him though is that he has a self-awareness that these feckers seem to lack. And also, the type of analysis that she would no doubt roll her eyes at due to the vacuousness of it and the fact that journalists like her are so above it yet falls victim to it here because, you know, everyone loves reading snide takes on things.

Anyway, rant over. It's just garbage to read.

 

[Bowden]

I thought the article from Reddy was pretty poor. I agree that so far United haven't really had a dominant performance where you sit up and take notice, yet despite that, we have won 5-1 and 4-1 at home and got a decent 2-1 against West Ham. Yet because we aren't firing on all cylinders and there are improvements to be made, Reddy speaks like our season has been a bit of a sham and where we are is flattering. She talks about how we never controlled the game at any point which I disagree but either way, I thought West Ham were meant to be a top team these days, finished top six and got into Europe.

From her responses to people on Twitter, her argument seems to be that United are still showing the same flaws we always have and she is just pointing out the trend. I just think making that judgement after five games where we have won four of them, against teams we often dropped points to last season, is just lazy short term analysis that is always built around the popular narratives of the day. Right now that narrative is that Chelsea look great and will win the league, Liverpool are back, City have some issues and United only get bailed out by individual brilliance. City could beat Chelsea on the weekend and it could all change.

Personally, I think after five games and where we are in the table, with Rashford and Cavani still to come into the team and Sancho needing to settle, the start of the season has been positive but definitely not perfect. Would have been nice if Reddy's article made any attempt to make that point.

 

[sugar_kane]

I thought the article from Reddy was pretty poor. I agree that so far United haven't really had a dominant performance where you sit up and take notice, yet despite that, we have won 5-1 and 4-1 at home and got a decent 2-1 against West Ham. Yet because we aren't firing on all cylinders and there are improvements to be made, Reddy speaks like our season has been a bit of a sham and where we are is flattering. She talks about how we never controlled the game at any point which I disagree but either way, I thought West Ham were meant to be a top team these days, finished top six and got into Europe.

From her responses to people on Twitter, her argument seems to be that United are still showing the same flaws we always have and she is just pointing out the trend. I just think making that judgement after five games where we have won four of them, against teams we often dropped points to last season, is just lazy short term analysis that is always built around the popular narratives of the day. Right now that narrative is that Chelsea look great and will win the league, Liverpool are back, City have some issues and United only get bailed out by individual brilliance. City could beat Chelsea on the weekend and it could all change.

Personally, I think after five games and where we are in the table, with Rashford and Cavani still to come into the team and Sancho needing to settle, the start of the season has been positive but definitely not perfect. Would have been nice if Reddy's article made any attempt to make that point.

Make no mistake, Liverpool or City play bad and win it’s the “mark of champions”.

Ole outers need to ask themselves why all the press are so against him and why opposition fans keep making nonsense remarks about PE teacher etc - it’s because he’s doing something right. Lose him and it’s another several seasons of chaos, which is what they all want.

Unless the next Klopp or Pep start to emerge I can’t see any sense in a change right now - although I wouldn’t be against added a more experienced coach to Ole’s team.

 

[Highfather_24]

Ole outers need to ask themselves why all the press are so against him and why opposition fans keep making nonsense remarks about PE teacher etc - it’s because he’s doing something right. Lose him and it’s another several seasons of chaos, which is what they all want.

This.

 

[ReddBalls]

Make no mistake, Liverpool or City play bad and win it’s the “mark of champions”.

Ole outers need to ask themselves why all the press are so against him and why opposition fans keep making nonsense remarks about PE teacher etc - it’s because he’s doing something right. Lose him and it’s another several seasons of chaos, which is what they all want.

Unless the next Klopp or Pep start to emerge I can’t see any sense in a change right now - although I wouldn’t be against added a more experienced coach to Ole’s team.

This.

My Chelsea and Liverpool-supporting friends (no one I know support City, go figure) have started cheking out Uniteds next fixtures again, while calling every United victory "lucky". I wonder why?

 

[golden_blunder]

Who needs the ABU media when a big portion of our own fans are doing the job for them?

 

[RedDevil@84]

Scoring goals and winning games, is this what Manchester United has been reduced to?

Guess we could all live in such kind of shame.

 

[RedDevil@84]

Who needs the ABU media when a big portion of our own fans are doing the job for them?

True. The amount of s**t certain posters throw in the player performances thread is unbelievable.

 

[Withnail]

And here we see the bitterness. He has another rubbish article out today. Anka is a tactical mastermind.

He described the win over West Ham as a smash and grab on the Talk to the Devil's podcast

Then he had a bit of a tantrum about United not being as good as Liverpool or Chelsea so far this season.

 

[Paxi]

Cristiano Ronaldo FC

Yeah they’ve decidedly looked besides themselves the last few matches.

 

[Valencia Shin Crosses]

Genuinely seems like the vast majority of "pundits" and writers are no better than twitter trolls these days with how much they actually watch of matches. We could have beaten West Ham by 4 or 5, and conceded a woeful deflection and a fluke penalty opportunity but we were apparently lucky and played like shite.

It's just strange, because pretty much every team in football has struggling parts of most games or flat parts. But that apparently defines us while other teams come off "resilient".

 

[GueRed]

He described the win over West Ham as a smash and grab on the Talk to the Devil's podcast

Then he had a bit of a tantrum about United not being as good as Liverpool or Chelsea so far this season.

He's bitter cos Ole took the piss out of him about the 6, 8 midfield bullshit at last week's press conference I guess

 

[Shane88]

No idea who thought it would be a good idea to ask Melissa Reddy for unbiased views on unit.

"Without controlling any stage of the game"

It's either an indictment of the level of knowledge you need to be a senior football writer or a testimony to her wumming skills.

 

[redshaw]

They seem really bitter that Ronaldo has come back to United and not their fav oil club sport washing franchise. Probably seething about Ole lifting us up the table while they laid out the carpet and rose petals for Arteta.

We controlled large parts of the game at WHU and even Sky brought up a stat that United were highest so far for shots etc etc at half time in the league. Not sure if the articles are just parodies now or sheer desperation.

If one of their manager darlings did a similar thing to bringing on Matic and Lingard to combine and fire it into the top corner, it would be heralded as a tactical masterstroke.

 

[nainaisson]

Ole outers need to ask themselves why all the press are so against him and why opposition fans keep making nonsense remarks about PE teacher etc - it’s because he’s doing something right. Lose him and it’s another several seasons of chaos, which is what they all want.

I disagree. The English press delight in people's failure and destruction, no matter who it is, for financial reasons. And given the size of the club's fan base, they'll exaggerate any minor hiccup for the sake of clicks. Capitalist incentives always trump any personal club loyalties.

 

[Djemba-Djemba]

Ignoring the fact whether you think it's "anti-United" or whatever, has football journalism always been so fecking snide and sarcastic as it is now. That excerpt above from that article is just terrible. Again, ignoring whether it's even part of the "ABU media" (which is something I don't necessarily subscribe to), it's just very poorly written, in my opinion. There just seems to be a trend amongst a certain gaggle of football journalists to try and outsmart-arse one another, in a weird competition to see who can be the most snarky and condescending.

Here's another example of it here: https://www.football365.com/news/this-england-ripe-ronaldo-nostalgia-john-nicholson

An article dripping in sarcasm and mockery. Jonathan Liew also has a penchant for this type of writing. A sort of hyper cynical, snide form of journalism which is no doubt the type of thing they decry in modern football fan culture, yet participate in it here to try and seem...cool and edgy?

And again, this whole "doing exactly what he's paid to do" has she put it in that article, has become a meme due to Roy Keane saying it all the time. The difference with him though is that he has a self-awareness that these feckers seem to lack. And also, the type of analysis that she would no doubt roll her eyes at due to the vacuousness of it and the fact that journalists like her are so above it yet falls victim to it here because, you know, everyone loves reading snide takes on things.

Anyway, rant over. It's just garbage to read.

That's a really interesting point and I think you're right.

There's a smug snidey tone to a lot of journalists and articles these days. I immediately think of the dismissive tweet from Miguel Delaney on how nobody in football respected Ole but they all loved Arteta and how condescending it came across.

 

[0le]

Another example of lazy narratives, fickleness and outcome-orientated journalism...

Open the Sky Sports app. and they are advertising their podcast with the headline "Brilliant Chelsea, Man United's slice of luck"

Now, I get Chelsea played well for periods against Spurs, but they were most definitely outplayed for the first 30-odd minutes and Spurs created a couple of really good chances. Chelsea then score a set piece and a hopeful pot-shot from Kante deflects in. Game over. Suddenly, Chelsea and Tuchel are brilliant.

Utd outplayed West Ham comprehensively for 90 minutes. We have two very good shouts for a penalty waved away. We dominate possession, we restrict West Ham to basically no chances, bar the penalty. The goal is another lucky deflection, as in the Southampton away game.

In reality, both teams deserved to win, but one got the breaks at the right time and one had to overcome setbacks. If you're looking at it objectively and are not outcome-orientated, you could easily argue Chelsea were "lucky" not to go behind and "lucky" to score a couple of goals out of not much. You could also argue Utd were "unlucky" to go behind and "unlucky" not to be out of sight by the time all the stoppage time penalty nonsense starts. Surely that means United deserve more credit? My summary would be "Chelsea overcome Spurs side who started brightly but faded after conceding two cheap goals" and "United overcome bad luck and poor refereeing decisions to win tough away game in good style".

I get that's never how sports journalism is going to work and you're always going to be either brilliant, lucky or terrible, with very little room for anything else. I just wish our own fans wouldn't swallow the narrative the media set so readily

Agreed.

Ignoring the fact whether you think it's "anti-United" or whatever, has football journalism always been so fecking snide and sarcastic as it is now. That excerpt above from that article is just terrible. Again, ignoring whether it's even part of the "ABU media" (which is something I don't necessarily subscribe to), it's just very poorly written, in my opinion. There just seems to be a trend amongst a certain gaggle of football journalists to try and outsmart-arse one another, in a weird competition to see who can be the most snarky and condescending.

Here's another example of it here: https://www.football365.com/news/this-england-ripe-ronaldo-nostalgia-john-nicholson

An article dripping in sarcasm and mockery. Jonathan Liew also has a penchant for this type of writing. A sort of hyper cynical, snide form of journalism which is no doubt the type of thing they decry in modern football fan culture, yet participate in it here to try and seem...cool and edgy?

And again, this whole "doing exactly what he's paid to do" has she put it in that article, has become a meme due to Roy Keane saying it all the time. The difference with him though is that he has a self-awareness that these feckers seem to lack. And also, the type of analysis that she would no doubt roll her eyes at due to the vacuousness of it and the fact that journalists like her are so above it yet falls victim to it here because, you know, everyone loves reading snide takes on things.

Anyway, rant over. It's just garbage to read.

Yup, good observation.

 

[izak]

Ole outers need to ask themselves why all the press are so against him and why opposition fans keep making nonsense remarks about PE teacher etc - it’s because he’s doing something right. Lose him and it’s another several seasons of chaos, which is what they all want.

Well put this post, they fear what Ole is building and want it stopped badly, they'll say anything to bring him down, I can only hope Ole doesn't give in in to the Media bullshit.

I noticed him in our last game vs West Ham, i saw him losing his cool a bit after the penalty descion, I just want him to keep his cool, as the good things he's being doing would come good soon.

 

[Flytan]

Make no mistake, Liverpool or City play bad and win it’s the “mark of champions”.

Ole outers need to ask themselves why all the press are so against him and why opposition fans keep making nonsense remarks about PE teacher etc - it’s because he’s doing something right. Lose him and it’s another several seasons of chaos, which is what they all want.

Unless the next Klopp or Pep start to emerge I can’t see any sense in a change right now - although I wouldn’t be against added a more experienced coach to Ole’s team.

You think there's a media conspiracy to get Ole fired because he's such a good manager? That's RAWK/Bluemoon levels of delusion.

 

[Baxter]

You think there's a media conspiracy to get Ole fired because he's such a good manager? That's RAWK/Bluemoon levels of delusion.

I’d agree, but I’m not 100% sure that was the point. However, I would say that there are certainly a few who wrote any chance of OGS being any sort of success that there may be a worry they might end up looking a bit silly.

 

[Fluctuation0161]

Don't read the articles, don't listen to his podcast then no ones making you. It's like people who get mad at Sky's coverage pre and post games. Turn the tv off, change the channel.

Anka is such a bland and avoidable journalist, I can't believe people exist who have a strong opinion of him.

Wrong thread Judas.

 

[RedTiger]

The days of having a siege mentality are back boys! Us against the world, just how we like it.

 

[Roosney]

We have Sami Hyypiä as pundit here in Finland, can't get more ABU than that.

Quotes from him and the other pundit before Young Boys game:
"United won Newcastle 4-1, but we all know, Ole knows too, that it wasn't a good performance."
"Last time United won Young Boys 3-0, but specially in the first half Young Boys were dominant."
"Liverpool are favourites to win the UCL"

 

[estel_manutd]

Why care about opinions from football journalists!? Why crave their praise and adulation!? Football journalists are obsessed with 'patterns of play', and 'philosophy'. Ole like Fergie is trying to get the team to play like United should: attacking football with brilliant players who are told to express themselves on the football pitch, adjusting individually and collectively to the state of the game at any given point.

Winning the league at the end of the season is all that matters!

 

[sugar_kane]

You think there's a media conspiracy to get Ole fired because he's such a good manager? That's RAWK/Bluemoon levels of delusion.

For it to be a conspiracy they’d have to all be colluding - I’m not implying that, it’s just lots of examples of individuals who don’t like a stable Manchester United for their own reasons.

 

[RedDevil@84]

Why care about opinions from football journalists!? Why crave their praise and adulation!? Football journalists are obsessed with 'patterns of play', and 'philosophy'. Ole like Fergie is trying to get the team to play like United should: attacking football with brilliant players who are told to express themselves on the football pitch, adjusting individually and collectively to the state of the game at any given point.

Winning the league at the end of the season is all that matters!

Media drives the narrative. They influence fan opinions, FA actions and referee decisions. Biased press journalists need to be called out.

 

[GiddyUp]

I knew football journalism was dead when I saw Oliver Holt on TV wearing an alice band.

 

[BeforeKeanetherewasRobson]

I thought the article from Reddy was pretty poor. I agree that so far United haven't really had a dominant performance where you sit up and take notice, yet despite that, we have won 5-1 and 4-1 at home and got a decent 2-1 against West Ham. Yet because we aren't firing on all cylinders and there are improvements to be made, Reddy speaks like our season has been a bit of a sham and where we are is flattering. She talks about how we never controlled the game at any point which I disagree but either way, I thought West Ham were meant to be a top team these days, finished top six and got into Europe.

From her responses to people on Twitter, her argument seems to be that United are still showing the same flaws we always have and she is just pointing out the trend. I just think making that judgement after five games where we have won four of them, against teams we often dropped points to last season, is just lazy short term analysis that is always built around the popular narratives of the day. Right now that narrative is that Chelsea look great and will win the league, Liverpool are back, City have some issues and United only get bailed out by individual brilliance. City could beat Chelsea on the weekend and it could all change.

Personally, I think after five games and where we are in the table, with Rashford and Cavani still to come into the team and Sancho needing to settle, the start of the season has been positive but definitely not perfect. Would have been nice if Reddy's article made any attempt to make that point.

Fortunate? Maybe

Good timing to play them without Antonio? Definitely

Lack of any control? uhuh..

(I’m talking about article not you)

 

[mav_9me]

No idea who thought it would be a good idea to ask Melissa Reddy for unbiased views on unit.

I find it sad. That a journalist ends up writing round thing into rectangular thing to downplay Ronaldo scoring a goal. I find it incredibly demeaning to oneself to descend to that level... Wow. You have to pity them and their profession.

 

[estel_manutd]

Media drives the narrative. They influence fan opinions, FA actions and referee decisions. Biased press journalists need to be called out.

Does it really? I don't *think* football writers influence FA actions or referee decisions, or at least I haven't seen any systematic evidence to that point. The best way to call out biased press journalists is to win, consistently and emphatically.

 

[Tyrion]

Thank you

Iirc, Welbeck became the most talented player in England once he left United while Pedro became the unseen puppeteer behind Messi's greatness once United missed out on him. If Ronaldo went to City, it'd be proof of our decline and guarantee them the title.

I disagree. The English press delight in people's failure and destruction, no matter who it is, for financial reasons. And given the size of the club's fan base, they'll exaggerate any minor hiccup for the sake of clicks. Capitalist incentives always trump any personal club loyalties.

Yep. I dont think they hate United. They just love to promote lazy narratives and whatever gets the most clicks.

That's a really interesting point and I think you're right.

There's a smug snidey tone to a lot of journalists and articles these days. I immediately think of the dismissive tweet from Miguel Delaney on how nobody in football respected Ole but they all loved Arteta and how condescending it came across.

Delaney seems like someone who loves to be among footballs "insiders" rather than everyone else and thinks it makes him smarter. Arteta seemed charismatic and his association with Pep made everyone hype him up. All the arguments against OGS apply to Arteta but he got the benefit of the doubt for some reason.

 

[Withnail]

Iirc, Welbeck became the most talented player in England once he left United while Pedro became the unseen puppeteer behind Messi's greatness once United missed out on him. If Ronaldo went to City, it'd be proof of our decline and guarantee them the title.



Yep. I dont think they hate United. They just love to promote lazy narratives and whatever gets the most clicks.



Delaney seems like someone who loves to be among footballs "insiders" rather than everyone else and thinks it makes him smarter. Arteta seemed charismatic and his association with Pep made everyone hype him up. All the arguments against OGS apply to Arteta but he got the benefit of the doubt for some reason.

Delaney's an absolute tool. He's always arguing with randomers on twitter. He loves acting superior.