Sky WTF

[Shaggy]

some people need to grow the **** up, drop all this bull**** anti-rafa **** ( he isnt here anymore so let it go )

Try telling that to Sky Sports.

[Roboklopp]

Try telling that to Sky Sports.

Why are you quoting me on that Shaggs? Trying to wind me up back?

[Roboklopp]

Odd...it had me as quoted.

[Craig_H]

I dont think they were doing this one as a dig at Rafa (one of the rare times they arent digging at him, to be fair), but it's just one of sky's wanky gimmicks as Shaggy said, and they do love them. If they wanted to do it as a dig, i agree that they'd have just put it over Rafa's face.

[Shaggy]

Why are you quoting me on that Shaggs? Trying to wind me up back?

Odd...it had me as quoted.

Yeah man, no idea how the **** that happened. Duly edited as soon as I noticed it.

[Roboklopp]

I dont think they were doing this one as a dig at Rafa (one of the rare times they arent digging at him, to be fair), but it's just one of sky's wanky gimmicks as Shaggy said, and they do love them. If they wanted to do it as a dig, i agree that they'd have just put it over Rafa's face.

Agree with that, although it does devalued the flag a bit.

Also agree there is a wider agenda though. In 5 years, I's love to see Rafa back, funded to the hilt & completely ram the nonsense back down their throats.

[Shaggy]

I dont think they were doing this one as a dig at Rafa (one of the rare times they arent digging at him, to be fair), but it's just one of sky's wanky gimmicks as Shaggy said, and they do love them. If they wanted to do it as a dig, i agree that they'd have just put it over Rafa's face.

But, as has been rightly pointed out in the RAWK thread, they are falsely presenting an image that paints all Reds as absolutely chuffed to ****. All this 'new dawn, new era' ****e. To the millions of brainwashed armchair viewers, that edited flag is the real thing. And, conveniently, it ties in with their new dawn bull****. Okay it's not a dig at Rafa (they offered plenty of those elsewhere), but it's not on IMO.

[Neil Young]

The media and journalists have to cover a broad range of teams. They're not really interested in the intricacies of a particular club. From their point of view last season for Liverpool FC was a complete disaster (which it was) and we played ****e football for 75% of the games (which we did) and that's the bottom line. For them, it's not about making excuses as to why we ended up 7th...it's far more enjoyable to stick the knife in.

It's cut throat but at the same time it can be a kick up the arse too.

I'd agree most don't have a personal grudge against Liverpool. However I don't agree they're as disinterested as you seem to be suggesting and their attitude towards the club, the manager or whoever is based on enthusiasm for/disgruntlement with whatever their ratings/circulation/clickrate is.

They like 'stories' - they're always going on about what the story is, the story of last season or whether someone scoring a goal or whatever makes for a great story. Frankly, I find it tiresome and sickening to be talked at like that but that's what they do and I suppose it must work for them to do it that way.

The thing is, they make up the stories. They decide to tell things a certain way because it makes the best story. It doesn't matter whether it's the truth, or at least comes close to the truth or whether it's even a bunch of lies, so long as the way of stringing together a few facts makes for a good story and will keep us dumb consumers entertained for a second and engaged enough not to turn the page or flick over during the ad breaks.

It doesn't work though if there are lot of contradictory stories in the media so generally a consensus emerges whereby the same story is repeated and embellished and refined until it becomes the dominant narrative - the Story.

And the current Story is Rafa was "negative and a control-freak," Hodgson is a "breath of fresh air," Gerrard has been rejuvenated thanks to being "let off the leash" so even obvious inaccuracies are shoe-horned in, like Jovanovic doing well enough to be credited as a Hodgson signing. What's not mentioned is whether certain members of the media didn't like Rafa because they couldn't get close to him, despite their early attempts to ingratiate themselves...

It is hard to remember now but even Rafa had a honeymoon period (apart from the odd outspoken xenophobe like Ian St. John) but that all crashed eventually. We'll have to wait and see whether the same happens for our current manager - I'd expect and certainly hope his doubtless better-developed contacts among the English media will protect him to some extent.

In short, the media have their interests and that's in getting the best story to sell to the punters and they don't mind what damage they do in getting it. The quality of the football played is not altogether unimportant but it's not the main thing.

They feed on football like rats and cockroaches feed on the detritus of everyday life.

[Vermilion]

But, as has been rightly pointed out in the RAWK thread, they are falsely presenting an image that paints all Reds as absolutely chuffed to ****. All this 'new dawn, new era' ****e. To the millions of brainwashed armchair viewers, that edited flag is the real thing. And, conveniently, it ties in with their new dawn bull****. Okay it's not a dig at Rafa (they offered plenty of those elsewhere), but it's not on IMO.

[Roboklopp]

But, as has been rightly pointed out in the RAWK thread, they are falsely presenting an image that paints all Reds as absolutely chuffed to ****. All this 'new dawn, new era' ****e. To the millions of brainwashed armchair viewers, that edited flag is the real thing. And, conveniently, it ties in with their new dawn bull****. Okay it's not a dig at Rafa (they offered plenty of those elsewhere), but it's not on IMO.

I can kind of see your point when you put it like that, aye. It's all a bit sinister propaganda. Like I say, this type of thing really helps to alienate me from the club.

Someone came over to me at the gym the other day asking about stuff & then he started on about LFC after a bit (I was wearing old shorts). He said he was a Red, but he genuinely didnt seem to understand why I was gutted Rafa had gone. Couldnt see past the media nonsense. It's far from atypical too.

[Craig_H]

But, as has been rightly pointed out in the RAWK thread, they are falsely presenting an image that paints all Reds as absolutely chuffed to ****. All this 'new dawn, new era' ****e. To the millions of brainwashed armchair viewers, that edited flag is the real thing. And, conveniently, it ties in with their new dawn bull****. Okay it's not a dig at Rafa (they offered plenty of those elsewhere), but it's not on IMO.

I think that's reading a bit much into it, myself. As for the brainwashed armchair viewers - we've got plenty of clueless wallies anyway, i've seen some with the s*n stuffed in their back pocket (while wearing the red shirt) and on Sunday, i was dismayed by how many of the new Standard Chartered shirts were being worn. As i say, a big portion are clueless or dont care anyway.

[Pablo]

I'd agree most don't have a personal grudge against Liverpool. However I don't agree they're as disinterested as you seem to be suggesting and their attitude towards the club, the manager or whoever is based on enthusiasm for/disgruntlement with whatever their ratings/circulation/clickrate is.

They like 'stories' - they're always going on about what the story is, the story of last season or whether someone scoring a goal or whatever makes for a great story. Frankly, I find it tiresome and sickening to be talked at like that but that's what they do and I suppose it must work for them to do it that way.

The thing is, they make up the stories. They decide to tell things a certain way because it makes the best story. It doesn't matter whether it's the truth, or at least comes close to the truth or whether it's even a bunch of lies, so long as the way of stringing together a few facts makes for a good story and will keep us dumb consumers entertained for a second and engaged enough not to turn the page or flick over during the ad breaks.

It doesn't work though if there are lot of contradictory stories in the media so generally a consensus emerges whereby the same story is repeated and embellished and refined until it becomes the dominant narrative - the Story.

And the current Story is Rafa was "negative and a control-freak," Hodgson is a "breath of fresh air," Gerrard has been rejuvenated thanks to being "let off the leash" so even obvious inaccuracies are shoe-horned in, like Jovanovic doing well enough to be credited as a Hodgson signing. What's not mentioned is whether certain members of the media didn't like Rafa because they couldn't get close to him, despite their early attempts to ingratiate themselves...

It is hard to remember now but even Rafa had a honeymoon period (apart from the odd outspoken xenophobe like Ian St. John) but that all crashed eventually. We'll have to wait and see whether the same happens for our current manager - I'd expect and certainly hope his doubtless better-developed contacts among the English media will protect him to some extent.

In short, the media have their interests and that's in getting the best story to sell to the punters and they don't mind what damage they do in getting it. The quality of the football played is not altogether unimportant but it's not the main thing.

They feed on football like rats and cockroaches feed on the detritus of everyday life.

Excellent post.

[Roboklopp]

I'd agree most don't have a personal grudge against Liverpool. However I don't agree they're as disinterested as you seem to be suggesting and their attitude towards the club, the manager or whoever is based on enthusiasm for/disgruntlement with whatever their ratings/circulation/clickrate is.

They like 'stories' - they're always going on about what the story is, the story of last season or whether someone scoring a goal or whatever makes for a great story. Frankly, I find it tiresome and sickening to be talked at like that but that's what they do and I suppose it must work for them to do it that way.

The thing is, they make up the stories. They decide to tell things a certain way because it makes the best story. It doesn't matter whether it's the truth, or at least comes close to the truth or whether it's even a bunch of lies, so long as the way of stringing together a few facts makes for a good story and will keep us dumb consumers entertained for a second and engaged enough not to turn the page or flick over during the ad breaks.

It doesn't work though if there are lot of contradictory stories in the media so generally a consensus emerges whereby the same story is repeated and embellished and refined until it becomes the dominant narrative - the Story.

And the current Story is Rafa was "negative and a control-freak," Hodgson is a "breath of fresh air," Gerrard has been rejuvenated thanks to being "let off the leash" so even obvious inaccuracies are shoe-horned in, like Jovanovic doing well enough to be credited as a Hodgson signing. What's not mentioned is whether certain members of the media didn't like Rafa because they couldn't get close to him, despite their early attempts to ingratiate themselves...

It is hard to remember now but even Rafa had a honeymoon period (apart from the odd outspoken xenophobe like Ian St. John) but that all crashed eventually. We'll have to wait and see whether the same happens for our current manager - I'd expect and certainly hope his doubtless better-developed contacts among the English media will protect him to some extent.

In short, the media have their interests and that's in getting the best story to sell to the punters and they don't mind what damage they do in getting it. The quality of the football played is not altogether unimportant but it's not the main thing.

They feed on football like rats and cockroaches feed on the detritus of everyday life.

It's a very similar thing as in politics. In general, people are just too thick to think for themselves & see things in their myriad shades of grey. They want things packaged in black & white - the average fan wants a soap opera type script, not an epic novel. It's what brings them back for more.

[wiw]

To be honest it irks me to see our manager bend over for those Sky retards. I know it's not Roy's fault he's the media darling, but the interview with the clearly delighted, grinning inanely Shreeves made my toes curl. There is a majorly unpleasant undercurrent to all of this.

Agreed. I don't think Hodgson is falling for it though and seems respectful towards Rafa. There was a moment in that interview where Shreeves made a comment near the end and laughed at him himself (I forget what it was about now ) but Roy didn't even crack a smile

Also during the commentary in the game, when Gray said that Liverpool are hard to break down, Tyler said something like "it's like you're watching Fulham" Fair play to Gray, he dismissed it and said no, like under Benitez

[Maxiedge]

I'd agree most don't have a personal grudge against Liverpool. However I don't agree they're as disinterested as you seem to be suggesting and their attitude towards the club, the manager or whoever is based on enthusiasm for/disgruntlement with whatever their ratings/circulation/clickrate is.

They like 'stories' - they're always going on about what the story is, the story of last season or whether someone scoring a goal or whatever makes for a great story. Frankly, I find it tiresome and sickening to be talked at like that but that's what they do and I suppose it must work for them to do it that way.

The thing is, they make up the stories. They decide to tell things a certain way because it makes the best story. It doesn't matter whether it's the truth, or at least comes close to the truth or whether it's even a bunch of lies, so long as the way of stringing together a few facts makes for a good story and will keep us dumb consumers entertained for a second and engaged enough not to turn the page or flick over during the ad breaks.

It doesn't work though if there are lot of contradictory stories in the media so generally a consensus emerges whereby the same story is repeated and embellished and refined until it becomes the dominant narrative - the Story.

And the current Story is Rafa was "negative and a control-freak," Hodgson is a "breath of fresh air," Gerrard has been rejuvenated thanks to being "let off the leash" so even obvious inaccuracies are shoe-horned in, like Jovanovic doing well enough to be credited as a Hodgson signing. What's not mentioned is whether certain members of the media didn't like Rafa because they couldn't get close to him, despite their early attempts to ingratiate themselves...

It is hard to remember now but even Rafa had a honeymoon period (apart from the odd outspoken xenophobe like Ian St. John) but that all crashed eventually. We'll have to wait and see whether the same happens for our current manager - I'd expect and certainly hope his doubtless better-developed contacts among the English media will protect him to some extent.

In short, the media have their interests and that's in getting the best story to sell to the punters and they don't mind what damage they do in getting it. The quality of the football played is not altogether unimportant but it's not the main thing.

They feed on football like rats and cockroaches feed on the detritus of everyday life.

Something has changed though Neil. There is a breath of fresh air around the club but only because a new manager's come in with new ideas, approach, tactics etc... however, the media's portrayal of this as a saviour to the Benitez era is out of order but so predictable

Funnily enough, it seemed like the only quarters of media that liked Benitez were those that were close to him...understood the pressures/constraints he was under and his love for the club.