Author Topic: Sky bias  (Read 2282 times)

Offline ffcne

  • Graham Leggat
  • **
  • Posts: 604
Re: Sky bias
« Reply #20 on: October 06, 2019, 10:31:22 AM »
We have a Moneybags reputation in the Championship which encourages Sky to load the pundits panel and favour the financial underdogs.
I am surprised that no one ha picked up on the fact that they considered Mitro’s goal to be offside although I have not seen their video proof.

 Mitro was off side in the build up but should have had a stone wall penalty in the first half. I try not to "buy" the bias line, but gave up with SKY pundits a couple of years ago as the bias was so unprofessional that it was a waste of time listening to it.

So the panel loaded with Charlton connections is acceptable ? .

Offline SuffolkWhite

  • Jimmy Hill
  • *
  • Posts: 2099
Re: Sky bias
« Reply #21 on: October 06, 2019, 11:09:54 AM »
Only commentator that has ever been pro Fulham to my knowledge is the Northern Irish Chap on Channel 5, he has always spoken well of us and loved our to the Europa League Final and Play Off final......Cant remember his name?

Offline ffcne

  • Graham Leggat
  • **
  • Posts: 604
Re: Sky bias
« Reply #22 on: October 06, 2019, 11:44:37 AM »
Only commentator that has ever been pro Fulham to my knowledge is the Northern Irish Chap on Channel 5, he has always spoken well of us and loved our to the Europa League Final and Play Off final......Cant remember his name?

Colin Murray .Does Quest channel EFL highlights.


Offline bahay18

  • tjl
  • *
  • Posts: 123
Re: Sky bias
« Reply #23 on: October 06, 2019, 11:57:47 AM »
It was beyond bias to the point of farce . Andrews described every fulham foul as a bit nasty/naughty , every charlton foul as not much in it . Bowyer afterwards saying that Cav's goal was simple and poor , the panel all nodding agreement . No recognition of the pace and power , the thought to cut across the defender to take him out of the game or firing it with his weaker foot into the top corner .

They were desperate to get Mitro sent off , i think the big man handled himself very well yesterday , easy for him to have seen red.

We probably created more chances than we did wednesday night . I really can't see what charlton could have complained about if we had won . Hats off they upset us in the first half and scored a good goal but there was only one team that wanted full time.

Offline Tabby

  • Legend
  • ***
  • Posts: 1609
Re: Sky bias
« Reply #24 on: October 06, 2019, 12:15:49 PM »
We have a Moneybags reputation in the Championship which encourages Sky to load the pundits panel and favour the financial underdogs.
I am surprised that no one ha picked up on the fact that they considered Mitro’s goal to be offside although I have not seen their video proof.

He looked pretty clearly offside when Cairney headed the ball. The Charlton defender was all over him, but he was behind him.

Here is an image of it.


Offline FFCAli

  • Graham Leggat
  • **
  • Posts: 554
Re: Sky bias
« Reply #25 on: October 06, 2019, 08:26:52 PM »
We have a Moneybags reputation in the Championship which encourages Sky to load the pundits panel and favour the financial underdogs.
I am surprised that no one ha picked up on the fact that they considered Mitro’s goal to be offside although I have not seen their video proof.

He looked pretty clearly offside when Cairney headed the ball. The Charlton defender was all over him, but he was behind him.

Here is an image of it.


But he didn't go for the ball and under the current (in my mind wrong) rules he was not interfering with play. When the ball came back to him he was both onside and receiving the ball from an opposition player so no problem.


Offline Andy S

  • The Bard/Corked Hat
  • *
  • Posts: 3810
Re: Sky bias
« Reply #26 on: October 07, 2019, 08:52:53 AM »
Everyone is biased to their own team. Even if you watch a match and start off unbiased eventually take sides. That is unless you are totally heartless. It was a good game for anyone who started as a neutral

Offline grandad

  • Gentleman Jim
  • ***
  • Posts: 8657
Re: Sky bias
« Reply #27 on: October 07, 2019, 09:41:40 AM »
For Charlton's 2nd goal they had 3 players in an offside position when the header was glanced in. No different to Mitro's situation.

Offline Tabby

  • Legend
  • ***
  • Posts: 1609
Re: Sky bias
« Reply #28 on: October 07, 2019, 10:17:23 AM »
For Charlton's 2nd goal they had 3 players in an offside position when the header was glanced in. No different to Mitro's situation.

It is very different. The 3 players in an offside position didn't pounce on the rebound and score from it. If Cairney had scored that header it would be the same.

I get being one-eyed to wrongs, but this is getting a bit ridiculous.
« Last Edit: October 07, 2019, 10:20:39 AM by Tabby »


Offline toshes mate

  • cebu
  • *
  • Posts: 4866
  • Vitam Impendere Vero
Re: Sky bias
« Reply #29 on: October 07, 2019, 10:27:34 AM »
On the subject of bias then what is the reason why Sky exists?  The simple answer is that it exists to make money and whilst it may, rather superficially IMO, seem to care about the customer who 'phones up to say that they want to cancel their subscription, as a corporation it really couldn't give a damn as long as the revenue from advertising, sponsorship and its own 'child' businesses continues to steadily rise in real terms if not exponentially or better.  They will play to the audiences that they see as forming a majority interest, potentially or in real terms.  Charlton rising from the ashes of a club that once achieved greatness in an area where there are no similar attractions means a potentially better audience for the media (e.g. more subscribers).

That bias is in everything they do.  Don't expect anything remotely resembling neutrality or decent customer service from a company that doesn't understand the meaning of those words, and cares even less to spend the money necessary to provide such things.   

Offline Jock White

  • Youth Academy
  • *
  • Posts: 16
Re: Sky bias
« Reply #30 on: October 07, 2019, 02:59:24 PM »
I'm just watching the post-match Charlton love-in from Sky.
What a load of sycophantic bollocks. Mitrovic "Offside" goal, if their defender had marked Mitro rather than wrestling him to hold him back Mitro would not have been ahead of him. And Bowyer telling them that they should have fouled Cav for his goal is a shocker for a manager to admit on telly.
Right I'm off to get my hair dyed pink like their striker...

Offline res

  • Graham Leggat
  • **
  • Posts: 695
Re: Sky bias
« Reply #31 on: October 08, 2019, 10:23:58 AM »
They said they kept Mitro quiet. Having a laugh. He was so all over them the only way they could contain him was to grapple,hold & shirt pull him at every set piece. Mitro gave his all & is my MOTM.

 Just seen some quotes from the Charlton centre backs....Mitro gave them "the toughest game of the season" and "it was hard to compete with his strength and competitiveness". Just ignore the Sky pundits, they really are clueless.


Offline bog

  • Gentleman Jim
  • ***
  • Posts: 5136
Re: Sky bias
« Reply #32 on: October 08, 2019, 11:05:00 AM »
In the Mail yesterday the whole of the report was about a Charlton player who is on loan from that lot down the road. Not a single word about us.   :031:

 092.gif

Offline Bill2

  • Legend
  • ***
  • Posts: 1767
Re: Sky bias
« Reply #33 on: October 08, 2019, 11:15:38 AM »
For Charlton's 2nd goal they had 3 players in an offside position when the header was glanced in. No different to Mitro's situation.

It is very different. The 3 players in an offside position didn't pounce on the rebound and score from it. If Cairney had scored that header it would be the same.

I get being one-eyed to wrongs, but this is getting a bit ridiculous.
The ball had been put back in play by the Charlton keeper and by the time he played the ball Mitro was on side as pr the comment above.

Offline sarnian

  • tjl
  • *
  • Posts: 226
Re: Sky bias
« Reply #34 on: October 08, 2019, 11:48:10 AM »
For Charlton's 2nd goal they had 3 players in an offside position when the header was glanced in. No different to Mitro's situation.

It is very different. The 3 players in an offside position didn't pounce on the rebound and score from it. If Cairney had scored that header it would be the same.

I get being one-eyed to wrongs, but this is getting a bit ridiculous.

I despair on the number of supporters who do not have a clue about the offside rule. It does not matter if the ball came back off the keeper when Cairney headed the ball Mitro was offside. The rules clearly state that there has to be 2 defenders between Mitro and the goal to be onside ( does not have to be the keeper it can be ant two defenders) so yes the goal should not have stood.

However Mitro was clearly pulled offside by force from the defender so a penalty could have been awarded.
The ball had been put back in play by the Charlton keeper and by the time he played the ball Mitro was on side as pr the comment above.


Offline toshes mate

  • cebu
  • *
  • Posts: 4866
  • Vitam Impendere Vero
Re: Sky bias
« Reply #35 on: October 08, 2019, 12:34:34 PM »
Mitro was in an offside position at the critical time of the header by virtue of the defender playing the man and not the ball.  Anywhere else on the pitch it is a foul but referees make a rod for their own back by not giving them in the penalty area.  I counted four other instances of Charlton defenders playing the man and not the ball in the area because they know this referee (Stroud) seldom (if ever) gives them.  It is something that has long needed to be kicked out of the game.

It wouldn't have hurt the rule makers to have added clear dimensions to the rules in the changes made last summer since it was briefly top agenda but then drifted back to how much can you get away with. It should be enforced at all times no matter where it happens but referees apply it arbitrarily and not particularly thoughtfully.  After a spate of penalties there would be fewer players willing to run the risk of giving fouls away but the football authorities just don't learn their lessons because they think it is much harder to referee when they are forced into decisive action like that rather than being free to ignore it.

Offline Jim©

  • tjl
  • *
  • Posts: 110
Re: Sky bias
« Reply #36 on: October 08, 2019, 02:38:00 PM »
I'm surprised no one has mentioned their second goal. Their number 17 was clearly offside- I've got image of it but won't let me upload.

Offline sarnian

  • tjl
  • *
  • Posts: 226
Re: Sky bias
« Reply #37 on: October 08, 2019, 03:02:34 PM »
I'm surprised no one has mentioned their second goal. Their number 17 was clearly offside- I've got image of it but won't let me upload.


But he was not interfering with play so he is ok.

Offline Jim©

  • tjl
  • *
  • Posts: 110
Re: Sky bias
« Reply #38 on: October 08, 2019, 03:34:21 PM »
I'm surprised no one has mentioned their second goal. Their number 17 was clearly offside- I've got image of it but won't let me upload.


But he was not interfering with play so he is ok.
No, he was offside the second that Pratley swung the ball in. Bobby DR was almost playing him on, but he was offside and moving back to an onside position, hence not given off. I've got the still, just can't upload it.

Offline SP

  • cebu
  • *
  • Posts: 4328
  • Fulham debut 1970
Re: Sky bias
« Reply #39 on: October 09, 2019, 02:51:53 PM »
That Charlton centre half should go on Strictly Come Dancing, he'd win it at a canter.