I went to read a match report about our game against B'ham tonight and it's like looking for a needle in a haystack. The front page of the BBC online is how the Manks are through in the league cup, then over to the Premier League page and the headlines are Arsenal held to a draw. Are we not top of the league? Why is that less important than a LC win for the manks and 3rd place Arse missing out on a win?

sorry for the rant.

Unless were underperforming, the media doesnt want to cover us.

You'd think Hitler had bought us the way the club is regarded

I'm quite happy to stay under the radar myself but i know what you mean. All i've heard is how poor B'ham were, much like when we hammered S'land the other week rather thean how good we have been in those matches.

They will realise soon that WE are top(oh and not by goals scored having played more games) and have been there for most of the season.

I'd rather have the plaudits albeit through gritted teeth at the end of the season with some silverwear in-tow.

To be fair, ours was a pretty routine win against a smaller club. The big games of the night were always going to be the Manchester derby and 7th vs 2nd.

I can definitely see how the same can happen after we play a big game and United beat, say, Hull at home 3-0.

You'd think Hitler had bought us the way the club is regarded

:D :D

To be fair, ours was a pretty routine win against a smaller club. The big games of the night were always going to be the Manchester derby and 7th vs 2nd.

I can definitely see how the same can happen after we play a big game and United beat, say, Hull at home 3-0.

hardly a routine win against a rubbish team, they were unbeaten in 12 and were one of the form teams in the prem. a 3-0 win was a very good win.

hardly a routine win against a rubbish team, they were unbeaten in 12 and were one of the form teams in the prem. a 3-0 win was a very good win.

I never said rubbish team, dkw, I said a smaller one. Ours would have been the fixture of the day had it not been for the other two games which undoubtedly featured teams bigger than Birmingham on both sides.

I went to read a match report about our game against B'ham tonight and it's like looking for a needle in a haystack. The front page of the BBC online is how the Manks are through in the league cup, then over to the Premier League page and the headlines are Arsenal held to a draw. Are we not top of the league? Why is that less important than a LC win for the manks and 3rd place Arse missing out on a win?

sorry for the rant.

Sadly, it appears that we have to accept the Media’s behaviour as a fact of life, Lauren, as all the major TV coverage providers and the leading British newspapers have their own agendas. Almost from the moment when we went top of the table earlier in the season, Sky Sports News have continually given United news and gossip ahead of anything similar on Chelsea unless, of course, it put us in a bad light. At one point I even recall a report on one of their games which was followed by an introduction to ours stating ‘and now elsewhere in the league’ ….and this was when we were the clear leaders!

The BBC are no better, only they prefer to take every opportunity to spread the word of Wenger through a series of past it ex-Arse pundits (even digging up Bob Wilson occasionally), probably due to the fact that Ferguson wont talk to them until they ask the right questions. Hansen and Lawrenson will continue to ply their trade at funereal pace for as long as Liverpool play dead, which will be until someone actually has the courage to pronounce them so… in other words never. Then there is ITV and the lover of Liverpool known to us all as Clive Tyldesley, who has to be dragged kicking and screaming towards anything resembling praise for us. Remember those CL semis against the Scousers and the special players and special nights only ever to be found on Merseyside?

Meanwhile the Fourth Estate are so desperate for Rooney to stay fit enough, never mind play well enough, for the forthcoming World Cup that they will wrap him in cotton wool prose from now until the summer, thereby guaranteeing vicarious support in print for his club side for the rest of the season. Okay, he is playing exceptionally well, but hacks throughout the land need his British Bulldog presence in South Africa too, otherwise names such as Terry, Lampard and Cole might, given half a chance and something called a favourable press, dominate the proceedings and demand their rightful place in, err what’s it called….ah yes, history.

Indeed, that is the real source of our problems with them and their reporting on Chelsea in general. In short, according to the many Neanderthals charged with keeping us informed on the football front, Roman is perceived to be destroying the very fabric of the game by the unscrupulous means of buying into its history. Whether we like it or not, they have deemed it necessary to give us their version of current events as they would wish them to be duly recorded for posterity and, therefore, in their own order of importance. It’s a skewed viewpoint on Sky, for we can see things as they are for ourselves, despite the bias that comes over in accompanying commentary. And it’s also pomposity on the part of the British Press because, in the main, their medium ends up as nowt but chip paper.

Media? In the words of Lofty, "F*ck 'em all!"

to be fair a lot of the papers have been fairly positive today, making the point that we were supposed to struggle this month and yet looking as good as ever etc...hansen on match of the day even said our football at the moment is as good as arsenal's...high praise indeed...never thought we'd be compared to the club who invented the beautiful game!!!

Edited January 28, 201016 yr by The Brit

Would think BBC is not biased but they just want the stories which they think are most interesting to people. Manu/Arsenal supporters among BBC readers= millions, Chelsea supporters= hundreds of thousands or so. I know it s*cks but that is the way it is.

This is a perfect example. The ratings for the Birmingham game by, who else, The Sun. I wouldn't say our entire team was excellent, but putting both teams on 6's and 7's? Unbelievable. If anything Chelsea deserved 7's and 8's for a good game against a tough opponent, and Birmingham deserved 4's, 5's and 6's.

Chelsea

Petr Cech 6

Branislav Ivanovic 6

John Terry 7

Ricardo Carvalho 7

Ashley Cole 6

Michael Ballack 6

Frank Lampard 8 - STAR MAN

Deco 5

Florent Malouda 7

Joe Cole 7

Nicolas Anelka 6

Subs:

Yuri Zhirkov (for J Cole) 4

Daniel Sturridge (for Anelka) 3

Subs not used: Turnbull, Ferreira, Alex, Matic, Borini.

Birmingham

Joe Hart 7

Stephen Carr 6

Roger Johnson 6

Scott Dann 6

Liam Ridgewell 6

Sebastian Larsson 6

Lee Bowyer 7

Barry Ferguson 6

James McFadden 6

Cameron Jerome 5

Christian Benitez 5

Subs:

Keith Fahey (for Jerome) 5

Michel(for McFadden) 5

Subs not used: Taylor, Queudrue, Vignal, McSheffrey, D Johnson.

REF: S Bennett 6

:unsure:

Unless were underperforming, the media doesnt want to cover us.

You'd think Hitler had bought us the way the club is regarded

Any mention of Hitler on this forum I will find absolutely hilarious, thank you QI :blush: