I have to admit over the last 2 years or so the press have calmed down a tiny bit with their anti-Chelsea bile, but I think today's misquoting is yet further proof of an anti-Chelsea agenda they have. Sky sports were quick to add false quotes after an interview with John Terry and although they had to apologise, (probably because our lawyers came down on them like a ton of bricks) I noticed that the apology didn't even make the front page, I actually had to google it to find it and now other websites have continued to use it as a source. In addition to this that rag paper (The S*n) also misquoted our manager. AVB saying that the CL trophy will end up at the Bridge in years to come has now gone from "AVB makes vow to Rom to deliver the CL title".

Despite what the anti-Chelsea press may believe, RA doesn't actually pick the team, not according to ex-managers like Ranieri, Carlo and Grant who were all quick to point this out. I don't know what this media obsession with RA supposedly having an obsession with the CL is all about. I think it's clear RA would like us to win it but I don't think he views it as the be all and end all as the press make out, at least Lampard seems to think so anyway and I'd rather take the world of our senior players than the pro-North West press.

When the Sheikhs took over City, I was intrigued to see if the press would vilify them in the same way as they did to us when RA took over and started spending big. They accused us of ruining football despite the fact much of the money we spent was on English players therefore money invested back into the English League. We picked up Joe Cole for around £6m, Glen Johnson for that price as well, as well as Parker, SWP, Ashley Cole etc for reasonable prices. yet Liverpool and Chequebook Ken are hailed for spending £35m and £20m on Championship standard players. In my view City haven't received anything like the vitriol we had to put up with. Mourinho was described as arrogant and unsportsmanlike by the press, yet the day after he left we were told how foolish we were to let him go and how RA was such a horrific man ruining our football club, despite investing millions, if not billions of his own money trying to build the club up in to what it is today, as apposed to the Glazers and H&G family that used the NW clubs as Leeches for their own profitable gain.

Year after year we are constantly reminded of who RA has spent X, Y and Z and we have not won the CL but I'm more than happy with the many trophies we've won under his ownership considering Chelsea winning trophies was more of a pipe dream to me not so long ago, yet now it is expectation. For what City have spent OVER the last 3 seasons, I think winning the solitary FA Cup (in which they only had to play 1 good team to win it) isn't good enough IMO.

Chelsea players are also constantly character assassinated in the press like no other, if Terry or Cole were United players the press wouldn't be allowed to write the sort of trash they do about them. Drogba is portrayed as the devil by the press despite his charitable nature. The media tarnished his reputation for 3 years just because of some misinterpreted words after a game with City at a time where he could barely speak or understand a word of English. There were journalists calling for us to be kicked out of Europe after THAT GAME against Barca, what would there reactions be if that was one of their precious red Cartel?

Why is it that we get under the medias skin so much they cannot let a 10 year+ grudge go? They have always hated us since Bates.

Edited July 19, 201113 yr by Myles_91

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hostile_media_effect

Aren't you exhausted yet from fuming about how the media are against us? I can't begin to count the number of times this has cropped up in threads, whether they're about players' alledged antics, transfer policy, the club's ambitions, and so on.

An anti-Chelsea bias is certainly apparent in the media. Take TalkSport for instance, who's regular presenters include Mickey Quinn, Ray Houghton. But are TalkSport really anti-Chelsea or generally speaking pro-Liverpool? I'd suggest that the latter is the case. Like it or not, Liverpool and Man U are historically much bigger clubs than ourselves, and they do have a larger fanbase. In other words, there are a lot more of the bar stewards.

At TalkSport this "bias" is apparent in favour of Liverpool, at Sky it's generally speaking towards Man U.

West Ham historically an easy ride in the national press because of the proximity of Fleet Street to the East End, printing being a traditional East End trade. To a point the same is true of Tottenham. Add these factors to the tendency to pander to the masses in red, and in it's easy to conjure up a conspiracy theory or three.

I remember when we played Barcelona in the Champions League, Adrian Durham pronounced long and loud that a victory for Barcelona would be a victory for football. Does he hate us? Not really. He's a wind-up merchant, pandering to the prejudices of the majority.

Not that it really matters. Conspiracy or not - they don't like us. we don't care!

We are the Chelsea and we are the best

We are the Chelsea so f**k all the rest!

Edited July 20, 201113 yr by Hutch

take it as a compliment...they wouldn't talk about us at all if we weren't one of the biggest clubs in the country...20 years back we barely got a mention

Aren't you exhausted yet from fuming about how the media are against us? I can't begin to count the number of times this has cropped up in threads, whether they're about players' alledged antics, transfer policy, the club's ambitions, and so on.

I appreciate that most fans of clubs think the media is against them, but even people I know that have no or little interest in football altogether have admitted there is an anti-Chelsea agenda in the press. I'm a fairly new member so probably haven't seen it crop up as many times as you have.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hostile_media_effect

That doesn't apply to me as I also believe that Arsenal are given just as tougher time in the media as us, and I have no affinity towards them whatsoever.

At the end of the day editors care only about sales figures and advertising dollars. The sports editor of the Australian tabloid Daily Telegraph admitted that the column inches directed to a certain sport was directly linked to advertising bought near it. Controversy and scandal build enemies, and building enemies is a powerful way to get people to buy your stuff. They do their best to shock and decieve, but will target any "tall poppy".

All the top clubs get some sort of criticism; it's how fans react to it, individually, that counts. The human brain is hardwired for both empathy and schadenfreude. It's a natural, intrinsic part of human nature to overestimate the threats to our group and underestimate the threats to other groups.

Someone is worried about us!!

Chelsea have been in a slow decline for a while, and nothing they are doing this summer will abate the rot. AVB is the fourth 'messiah' to be wheeled in and try and transform a team that has become 'grumpy old men' ; it's hard to anticipate he'll have any greater success understanding Terry and Co.

All over the pitch are problem areas and personnel to match, yet nothing major has changed. These players are just a year older and more self-entitled than ever. If you fill your team with greedy nouveau millionaires / mercenaries what right does anyone have to expect anything different than the, 'dont care', meek surrenders that characterised Chelsea last season.

Cech is done. Cashley's 'abilities' are jockeying and that's it ; cant pass, cant cross, cant shoot. Terry is the type of person you dont want anywhere near your squad ; a toilet bowl who sucks everything down with him. Chelsea have no RB. Luiz is good but his attitude sucks. Lampard is slower than molasses.

Ramires, Mikel, Sturridge, McEachran - all good players but will they be overlooked in favour of fading 'stars' ?? The first team resembles a Euro trash competition. not suprising when you check out the owner.

Chelsea will do well to finish top 6.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/blog/2011/jul/20/chelsea-andre-villas-boas

Oh guddy69 I was about to verbally gut you, then you finish the post with the link revealing its not your words. Talk about an anti-climax.

Oh guddy69 I was about to verbally gut you, then you finish the post with the link revealing its not your words. Talk about an anti-climax.

Gut the idiot that wrote the post, I will hold him down for you.

I want to pull his scouse tongue out first though!..

I think we get a lot of stick from the media as they know it plays well with most other "neutrals"...

When I think back to the night against Barcelona (its a f*cking disgrace) our press were all over Drogba for his comments, one of his finest hours in my opinion, and very few journalists seemed bothered about the gross incompetance of the ref, and the breathtaking negligence of Uefa for employing him in the first place...I feel if that had been any other English club, they might have taken a different viewpoint...I'm not saying they didn't criticise the ref in the media but I didn't sense a great deal of anger on our behalf, maybe because I was furious it almost sent me mental, so I might have been a bit over sensitive..

As for Sky showing Drogba's rant again after the ad break in case anyone missed it, and then slimey Richard Keys apologising, you have to wonder why they did that...

I've never had much time for Graeme Souness, but he was brilliant that night, he was as outraged as any Chelsea fan...I hate to sound bitter, and I know I should be over it,but the reaction of most of our Media to the events of that night made me angrier than the useless ref...

Do other clubs get stick, yes of course they do, certain clubs get a slightly easier ride for instance Liverpool, always threatening to uneash a Scouse fatwa on anyone who dares to criticise them, and Man U for obvious reasons.

Arsenal get some stick, but generally about their lack of trophies, rather than individual players or their owners, Spurs have got loveable 'Arry in charge who's very pally with a lot of journalists, if Citeh start winning things it will be interesting to see if they start getting slagged off more...

I except that we get a lot of criticism as we have been a top four club with lots of money for quite some time, but don't forget even when were mid table and skint, I rarely heard or read anything positive about us in the press as a lot of journalists also hated Ken Bates. We were even a music hall joke back in the pre war years.

In short, f*ck the lot of 'em.

Edited July 21, 201113 yr by SHELLY

Valerie is right we have been over this a lot however I the examples you have quoted are spot on for me Myles... All the evidence points to RA not having as much of a say as percieved, this is an extremely successful business man who has appointed a board to do the work. He clearly enjoys being a fan. However I am sure he does hold some influnce and rightly so.

The other classic anti Chelsea or maybe pro Utd media maybe was the season before last when Giggs Scored 100 league goals, the build up and then the aftermath was saturation.... Particularly on Sky, couple of months later Frankie achieves the same feet in about half the time, 3 rd spot on the news that night I think it was :)

I couldn't care less what the media say about us. Results are what count.

As The Brit said coupled with green eyed envy.

Interesting to hear Goughy on talksh*te,bigging up Torres,saying he will deffo come good next year and show his worth