the fact that Stan wants to voice an opinion about violent conduct is beyond me

People seem to want to extrapolate that article from Charles Sale (actually it's not an article about that. It's predominantly about TV rights and is a single paragraph filled with bile) and apply it either to the entire newspaper or rather more preposterously to the entire media. That's just faulty logic.

 

 

In the same newspaper you might get Martin Samuel calling Jose Mourinho 'brilliant' and that Chelsea haven't received the credit they deserve

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2616249/MARTIN-SAMUEL-Its-easy-defend-Jose-Mourinho-The-Chelsea-boss-not-dull-hes-BRILLIANT.html

 

or a Neil Ashton story about how Jose might have a point about there being a 'deliberate campaign' against us from the refs

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2891301/Chelsea-two-penalties-season-home-Jose-Mourinho-point.html?ITO=1490&ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490&utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

 

or a Jeff Powell article about how we are on the 'cusp of true greatness'

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2894157/Jose-Mourinho-brink-special-Chelsea-team-history-Arsenal-s-Invincibles-Euro-kings-Manchester-United-Barcelona.html

 

or a Kevin Kilbane article about Jose's 'Genius'

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2519655/Jose-Mourinhos-willingness-use-long-ball-genius--Kevin-Kilbane.html

 

or an Adam Shergold article about Jose's 'masterclass' tactical performance in the match at Anfield

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2825135/Liverpool-vs-Chelsea-Flashback-April-s-title-decider-Steven-Gerrard-s-slip-Jose-Mourinho-masterclass-killed-Reds-Premier-League-title-dream.html

 

or another Ashton story about Fabregas being 'blue through and through'

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2781396/Cesc-Fabregas-true-blue-rises-taunts-deliver-midfield-masterclass-against-old-Arsenal.html

 

or a Keown article praising Diego Costa

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2930564/To-mark-Diego-Costa-match-Chelsea-striker-s-physicality-means-risking-booked.html

 

or a Matt Barlow match report extolling our 'spirt and hunger'

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2131818/Chelsea-plan-leaves-Lionel-Messi-stuck-gear--Matt-Barlow.html

 

And that's the issue. Newspaper are written by individuals. Individuals have different opinions and that's the beauty of a free press. Now to even begin talking about a concerted media agenda against this one club you need to identify where that is happening. Is it on the front line with the journalists or is it the gatekeepers - the people who allow these articles to go to press. Is it the sub-editors, the head of the sports section, the editor of the newspaper or is it someone at board/owner level.

 

Or is it that people will inevitably cherry pick things to support their own conspiracy theories? The numpties on Bluemoon certainly do that and in a recent interview with Daniel Taylor they were shown to be the loons we all thought they were.

 

http://bluemoon-mcfc.co.uk/News/Article.aspx?id=728#.VMtA9lWsW5M

 

Now I have no issue discussing the biases (perceived or otherwise) of individual journalists but it says something that it's taken about 10 pages or so of discussion for one to finally be named. One Charles Sale paragraph will give succour to those scrambling for evidence of a media agenda but you'd have to be truly myopic to think that alone is evidence of a concerted media agenda. 

So respected ex-players who played the game for years, won pretty much everything and have proven their selves as decent pundits - Neville, Carragher and Henry - all say no retrospect ban. Ex-players who achieved f*ck all, made no impact in football, who’s opinions are repetitive, bias & idiotic and are more known for be married to or beating up a famous woman respectively - Redknapp and Collymore - think he should be.

Says it all really.

So respected ex-players who played the game for years, won pretty much everything and have proven their selves as decent pundits - Neville, Carragher and Henry - all say no retrospect ban. Ex-players who achieved f*ck all, made no impact in football, who’s opinions are repetitive, bias & idiotic and are more known for marrying to or beating up a famous woman respectively- Redknapp and Collymore think he should be.

Says it all really.

 

Graham Poll reckons it was a red and he's been fair to us in the past with regards the 'diving'. 

 

I think it's a judgment call and Costa's reputation could go against him. You only have to look at some of the responses almost lauding what he did to see that it's not just numpties like Redknapp who thought it was deliberate. 

 

Very much a coin toss. Would be very relieved if he got off but would be totally unsurprised if he got a 3 match ban.

Bravo Gem

It was a trample, not a stamp.

It was a mis-control not a slip :)

Reporting does change what events were

Regardless of what Neville, Lineker and Henry say, Costa will get banned. There is no doubt whatsoever. They may acknowledge that he was looking at the ball and did not break stride or kick out at Can, but they will say that the video shows he trod on him, and that's is all it takes. That's all it took for them to convict John Terry. The video showed him using the words, so they convicted him. Never mind that he was cleared by a court, on the grounds that the evidence was inconclusive. In the FA's eyes he was guilty

If you raise your hands and touch a player's face, you'll get a red card. You may not have laid him out with a clenched fist, but you are still guilty (unless you are Sterling and the FA turn a very even-handed blind eye, as they do to Skrtel's thuggish elbows).

 

They may acknowledge Costa might have been going after the ball, but they will do him for treading on Can anyway.

With José this week, they cleared him of implying refs were influenced by the media into giving decisions against Chelsea, but they still decided he should be punished for complaining about the media's treatment of the club.

We cannot win with this bunch.

Regardless of what Neville, Lineker and Henry say, Costa will get banned. There is no doubt whatsoever. They may acknowledge that he was looking at the ball and did not break stride or kick out at Can, but they will say that the video shows he trod on him, and that's is all it takes. 

 

Let's be honest though. Anyone who has played a contact sport knows that you don't have to be looking at your opponent to have a good idea where he is so you can put something on him. It's not unheard of for players to be clever and sneaky about these types of things.

It's utter bullsh*t how unfair the FA are being with Jose and Chelsea and it's only going to get worst. Either way, the title still comes home in May. 

 

LOL.

 

 

(I assume you are having a laugh....)

why?

People seem to want to extrapolate that article from Charles Sale (actually it's not an article about that. It's predominantly about TV rights and is a single paragraph filled with bile) and apply it either to the entire newspaper or rather more preposterously to the entire media. That's just faulty logic.

In the same newspaper you might get Martin Samuel calling Jose Mourinho 'brilliant' and that Chelsea haven't received the credit they deserve

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2616249/MARTIN-SAMUEL-Its-easy-defend-Jose-Mourinho-The-Chelsea-boss-not-dull-hes-BRILLIANT.html

or a Neil Ashton story about how Jose might have a point about there being a 'deliberate campaign' against us from the refs

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2891301/Chelsea-two-penalties-season-home-Jose-Mourinho-point.html?ITO=1490&ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490&utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

or a Jeff Powell article about how we are on the 'cusp of true greatness'

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2894157/Jose-Mourinho-brink-special-Chelsea-team-history-Arsenal-s-Invincibles-Euro-kings-Manchester-United-Barcelona.html

or a Kevin Kilbane article about Jose's 'Genius'

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2519655/Jose-Mourinhos-willingness-use-long-ball-genius--Kevin-Kilbane.html

or an Adam Shergold article about Jose's 'masterclass' tactical performance in the match at Anfield

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2825135/Liverpool-vs-Chelsea-Flashback-April-s-title-decider-Steven-Gerrard-s-slip-Jose-Mourinho-masterclass-killed-Reds-Premier-League-title-dream.html

or another Ashton story about Fabregas being 'blue through and through'

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2781396/Cesc-Fabregas-true-blue-rises-taunts-deliver-midfield-masterclass-against-old-Arsenal.html

or a Keown article praising Diego Costa

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2930564/To-mark-Diego-Costa-match-Chelsea-striker-s-physicality-means-risking-booked.html

or a Matt Barlow match report extolling our 'spirt and hunger'

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2131818/Chelsea-plan-leaves-Lionel-Messi-stuck-gear--Matt-Barlow.html

And that's the issue. Newspaper are written by individuals. Individuals have different opinions and that's the beauty of a free press. Now to even begin talking about a concerted media agenda against this one club you need to identify where that is happening. Is it on the front line with the journalists or is it the gatekeepers - the people who allow these articles to go to press. Is it the sub-editors, the head of the sports section, the editor of the newspaper or is it someone at board/owner level.

Or is it that people will inevitably cherry pick things to support their own conspiracy theories? The numpties on Bluemoon certainly do that and in a recent interview with Daniel Taylor they were shown to be the loons we all thought they were.

http://bluemoon-mcfc.co.uk/News/Article.aspx?id=728#.VMtA9lWsW5M

Now I have no issue discussing the biases (perceived or otherwise) of individual journalists but it says something that it's taken about 10 pages or so of discussion for one to finally be named. One Charles Sale paragraph will give succour to those scrambling for evidence of a media agenda but you'd have to be truly myopic to think that alone is evidence of a concerted media agenda.

All that research yet you couldn't find what you were looking for.

Why shouldn't we get good stuff, every club would if they were top of the league and strutting their stuff.

A player from any other club commits that "stamp" and there would never be anything like the media witch hunt, any player you care to mention, from any club, and as you've already found out through your research, no other club would be described as classless, ever.

So respected ex-players who played the game for years, won pretty much everything and have proven their selves as decent pundits - Neville, Carragher and Henry - all say no retrospect ban. 

 

Another interesting point you've raised there is that the three biggest stars of Sky's football coverage have come out and said it doesn't deserve a ban. 

 

Considering a lot has been made of Redknapp's comments and them being blown up by some to suggest some media conspiracy, it's odd they've said these things no?

 

Also the host of MOTD has said the same. 

Another interesting point you've raised there is that the three biggest stars of Sky's football coverage have come out and said it doesn't deserve a ban.

Considering a lot has been made of Redknapp's comments and them being blown up by some to suggest some media conspiracy, it's odd they've said these things no?

Also the host of MOTD has said the same.

What's odd is that the mainstream media isn't reporting it.

Another interesting point you've raised there is that the three biggest stars of Sky's football coverage have come out and said it doesn't deserve a ban.

Considering a lot has been made of Redknapp's comments and them being blown up by some to suggest some media conspiracy, it's odd they've said these things no?

Also the host of MOTD has said the same.

It's a pity neville didn't do the match, and henry didn't pipe up while he was getting paid for his opinion. I doubt he would have got a charge in the first place.

While we're at it, I'm still to get an explanation for all the bad decisions that go against us, if refs aren't influenced by the media.

Tuesday night, Oliver has now said he would have sent off Costa, he failed to give the penalty and he failed in his duty to send two of their players off.

That's four massive decisions all gone against us, and not one for us, and I'm afraid that's the norm this season.

It's a pity neville didn't do the match, and henry didn't pipe up while he was getting paid for his opinion. I doubt he would have got a charge in the first place.

 

Didn't see Henry's comments but Neville is far and away their best pundit. Redknapp is nothing but a suit-filler and I tend to ignore what he says. After his altercation with Jose last year it's not a surprise that he's got an axe to grind though and maybe he saw this as his chance for revenge. Twat of the highest order.

What's odd is that the mainstream media isn't reporting it.

 

So Sky TV isn't part of mainstream media?

While we're at it, I'm still to get an explanation for all the bad decisions that go against us, if refs aren't influenced by the media.

Tuesday night, Oliver has now said he would have sent off Costa, he failed to give the penalty and he failed in his duty to send two of their players off.

That's four massive decisions all gone against us, and not one for us, and I'm afraid that's the norm this season.

How the f*ck can Oliver say he would have sent Costa off if he had seen the incident when he clearly saw the incidents that he failed to act correctly on. On the balance of that evidence it is quiet clear that his opinion is formed post match as he consistently failed to make the big decisions when they mattered. 

Jamie Redknapp would struggle to report objectively on a school summer fete.

So Sky TV isn't part of mainstream media?

 

Independent are reporting the tweets as well

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/premier-league/diego-costa-thierry-henry-paul-scholes-gary-neville-and-gary-lineker-say-controversial-chelsea-striker-should-not-be-banned-10012865.html

 

as are ITV

http://www.itv.com/news/2015-01-30/former-liverpool-striker-stan-collymore-in-twitter-row-with-gary-neville-over-diego-costa-stamp/

 

as did Sky Sports News

 

but apart from that, what did the Romans.....

Sky doesn't 'feel' mainstream to me, it feels like the big, ugly giant hovering over the village of newspapers, radio and TV channels.

Independent are reporting the tweets as well

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/premier-league/diego-costa-thierry-henry-paul-scholes-gary-neville-and-gary-lineker-say-controversial-chelsea-striker-should-not-be-banned-10012865.html

as are ITV

http://www.itv.com/news/2015-01-30/former-liverpool-striker-stan-collymore-in-twitter-row-with-gary-neville-over-diego-costa-stamp/

as did Sky Sports News

but apart from that, what did the Romans.....

Neville's 'forgot he was a player' comeback to collymore shut him right up.

The hypocrisy from a man who has beaten woman, and attempted to break a fellow pro's leg, to then chime in on how any human or sportsman should behave, is absolutely astounding.

This topic really is dragging on into absolute boredom. Does Chelsea get more stick then deserved from a couple of journos here and there that clearly have it in for us? Yes. There is no widespread agenda though, but there are sh*t journos (this should come as no surprise). Does the FA have have it in for us particularly? No, but they have a history of making bad decisions and good decisions. Most teams feels like they get more bad decisions then worse ones. Most Liverpool fans went on and on about Suarez being crucified by the press after the Evra and Ivanovic incident and that the long ban was outrageous, fans of rival clubs felt that racist f**ker got what he deserved. I remember Utd fans and Ferguson were up in arms after Atkinson continued to get Chelsea-Utd games as he was "clearly in Romans pocket" and Ferguson ended up serving time for saying he considered putting out the reserves, because with that ref they would lose regardless. It is what it is. 

Independent are reporting the tweets as well

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/premier-league/diego-costa-thierry-henry-paul-scholes-gary-neville-and-gary-lineker-say-controversial-chelsea-striker-should-not-be-banned-10012865.html

Can you actually find a newspaper that people read ?

If he isn't banned I will piss myself laughing if he scores the winner tomorrow