Jump to content
IGNORED

I might be being hyper-sensitive but...


Silvio Dante

Recommended Posts

Bear in mind we’re now 5th with 6 to go, and 4 points clear of 7th with a game in hand. Weds are 6 points off us, 4 points off the playoffs and have played a game more.

These are the two BBC reports from our game and Sheffield Weds games last night.

One team is described as “play off hopefuls”

One team is described as “strong play off contenders”

Guess which one is which?

Sheffield Wednesday 3-0 Nottingham Forest: Marco Matias hits two in Owls win https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/47781555

Bristol City 3-2 West Bromwich Albion: Robins hang on to beat Baggies https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/47781557

(As I said yesterday, sod ‘em!)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Silvio Dante said:

Bear in mind we’re now 5th with 6 to go, and 4 points clear of 7th with a game in hand. Weds are 6 points off us, 4 points off the playoffs and have played a game more.

These are the two BBC reports from our game and Sheffield Weds games last night.

One team is described as “play off hopefuls”

One team is described as “strong play off contenders”

Guess which one is which?

Sheffield Wednesday 3-0 Nottingham Forest: Marco Matias hits two in Owls win https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/47781555

Bristol City 3-2 West Bromwich Albion: Robins hang on to beat Baggies https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/47781557

(As I said yesterday, sod ‘em!)

For some reason the midtable match is higher up the list of Sport headlines too. Very strange.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guess which of the two teams have to play Norwich and Leeds, both away, next up? Not half as tough as our next game at the Play Off Winners elect mind.

As others have said, sod what the BBC says (or doesn’t say in the case of Nathan Byrne). But one thing you do know is if we did do the unthinkable they would be first in the queue with their “so who are Bristol City?” articles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To football fans, people and pundits outside of Bristol we are insignificant, unremarkable, and easily overlooked (on the pitch, and off). With very limited "history" (one play off final, anything else?). We are barely part of the story of English football; mostly just making up the numbers. 

Insignificant, unremarkable, easily overlooked.

This is what has riled SL before; this is what he is trying to change. It won't be changed with one play-off charge or finish. 

Bristol City: insignificant, unremarkable (this could be describing the new badge, too), easily overlooked. This is what we are! Don't forget (keep reminding yourself).

We delude ourselves that we are anything more than this, to football outside of Bristol. 

How Sky Sports cover us now is telling us something about who we are now, and who we have been: it's not Sky's fault that we have been mediocre for 100 years and there is precious little "narrative" for them to draw on and prattle on about and hype up (compared with Sheffield Wednesday, Aston Villa etc).

Insignificant, unremarkable. Easily overlooked. 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Moments of Pleasure said:

To football fans, people and pundits outside of Bristol we are insignificant, unremarkable, and easily overlooked (on the pitch, and off). With very limited "history" (one play off final, anything else?). We are barely part of the story of English football; mostly just making up the numbers. 

Insignificant, unremarkable, easily overlooked.

This is what has riled SL before; this is what he is trying to change. It won't be changed with one play-off charge or finish. 

Bristol City: insignificant, unremarkable (this could be describing the new badge, too), easily overlooked. This is what we are! Don't forget (keep reminding yourself).

We delude ourselves that we are anything more than this, to football outside of Bristol. 

How Sky Sports cover us now is telling us something about who we are now, and who we have been: it's not Sky's fault that we have been mediocre for 100 years and there is precious little "narrative" for them to draw on and prattle on about and hype up (compared with Sheffield Wednesday, Aston Villa etc).

Insignificant, unremarkable. Easily overlooked. 

 

 

 

 

 

Not helped by sharing a city with our illustrious and universally adored neighbours.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We aren't a club that the wider world is interested in to put it bluntly.

In 2008 when we led the Championship I remember an embarrassing lack of acknowledgement from Sky Sports on their Soccer Specials.

We were top of the league and they didn't even have a live reporter at the ground, but they were creaming over "fallen giants" battling it out in mid-table and that is where the live reporters were.

In the end a City fan phoned up and Jeff made some garbled half hearted apology and went on about there not being bias to other clubs, but it was so painfully obvious that it was embarrassing.

The ignorant ones top it off by calling us "Bristol". Even when we were in the top flight commentators would call us "Bristol".

We are only ever of interest if a "fancied club" is after one of our players or our manager. We are instantly dismissed in terms of whether or not a player or manager would stay; We are instantly written off as fodder.

We could go up and stay up for 10 years and we'd still be "Bristol" and the only time we'd get a mention would be if one of the "fancied teams" required us to lose for us to go down and for them to avoid relegation.

This is the norm. We have to accept that we are a footballing backwater and a "Rugby Town". Pathetic and incorrect as it is, who gives a flying ****?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BS2 Red said:

I agree with the posts above, I don't really care how they describe us and being under the radar is great.

I'm with you on this. When they first went up, nobody gave Bournemouth a second look and, what do you know, they are still there. Fulham, being a London club got all the praise and adulation. I think they have won 5 league games all season; despite having the great Joe Bryan. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Moments of Pleasure said:

To football fans, people and pundits outside of Bristol we are insignificant, unremarkable, and easily overlooked (on the pitch, and off). With very limited "history" (one play off final, anything else?). We are barely part of the story of English football; mostly just making up the numbers. 

Insignificant, unremarkable, easily overlooked.

This is what has riled SL before; this is what he is trying to change. It won't be changed with one play-off charge or finish. 

Bristol City: insignificant, unremarkable (this could be describing the new badge, too), easily overlooked. This is what we are! Don't forget (keep reminding yourself).

We delude ourselves that we are anything more than this, to football outside of Bristol. 

How Sky Sports cover us now is telling us something about who we are now, and who we have been: it's not Sky's fault that we have been mediocre for 100 years and there is precious little "narrative" for them to draw on and prattle on about and hype up (compared with Sheffield Wednesday, Aston Villa etc).

Insignificant, unremarkable. Easily overlooked

 

 

 

 

 

Just so I've got this straight. We're Insignificant, unremarkable. Easily overlooked?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Silvio Dante said:

Bear in mind we’re now 5th with 6 to go, and 4 points clear of 7th with a game in hand. Weds are 6 points off us, 4 points off the playoffs and have played a game more.

These are the two BBC reports from our game and Sheffield Weds games last night.

One team is described as “play off hopefuls”

One team is described as “strong play off contenders”

Guess which one is which?

Sheffield Wednesday 3-0 Nottingham Forest: Marco Matias hits two in Owls win https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/47781555

Bristol City 3-2 West Bromwich Albion: Robins hang on to beat Baggies https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/47781557

(As I said yesterday, sod ‘em!)

Maybe we should borrow the Millwall 'handle..."no one likes us we don't care"...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We’re just unfashionable , like Huddersfield and Bournemouth were. The pundits fall all over themselves about dirty Leeds , who have been in the second / third tier for nearly twenty years , forest , boro, sheff weds, WBA etc etc . They’re lazy pundits who get paid to spout bollocks. I’d like nothing more than to shut the likes of Kieth Andrews up once and for all

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Un - der the ray - dar, down by the sea ee ee

On a blanket with my can of Natch's where I'll be.

Under the radar, we'll be sneakin' in sixth,

Under the radar, Sky won't notice we're  sixth,

Under the radar, Derby will think they are sixth,

Under the ray - dar, ray - dar

(Whistle) .........."

 

Or is that Dock of the Bay?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, The Journalist said:

There is absolutely nothing in this, I promise you.

There’s no agenda against us I agree . It seems though that the so called pundits fawn all over the big clubs without even educating themselves about clubs like us . It’s embarressing to be honest. The only decent one is Liam rosenior 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You could say the same about Norwich. They barely get talked about in comparison with their achievements this year. Same with Cardiff last year. Just need to get used to the fact that Leeds, Villa, Wednesday, Forest and Derby are bigger clubs than us with bigger fan bases and far better history. No shame in that at all it’s just fact. And as such they will attract more media attention. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, lenred said:

You could say the same about Norwich. They barely get talked about in comparison with their achievements this year. Same with Cardiff last year. Just need to get used to the fact that Leeds, Villa, Wednesday, Forest and Derby are bigger clubs than us with bigger fan bases and far better history. No shame in that at all it’s just fact. And as such they will attract more media attention. 

Being a bigger club doesn't mean Wednesday are more likely to get promotion from their current position than we are, which is what the phrasing in the articles would suggest.

Size of the club means absolutely **** all and is no excuse for bad journalism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, JamesBCFC said:

Being a bigger club doesn't mean Wednesday are more likely to get promotion from their current position than we are, which is what the phrasing in the articles would suggest.

Size of the club means absolutely **** all and is no excuse for bad journalism.

My point was a general one.  

But looking at the respective headlines I see absolutely no problem with them. Weds are still in with a shot of the play offs and we are by no means guaranteed as it stands to make it. Not sure what the issue is here - two reasonable headlines written by two separate journalists, it’s a case of semantics. What would you rather they said out of interest? Maybe I’m completely missing something but don’t think so. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, steviestevieneville said:

We’re just unfashionable , like Huddersfield and Bournemouth were. The pundits fall all over themselves about dirty Leeds , who have been in the second / third tier for nearly twenty years , forest , boro, sheff weds, WBA etc etc . They’re lazy pundits who get paid to spout bollocks. I’d like nothing more than to shut the likes of Kieth Andrews up once and for all

I would say that Leeds get a lot of coverage because a) They are a big historic club and b) Have appointed a manager well renowned in world football.

That aside, yeah fully agree- the fact that Sheffield Wednesday v Nottingham Forest seemed to get more coverage and more positive comments in terms of playoff contention was laughable. Plenty of lazy pundits out there, crap ones at that. Still I'm fairly happy to sneak along under the radar for a bit longer...doesn't exactly do us much harm! They like to go for names, history and hype- and on this second point I include Leeds despite what I wrote above.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, lenred said:

My point was a general one.  

But looking at the respective headlines I see absolutely no problem with them. Weds are still in with a shot of the play offs and we are by no means guaranteed as it stands to make it. Not sure what the issue is here - two reasonable headlines written by two separate journalists, it’s a case of semantics. What would you rather they said out of interest? Maybe I’m completely missing something but don’t think so. 

I don't have a big issue with it, but your point was totally wrong.

The media should report things as they are, not be biased to a club because they won something 40 years ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...