Vincent Vega Posted April 21, 2015 Report Share Posted April 21, 2015 I would say it's south , right next to Knowle.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aizoon Posted April 21, 2015 Report Share Posted April 21, 2015 Brislington is in South East Bristol you dumb *****! Saying it is South Bristol is equally as correct as saying it is East Bristol! Similarly you could say Bristol is in South of England just as you could say we are West! Why come onto a public website just to embarrass yourself? The significant division in football terms is between north and south, and in that context Brislington is south. Why come onto a public website just to embarrass yourself? I smell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zlatan Posted April 21, 2015 Report Share Posted April 21, 2015 The significant division in football terms is between north and south, and in that context Brislington is south. Why come onto a public website just to embarrass yourself? I smell So you agree with me, Brislington is technically South? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Posted April 21, 2015 Report Share Posted April 21, 2015 Swindon losing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aizoon Posted April 21, 2015 Report Share Posted April 21, 2015 So you agree with me, Brislington is technically South? Idiot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aaron-Bcfc Posted April 21, 2015 Report Share Posted April 21, 2015 as someone who has lived in Briz on and off all my life neither me or anybody I've ever known have ever said that Briz is in South Bristol, why the insult? City Lads from the Bloomer to the GI would disagree and refer openly to Briz being South Bristol. Likewise, I live a stones throw away from Briz and know enough people who live there who certainly class it as South Bristol. Only have to look at a map for proof. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nogbad the Bad Posted April 21, 2015 Report Share Posted April 21, 2015 This diversion started with post 22 from Robin1988 stating that Norton's from South Bristol, with the clear inference that meant he's unlikely to be a gashead. Whether Brislington is in South Bristol, East Bristol or South East Bristol I'll leave the locals to sort out. Let's not lose the main point relevant to this thread, the editor of the EP is undeniably a lifelong and very committed gashead. Clearly the sooner RedTop moves back to Bristol and takes over the better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
City Rocker Posted April 21, 2015 Report Share Posted April 21, 2015 This diversion started with post 22 from Robin1988 stating that Norton's from South Bristol, with the clear inference that meant he's unlikely to be a gashead. Whether Brislington is in South Bristol, East Bristol or South East Bristol I'll leave the locals to sort out. Robin didn't infer that at all, he was clearly and simply responding to the poster above who claimed that Brislington is not in South Bristol. Which of course it is, as a matter of geographical fact. The (Evening) Post was always a terribly poor quality publication for as long as I can remember. As for football bias though, I don't believe there has ever been any, despite a few fans of both City and Rovers forever claiming to the contrary. It's a business (albeit a failing one) and can't afford to alienate any of its potential market. Extraordinary amount of paranoia on this thread! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nogbad the Bad Posted April 21, 2015 Report Share Posted April 21, 2015 I've given you reasoned debate in response to your nonsense, why you constantly play the victim after coming out with this garbage I don't know. The City writer is a Brentford fan, the deputy editor is an Ipswich fan and the editor is from South Bristol. We had the front page last Tuesday, extensive coverage today and it'll be the same when we receive the title after Walsall. Rovers' gates eclipse a number in our own league, so you can work out for yourself why they get the same attention, not that they even do at the moment. Robin didn't infer that at all, he was clearly and simply responding to the poster above who claimed that Brislington is not in South Bristol. Which of course it is, as a matter of geographical fact. The (Evening) Post was always a terribly poor quality publication for as long as I can remember. As for football bias though, I don't believe there has ever been any, despite a few fans of both City and Rovers forever claiming to the contrary. It's a business (albeit a failing one) and can't afford to alienate any of its potential market. Extraordinary amount of paranoia on this thread! Post #22 requoted for you above you CR, he very clearly did say it, and taken with the rest of the sentence the inference is clearly that the editor originating from South Bristol makes it unlikely there would be any pro Rovers or anti City bias. As for paranoia, can't agree, it seems to me posters who think that must quite simply have missed quite a large number of reports in the EP over the years. Perhaps one of the reasons it's failing is because it HAS alienated so much of it's potential market? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luke_bristol Posted April 21, 2015 Report Share Posted April 21, 2015 Eh? My main worry is my 4 year old being one of only 4% of kids in Bristol to not get into our top three schools choices. What's yours? Someone calling us Bristol on the TV? No probably the next IED I have to deal with How can you possibly conclude that the OPs biggest worry is whatever he posts about on OTIB then not accept the same logic in return Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
City Rocker Posted April 21, 2015 Report Share Posted April 21, 2015 Post #22 requoted for you above you CR, he very clearly did say it, and taken with the rest of the sentence the inference is clearly that the editor originating from South Bristol makes it unlikely there would be any pro Rovers or anti City bias. As for paranoia, can't agree, it seems to me posters who think that must quite simply have missed quite a large number of reports in the EP over the years. Perhaps one of the reasons it's failing is because it HAS alienated so much of it's potential market? Sorry, using a tablet I can't see post numbers. Thanks for pointing out post 22, he makes a good point. Like I said, fans of both clubs have complained of bias on the part of the EP for as long as I can remember. However, most realise it's just shit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich Posted April 21, 2015 Report Share Posted April 21, 2015 There are people on here using the recent seasons reporting as evidence that there is no bias within the local media. Well well well, the season that see's us promoted, being top of the table all through, ending up as champions and going through a massive redevelopment of our ground. There in lies just a little bit of a clue to the recent seasons equal reporting. The truth is, we have had much more happening at our club over recent seasons than Rovers, so it stands to reason more will be written. The Evening Post and radio Bristol co promoted and chaired a live radio debate at Hengrove academy, to debate whether there should or should not be a stadium at AV. At the time it had already been given planning permission, along with the access road and the permission to build Sainsbury's at AG. There was no need to have a debate and the only people it benefitted were those opposed to the stadium, those in the local media and BRFC, as it held it up more and elongated the debate. There was a scandal about a Rovers player getting someone up the duff, he was promptly sold cheaply and nothing was reported. Tommy Doherty was fined for no insurance while driving (front page). Jacki was featured (front page) for not paying Child benefit. Tony Fawthrop was hounded out of his job by the EP for lending an acquaintance money to start a business, who subsequently fiddled someone. The EP led a campaign to find city fans who'd gone onto the pitch at AG, with a front page feature full of photos. The same happens at Rovers, no feature. I know one happened later after much pressure from city fans. It's more about what they don't print than what they do, if City had acquired their ground in the same manner as Rovers did, then it would have been held open for debate for years to come, no mention at all in the post, not even a little bit of investigative journalism. This isn't paranoia, just a healthy interest in how the local media have portrayed one club more favourably than the other. That people can't see it, or dismiss it as paranoia is neither here nor there. Rovers fans claim bias because there is sometimes more written about city, I repeat, it's more to do with what is not written, by their mates about their mates. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nogbad the Bad Posted April 21, 2015 Report Share Posted April 21, 2015 Sorry, using a tablet I can't see post numbers. Thanks for pointing out post 22, he makes a good point. Like I said, fans of both clubs have complained of bias on the part of the EP for as long as I can remember. However, most realise it's just shit. No problem, but I have to disagree. The fact he uses the editor 'coming from South Bristol' as one reason why the paper wouldn't be pro Rovers when the person he is talking about is well known to be a Rovers fanatic rather destroys his argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nibor Posted April 21, 2015 Report Share Posted April 21, 2015 Norton is a sag, and the news department's obvious anti city bias reflects that. Look at how any incident involving City fans makes the front page for days whereas any incident involving Rovers fans is much lower profile. The sports department is just generally incompetent, rather than biased. And Brislington is in South Bristol. We don't bother with East and West - you're either the right side of the river or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin1988 Posted April 22, 2015 Report Share Posted April 22, 2015 No problem, but I have to disagree. The fact he uses the editor 'coming from South Bristol' as one reason why the paper wouldn't be pro Rovers when the person he is talking about is well known to be a Rovers fanatic rather destroys his argument. I've explained my point (explicitly, unlike the 'clear' but unwritten assertion). Interestingly you've only repeatedly taken issue specifically with something I haven't said. There are people on here using the recent seasons reporting as evidence that there is no bias within the local media. Well well well, the season that see's us promoted, being top of the table all through, ending up as champions and going through a massive redevelopment of our ground. There in lies just a little bit of a clue to the recent seasons equal reporting. The truth is, we have had much more happening at our club over recent seasons than Rovers, so it stands to reason more will be written. The Evening Post and radio Bristol co promoted and chaired a live radio debate at Hengrove academy, to debate whether there should or should not be a stadium at AV. At the time it had already been given planning permission, along with the access road and the permission to build Sainsbury's at AG. There was no need to have a debate and the only people it benefitted were those opposed to the stadium, those in the local media and BRFC, as it held it up more and elongated the debate. There was a scandal about a Rovers player getting someone up the duff, he was promptly sold cheaply and nothing was reported. Tommy Doherty was fined for no insurance while driving (front page). Jacki was featured (front page) for not paying Child benefit. Tony Fawthrop was hounded out of his job by the EP for lending an acquaintance money to start a business, who subsequently fiddled someone. The EP led a campaign to find city fans who'd gone onto the pitch at AG, with a front page feature full of photos. The same happens at Rovers, no feature. I know one happened later after much pressure from city fans. It's more about what they don't print than what they do, if City had acquired their ground in the same manner as Rovers did, then it would have been held open for debate for years to come, no mention at all in the post, not even a little bit of investigative journalism. This isn't paranoia, just a healthy interest in how the local media have portrayed one club more favourably than the other. That people can't see it, or dismiss it as paranoia is neither here nor there. Rovers fans claim bias because there is sometimes more written about city, I repeat, it's more to do with what is not written, by their mates about their mates. Rich think outside of your world for a moment. I don't agree with the anti-AV NIMBYs but we live in a free society. The debate was regarding TVG status, which was a matter for fervent debate in 2010. Coverage featured here seems perfectly reasonable to me. Rovers' post-Mansfield pitch invasion was covered by no fewer than nine articles about court proceedings/jail time/police appeals. What have they not printed there? When David Pipe was arrested and jailed, there were eight articles published. Were you expecting a book? A number of Rovers fans were jailed not that long ago for incidences during the derby... Guess where I read about it. It's far from a work of art but your almost worrying levels of hysterical paranoia (yes, it is) are bizarre. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Up The City! Posted April 22, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 22, 2015 My original point was we won a league title for the first time in 60 years and didnt make the front page and didnt even make the front page of the GreenUn. Instead the sags getting a draw in a non league got front page of the GreenUn. Doesn't make sense. Now if Rovers finish top of a poxy non league they will be plastered from front cover to back cover. Thats my issue. We are now a Championship side. They are a non league side. The coverage ib the paper should reflect that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChippenhamRed Posted April 22, 2015 Report Share Posted April 22, 2015 My original point was we won a league title for the first time in 60 years and didnt make the front page and didnt even make the front page of the GreenUn. Instead the sags getting a draw in a non league got front page of the GreenUn. Doesn't make sense. Now if Rovers finish top of a poxy non league they will be plastered from front cover to back cover. Thats my issue. We are now a Championship side. They are a non league side. The coverage ib the paper should reflect that.No, it will reflect the interest level in the sides in the paper's area of distribution. Regardless of division, there is (very roughly) an even split of City and Rovers fans in Bristol. Look at the Twitter followers: 49k City, 33k Rovers. So roughly 4 City fans for every 3 Rovers. Not exactly a Man Utd / Oldham situation. City did get a mention on the front page (as mentioned in the OP). There were numerous pages throughout the paper and the green un on City. And you know as well as I do that it wasn't just any old non-league away draw, it was a critical match that cost them two crucial points in a promotion race, which is very newsworthy for Rovers supporters. Oh, and when we won the JPT it was "plastered from cover to cover" - a competition that many of our own fans also describe as "poxy". The paranoia of some posts on this thread is just childish and embarrassing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ten minutes of rough Posted April 22, 2015 Report Share Posted April 22, 2015 How is Brislington not South Bristol?? It is, well it was when I lived there as a yoof. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ten minutes of rough Posted April 22, 2015 Report Share Posted April 22, 2015 My original point was we won a league title for the first time in 60 years and didnt make the front page and didnt even make the front page of the GreenUn. Instead the sags getting a draw in a non league got front page of the GreenUn. Doesn't make sense. Now if Rovers finish top of a poxy non league they will be plastered from front cover to back cover. Thats my issue. We are now a Championship side. They are a non league side. The coverage ib the paper should reflect that. Seems there is no pleasing some, what does it really matter? Even if these ridiculous clams have some substance, it all is very petty, constant City, Rovers sniping is embarrassing, we need to evolve from the past and embrace the future, if anyone has any doubts the tough job that this Club has in getting this club into the top league, a City like Bristol deserves, then witness threads like this. We have just won the league, and still there is all this rubbish, more concerned regarding the demise of Rovers than our own success. Grow up!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PHILINFRANCE Posted April 22, 2015 Report Share Posted April 22, 2015 No, it will reflect the interest level in the sides in the paper's area of distribution. Regardless of division, there is (very roughly) an even split of City and Rovers fans in Bristol. Look at the Twitter followers: 49k City, 33k Rovers. So roughly 4 City fans for every 3 Rovers. Not exactly a Man Utd / Oldham situation. City did get a mention on the front page (as mentioned in the OP). There were numerous pages throughout the paper and the green un on City. And you know as well as I do that it wasn't just any old non-league away draw, it was a critical match that cost them two crucial points in a promotion race, which is very newsworthy for Rovers supporters. Oh, and when we won the JPT it was "plastered from cover to cover" - a competition that many of our own fans also describe as "poxy". The paranoia of some posts on this thread is just childish and embarrassing. And boring. Your post seems pretty accurate to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tinmans Love Child Posted April 22, 2015 Report Share Posted April 22, 2015 You said 'the editor is from South Bristol' - little point in mentioning that unless you were intimating he was unlikely to be a Rovers supporter. He is, and very much so, and the upper echelons of both the EP and Radio Bristol have been crammed full of gasheads for decades. We're not just talking about the last few months here, or even the last few years. So what? I can't believe anyone actually cares? The EP clearly is very balanced, only a very biased fan would say it wasn't, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChippenhamRed Posted April 22, 2015 Report Share Posted April 22, 2015 http://www.bristolpost.co.uk/sport Only 3 of the top 4 articles today are about City! It's a disgrace! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WTMS Posted April 22, 2015 Report Share Posted April 22, 2015 There are people on here using the recent seasons reporting as evidence that there is no bias within the local media. Well well well, the season that see's us promoted, being top of the table all through, ending up as champions and going through a massive redevelopment of our ground. There in lies just a little bit of a clue to the recent seasons equal reporting. The truth is, we have had much more happening at our club over recent seasons than Rovers, so it stands to reason more will be written. That could also be used to exemplify improvement. The Bristol Post sent photographers to the Three Lions flag day, published photographs and made a few small mentions in print. For fans involved in that event. That is quite pleasing because it represents recognition given to fan initiative, the club do not do this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedM Posted April 22, 2015 Report Share Posted April 22, 2015 Norton is a sag, and the news department's obvious anti city bias reflects that. Look at how any incident involving City fans makes the front page for days whereas any incident involving Rovers fans is much lower profile. The sports department is just generally incompetent, rather than biased. And Brislington is in South Bristol. We don't bother with East and West - you're either the right side of the river or not. Pretty sure he was Arsenal when at school, but that is a long time ago! Haven't read back to see why Brislington is mentioned but I can confirm he was also from Brislington Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aizoon Posted April 22, 2015 Report Share Posted April 22, 2015 Robin didn't infer that at all, he was clearly and simply responding to the poster above who claimed that Brislington is not in South Bristol. Which of course it is, as a matter of geographical fact. The (Evening) Post was always a terribly poor quality publication for as long as I can remember. As for football bias though, I don't believe there has ever been any, despite a few fans of both City and Rovers forever claiming to the contrary. It's a business (albeit a failing one) and can't afford to alienate any of its potential market. Extraordinary amount of paranoia on this thread! Who are you calling paranoid? It's people like you that have been persecuting me all my life Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
City Rocker Posted April 22, 2015 Report Share Posted April 22, 2015 Who are you calling paranoid? It's people like you that have been persecuting me all my life I know where you live..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admin phantom Posted April 22, 2015 Admin Report Share Posted April 22, 2015 Any Andy Stockhausen has tweeted that there will be a special edition released soon, with the whole edition dedicated to our promotion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zyderiup Posted April 22, 2015 Report Share Posted April 22, 2015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich Posted April 22, 2015 Report Share Posted April 22, 2015 I've explained my point (explicitly, unlike the 'clear' but unwritten assertion). Interestingly you've only repeatedly taken issue specifically with something I haven't said. Rich think outside of your world for a moment. I don't agree with the anti-AV NIMBYs but we live in a free society. The debate was regarding TVG status, which was a matter for fervent debate in 2010. Coverage featured here seems perfectly reasonable to me. Rovers' post-Mansfield pitch invasion was covered by no fewer than nine articles about court proceedings/jail time/police appeals. What have they not printed there? When David Pipe was arrested and jailed, there were eight articles published. Were you expecting a book? A number of Rovers fans were jailed not that long ago for incidences during the derby... Guess where I read about it. It's far from a work of art but your almost worrying levels of hysterical paranoia (yes, it is) are bizarre. You patronising PRAT. If you only had the intelligence to look further into something than more recent times, you might just realise that I'm not paranoiac. I've just had an interest in my city and for such a long time the EP was the only place to get news about Bristol. As such, I have read nearly every edition of that paper since the late sixties, right up until recent times when it's been available online. In more recent times, the EP has received an enormous amount of stick because of it's bias, as a result, it has had to change it's editorial and actually feature similar acts from the blue few which previously went either unreported, or were hidden away on page four. Perhaps this is a result of now being open to criticism online and news is now more available through the internet, which it previously had the power to edit out. The exposure given to City players, staff, supporters and their misdemeanours has always taken a higher profile until recently. Perhaps it is something to do with attracting a wider audience in their eyes, with a view to selling more papers, but, you cannot tell me that, if the editorial staff is made up of people with similar views and they're reporting on a favoured team as opposed to just being professional, then that favoured team will not come out better in any articles written. Somewhat like a politically biased red top would do. As for the TVG debate, it was only a fervent debate by those opposing it because they made it that way. The media new the level of opposition was minimal but loved the debate, as it gave them news worthy stories. I dealt with certain media people during the whole stadium application at both AV and AG, they new the opposition was small but it sold papers. The BBC had people within it who were associated with those opposing and did their utmost to keep the debate alive as it suited their mates in Southville. Now I'd appreciate less psychological analysis of my good self from a person who knows little of me, except for a small contribution in a debate. You are too eager to make judgements, with so little knowledge to hand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nogbad the Bad Posted April 22, 2015 Report Share Posted April 22, 2015 I've explained my point (explicitly, unlike the 'clear' but unwritten assertion). Interestingly you've only repeatedly taken issue specifically with something I haven't said. You were denying EP pro Rovers bias and used 'the editor is from South Bristol' as one of your reasons to back this up. You obviously didn't realise that though the editor does indeed originate from South Bristol he is a actually a well known, lifelong, fervent gashead which made nonsense of your comment. Anyway, though you seem loath to accept that you could do worse than take on board Rich's posts on this thread. It's obviously something he's taken a keen interest in for a very long time, he's very knowledgeable on the subject, and imo he's 100% right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.