Awful ITV Coverage

[westonred]

To me the hightlight of the match yesterday was the amazing bit of skill and trickery Scotty did, twisting and turning away from 3 or 4 players to realease Nakhi to set up the goal for Bell.

On the EFL programme last night they decided not to show his sublime bit of skilll only to show the pass. If a player from a more fashionable club had done that the studio pundits would have been jizzing, and showing it time and time again

At least they didnt show us last again this week

[Port Said Red]

Just now, westonred said:

To me the hightlight of the match yesterday was the amazing bit of skill and trickery Scotty did, twisting and turning away from 3 or 4 players to realease Nakhi to set up the goal for Bell.

On the EFL programme last night they decided not to show his sublime bit of skilll only to show the pass. If a player from a more fashionable club had done that the studio pundits would have been jizzing, and showing it time and time again

At least they didnt show us last again this week

That was disappointing, but for me the interesting bit was the pundits saying that we were exciting going forward with Bell, Wells etc, and then saying "and of course Alex Scott behind them", like it was a given that he's so good he doesn't need to be mentioned.

[shahanshahan]

4 minutes ago, westonred said:

To me the hightlight of the match yesterday was the amazing bit of skill and trickery Scotty did, twisting and turning away from 3 or 4 players to realease Nakhi to set up the goal for Bell.

On the EFL programme last night they decided not to show his sublime bit of skilll only to show the pass. If a player from a more fashionable club had done that the studio pundits would have been jizzing, and showing it time and time again

At least they didnt show us last again this week

For your purpose, I hope ITV give better coverage for the FA Cup game!

[Port Said Red]

Just now, shahanshahan said:

For your purpose, I hope ITV give better coverage for the FA Cup game!

Well Tyldesley or Matterface will be chatting away about some other game for most of the 90, either previous Man City games, or the ones they have coming up. Mention of the lack of VAR will come up around 10 times as well.

Then their top notch production team will probably switch to an advert for Honda or something similar, just as we score. 

As you can see, I don't trust their ability to do a good job one jot, which is part of the reason I would prefer to part with £30 to watch without them.

[Big C]

1 hour ago, westonred said:

To me the hightlight of the match yesterday was the amazing bit of skill and trickery Scotty did, twisting and turning away from 3 or 4 players to realease Nakhi to set up the goal for Bell.

On the EFL programme last night they decided not to show his sublime bit of skilll only to show the pass. If a player from a more fashionable club had done that the studio pundits would have been jizzing, and showing it time and time again

At least they didnt show us last again this week

The lack of coverage Scott gets the better I would say 

[Norn Iron]

https://www.bcfc.co.uk/news/highlights-preston-north-end-1-2-bristol-city/

 

Watch this version. The commentator was giving out stats at the time of Alex's masterclass. However, on the replay the bloke says it was "Brilliant".

Was this the same commentator as the itv version?

If not, whoever he is....well done good sir. 

[Norn Iron]

I also wanted to see the players doing their American Football/Basketball routine of encouragement after defending for a goal kick near the final whistle. Gary Owers was really impressed on radio brizz commentary. Sadly it wasn't shown. The defending was though. Wow. 

[LondonBristolian]

2 hours ago, Port Said Red said:

That was disappointing, but for me the interesting bit was the pundits saying that we were exciting going forward with Bell, Wells etc, and then saying "and of course Alex Scott behind them", like it was a given that he's so good he doesn't need to be mentioned.

I think a massively impressive thing about our recent performances is that, whilst Scott may well be the finest talent the club has ever developed, we are not in any way a one man team. I did not see the show but I can easily believe the pundits genuinely initially forgot to mention Scott due to how well the forward three played.

[Slack Bladder]

 

I think those who know, know about Alex Scott and his value goes up and up every game.

 

 

 

 

[Super]

Ah the weekly ITV moan.

 

 

[CiderJar]

3 hours ago, westonred said:

... If a player from a more fashionable club had done that the studio pundits would have been jizzing, and showing it time and time again.

I thinks Bristol City is well trendy in'em?

[OneCity]

Another way to look at it is, the more his talent goes unstated - or at least understated - the less awareness and attraction he'll draw.

And I'm fine with that.

[Open End Numb Legs]

Yep, the average fan might not have heard but he is exactly what top coaches look out for.

Agree with the original post though, the skill and balance on that touchline seemed to defy physics and deserved a separate mention, not editing out!

[pongo88]

In tonight’s meagre coverage the match was described as being “low in quality”. That’s not the match I watched 

[E.G.Red]

21 minutes ago, pongo88 said:

In tonight’s meagre coverage the match was described as being “low in quality”. That’s not the match I watched 

On the flip side under the radar just as I like it, and no mention of Alex

Edited February 11, 2023 by E.G.Red

[Davefevs]

2 hours ago, pongo88 said:

In tonight’s meagre coverage the match was described as being “low in quality”. That’s not the match I watched 

Low in “pretty football” qualify.

High in “grit, guts, physical, hardworking” quality.

[TomThumb84]

Just watching highlights through and off City topic kind of but wow, take a look at the shambles that Marlon Pack makes of Plymouths third. Could not have got it more wrong then has a pop at the poor keeper! Astounding display of how the game catches up on you.

[firstdivision]

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

Low in “pretty football” qualify.

High in “grit, guts, physical, hardworking” quality.

Yep. Low in softness; high in hardness - softness being a 'quality' we've demonstrated for too long and seemed to have abandoned, the softness we demonstrated when we played prettily at Norwich in September...and lost.

[Super]

9 hours ago, pongo88 said:

In tonight’s meagre coverage the match was described as being “low in quality”. That’s not the match I watched 

I really enjoyed the game it but it wasn't a high quality game. Defensively we were fantastic but we could have been better going forward.

[Numero Uno]

10 hours ago, pongo88 said:

In tonight’s meagre coverage the match was described as being “low in quality”. That’s not the match I watched 

We got better coverage than last week..........which was the first time I had watched the ITV4 version and thought it was shocking!! The Sheffield United Woman player who was analysing did say that we had too much work to do to get the play-offs, which is fair if you look at it logically (teams have defied logic before but never the Gas as their logic trumps all) and that our bad run earlier in the season coincided with injuries. She, unlike many other guests on these shows, appears to have at least a grain of knowledge about us......either that or simply bothered to find out before commenting which seems to be beyond many doing her job.

On the game itself, lots of pretty backwards and sideways from Norwich and their £30K per week plus players but no cutting edge simply because our lot went old school and "got stuck in". Someone on here yesterday described their midfield as "all fur coat and no knickers"..........that was Norwich City, full stop, yesterday. Fifteen shots in 90 minutes according to the BBC stats which some on here use to judge the game and only three were threatening, the rest literally wouldn't have bothered some Suburban League Division 5 goalkeeper on Pitch 5 at The Netham. We do break with real quality at times, or hurt teams in transition as seems to be the en-vogue terminology, although taking everything into account I could understand a "neutral" over 90 minutes thinking the game wasn't high on true quality.

I think the vast majority of us were buzzing at 4:55pm yesterday, that's all that counts!!

[East End Old Boy]

38 minutes ago, Numero Uno said:

We got better coverage than last week..........which was the first time I had watched the ITV4 version and thought it was shocking!!

She, unlike many other guests on these shows, appears to have at least a grain of knowledge about us......either that or simply bothered to find out before commenting which seems to be beyond many doing her job.

Whilst I agree she seemed knowledgeable, pretty certain it’s scripted for them, note the iPad’s! Last week Dean Ashton appeared to know every player each club had bought and sold in January - I have trouble just remembering what went on at Ashton Gate!

[Red Cloud]

8 minutes ago, East End Old Boy said:

Whilst I agree she seemed knowledgeable, pretty certain it’s scripted for them, note the iPad’s! Last week Dean Ashton appeared to know every player each club had bought and sold in January - I have trouble just remembering what went on at Ashton Gate!

1st time I've watched it for yonks, 1st impression, box-ticking at its ugliest

[Sleepy1968]

12 minutes ago, Red Cloud said:

1st time I've watched it for yonks, 1st impression, box-ticking at its ugliest

I can't watch it. Remember in the 90's or early 00's when ITV had the rights and Gabriel Clarke used to stand on the pitch and do a recorded piece to camera pre feature match, sometimes as the teams ran out? Thinking about it now, it was so long ago, I wonder if it actually happened?

[pongo88]

9 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Low in “pretty football” qualify.

High in “grit, guts, physical, hardworking” quality.

 

1 hour ago, Super said:

I really enjoyed the game it but it wasn't a high quality game. Defensively we were fantastic but we could have been better going forward.

I’ve got to agree with you that it was perhaps low in “quality” football but I still think the match wasn’t “low in quality”.  This may seem strange but it depends on how you regard football. It’s obviously a game but, at professional level, it’s also entertainment as people pay to watch. For me the match was very entertaining even though it was a bit hectic. It was end to end and the result was in doubt until the final whistle. I’m sure most of the City supporters went away happy and a few people in the pub afterwards said it was one of the best matches they had seen this season. Not because of the quality of the football but because of the quality of the entertainment 

[Phantom]

The 15 minute match dedicated highlights on sky sports is the go to for highlights 

[Davefevs]

3 hours ago, Numero Uno said:

We got better coverage than last week..........which was the first time I had watched the ITV4 version and thought it was shocking!! The Sheffield United Woman player who was analysing did say that we had too much work to do to get the play-offs, which is fair if you look at it logically (teams have defied logic before but never the Gas as their logic trumps all) and that our bad run earlier in the season coincided with injuries. She, unlike many other guests on these shows, appears to have at least a grain of knowledge about us......either that or simply bothered to find out before commenting which seems to be beyond many doing her job.

On the game itself, lots of pretty backwards and sideways from Norwich and their £30K per week plus players but no cutting edge simply because our lot went old school and "got stuck in". Someone on here yesterday described their midfield as "all fur coat and no knickers"..........that was Norwich City, full stop, yesterday. Fifteen shots in 90 minutes according to the BBC stats which some on here use to judge the game and only three were threatening, the rest literally wouldn't have bothered some Suburban League Division 5 goalkeeper on Pitch 5 at The Netham. We do break with real quality at times, or hurt teams in transition as seems to be the en-vogue terminology, although taking everything into account I could understand a "neutral" over 90 minutes thinking the game wasn't high on true quality.

I think the vast majority of us were buzzing at 4:55pm yesterday, that's all that counts!!

That was me

 

[Numero Uno]

5 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

That was me

 

True though. If ever judging 15 shots by one team in a game was a completely incorrect way of determining how the game went, yesterday was that game. Norwich were a team of good individual footballers, man for man better than ours (except Scott who is better than anything they have) and they do get paid triple/quadruple in most cases, but very rarely hurt us all afternoon. Wagner agreed that they never hurt us all afternoon.

Edited February 12, 2023 by Numero Uno

[Peter1450]

It may not have been the prettiest, but having just watched the highlights from last weekend of Norwich tearing PNE a new one away from home it makes you appreciate what a great effort that was yesterday.

[Davefevs]

10 minutes ago, Numero Uno said:

True though. If ever judging 15 shots by one team in a game was a completely incorrect way of determining how the game went, yesterday was that game. Norwich were a team of good individual footballers, man for man better than ours (except Scott who is better than anything they have) and they do get paid triple/quadruple in most cases, but very rarely hurt us all afternoon. Wagner agreed that they never hurt us all afternoon.

 

we had 4 chances better than their best one according to xG

whatever you think of xG, I think its a fair reflection that we created the better chances.

Edited February 12, 2023 by Davefevs

[Numero Uno]

Just now, Peter1450 said:

It may not have been the prettiest, but having just watched the highlights from last weekend of Norwich tearing PNE a new one away from home it makes you appreciate what a great effort that was yesterday.

Norwich got battered by Burnley last week and we beat Preston. Week before maybe?

[Numero Uno]

1 minute ago, Davefevs said:

 

There were a couple of blocks that we HAD to make including that header over the bar from Vyner because Max was getting nowhere near that otherwise, as your stats show above, they never hurt us all afternoon with their wayward and unrealistic shooting.

[Davefevs]

10 minutes ago, Numero Uno said:

There were a couple of blocks that we HAD to make including that header over the bar from Vyner because Max was getting nowhere near that otherwise, as your stats show above, they never hurt us all afternoon with their wayward and unrealistic shooting.

Also, in the better xG models they take into account opponents between shooter and goal, so likelihood of a block reduces the xG score.

[Henry]

I think Pearson (or I might be getting mixed up with Roy Keane) has said in the past about modern managers want to pass, pass, pass is they forget you have to win football games.

We are finally finding different ways of winning football games. If you take the wins against West Brom, Birmingham, Preston and Norwich, you couldn’t find more different games.

[Numero Uno]

1 hour ago, Henry said:

I think Pearson (or I might be getting mixed up with Roy Keane) has said in the past about modern managers want to pass, pass, pass is they forget you have to win football games.

We are finally finding different ways of winning football games. If you take the wins against West Brom, Birmingham, Preston and Norwich, you couldn’t find more different games.

We don’t have many dominant players. If teams play open we’ll engage them in a game of football but when we play games like yesterday it’s more of a battle for us. We tend to feed off what the oppo are doing. Where we struggle is when we play sides who want US having the possession and look to counter on us. Hopefully this is where Mehmeti will help us because he certainly wants the ball at his feet. Additionally he should help us see out one or two close games too based on what I saw yesterday.