Am I missing something
Admittedly I don't get to go as often as I did, but I watched the game against Stoke and, although it was a poor game, I thought we had the better of it... but the MotD pundits and papers all say Stoke were unlucky.
Against Blackpool, the radio said Everton were in control but MotD showed that they battered us and, apart from Saha's pathetic effort, we did nothing after equalising! Are we really as shite as we are made to look? Am I looking through rose tinted glasses?
Chris Perry, Posted 07/11/2010 at 12:25:57
Return to the Mail Bag
Note: the following content is not moderated or vetted by the site owners at the time of submission. Comments are the responsibility of the poster. Disclaimer
We were the better side in a good match for the neutral, with a spirited display by Blackpool. Once Heitinga was taken off on 75 mins-ish, it opened up the game to real end-to-end stuff where Blackpool were able to pose a more direct threat. They were unlucky perhaps not to have scored in this period, but Everton should have had it sewn up long long before.
I don't believe the MotD pundits watch 90 mins of every game ? only the highlights chosen by producers. The Stoke game showed none of our play other than the goal and was another peice of biased editing...
The BBC are guilty of all kinds of propaganda and seem to revel in this making us look second rate. I think it is due mainly to so many RS fans working for the commies!!!!
MotD is long past its sell-by date, and isn't a patch on Football First or Goals on Sunday. It's something I hate to admit cos it means I'm forced to give my money to Rupert fuckin Murdoch.
I realise not everyone can afford Sky so apologies to anyone who can't in advance, but I rarely watch MotD unless I want to watch highlights of other teams. It's biased and poor both from how they edit the match to what their pundits say... faint praise at best. For Everton, I watch Football First on Sky ? best part of 60 minutes worth`so a much better indication of how we played. Yesterday, my hour's worth confirmed our approach play is getting better and better, we just need a striker who knows where the goal is.
We should have won 4-2, if Pienaar managed to actually hit the ball harder than Ossie ? or Saha remembered that he is a great forward.
Just read Ken Buckley's match reports on here.
You apologise but not everyone goes out and buys every shiny object they see.
Posted 08/11/2010 at 07:59:28
Yeah MotD again hide the truth.
I don't understand why they showed a couple of "chances" for Blackpool over Pienaar's one on one with the keeper.
I streamed the game and we were better than that ridiculous excuse of a program made us out to be.
A decent point to be honest, away against a battling and hard working side. Let us move on and give us something to shout about mid week.
A point gained on Spurs, Arsenal and Chelsea is how I am looking at this weekend just gone.
Well done to Nick Entwistle for completely missing my point, you were about as off target as Cahill's 30 yarder on Saturday. You also managed to be patronising too. Well done.
Right back at you Steve. I don't want more channels of shit, but I have you apologising to me because apparently I can't afford it.
Where does the list end? iphones, ipods, ipads, blackberrys, wiis, sat navs, a Moben kitchen designer?
The match was shown live here in Malaysia and I can conform that it was hardly a case of being battered by Blackpool ? far from it, in fact. At 2-2, we had two gilt-edged chances to take the lead (Pienaar and Saha) and possibly even win the game. Yes, they attacked and the last five mins were a bit tense for away supporters but on the whole 2-2 was a fair result as both teams were quite evenly matched on the day.
Funnily enough, a mate of mine in the UK texted me saying that according to MotD over the weekend, it seemed that Blackpool were all over us. I told him it was probably the handiwork of all the RS fans working on the show.
Chris, MotD clearly commentate based on the highlights put in front of them and not from actually watching the game. I was watching Sky Sports Soccer Saturday and according to Paul Merson, watching the game live, we were in control for most of the game and playing some great football. Blackpool earned a good draw, and we dropped 2 points but they seem to be the 'pundits' favourites on the BEEB.
The MOTD coverage of the 1-1 draw with Spurs a couple of weeks back was utterly disgraceful in it's bias. Literally it wasn't the same game I'd watched on Sky earlier that day.
Like I said, Nick, you missed the point, possibly because of the huge chip you appear to be carrying on your on your shoulder. :-)
What was your point? That anyone who doesn't watch Football First is not watching because they can't afford Sky?
Without getting into the Sky v BBC issue, for some reason that's never been explained, we don't seem to be flavour of the month with the station that we all help to pay for, like it or not.
As for Sky, those who CHOOSE to pay get a better coverage of all Premier League teams on Football First and Goals on Sunday.
I was baffled by MotD's coverage. I watched the game very closely and we were clearly the superior team right up until Heitinga going off. At the time they had scored their second, they had only registered two shots all game ? both went in.
Heitinga went off and Charlie Adam suddenly had a free reign. But MotD made it appear like Blackpool dominated!
Confused by it, but not exactly surprised given the BBC are notorious in their bias.
Add Your Comments
In order to post a comment to the MailBag, you need to be logged in as a registered user of the site.
Log in now
Or Sign up as a ToffeeWeb Member — it's free, takes just a few minutes and will allow you to post your comments on articles and MailBag submissions across the site.