Their investigative journalism is quite good. Their opinion pieces have always been self indulgent and disconnected with reality, much like Wilson's.
I see the 'ABU' Media are back in full voice...
- Thread starter LawCharltonBest
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik @Rood and Imran @Annihilate Now! start with the good news by celebrating Manchester United Women's emphatic FA Cup win over Spurs at Wembley and the future of manager Marc Skinner.
Then it's the bad news and the ever worsening form of our Men with losses to Arsenal and Palace.
Finally the main debate - ETH Out now or keep him until the end of the season - if not longer. Are you Team Nik or Team Imran?
- Status
Definitely agree with this. I've felt uncomfortable with him returning to the club to be honest, with the information that is out there. Mentioning it at this point in the most minimal way in an article whilst everyone around is wanking themselves senseless... I think it would be negligent to not bring it up.
Including this absoloute clanger
Is he fecking stupid? Even if Ronaldo was completely past it, which he is not, did he consider that City lacks a striker and he would fill that hole and then some. Also it would put a HUGE dent in Uniteds reputation. If one of the biggest United legends in modern time suddenly joined our local rivals and won the league with them...that would be a massive blow to our status and it would really sting the fanbase as well
Also, he does realzie football fandom is very emotional and not always rational or logical. Yeah, signing a CM would propbably be a good idea, but i dont think there is a United fan on earth that would take that over having Ronaldo back. Even if its just for two years
Tosser
You can understand why she hesitated to report it first. I can barely bring it up, or barely say something negative about Ronaldo without 40 fanboys screaming in my ear that I'm clueless, ABU and stupid. I've not liked Ronaldo since his utterly pathetic "I'm a slave"-comments, and his standard didn't rise when he nearly signed for City and obviously...this. Great footballer he is and probably number one or two in the world during my lifetime but very sketchy human being. That United bought him and keeps inviting Giggs to the VIP seats shows that the club doesn't care at all. Disappointing.
And as a football writer he's entitled to judge things without emotion and with logic.
People here are really struggling with someone having a different opinion. I happen to agree with Wilson. Both his recent articles.
I don't think the 'I'm a slave' comments or the possibility of him signing for City should be compared to the accusation of sexual assault. Being happy to go to City is not evidence that he is a 'very sketchy individual'. When you bring this up it sort of undermines the point about sexual assault - which needs to be taken very seriously - by just listing it as one of several reasons you don't like him.
Giggs should not be welcomed at United after his court case ends.
I don't see how both can be true at the same time though. If Ronaldo detracts from the team, why does it improve the team enough such that we have to title challengers now?
Yeah then he is fecked as his articles lack any logic when he contradicts his own articles within a week.
He does obviously judge it with emotion though? If he’s trying to find a fault in everything we do then maybe it’s time for him to assess if he’s approaching Utd with a level head
Wilson clearly isn't speaking without emotion and with logic. The quote that you're responding to is basically calling United fans deluded for disagreeing with him and being optimistic about the Ronaldo signing.Where is the logic in his article? He's making up symbolism thats not even there like some high school English teacher.
You agree with a nonsense quote like this?
"he jogged out to warm up, cleverly maximising his exposure by positioning himself behind Donny van de Beek, a player of translucent appearance and reputation"
You honestly think Ronaldo, who admitted to being quite nervous before the match, intentionally chose VDB to jog out with for his warm up just to maximise the attention he would get? As if jogging out beside Pogba would somehow make a jot of difference to the "exposure" he was going to get, with the entire footballing world eagerly awaiting his appearance? It's laughable trash. It's not informed opinion, it's Wilson making up his own fantasy narrative of what's going on in Ronaldo's mind and trying to pass it off as fact.
No, that's silly. But I don't have to agree with every single word or observation in order to agree with an article. And certainly not with the overall narrative.
Hes completely missing the point though. Seeing Ronaldo go to City, even completely disregarding any contributions on the pitch, would be a massive blow to both the fans and the club. What hes saying is that we basically just signed Ronaldo out of sentiment and we're fools for not buying a CM instead, but have he considered that we might not been able to land the targets we wanted?
Ronaldo returning was a huge morale boost to both club and fans, and that kind of positive vibe isnt something to scoff at.
I think morale boosts are great. But you shouldn't sign a player for that.
Exactly! Yesterday felt, for the first time since Fergie retired, that the fear factor was back. That's definitely worth a few extra points over a season. Newcastle's keeper had three outrageous pieces of time wasting in the first 15 minutes. It was poetic justice that he spilled Greenwood's shot in the added time for time wasting for our first goal. Newcastle players were shit scared of diving in on Ronaldo for fear of being shown up by a piece of magic or conceding a penalty. Also, by two or three of them trying to close Ronaldo down, that opens up space for our other players and Ronaldo is good enough to pass the ball to one of them quickly.
We are on our way back, the ABU'S know it and they don't like it
Maybe the fact that he was top scorer in serie A last season and the GOAT had something to do with it?
You should if the alternative result is a long lasting depression of mood if he had joined City. United couldn't allow Ronaldo to join City because of financial, historic, reputational, legacy changing reasons. Everyone seems to be downplaying this. Doing so would have soured the fans against everyone at the club and also tainted all the past glories the club loves to play to for nostalgia marketing. The Glazers would have lost all the goodwill they have gained over the summer and the move would have gone long way into establishing United as the "inferior Manchester club". Imagine lining up to play against Ronaldo in City when he's painted all over your academy and training complex.
PS: Not to even mention that you're weakening a direct title rival while at the very least also improving your first choice striker.
Boosting morale while weakening your opposition's morale can give you momentum. Momentum is crucial if you want to win titles.
That's one argument among many for why buying Ronaldo was a good move. But somehow Wilson can't even acknowledge the existence of one argument why United aren't a roaring failure this season. Whenever we win a game comfortably, Wilson quickly rushes an article to press about how our success is irrelevant. That's why I suspect that he does just hate Man United.
When Wilson appears on the Guardian podcast he constantly speaks about his distain and disillusion with modern football and how the teams with money buy the best players and therefore win the most games. He hates all the oil clubs and teams like United who can essentially buy players that his Sunderland (and other teams) can’t. He’s not just ABU at this point he’s anti football.
You sign players that improve the team. One of the very finest goalscorer's in Europe kinda does that...
When there was talk of him joining City, I was disappointed from a sentimental point of view, the thought of a much admired ex red donning blue. I was devastated from a pragmatic point of view though as he would have unquestionably improved their team, making our trophy drought that much more difficult to end.
Why United chose to sign him, only United know. I'm just talking about the idea that it was a good move due to morale issues. I hope there was more to it than just 'We can't let City have him', for whatever reasons.
Yeah, that's fair, I agree with that.
He has two genres of articles - how money is destroying football, and how ole is destroying united. once a year he will praise either Pep or Klopp.
When he singles out one manager for such criticism (usually ignoring what happened with Moyes/LvG/Jose and pretending he took over a proper team), it's obvious he has a specific agenda too.
Of course there was more to it. The reasons I stated in the post you replied too are a good starting point.
Its not just the morale boost, its also
- Massive, massive shirt sales and other revenue connected to us signing him. I am pretty confident when the dust have settled, the club would have gained a significant net gain from signing him
- Hes a model pro. Having him around is going to be huge for the younger players
- Him going to City would be a huge blow to the clubs status.
- Despite his age, hes still in peak physical condition and hes still a fecking good player
Also, in an alternate reality where Ronaldo signs for City and scores a brace in his debut, you can bet you have ABU hacks like Wilson writing a piece about how we are fools for letting one of our biggest legends go to our local rivals and how it firmly establishes us as "the other club" in Manchester
Wilson at it again this morning. One of the ten most important points from this weekend's action is, apparently, how lost Jadon Sancho looks.
That I would argue is very true. He looks like a kid fresh out of the academy, both for United and England. There’s no incisiveness there, no sense that he belongs. Very different from what I have seen of him at Dortmund.
I wouldn’t worry too much yet, given the depth we have, but Greenwood, Rashford when he returns, and even Lingard all look more certain to deliver over the next few months. I wouldn’t expect too much from him in the short term, but it should click.
I’d play Lingard midweek in the CL and probably too at West Ham, then give Sancho the League Cup match when I expect Moyes to heavily rotate and be very negative.
Not all negative on Ronaldo in The Times.
I thought he looked a lot better v Newcastle. Kept the ball well, good link up with Shaw and showed composure in tight areas.
He isn’t at his best but in no way did he look lost.
George Best got a trophy built for him, yet he was known to hit his partners. So I doubt the club will stop Giggs from entering the stadium.
I agree, after reading comments on here I was pleasantly surprised when I got to watch the match on Saturday evening.
It's not that Wilson doesn't make valid points. He does. It's that there is absolutely no journalistic balance at all.
The positive points, and there aren't many, are glossed over or immediately qualified with cynicism.
If I didn't know the result before reading the article I'd have assumed United had dropped points in a worryingly poor display. Whereas in fact they won 4-1 and the crowd was elated.
I personally think people are too giddy and the reality of our tactical and midfield shortcomings will all too soon be a talking point on here again. But come on, if you can't see that Saturday was a massive positive experience for United which had genuine seeds of hope for the season then you're either a curmudgeon, an ABU, or as in Wilson's case, both.
The positive points, and there aren't many, are glossed over or immediately qualified with cynicism.
If I didn't know the result before reading the article I'd have assumed United had dropped points in a worryingly poor display. Whereas in fact they won 4-1 and the crowd was elated.
I personally think people are too giddy and the reality of our tactical and midfield shortcomings will all too soon be a talking point on here again. But come on, if you can't see that Saturday was a massive positive experience for United which had genuine seeds of hope for the season then you're either a curmudgeon, an ABU, or as in Wilson's case, both.
I completely agree.
Things certainly aren't perfect, they very rarely are. However, it's a pretty good result that puts United level at the top of the pack.
Points are valid, It's just that Wilson's commentary on United is just always so negative, it's not new either. It's been like this for years.
Personally, I thought that Sancho looked fine. He showed some glimpses and any reasonable journalist would expect a younger player to take a few games, especially after injury, zero pre-season and their involvement in the dramatic final moments of the Euros.
It feels like there's no negative story to write here but he's desperate to force some more gloom into a bright weekend where he's already spat his 600 words of bile.
He's going to take time to get used the intensity of the Premier League, it's totally different than the German league. He has shown glimpses of what he can do and with the team he has around him he can only get better.
Thought Sancho looked good.
So dumb. Also ignoring the huge possibility that the City link could have been made up for a number of reasons.
Actually, what he writes about our supposed tactical and midfield shortcomings is arguably even more annoying and contemptible than the obvious downright dislike, because it basically distorts points that are valid enough to merit discussion, and hence contribute to them not being discussed properly. Particularly his insistence that United gets into trouble against middling and low-block sides too often for a top club as a result of lacking tactical structure, which is simply not true (we do of course, but not nearly as often as Liverpool or Tuchel Chelsea did last season), and his absurd belief that we are still a team that likes to defend low and rely on the counterattack, as if it was still 2019.
In the first case; not many people would disagree that United has issues in the midfield. But Wilson more than implies that this reflects a general lack of tactical shape - even "incompetence" - which leaves United vulnerable to upsets by weaker teams in a way that other, better organised, more competently led top teams are not. But if that is true, then why did Liverpool and Chelsea under Tuchel (whom no one, and certainly not Wilson, would regard as anything other than firmly organised tactically and ably managed) drop more points against such teams than United did? Results are the objective measure of how well something works, and it is a fact that what OGS did against such teams worked better than what Klopp and Tuchel did. Either we're not as disorganised and tactically clueless as he implies, or a firm and clear tactical organisation matters less than he implies. Or both. While it is fair to point to the midfield as an area that needs improvement, both in terms of player quality and in terms of working out more clearly exactly what the midfield is supposed to deliver and its function in our overall game, this does not result in vulnerabilities that teams with a clearer organisation and comparable (or superior) squad quality don't have.
In the second case; I think you can only conclude that Wilson sticks to this narrative because it would support his point if it was true: Tactical one-trick ponies, with no plan B if the opponent refuses to oblige by trying to dominate the game and attack. But this is not how United plays, and we haven't played in this way for a long time. And again, you can only argue that we struggle unduly under such circumstances if you ignore the actual results. Since February 2020, no team has outperformed us in their results against lower-half opponents in the PL, save perhaps for Manchester City.
He's unable to make valid points about this, because he chooses to make points that are clearly contradicted by the reality of the team's results. Hence, he just contributes to clouding the issues.
To be fair, I would. Certainly if you'd asked me ahead of the signing. But that doesn't mean I don't see any upside to signing Ronaldo instead, and that doing so can only reflect an irrational infatuation with the past. Which is Wilson's stance.
That is the nature of opinion pieces, which is what his commentaries are.
- Status