This has been discussed in so many threads, so maybe its worthy of discussion seperatley.
I dont understand the need for the attempted comedic thread title(s). It undermines the arguments that can be made, and sets the tone of the discussion so that those arguing that bias against Liverpool exists are being mocked.
Maybe a title like "Does bias exist against LFC?" Would that be a bit more fair?
Anyway, my apologies for rising to the bait set by
@sms1986 in the Man City Rivals thread. He was clearly looking for reaction with the conspiracy comments, and I reacted. But that thread was not the only one where baiting occurred. Maybe he thought he would have a wind up, bit of comedy gold?
Anyway
I dont believe there is a conspiracy at the highest level to stop us winning the league.
But.....bias exists against us and has done for a while now. Whether its overt or hidden, its there, and it is, in my view primarily down to the Murdoch influence in football, with SKY being an extension of his empire. Since his rag was hammered following their lies, his media influences had Liverpool in their sights. But the distaste for Liverpool went back a bit further. The European ban following Heysel had some clubs take the knives out for LFC. And that is probably engendered in their culture since. The ban hurt Liverpool more than the rest, but its still rankles with some clubs that they could have played in Europe but for LFC.
Then SKY invented football, resureccted Man Utd, and put LFC in their place. So all was well with the world.
Whenever LFC raised their heads something was flung at them. Rafa's rant haunted us. He told the truth but SKY made him look a bit foolish. Fergie called Suarez a diver. So he is a diver. The Evra situation, badly handled by the club but the word of a serial liar leads to a ban for Suarez? If it was Lampard or Terry in Suarez place the FA might have told Evra to fuck off, but the die had been cast for Suarez. One of the best players to grace the league was never loved by the media, despite his obvious brilliance. Why? Because Fergie said he was a cheat. And SKY agreed.
Research and stats from last season of an 18 point swing in favour of Man Utd against Liverpool due to incorrect decisions. The facts smugly derided by the same people who use stats to support other arguments? I was asked if Stoke had grounds for complaint, as they lost points to bad decisions. But this isn't a Stoke forum?
If the study had no empirical value, if it was handwritten on a cigarette packet you could expect a five or six point swing, but eighteen?? Explain that away.
To this season. City won their last two games with very dodgy decisions. Sterlings goal was offside. It wasnt a penalty in the previous game. 4 points accrued? Maybe not, but it went their way. Kompany should have been red carded vs Liverpool. But no. Then look at last Sunday at Liverpool. Burnleys goal? Was the linesman actually there? VVD was clattered on five occasions that I counted in aerial duels. No free kick no yellow cards. No penalty for a blatant hand ball. But they even out the rational amongst us reckon. No, they fucking dont. And yes we get the odd decision. Game changers? Dont think so.
And bias exists in Europe, where the likes of Real Madrid are allowed away murder. 2017 CL final, Ramos does not produce a urine sample. No problem, move on.
2018 CL Final Ramos assaults Salah. No problem. Move on. But maybe that didnt happen? We made it up.
Back to the PL....
The ongoing tedious debate on Salah 'diving'. Kane goes over like a drunk ballerina and its not mentioned. Salah is demonised by the sagely hacks and some former pros like Shearer that should know better.
Refs are analysed to the hilt and yet poor decisions concerning Liverpool are brushed over.
Bias exists because of agendas and influences. Calling people conspiracy theorists and making smug comments doesnt make the uncomfortable truth go away.
*
