• The forum upgrades are now largely complete.
    Please read this thread for more details.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.

Look North/Tyne Tees Coverage ***Europa League Special***

gramw said:
Look norths coverage was pitiful in comparison to ITVs. They only gave around 1 minute 13 seconds more coverage than they gave to Boro about their match.
Click to expand...
You're complaining - even though your post actually states that your match got MORE coverage than Boro's !!

Irony in the extreme
 

seahamstar said:
You're complaining - even though your post actually states that your match got MORE coverage than Boro's !!

Irony in the extreme
Click to expand...
The Tyne wear derby is a bit more of an occasion than Boro drawing 0-0 with blackburn though mate. The racist abuse got 10 seconds of airtime, and that was a ridiculous quip from Edwards.

ITV gave it the coverage it warranted
 
Last edited:
gramw said:
The Tyne wear derby is a bit more of an occasion than Boro drawing 0-0 with blackburn though mate.
Click to expand...
Not to Boro fans it isn't - it means nothing.
But I've not seen any Boro fans moaning about us having a whole 1 minute and 13 seconds less coverage than another match in the BBC North region.

People on here moaning about Newcastle being seemingly more important than Sunderland (on BBC), and then moaning that Sunderland's match 'only' gets 1 minute 13 whole seconds MORE coverage than another club in the region.

So, the BBC have no right in supposedly 'favouring' Newcastle over Sunderland, but they can favour Sunderland over Boro ???

Hypocrisy
 
seahamstar said:
Not to Boro fans it isn't - it means nothing.
But I've not seen any Boro fans moaning about us having a whole 1 minute and 13 seconds less coverage than another match in the BBC North region.

People on here moaning about Newcastle being seemingly more important than Sunderland (on BBC), and then moaning that Sunderland's match 'only' gets 1 minute 13 whole seconds MORE coverage than another club in the region.

So, the BBC have no right in supposedly 'favouring' Newcastle over Sunderland, but they can favour Sunderland over Boro ???

Hypocrisy
Click to expand...
Can’t be arsed to argue with you.

But if you don’t think the derby which involved fans having bottles thrown at them during a police escort, the team bus having its window smashed and the first incident of a premier league match being stopped due to racist abuse from the crowd deserves more than an extra minute of coverage than a 0-0 in the championship then I don’t know what to tell you.
 
PhilY said:
They have for years given more coverage to the Premier League than the Championship. (And then likewise progressively less further down the leagues).

I can understand the logic.
Click to expand...
But, Until this season - Newcastle have been in a higher division than Sunderland (and Boro) for a number of years - and people on here have raged about the 'bias' towards Newcastle in those years too.
 
Wansbeck Viking said:
“A very short segment”

It’s the derby but they (look north) made it a short segment.

If the roles were reversed, Newcastle won and a Sunderland fan committed racial abuse it would’ve been “a very long segment”
Click to expand...
I think the racism incident hasn’t been talked about enough either.
seahamstar said:
But, Until this season - Newcastle have been in a higher division than Sunderland (and Boro) for a number of years - and people on here have raged about the 'bias' towards Newcastle in those years too.
Click to expand...
I don’t think it’s a much as the bias towards Newcastle in terms of air time it’s more the general content and opinions.

Do you think it would have been further up the news if the Mags had won?
 
gramw said:
Can’t be arsed to argue with you.

But if you don’t think the derby which involved fans having bottles thrown at them during a police escort, the team bus having its window smashed and the first incident of a premier league match being stopped due to racist abuse from the crowd deserves more than an extra minute of coverage than a 0-0 in the championship then I don’t know what to tell you.
Click to expand...
That's just twisting stuff.
My original reply to you was about the fact that your match ONLY got 73 seconds MORE coverage than Boro's.

Like your match was somehow more newsworthy than ours.
To Boro fans it wasn't - it meant nothing
 
seahamstar said:
That's just twisting stuff.
My original reply to you was about the fact that your match ONLY got 73 seconds MORE coverage than Boro's.

Like your match was somehow more newsworthy than ours.
To Boro fans it wasn't - it meant nothing
Click to expand...
What's this shit now

The Tyne and Wear derby isn't of interest to Boro fans so shouldn't have been covered

Typical smb. Threads always get taken over by wums. This one, a drunken one and a Boro one
 
Couldn’t give two fucks about the actual way in which they use glossed over the game and result, it doesn’t surprise me in the slightest

They are mags and have had their delicate superiority complex pricked yet again by little old Sunderland (who they don’t care about 😉)

However the handling of the racism incident is beyond excusable from the producers of the programme and those presenting it….it just defies belief that they would make such a quip when mentioning it as well as giving it virtually zero air time.

They should be ashamed but they won’t be
 
seahamstar said:
But, Until this season - Newcastle have been in a higher division than Sunderland (and Boro) for a number of years - and people on here have raged about the 'bias' towards Newcastle in those years too.
Click to expand...
Yes, but that’s at least partly because when Newcastle were in the Championship, they abandoned their ‘Premier League’ first policy!

(Also, (b) not a lot on here care that much about Boro).

I think Boro fans ought to be questioning the coverage they get, as should those of Hartlepool, Carlisle etc etc.
 
Last edited:
gramw said:
The Tyne wear derby is a bit more of an occasion than Boro drawing 0-0 with blackburn though mate. The racist abuse got 10 seconds of airtime, and that was a ridiculous quip from Edwards.

ITV gave it the coverage it warranted
Click to expand...
It all seemed a bit rushed and an afterthought as though it was just a run of the mill game
Considering they often seem desperate for content and considering the story that led the programme- some health centre in whitehaven! it was unacceptable
 
BlackHoleSun said:
What's this shit now

The Tyne and Wear derby isn't of interest to Boro fans so shouldn't have been covered

Typical smb. Threads always get taken over by wums. This one, a drunken one and a Boro one
Click to expand...
That second sentence is not what I said .
Merely pointing out the irony that a certain poster moaned about Sunderland's 'lack of coverage', using the fact that the coverage was ONLY 73 seconds MORE coverage than the coverage of another club in the region.



Quite insulting calling the other person a 'drunken wum' too.

People are allowed different opinions , without having to put up with insulting remarks
 
seahamstar said:
That second sentence is not what I said .
Merely pointing out the irony that a certain poster moaned about Sunderland's 'lack of coverage', using the fact that the coverage was ONLY 73 seconds MORE coverage than the coverage of another club in the region.



Quite insulting calling the other person a 'drunken wum' too.

People are allowed different opinions , without having to put up with insulting remarks
Click to expand...
It's literally nothing to do with Boro. AT ALL

I've seen you before doing the Boro wum routine on threads. Are you that desperate for attention you've somehow made it about you and Boro?

And the other one literally said he was drinking while posting. It certainly showed
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top