Why you hate The Game

Some classic examples of bias today.

First off is this article on Ryan Giggs in The Sun, which seems to be quotes taken from an upcoming GQ interview. Now I've nothing against Ryan Giggs, he's been a great player for us for years, but there's always a feeling that he's the Man Utd player it's OK to like, even if you hate Man Utd, consequently he's overrated in the media, never a bad word allowed to be said about him, never allowed to have a bad game, his woeful finishing generally glossed over. It's a similar story with Scholes I guess, but why Gary Neville isn't in the same category with the media is a question to be pondered, I mention these two names because of this sentence in the article:

No modern-day player can come close to Giggs when it comes to loyalty

I don't think I need comment further on that.

My other example might seem like a bit of a stretch but given the seasons long history of this sort of thing it becomes part of the larger picture. Here are two opinion pieces, this from The Independent on Fabregas - and this, from The Telegraph, on Christiano Ronaldo. It might seem that there's not much to complain about here, given that Ronaldo has hardly, by any standard, come out of the protracted transfer saga looking good, however I think the underlying thing here is to show the contrast between the coverage of Arsenal and the coverage of us.
Take this, from The Independent article:

The cause of celebration, a few hours after Fabregas had been reported to be flirting with Real Madrid and their piratical president Ramon Calderon, was Fabregas's astonishing statement of fealty to the club which has nurtured him so brilliantly. Yes, astonishing, in the perspective it may just have brought to the manoeuvrings of such as Cristiano Ronaldo, Dimitar Berbatov, Didier Drogba and Fabregas's club-mate Emmanuel Adebayor.

So other players are mentioned, but note Ronaldo is there, and note also that the word astonishing is only used in the context of these "manoeuvrings". So what was this statement?

He declared: "I have not spoken to anyone in the media, so it is frustrating to read quotes that I have supposedly said. I have spent the summer relaxing with my family, friends and girlfriend, and I return to training tomorrow. I think some people are trying to make mischief, but my intentions are very clear. I am happy here at Arsenal, my future is with Arsenal and the priority is to achieve success and win trophies at Arsenal."

So it's the usual cliched footballer's comment then? "Astonishing" indeed. Even the writer, James Lawton, doesn't actually appear to think it's astonishing:

As it is, doubts will almost certainly continue to linger. ... it is reasonable to wonder how long Fabregas ... will continue to display values that many in the game believe have never been more firmly rooted in the past.
...
For nine months now the question can be put away.

No one can doubt his loyalty ... for a whole nine months. Indeed, if we look at Lawton's reading of the quote that Fabregas claims not to have said, we see the absolute fallacy of his whole argument:

Marca quoted Fabregas as saying: "I didn't tell Ramon Calderon no. I told him it wasn't the time to go to Madrid. That you are wanted by one of the biggest teams in history is important. To be four seasons without winning any titles would be too much for me."

Translation: "Senor Calderon, por favor, kindly hang on a year."

So what Fabregas did say (his "astonishing" statement of loyalty) and what he didn't say (the disputed quote) amount to exactly the same thing - he might move on in a year.
As we have noted, the word "astonishing" was only used in the context of Ronaldo (and the other players), it is as if after writing that paragraph he forgot all about the astonishing thing and came back to earth, realising there was nothing astonishing at all involved. The rhetorical point had been made however, Fabregas/Arsenal = good; Ronaldo/Man Utd = bad. Why do I extend this to the club as well as the player? The article must be viewed in the context of the long history of favourable Arsenal press coverage - imagine this article being written about a Man Utd player, is it even possible? Take the Ronaldo saga - every quote in every Spanish paper is immediately taken as 100% accurate, never, as in this Fabregas article, is there any questioning, and, frankly, even if there is, it is of the nature of "well, maybe the quote is made up, but, given that we all know that Ronaldo wants to move to Real it doesn't matter because this made up quote adequately conveys what Ronaldo is really thinking". The wider point being that Arsenal and everything associated with them are portrayed as pure, whereas everything to do with us is portrayed as polluted.
That this piece in The Telegraph comes on the same day is a happy coincidence, as it shows up the difference in treatment brilliantly. At first sight it might even seem like it is an article full of praise for us, given that it argues that Ronaldo should stay with us for the good of his career. And yet.
The article uses the first tactic I mentioned today - in this case it is praising Sir Alex, who has, after 20 years gained a respect in the papers which it has, almost literally, taken 20 years to gain.
After, he says, looking at two photos of two different England teams

it was impossible for the mind not to muse on the career choices of Gascoigne and Beckham, and wonder whether the little grey cells in Cristiano Ronaldo's head are all in full working order. As Manchester United's Footballer of the Year relaxes on his sunlounger in LA, pondering whether he should push to leave for Real Madrid this summer or next, he should consider the stories of Gascoigne and Beckham.

Working with Sir Alex Ferguson is an education and privilege that should not be forsaken lightly.

It is not playing for Man Utd that is a privilege, it is "working with Sir Alex", nothing to do with the club. The contrast with the other article is obvious: there it was, "the club which has nurtured him [Fabregas] so brilliantly". Not Wenger, but the club.
His two examples prove nothing, on the one hand Gascoigne would, supposedly, have flourished under Ferguson, and maybe he would have done, who knows, but putting this next to the argument that, "Beckham's career never recovered from leaving United", is ridiculous. Ignoring the obvious fact that Beckham didn't do too bad for himself after leaving us, the fact that Beckham left at all seems to ruin the whole Ferguson as Gascoigne's saviour argument - Beckham left, according to the press version, because Ferguson couldn't handle Beckham's celebrity, so why does he become the perfect person to handle Gascoigne? Not that I'm saying Gascoigne wouldn't have been better off playng for us, I'm simply pointing out the stupidity of Henry Winter's logic.
Similar stupidity can be seen in these paragraphs:

Those coveted stars such as Ronaldo contemplating transfers, sooner or later, should choose their managers before lifestyle and salary. Still only 23, Ronaldo can continue to mature under Ferguson, whereas at Madrid he will be expected to produce magic, game in game out, for Bernd Schuster, who cannot afford star signings having quiet performances. If Ronaldo goes missing against Barcelona, he will find Real's coach and supporters less forgiving.

Yet the suggestion that Ronaldo should "give it one more year'' at Old Trafford is also unsatisfactory. His mind would be elsewhere. Ronaldo is either fully committed to the champions or not. There can be no halfway house and one of football's most sensible tenets is never to hold on to an unhappy player.

What he claims is a reason to stay at Man Utd - that too much will be expected of him at Real, that he won't be allowed to underperform - would seem to me a great reason to go for a player like Ronaldo who loves the spotlight and always seems (excepting Euro 2008, hopefully not a sign of things to come...) to give his all. From this angle it sounds like Henry Winter thinks that Ronaldo should just stay with us so he can tread water, take things easy.
Also note the fact that its considered "astonishing" for Fabregas to play another season at Arsenal, for Ronaldo it is "unsatisfactory" to stay at Man Utd for another season.

Two articles, one agenda.