Based in London and writing for a global audience our aim is to produce EliteFootballTalk. Enjoy the site and feel welcome to join in our discussion on the beautiful game.

Monday, February 25, 2008

Complain direct to MOTD over their coverage of Eduardo/Gallas incidents HERE

I know that I'm not alone in thinking that the Match of the Day coverage of the brutal Taylor challenge on Eduardo was singularly abysmal to fair-minded football fans.

Comments on my post yesterday, comments read elsewhere and talking to supporters of other clubs about the coverage that saw a perversely distorted sense of priority given to attacking Gallas for his despair at the end of a game and Wenger for his strong but understandable comments on Martin Taylor, while on the other hand effectively sweeping under the carpet without detailed investigation the brutal, late and high challenge from close range from Taylor on Eduardo by describing it merely as 'clumsy' has offended supporters like myself who expect far better analysis and coverage of truly significant footballing incidents.

As the flagship football programme on national television the priority should have been a thorough analysis and condemnation of the reckless tackle and not an emphasis on protracted criticism of the reactions of Gallas and implicit criticism of Wenger - which in itself failed to acknowledge that both were clearly affected by witnessing the catastrophic results of an over-the-top tackle that led to a devastating broken leg for one of their own.

If you agree that the editor of the programme plus Alan Hansen and Mark Lawrenson got their priorities seriously wrong last Saturday I urge you to go to this link and make a complaint about Match of the Day's Coverage on 23 February 2008 plus request a response. http://www.bbc.co.uk/complaints/make_complaint_step1.shtml

These people in a position of influence need to know that when something truly serious occurs the footballing public sensibly expect a carefully considered and proportionate response and not an undue focus on relative trivialities.

36 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Made. I'm so FUCKED OFF ABOUT THIS.

Get well Eduardo.

2/25/2008 10:42 pm

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You sometimes wonder what the agenda of these so called experts is!!!
The real issue in such a difficult moment was to suggest ways of dealing with an issue that has been the highlight of the season so far.
Now, here we are with concrete evidence and the media decide to go after mere words spoken by the victims.

2/25/2008 10:45 pm

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I've gone and given them a piece of my mind.

2/25/2008 10:48 pm

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Complain to Ofcom as well!!

Complaining to the Chav and Yids owned BBC will get nothing.

http://www.ofcom.org.uk/complain/progs/

2/25/2008 10:49 pm

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

http://www.carlingcup.premiumtv.co.uk/page/Home/0,,11995,00.html

VOTE FOR EDUARDO FOR PLAYER OF THE CARLING CUP

2/25/2008 10:53 pm

 
Blogger T said...

Nice one first and third commentators. Hope you made that point to them second commentator. Everyone who felt a strong sense of injustice and a lack of sanity in the coverage on Saturday I really feel needs to make a complaint.

2/25/2008 10:53 pm

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

My complaint -
The attitude towards the Eduardo injury and the behaviour of Gallas was typically Anti-Arsenal. The weekly criticism the club receives from muppets like Hansen, borders on bigotry. If it was Rooney who’s leg which was savagely snapped, or John Terry's reaction to the day’s events taking over his emotions, i have no doubt Hansen’s attitude would have been the opposite, i.e. condemn the player which injured Rooney and praise the "leader among men" John Terry. However, this is typically bias sport journalism shown by the evermore racially prejudiced BBC.

2/25/2008 10:54 pm

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

why is everybody so against arsenal, that challenge on eduardo was sickening, everyone i am yet to hear a good thing said about us.

2/25/2008 11:07 pm

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Quite agree. Have already posted my complaint. It's like they would blame the pedestrian for getting hit by a speeding car and then for having the temerity of saying the driver should be banned. The more that compalin the better -btw its ot just MoTD - I was listening to Five Live this evening and it was the same there.

2/25/2008 11:11 pm

 
Blogger paddybarnes said...

On tonight's Five Live McLeish was saying that he hoped Arsene would apologise to Martin Taylor as he had been 'mentally shattered' since the weekend.
Let's repeat that - Eduardo's assailant, the thug who has potentially ended the Croatian's glittering career, is a bit upset that he's made so many enemies. Taylor's manager therefore criticises Wenger for voicing his anger at the maiming.
If it wasn't so revolting it might be funny. And yet the BBC cover it as if it's news.

2/25/2008 11:16 pm

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I have never rated Mark Lawrenson anyway nor has he ever given Arsenal a fair assessment. That guy should not be getting paid on my taxes with the likes of Lineker (an ex-Spurs) and Alan Hansen who lost to us in the 1989 division 1 decider at Anfield if memory serves me right. I hereby lend my voice to the many that have complained about the coverage.

2/25/2008 11:16 pm

 
Anonymous Nick said...

Can only agree with all the above, heres what i put if anyone needs any inspiration:

The blatent lack of concern or due respect foir the injury suffered by Eduardo during the Arsenal vs Birmingham City match followed by the frankly appaling critism of a Manager who has seen a player/collegue injured by an heinous challenge, clearly intented to harm (and later retracting the statement) and the club captain who has had to endure not only that but the appaling decison that cost his side points. while never attempting to show a different side to the arguement, or indeed giving due air time to the challenge. This is acceptable on a normal weekly basis, the bias shown towards particular clubs is understandable considering the 'pundits' backgrounds. However Saturdays show was so one sided that it has just added to the hurt felt by fans of Arsenal and Eduardo over this whole incident. Were this Wayne Rooney or Steven Gerrard or some other notable English player, I feel that this challenge would have been given more time, a through investigation, and, most probably be followed by baying for blood and vengence by said pundits. Is this the unbiased reporting we expect from the BBC or indeed pay our license fee for, we all pay the same, at least make an attempt to treat us all equally.

I decvided to stop short of calling them racist.

2/25/2008 11:17 pm

 
Anonymous alex butterfield said...

Is there anywhere I can see this MOTD footage? Or a transcription or something?

It's hard to comment having not seen it. And I'm sure that I'll be berated for attempting to, but it seems to me that this is a case of Arsenal fans feeling sorry for themselves. (It should really be Eduardo that you are feeling sorry for)

I havent seen MOTD for the last 3 months, since I moved abroad but i had never previously noticed any bias against arsenal. On the contrary all the MOTD and MOTD2 pundits were very complimentary of the Arsenal performances early this season. The general consensus was that it was great to see a team playing great football and doing so well in the league.

I'd like to know what the deal was with the comments about Gallas.

BUt regarding Wenger's comments. Put yourself in the MOTD shoes (and not with your biased Arsenal view).

They believed that Taylor was reckless not malicious (which I agree with - its self evident from the replays). And then to have someone over-react and call for a life-ban, as Wenger did, how can they not attack that statement? Had Wenger not gone so far with his reaction, then perhaps the focus would have been on whether the disciplinary system in the Premier League is capable of awarding fitting punishment for such reckless challenges as this - which is clearly deserving of more than a 3 match ban, but significantly less than a life-ban.

In fact had Wenger made this point, rather than over-reacting, then people would have agreed with him. However he was clearly in an emotional state, and his over-reaction can be forgiven. But for Arsenal fans to jump on the band-wagon which Wenger has already abandoned is less forgivable.

Just try to be objective. And don't expect your arsenal-biased complaints to be taken seriously. If you really have a legitimate complaint about tactless coverage, for example, make your complaints about that. Saying, ex spurs and liverpool pundits hate arsenal won't get taken seriously.

2/25/2008 11:55 pm

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I haven't watched MOTD for 3 years, due to their biased coverage.

I have, however, heard what Alan Hansen had to say on the incident, and was disgusted, therefore have complained to the BBC.

2/25/2008 11:59 pm

 
Anonymous goduffgo said...

posted a complaint, been meaning to do so after jokes about arsenal nerly every episode and this did break the ice so to speek!

every gooner here should complain..not just for the comments but for the replay of the challenge!!

2/26/2008 12:04 am

 
Anonymous Twigleg said...

I wonder if your reaction to the Gallas coverage would have been different if Almunia had saved the penalty but a Birmingham player had put in the rebound. The Arsenal captain was stood in the wrong half!

Secondly, Eduardo has acknowledged that Taylor's challenge was not malicious and anybody who knows the game would agree. It's geeks like you give internet football blogs a bad name.

2/26/2008 12:48 am

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Until Wenger starts acknowledging that Arsenal players also make dirty challenges (see Eboue among others, and recognise the number of Arenal players who get sent off indicating that they are the dirtiest side in the UK), he should be ignored when an equally dirty tackle is suffered by an Arsenal player. His reaction was emotionally misguided - the tackle was poor/reckless, deserved a red, and the injury is unfortunate, sure. But stop bleating - Arsenal are the guiltiest team in the EPL.

And Gallas embarrasses your club with his petulance - if you can't see that, I bet some of your former greats can.

2/26/2008 1:35 am

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

'They believed that Taylor was reckless not malicious (which I agree with - its self evident from the replays)'

Right, excellent. That's fantastic, maybe Eduardo can play this Saturday now then. It was only reckless. If you think about it, Taylor's the victim after all.


Previous poster (1.35)- shut the fuck up you biased fool.

No need to counter- unless you feel like posting something logical.

2/26/2008 1:39 am

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

i hate these so called soccer experts who played the game twenty years ago. The game has moved on and so have the rewards.
Yes these tackels could be mistimed but were designed to hurt/maim the opponent.I am inclined to think it's the latter.
Don't forget many teams and players are jealous of Arsenal especially one red faced who thinks the epl title is his divine right.
So if if you can weaken Arsenal at a crucial stage of the season so much the better.I am not the type of guy who believes in the shit by the media about mistimed or misplaced tackles.I am very cynical when someone suggests that Taylor did not mean it.
Can you guarantee that he did not it on purpose bearing in mind his boss is a former protege of the red faced/nosed.

2/26/2008 3:23 am

 
Anonymous alex butterfield said...

anon 3:23 - i wonder if anyone with such blind cynicism as this should ever be listened to. its as illogical as blind faith (and i know thats a tautolgy and that all faith is blind).

look at the evidence and if youve ever played the game, youll see this was reckless not malicious.

anon 1:39 - that's right, reckless not malicious. there is a huge difference. im not defending the former, but simply saying that someone who commits a reckless challenge should not be punished equal to someone who commits a malicious challenge. malice deserves a life ban, recklessness doesnt.

It's the same line as between murder and manslaughter. both deserve harsh punishment but they are not equal.

I certainly dont think taylor is the victim. but i equally dont think arsenal fans are. its such a self righteous, selfish attitude to believe that even the health of your players belongs to you as fans of a club - oh no, eduardo is injured, now we only have 3 strikers for the season, we'll have more pressure on adebayor now - that is what so many arsenal fans are really thinking and its messed up. and yes arsenal paid good money for eduardo, but he will be insured against such injuries.

the only tragedy is the personal one he is suffering as a player in agony, forced to miss out on his dream of the euros and the champions league and possibly a top level career.

2/26/2008 7:09 am

 
Anonymous Arthur The Gooner said...

First of all I think the tackle was malicious perhaps without the intent of it being malicious but the outcome is plain and simple there.

ma·li·cious
–adjective
full of, characterized by, or showing malice; malevolent; spiteful: malicious gossip.

Law. vicious, wanton, or mischievous in motivation or purpose.

The tackle was bad, mistimed, career and livehood threating, I#m not saying Taylor meant it but he did it and thats the end of that. I think a three match bad is a joke!

2/26/2008 8:43 am

 
Blogger RedsMan said...

Anon (1.39AM), no, Eduardo is not playing against Villa, Taylor is not the victim but is the victim of alleged death threats to himself and his family. Are we looking to step that far over this issue? Now footballers are not to be dealt with in discipline under the authority of the game but in a turkey shoot? Perhaps that is what some people commenting here really want. I can say I wouldn't want it in the shoes of a Gooner fan right now.

As for Anon's comments (1.35AM), he is right. The other Arsenal players were affected but not to the manner Gallas showed and as skipper I am looking for him to be firm though emotional out there for they are looking towards him for leadership, through thick and thin. He and they want to win the game for more than one reason but many others show composure despite being under immense pressure.

Anon (3.23AM), these words "Don't forget many teams and players are jealous of Arsenal especially one red faced who thinks the epl title is his divine right. So if if you can weaken Arsenal at a crucial stage of the season so much the better", imply that Ferguson had a hand in dislodging the Arsenal players' focus and rhythm on Saturday?

And as for MOTD, I agree with Alex that they have been overall complimentary of Arsenal's style of football. I dont agree with their opinion on Taylor's tackle, my opinion is clear throughout this forum, but several compliments and then one or two criticisms' in between and there's a witch-hunt. And it does sound like it.

Anguish and anger, yes I sympathise. Wenger was potentially internally incensed, I do not blame him, particularly with the title race currently as it is, his player injured, the affect on his other players, and losing two points at the death, I don't blame Wenger one iota. Thanks for the definition of 'malicious' but does it count in the rules of football? Because in Law it is a very, very strong characteristic of an offence, without which you fail on a conviction for murder at the least.

We dont want a witch-hunt, a lynching because elements in society we do not account for then enter to spiral it into chaos and what should be the fitting way of dealing with an aggression is overspilled with a lust for retribution. At first I felt Taylor had shown no knowledgement of the injury but since then I have viewed it again and am certain he was. Perhaps others need to examine or re-examine objectively.


RedsMan.

2/26/2008 10:02 am

 
Anonymous Frichie said...

Best thing to do is stop watching BBC and SKY. Even when the game is televised i prefer to watch with Malaysian or Chinese commentary (if you know what i mean). Those bastard pundits are all the same. they go about the attitude of Gallas that it is the pressure etc, but they didnt even mention the fact that Clichy got the ball and it was not a penalty and that a few moments earlier Ade was pulled back with his shirt which was a clear penalty. Not it couldnt be that causing the frustration, nor the fact that a team mate has an horrendous injury...its because Arsenal are feeling the pressure of their title chances. Pundits believe that if they say it enough it will become a fact

2/26/2008 10:05 am

 
Blogger RedsMan said...

Hey, they did mention that Clichy got the ball and it was not a penalty, they did mention that Adebayor was tugged in the Birmingham box. Did you watch MOTD or you received what was said from someone else?

I do believe in the point that frustration and the injury added to the anxiety of it all when the penalty was given. Also consider that Arsenal found it difficult to get into the first half, understandably, yet choice words from the manager later they got themselves in the lead through two well taken goals and should have killed it when Adebayor was through on goal with Bendtner to his right unmarked. Potentially add to that the frustration of not breaking through on AC Milan in midweek. We can only speculate but from the above we wouldnt be far off the mark.


RedsMan.

2/26/2008 10:21 am

 
Anonymous N17 said...

Whats that hanging out of your sock? is it an ankle? is it an ankle!

2/26/2008 11:35 am

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

How comes wenger saw that tackle yet cannot see he his player headbutting each other?

Myopic nonce!

2/26/2008 11:40 am

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Shame it wasn't Fabregas


sleek

2/26/2008 11:42 am

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Stand Up, coz Eduardo can't
Stand Up, coz Eduardo can't
Stand Up, coz Eduardo caaaaaan't
Stand Up, coz Eduardo can't

Repeat ad nauseum :o)

YIM

2/26/2008 11:45 am

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

and around his neck area

2/26/2008 11:45 am

 
Blogger Lurker1966 said...

Yeah dreadful eh?

Eboue's assault on John Terry in last years Carling was far worse.

Can we ask MOTD to have a look at that one again?

''Whats that sticking out of his sock is it his ankle is it his ankle?''

2/26/2008 12:14 pm

 
Blogger RedsMan said...

Last few comments, regardless who, are bang out of order. This is the kind of thing I hoped to avoid but immaterial of the call for objectivity and re-thinking, now it's a stand-off clash with spite and low-level ridicule. Proud of yourselves, everyone.


RedsMan.

2/26/2008 4:29 pm

 
Blogger T said...

Its sadly predictable Redsman - some so-called 'supporters' can't resist.

Thanks for everyone else to their comments to this post.

Alex- must say you are heavy with presumptions about Arsenal supporters and the reasons for their emotions. As an Arsenal supporter I know the reasons for my reactions and it is not to do with thinking that we now only have three strikers. Its quite sweeping to make generalisations about a set of supporters who have been moved about a horrendous injury to one of their own and have felt that the coverage of it was abysmal and unfair. Animosity between fans of different clubs is not good - i'm sure you agree.. so why add to this?

2/26/2008 10:48 pm

 
Anonymous Bet Blogger said...

I think we need a bit of perspective here. The challenge on Eduardo from Taylor was analysed in much more detail by MOTD because of the severity of the injury. There have been far worse tackles this season and in the past but the reason the tackle has received so much attention is because the injury was so horrific. As for challenge itself, I honestly think it was just a mistimed challenge and there was no malice in it at all, unfortunately these things happen in the game from time to time and I hope Eduardo is back in time for next season.

2/27/2008 10:32 am

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

What is the point of writing on this blog
yesterday I wrote a perfectly civil comment which disagreed with your viewpoint, and was then told I was a "fucking little cunt" by one of your other posters. and now I find my post has been removed.
Obviously this one will be too, but I want you to ask yourself, what excactly is the point of a Blog sharing a viewpoint when you censor comments because they disagree with you, (ironically on a blog complaining about a biased viewpoint)
It seems what you want is sycophants not debate

2/27/2008 4:30 pm

 
Blogger T said...

Sorry anon - deleted the article posted yesterday because it was a repeat of this one - as I mentioned at the start of that post I only repeated it to catch daytime readers to Newsnow. Unfortuntately the comments were deleted with it and I apologise to any readers who are disappointed by that. The post was up for ten hours and during that time had many readers so it would not have gone to waste.

We don't censor comments here - for three years we have been running and in all that time we have maintained a policy of letting comments on without moderation. Only if a comment is obscene in nature will it be removed (and this is extremely rarely done) - otherwise debate is free and welcome. Trust me we have been at this long enough not to be naive enough to think that everyone will agree with whatever position we take in our articles. In other words it is definitely expected that our articles will be met with opposing comments.

By the way, given that I and others at EFT are not in the position to check the site all the time I apologise that the comment using that gutter language remained up. That is the sort of comment we would seriously look at removing - it is insulting, obscene and really lowers the tone of the debate.

2/27/2008 11:26 pm

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

thank you T
I will take your word for the reason my comments were deleted and apologise for calling your integrity into doubt
I have read the articles on here for some time and although some i have disagreed with, i have very rarely posted.
However this particular article incensed me to such an extent that i did post.
Opinions are one thing and everyone has one, but the overreaction to the MOTD commentry was in my opinion beyond the pale.
Gallas's part in all ths was rightly condemned, and frankly whoever you support, if your captain behaves in this way, then he should be critisised for it, and as for wengers call for a life ban, again it was rightly condemned.
Having said all that I understand that there were circumstances on the day that may have contributed to both manager and captains reactions, but to then attack MOTD out of some sense of righteous indignation when both had acted extremely badly is for want of a better word paranoid.
Wenger withdrew his remarks and praise to him for that, although he would probably have been better not to make them in the first place, as for Gallas, the mans track record speaks for itself and this is just the latest incident in a colourful career.
To answer the poster who suggested I was a small vagina, I support Liverpool and having given up on the league(again) my support goes to you against the mancs.
This was not a "I hate Arsenal" comment this was an "I hate Arsenal supporters and Arsene Wengers persucution complexes" and this article is a text book case.
Do you honestly think that Man Utd Chelsea & Liverpool dont get kicked about by lesser teams, or do you think they only single out Arsenal.
If a team is better than your team in terms of skill, then often the shortfall is made up in other areas.
But let me reiterate, I do not believe that there was a deliberate attempt to break legs and these things happen, He isn't the first player to suffer this sort of injury, nor will he be the last, he was just unfortunate and my sympathy is with him, but if he can hold no grudge, then surely you can forgive to.
In short noody has an agenda against Arsenal, think about it, I'm a Liverpool supporter, do you think the press has been kind to us?
Let me tell you, if a similar article appeared from a Liverpool blogger, I would give him short shrift too.

2/28/2008 4:09 pm

 

Post a Comment

<< Home

 

Locations of visitors to this page