nick76 Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 17 minutes ago, Stevo985 said: That's not an agenda though, that's understandable bias towards bigger clubs. Whether we like it or not, Spurs are a bigger club in recent years than we are, and them winning the title is far more feasible than us going on reputation (FWIW there's no chance that they will) Same reason Arsenal are being talked about in title race conversations and we're not. It's Arsenal. They were 2nd last year and they've won the prem countless times. We're Aston Villa, we've been (mostly) completely shit for 25 years and haven't won a league title for over 40 years. Is it bias? Sure, of course it is. The media will always have a bias to big clubs. But it's not an agenda. As has been said above, the media would absolutely **** love it if we won the league. It would be a huge story In this context I don’t see the difference between bias and agenda. Obviously those two words have different meanings but can overlap and here I believe it does. Yes Spurs have been the bigger club in the last few decades but we finished above them last season, had a better ppg than them since Emery came, had the second best points accumulation in 2023, we have a serial trophy winner in Emery who consistently has been described as the third best manager in the league. It’s been almost a decade since Spurs were close to being title challengers back in 16/17, they have consistently been average over the seasons despite top managers at the helm, they have been marked with the term ‘Spursy’ and have a new manager to the league and at this level. Some of their unconscious agenda is due to their bias, it’s how they frame questions, do far more segments on Spurs and then the analysis of games and plays. Yes more pundits are London based, maybe more Spurs fans and yes Spurs have been one of the big six and that’s a fair comeback but there is also some agenda sometimes imo. Of course the media would love us to win the league but I doubt a lot would be happy if Villa consistently outperformed one or a couple of the big six, season after season for a long period. Of course this is just my opinion and I know many disagree with that opinion and I’m not a person that usually likes to accept myself being a victim in any situations as someone suggested to somebody else recently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nick76 Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 (edited) 6 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said: Completely agree. This thread was deservedly languishing in obscurity, we get an (admittedly good) win against one of the worst teams in PL history and out it comes again. Of course the vibes are better after a win, I get it, but beating Sheffield United changes nothing at all really. If people expect us to be in the title race, there's going to be a lot more negativity when we inevitably drop points, there's no point people doing this to themselves. I don’t feel we are in the title race at all, we are definitely challenging for Top4 only. My point was about how Spurs were seen as title challengers last week but we were seen as maybe struggling for Top4 despite both teams on the same points and both teams getting key players back. I just think both us and Spurs are fighting for Top4, no more, no less. Edited February 5 by nick76 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 Just now, nick76 said: I don’t feel we are in the title race at all, we are definitely challenging for Top4 only. My point was about how Spurs were seen a title challengers last week but we were seen as maybe struggling for Top4 despite both teams on the same points and both teams getting key players back. I just think both us and Spurs are fighting for Top4, no more, no less. Yes, I understand - I wasn't really referring to your posts. I agree with your view on what Spurs and us are competing for. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted February 5 VT Supporter Share Posted February 5 8 minutes ago, Captain_Townsend said: We are a big club though, we aren't Blackburn or Leicester. We have underachieved for a long while but have won it more recently than Spurs and have been 2nd twice since we last won it. We have pedigree and I think the way we as a club don't tend to puff out our chest impacts how we are seen by others/media Nobody is saying we're not a big club. Nottingham Forest are a huge club as well, historically, but if they were in 4th or 5th they wouldn't be talked about as title challengers either. Whether we like it or not, in recent years Spurs are far more successful than us in terms of league position and the prospect of them finishing top 4 or winning the league is more realistic based on reputation than us doing it. Honestly us winning the league more recently than Spurs is utterly irrelevant 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted February 5 VT Supporter Share Posted February 5 20 minutes ago, nick76 said: In this context I don’t see the difference between bias and agenda. Obviously those two words have different meanings but can overlap and here I believe it does. There is a stark difference. Bias is (in this context) unconscious. An agenda is a specific, calculated action Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fun Factory Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 5 minutes ago, Stevo985 said: Nobody is saying we're not a big club. Nottingham Forest are a huge club as well, historically, but if they were in 4th or 5th they wouldn't be talked about as title challengers either. Whether we like it or not, in recent years Spurs are far more successful than us in terms of league position and the prospect of them finishing top 4 or winning the league is more realistic based on reputation than us doing it. Honestly us winning the league more recently than Spurs is utterly irrelevant Forest aren't huge. They achieved an unbelievable amount under Clough, incredible really that a team, from the size of the city of Nottingham could have done that. Will never happen again. But outside of Clough they haven't done a lot, won 1 FA Cup managed by Villa great Billy Walker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nick76 Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 5 minutes ago, Stevo985 said: There is a stark difference. Bias is (in this context) unconscious. An agenda is a specific, calculated action We aren’t going to agree on this, so I’ll leave this particular discussion at this point. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted February 5 VT Supporter Share Posted February 5 4 minutes ago, nick76 said: We aren’t going to agree on this, so I’ll leave this particular discussion at this point. An agenda isn't unconscious. If that's how you're interpreting then you're right, we won't agree. But that's due to your misunderstanding of the term 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post HanoiVillan Posted February 5 Popular Post Share Posted February 5 The basic outline of this is as follows: We are on 46 points. With 45 left to play for, the maximum we can get is 91, if we win every remaining game. Man City are also on 46 points. They have 51 left to play for, so can reach 97. How many points do people really think City are going to drop? 10? 12? Probably not much more than that? If City drop 12 points we would need to win 13 out of 15 matches just to finish level with them, and even then our goal difference would probably prevent us winning. It just isn't going to happen. We're not going to put together the kind of winning run that would be needed. 4 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted February 5 VT Supporter Share Posted February 5 8 minutes ago, The Fun Factory said: Forest aren't huge. They achieved an unbelievable amount under Clough, incredible really that a team, from the size of the city of Nottingham could have done that. Will never happen again. But outside of Clough they haven't done a lot, won 1 FA Cup managed by Villa great Billy Walker. You have to start counting trophies won over 100 years ago before Aston Villa have more honours than Forest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rubberman Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 We're obviously not out of it completely yet, but massively outsiders. Let's see where we get to over the next couple of games. I'm pretty certain that even City will have some crap results - it's a really compettitve competition this year. Do our business and see where we end up. I still believe (a bit) for now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdman Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 35 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said: The basic outline of this is as follows: We are on 46 points. With 45 left to play for, the maximum we can get is 91, if we win every remaining game. Man City are also on 46 points. They have 51 left to play for, so can reach 97. How many points do people really think City are going to drop? 10? 12? Probably not much more than that? If City drop 12 points we would need to win 13 out of 15 matches just to finish level with them, and even then our goal difference would probably prevent us winning. It just isn't going to happen. We're not going to put together the kind of winning run that would be needed. Good post highlighting the reality. Fun to dream though! As long as the team maintain the Emi "I'm a believer mate" mentality then hopefully we can maximise our potential of being the best of the rest. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillaJ100 Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 There is a bit of a London bias, when West Ham were 6th with Lingard it was all 'can they get champions league', they were like 8 points off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMelvillan Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 really starting to regret using the word agenda in my original post but really what is the point in having a 20 team league when the ultimate prize isnt viably winnable by a team sitting joint third with 15 games to play? Just take the biggest 4 teams in the land and let them scrap it out Oh and according to TNT Sports on Twitter today "Arsenal are unbeaten against the big six in the Premier League this season" citing City, Liverpool, Man Utd, Spurs and Chelsea. Factually correct but frustrating unimportant as they seem to have included a mid table and upper mid table team in that stat 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nick76 Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 41 minutes ago, Stevo985 said: An agenda isn't unconscious. If that's how you're interpreting then you're right, we won't agree. But that's due to your misunderstanding of the term There are literally peer-reviewed research papers on the topic of conscious and unconscious agendas if you care to look. Anyway I’m definitely out of this discussion now, you somehow pulled me back in but I have to log off now so I’m definitely off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fun Factory Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 46 minutes ago, Stevo985 said: You have to start counting trophies won over 100 years ago before Aston Villa have more honours than Forest Well if you judge it like that then Leceister, Portsmouth, and Wigan are bigger clubs than us. Just saying Forest have had long periods outside the top flight, and support wise they are no bigger than Derby or Leceister but not having a dig at their incredible successes under old big head. Back to Villa until City win their games in hand I would say that we should at least be discussed in the title race picture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillaChris Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 3 hours ago, Condimentalist said: And probably the pundits said no? That said, I do think there is arguably a bit of a pro Spurs bias more than anti Villa. Because they've had more success in recent years, but there are also undoubtedly a lot of Spurs fans in media roles. In the end, it's hard for a team that hasn't been challenging regularly to be seen as a contender. That underdog status isn't necessarily unhelpful for us though. I'd rather be an underdog this season. Don't think this team is ready yet to be declared a favourite for anything. I thought we froze a bit on the night to go top v Sheffield United considering the hard work we were making of it even before the VAR robberies. Then I think if we'd beaten Man. United we'd have had a chance to go top by beating Burnley and we made a complete mess of that scenario. If you think back to the MON years we were getting loads of praise in that period but ultimately we won nothing in the end and spectacularly fell back down the league. I do think an issue with this is Emery. So much of the press and content creators were slaughtering him as Arsenal manager they can't really bring themselves to do a u turn so waiting until we finish top 4/win something and then they'll have no choice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomav84 Posted February 5 VT Supporter Share Posted February 5 17 minutes ago, TheMelvillan said: really starting to regret using the word agenda in my original post but really what is the point in having a 20 team league when the ultimate prize isnt viably winnable by a team sitting joint third with 15 games to play? Just take the biggest 4 teams in the land and let them scrap it out Oh and according to TNT Sports on Twitter today "Arsenal are unbeaten against the big six in the Premier League this season" citing City, Liverpool, Man Utd, Spurs and Chelsea. Factually correct but frustrating unimportant as they seem to have included a mid table and upper mid table team in that stat yeah the media really need to stop with this "big 6" crap. it's the only thing that really bothers me. i don't mind not being talked about in the context of a title race because we're not in it. but chelsea have been shit for 2 seasons now. they don't deserve to be in the "big 6" group now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Condimentalist Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 19 minutes ago, TheMelvillan said: really starting to regret using the word agenda in my original post but really what is the point in having a 20 team league when the ultimate prize isnt viably winnable by a team sitting joint third with 15 games to play? Just take the biggest 4 teams in the land and let them scrap it out Oh and according to TNT Sports on Twitter today "Arsenal are unbeaten against the big six in the Premier League this season" citing City, Liverpool, Man Utd, Spurs and Chelsea. Factually correct but frustrating unimportant as they seem to have included a mid table and upper mid table team in that stat I do think that 'the big 6' is an outdated concept and I think that Newcastle and hopefully ourselves will demonstrate that over the years ahead. But if nothing else, in terms of revenue, they are currently much bigger. These things can change though. It used to be 'the big 4'. Perhaps in a few years 'the big 8'. We'll see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted February 5 VT Supporter Share Posted February 5 29 minutes ago, The Fun Factory said: Well if you judge it like that then Leceister, Portsmouth, and Wigan are bigger clubs than us. Just saying Forest have had long periods outside the top flight, and support wise they are no bigger than Derby or Leceister but not having a dig at their incredible successes under old big head. Back to Villa until City win their games in hand I would say that we should at least be discussed in the title race picture. I'm not judging it like that, that was my point Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts