BT Sport

Bluedub

Alert Team
The Daisycutter is like a dog with a bone.

http://www.thedaisycutter.co.uk/2016/08/bt-sports-snub-is-final-straw-for-manchester-city-fans/
 
Why not?

My TV is provided by my broadband supplier, and just recently they've added BT Sport to the range of channels available, but it's not for me at the moment, for two reasons.
The first is the connection charge and length of contract involved, and second is the fall out from this, although I have heard reports the coverage of the first leg with Given and Dunne in the studio was better.

What do you think RTE's coverage will be like this season, Dub?
 
A good well reasoned article by the daisy cutter, if a little lengthy. BT in the end are the losers.
 
I've said this before - I am not going to cut my nose off to spite my face and so I continue paying £5 a month to watch BT Sport. Having said that I don't generally watch anything on their channels, except when City play. My two son-in-laws however, when they are around for any length of time like to watch motor sport on BT Sport 1. As for me, I can't stand any form of motor racing (yuk).
 
Put it this way CITK,I'll be tuning in just before kick off and I'll be switching straight off when the final whistle blows.
 
Great article and good to see them not letting this drop.

BD is winning the insult table by a short hair there I think.

Bitter Twat Sport Watch will be active to monitor whether they can maintain their marginal improvement or if they will fail to keep it up and like most people who pretend, find that the mask eventually slips and they reveal tier true colours again......
 
Bluedub - 24/8/2016 07:17

Put it this way CITK,I'll be tuning in just before kick off and I'll be switching straight off when the final whistle blows.


Haha, you must be my long lost Irish cousin - I usually do the same with Sky :006:
 
There were some good questions. BT Sport may have altered their pundits, but too little too late.

Did BT Sport expect to attract viewers by their negativity towards City? :001: :001: :001: :001: :001: :001: S

Sadly no-one cares enough to turn up and answer the questions. :017: :017: :017: :017: :017: :017: :017:
 
Tudor - 24/8/2016 06:47

I've said this before - I am not going to cut my nose off to spite my face and so I continue paying £5 a month to watch BT Sport. Having said that I don't generally watch anything on their channels, except when City play. My two son-in-laws however, when they are around for any length of time like to watch motor sport on BT Sport 1. As for me, I can't stand any form of motor racing (yuk).

That is what I though T, but they added another £10 to watch in HD, make sure that you are not paying that extra.
 
Buzz Lightyear - 24/8/2016 13:38

There were some good questions. BT Sport may have altered their pundits, but too little too late.

Did BT Sport expect to attract viewers by their negativity towards City? :001: :001: :001: :001: :001: :001: S

Sadly no-one cares enough to turn up and answer the questions. :017: :017: :017: :017: :017: :017: :017:

The whole negativity thing is jute baffling. I wouldn't tune in to watch them televising a rag game just because they had a whole set of ex-City pundits in the studio & commentary box slagging them off. I just wouldn't.

It doesn't make any commercial sense except they may be pandering to the masses in the pubs where it might be on in the background. But then if you were a rag or scouser would you go to the pub if you knew the televised game featured City? Bizarre.

Unless it is pure malice on the part of rag supporting BT Sport editorial team members.
 
Exactly Skoorb, I mean to deliberately make the English side the bad guys when playing foreign teams, would that endear them to the supporters who tuned in to watch City play?

I mean we all tuned in to watch Villa and Forest,Liverpool Celtic Chelsea as neutrals hoping that they would win the Trophy and I am sure would have been amazed had the commentary and punditry been negative against the British side.

if their viewing figures were low, then it would make sense to build up any team left in the competition but they did the opposite by just ignoring us
 
Buzz Lightyear - 24/8/2016 14:46

kennyclementstache - 24/8/2016 14:38

Pub has BT - so I don't have to.

Do a lot go to the pub to watch the match when City play?

New season, new pub! Hopefully using it will be the lucky omen that wins the European Cup - players efforts notwithstanding. Not sure, probably just me, it's a locals local albeit with three massive tv screens.

Despite being a CAMRA pub it only seems to have two beers although it does sell free range eggs. If anyone is in Bradford on Avon please come and say hello, I'm less cynical and generally more convivial if beer is involved.

 
I take it there will be a lot of neutrals, you will be aware if they are for or against City winning, when they boo when City score is a big clue!
 
Buzz Lightyear - 24/8/2016 18:49

I take it there will be a lot of neutrals, you will be aware if they are for or against City winning, when they boo when City score is a big clue!

Just me & Mrs KCT - and she spent most of the game on her phone, pausing to ask if there had been a goal and who is that? (VK4 since you ask). Cricket on other screen and locals spent most of the match comparing club feet and mono brows with only the occasional shout of 'it's still 1-0' breaking the general hubbub.

 
Well just caught up with the game this morning. The BBC was more exciting especially when I was stood over the grill with an umbrella in the rain :060:

Overall impression of the coverage - altogether a much more positive and balanced affair. Richard Dunne and McPointalot in the studio with Lineker - even though it wasn't the most entertaining of games for various reasons they stayed fair and took account of the reasons. None of the previous "with the squad they have and the money the club have spent City should have been 8-0 up after 15 minutes" which we would have witnessed under the regime last season with the studio stuffed with bitter ex-rags and dippers.

Owen Hargreaves as the commentary summariser was again balanced and altogether appreciative of the circumstances under which the game was played. Effectively over as a tie the opposition sat deep and there was zero benefit to City in busting too many guts, risking injury trying to rack up a cricket score. He applied his professional head rather than the previously scripted "be controversial, make an issue of something".

Overall they get a B+. Decent effort and need to keep up the good work to avoid slipping back into old habits
 
Thanks for the BT update, Skoorb. If they continue this improvement, I may re-subscribe. I'm under huge pressure to do so at home but so far I have stood firm. (I can be stubborn).