Some absolutely blatant nonsense about a Liverpool items calculation kicks off a Mediawatch that, even by its own requirements, contains an alarming amount of deceptive bollocks.
Point of order
It is with great sadness that we must survey the Reach names are At It Again.
Worth remembering that Approach were lamenting the fact that none of their viewers are apparently willing to pay to listen to their information when you consider this work and the large amount to which it doesnt so much insult the intelligence of those readers as deny that intelligences life altogether.
Liverpool told how points deduction could follow after Arne Slot clash with Michael Oliver
There is only one sane way to read that headline, and its the one the Mirror are absolutely counting on you landing upon: that Arne Slots clash with Michael Oliver after the Everton game could lead to Liverpool getting a points deduction now in the actual real world that exists.
Which would be important information and, by bright fortuitous happenstance even a headline that, as well as luring in Liverpool readers, may also find plenty of Arsenal strays given the impact it could also have on their season. What success! What larks!
Then, with your click safely banked from that absolute sh*thouse of a headline, you get hit with this intro.
Former PGMOL chief Keith Hackett has suggested the , Premier League , could be , tempted to introduce points sanctions for managers behaviour in the aftermath of Arne Slots run-in , with Michael Oliver.
Ever get the experience youve been had? But thats not even all. How this right at the end of this tale, a coronation crap in an filled dish?
Despite Hacketts debate, there has been no sign from the , Premier League , that points conclusions for on-field crimes are in the network.
But who various than Mediawatch is bothering to learn all the way to the last line of this disingenuous shite? We need to get out more.
READ: Liverpool genius Arne Slot threatening to dislodge Mourinho and Conte
Real talk
Just a really weird headline, this, from the Telegraph.
England need to understand they are on boundary of greatest period in 41 years
Do they, although? Do they need to understand that? Why do they need to realize that? Is there even any idea that, in reality, they have no realised this?
READ: PSG vs Liverpool predicted line-ups, how to watch, referee and stats
Jack the lad
And from weird Telegraph headlines to entire weird Telegraph stories with this deeply curious nudge, nudge, wink, wink effort from Sam Wallace about Jack Grealishs Big Day Out.
Youve probably seen the social media posts about it. If no, Grealish has been out and about and spotted in restaurants and social venues and the like having a good time and significant this getting into no difficulty whatsoever. He put 500 behind a bar on Wearside and is in multiple photos and videos on multiple social media platforms. The general response has been positive, with stories praising his relatability and one-of-us credentials at odds with his 100m footballer status. This seems to have irritated Wallace greatly.
The key line of a 900-word story that asks a lot of pointed questions but contains no actual new information or answers whatsoever comes very early.
Of this latest episode no training session has been missed as a consequence. There has been no sanction from , Manchester City  , or any that we know about. Doubtless there was time off granted.
Its almost like hear us out here there is no story here beyond a very newsworthy player passing his own time without getting into any trouble or breaking any rules or even any instruction from his club, who have issued no sanction because none is needed.
How to deal with this tricky problem of not actually being able to say Grealish has done anything wrong? Why, thats simple. Simply hint at Pep Guardiola not being happy about it, even though that is nothing more than a guess on your part and something else you also cant just say out loud because you dont know whether or not its true.
Yet for Grealish, the only person whose opinion matters is that of , Pep Guardiola. It is what the greatest coach of his generation thinks of the player upon whom he has sanctioned the biggest transfer fee of his career which matters the most.
And we have no idea what Guardiola thinks of it. And after reading another 700 or so words of this innuendo, we still dont.
But, still: what does Guardiola think?
We. Dont. Know. And. Nor. Do. You.
This is one of the rare weeks of the season when City do not play midweek, and the release of a few days from the relentless churn of games at the elite end will doubtless have been accompanied by some days off. But it is how one spends those few days of freedom that will count as much with a manager like Guardiola as anything else.
We get it. He had some time off. He did nothing wrong with that time off. But for some vaguely defined and unsubtly hinted-at reasons, Guardiola might nevertheless hypothetically be annoyed.
For Guardiola, one assumes that too much is at stake. He has been tolerant of Grealish, but eventually team selection tells its own story. Grealish is on course to play fewer games this season than any campaign since he became an established senior player, first at Aston Villa and then at City.
Another assumption, before taking two and two and confidently concluding the answer is five.
But ultimately it will not be he who defines the terms of his selection or otherwise for City. That decision is the preserve of his manager.
This final conclusion is presented with a sort of grand flourish that suggests Wallace believes it has tied up the previous 900 words of conjecture and nudge-winkery in a neat and definitive bow. Rather than saying what it actually says, which is Pep Guardiola decides who he picks to play for Manchester City, because he is the manager of Manchester City.
Dedications what you need
With a weary sigh, Mediawatch realises that weve started a new obsession, that weve noticed something we will now never be able to stop noticing and that this something assuredly is something that bothers us and surely literally nobody else on this stupid doom-spiralling planet.
But there it is. Weve noticed that football journalism has become enormously fond of taking what are just very niche previously unconsidered and unknown statistical occurrences and calling them records because it sounds grander and draws more attention.
So when we saw this Sun headline, we knew we were going to get very quickly very annoyed.
Six records Arsenal broke in Champions League demolition of PSV as Gunners produce seven-star display
First of all, seven-star display is not the preferred nomenclature here. Five goals is a five-star display. We will even accept four-star for four goals. Then youve got hit for six or the racier the joy of six if youre feeling bold when its six goals and magnificent seven or seventh heaven which is the one The Sun needed here to describe Arsenals exploits in Eindhoven.
Eight goals is admittedly a bit of a tricky one, but then youre back in business with cloud nine. Thats the system, and The Sun are damn fools to have deviated from that path.
But anyway. Not the main point. The main point is the joy of six records, isnt it?
ARSENAL smashed six records as they produced a seven-star display against PSV last night.
We already know this intro is going to be just wrong for multiple reasons.
Arsenal , now have one foot in the quarters, where a , battle against either Real Madrid or Atletico awaits.
But after hitting PSV for seven yesterday, the Gunners also took down six records in the process.
Mediawatch adores the cliched caginess of that one foot in the quarters but we are, yet again, becoming distracted from the main job at hand. What six records did Arsenal take down? Come on, lets get on with it.
The thumping result meant Arsenal became the first-ever team to score seven away goals in a single Champions League knockout game.
Well allow this one. Its niche and caveated to within an inch of its life but its fine. It is indeed a record-breaking number of goals to have scored within those set parameters. Its a niche record, but a record nonetheless. Its 1-0 to the Sun.
And it also meant they became the first-ever side to have six different goal scorers barring own goals in a Champions League knockout game away from home.
Arsenal are now the quickest team to net five away goals in the Champions League too, with Trossards strike for 5-1 coming in the 48th , minute.
Do feel like were in the realm of related contingencies here, with these records pretty much just variations on a theme. Fastest team to net five away goals in the Champions League is also definitely a record that thoroughly fails the if you cant easily identify the previous record holder then its not a record test.
Now, though, we get to the things that definitely are not records.
Meanwhile, the result meant Arsenal have now won five successive Champions League games in the same tournament for the first time since the 2005/06 season.
Tis a fine stat but sure tis no record. At the most fundamental level if you are claiming a record has been broken you really cannot include phrases like for the first time since the 2005/06 season. Youve broken nothing, record or otherwise, here. At best, this is equalled.
On which note, we get this absolute f*cking p*ss-take.
Nwaneris goal saw him become the third-youngest goal scorer in a Champions League knockout game at the age of 17 years and 348 days.
While in no way wishing to play down Nwaneris achievement, this is not at all what record-breaking means.
But maths fans will have noted were still only at five records anyway.
Arsenals latest starlet was set up for his goal by fellow kid Myles Lewis-Skelly.
And it meant that two English teens had combined for a Champions League goal for the first time in the competitions history.
What are any of us even doing here, really? Why and how have we reached a point where it is deemed necessary to do this? When Lads, it was a 7-1 away win in a Champions League knockout game isnt already mental enough on its own astonishing terms without having to just make up some records?
Volume control
Back on that familiar Mediawatch hobby-horse here, were afraid, and the latest instalment of our doomed and defeated campaign to protect the apparently now freely discarded idea that Words Have Meanings. Its the Mirror at it here.
Arsenal stars Ethan Nwaneri comments speak volumes as Bukayo Saka claim made
That is not what speak volumes means. To speak volumes is to say things without words. That is the entire point of the phrase. A look can speak volumes. A gesture can speak volumes. An act can speak volumes.
Mikel Arteta subbing off yellow-card magnet Myles Lewis-Skelly after 35 minutes, for instance, if you wanted an actual example of possible volume-speaking from last nights game.
But if the actual out-loud speaking of words at a volume, such as Declan Rice saying quite reasonably that Ethan Nwaneri is sh*t-hot at football, counts as speaking volumes then all youre left with is a clumsy and needlessly over-descriptive phrase for talking.
