Originally Posted by RadioPhoenix:
“I'll try to keep this brief as i'm aware most other posters probably don't care about this.
There clearly is an argument as I made it, whether you agree or not is ironically The Difference
I agree basing things on one derby is wrong, but equally we shouldn't refer to things 10 or 20 years ago, I wouldn't deny Wolves have had good coverage in the past, but I'm talking about the last few seasons where there has been a definite shift to Villa being the predominant side. Just because WM couldn't cover all the Villa matches contractually doesn't mean they weren't favoured, that's like saying your first born can't be your favourite because they don't live at home anymore.
The point about the phone ins was that when major things happened at Villa this summer they changed their schedule to have a special phone in, they didn't do the same for Wolves or Albion, having more Wolves callers on the regular phone in doesn't mean the station favours us, it just means we moan more
”
“I'll try to keep this brief as i'm aware most other posters probably don't care about this.
There clearly is an argument as I made it, whether you agree or not is ironically The Difference

I agree basing things on one derby is wrong, but equally we shouldn't refer to things 10 or 20 years ago, I wouldn't deny Wolves have had good coverage in the past, but I'm talking about the last few seasons where there has been a definite shift to Villa being the predominant side. Just because WM couldn't cover all the Villa matches contractually doesn't mean they weren't favoured, that's like saying your first born can't be your favourite because they don't live at home anymore.
The point about the phone ins was that when major things happened at Villa this summer they changed their schedule to have a special phone in, they didn't do the same for Wolves or Albion, having more Wolves callers on the regular phone in doesn't mean the station favours us, it just means we moan more
”
This is one discussion point we'll have to agree to differ on, so I'll try to keep things as brief as possible before we start going around in circles.
I set out some points about both recent and distant history to give some context to my view that Wolves have been the club that has received the most favourable coverage from BBC WM over a consistent period, with continual regular commentaries on them at times when there have been minimal coverage of the other four league clubs. Most recently, I don't think you can discount how WM had very limited access to Aston Villa home games for a number of seasons with very few commentaries on their home games compared to the other three higher division clubs. So any shift towards favouring Villa will have to be a very recent thing i.e. this summer onwards. And I don't think one special phone-in can be highlighted as being any greater than one summariser dropping out of covering a derby, equally there may have been factors (key people from the sports department being on holiday or committed elsewhere) that prevented them from giving the Wolves and West Brom takeovers the same immediate treatment.
As you said earlier it is all about perspectives, and as someone who supports Walsall rather than either club, I've never viewed WM as favouring Aston Villa ahead of the other three higher division clubs or giving Wolves anything short of exemplary coverage.
Originally Posted by RadioPhoenix:
“...having more Wolves callers on the regular phone in doesn't mean the station favours us, it just means we moan more
”
“...having more Wolves callers on the regular phone in doesn't mean the station favours us, it just means we moan more
”
Well, in the nicest possible way, at least there's one thing we can agree on!



