Newcastle wanting fair price for star player is transfer breaking point for mainstream media

Not that we really need more at this point, but if you ever wanted proof of the media bias towards the 'Big Six', then look no further than The Mirror.

We've seen it a million times before: the not-so-subtle bias towards the 'Big Six' clubs from the national media. The fact that the Premier League top 10 becomes a Top 11 when one of the media darlings drops into the bottom half, and Sky Sports shows the table the way in which transfer stories for players linked with one of these teams are reported and the saturation of the coverage on these sides over the rest of the league.

Newcastle United have had some top players through the doors lately, and as soon as they hit the heights we all know they're capable of, the media assault begins. The national media were instrumental in the transfer of Alexander Isak to Liverpool, playing their part in making sure that Isak and everyone around him knew of Liverpool's interest and pushing the narrative so hard that a move became inevitable.

There's another side to this which has reared its ugly head over the weekend, thanks to The Mirror's Andy Dunn, who seems very upset that Newcastle and Nottingham Forest have the audacity to want a good price for their big players.

The system is broken because our darling clubs have to pay to have the best players

Manchester City are keen on Elliot Anderson and Sandro Tonali, with Tottenham Hotspur also tracking the Italian. Forest paid £35 million for Elliot Anderson from Newcastle, and since then he's become a first-team regular and an England international starring at the World Cup. He's still only 23 and also carries the "English tax", so of course Nottingham Forest want to maximise what they can get for his services.

Similarly, Sandro Tonali has proved his potential at Newcastle, and while we can agree that this past season wasn't his best, we do know what he's capable of and the engine he possesses. Newcastle are asking £100 million for Tonali, who is contracted to 2030.

Apparently, this is just crazy in the eyes of Andy Dunn and is proof that the English transfer market is 'madder than ever'. We're not denying that transfer fees are out of control, but why has it taken two 'lesser' clubs demanding what they view to be a fair price for this to become an issue?

How dare they demand fair compensation?

By selling Tonali and Anderson, Newcastle and Forest will become significantly weaker sides, and they need to replace those players with ones who can fill the void, and that won't come cheap. It's only fair then that we get properly compensated.

Newcastle still haven't fully recovered from having to sell Anderson for just £35 million because the system was so stacked against them, but there was no outrage from the national media then. It was 'you reap what you sow' when it was us. Yet, Manchester City STILL haven't answered for their 115 breaches. Chelsea get a slap on the wrist for their near-endless breaches, but when one of the peasant clubs tries to game the system, football is broken.

If/when Newcastle breaks this ceiling and disrupts the established order, will we feel differently if the media starts to champion us? Probably, we're all hypocrites at the end of the day, but this post will stand as a reminder of where we came from, and hopefully it can keep us humble. Doubtful, but we can at least hope to be better.