The Terrible Journalism & Tom English Thread

[Monkey Tennis]

1 minute ago, 2426255 said:

Maybe not totally comparable, but similar: I also prefer first hand accounts of conflicts from soldiers or officers or generals rather than opinions of war correspondents. 

Shit, you read Andy McNab don't you?

[2426255]

7 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said:

Shit, you read Andy McNab don't you?

When I was 12 years old, but not now. I liked his books at the time.

I prefer first hand accounts to 2nd hand ones.

Edited August 3, 2023 by 2426255

[coprolite]

4 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said:

That's true.

It obviously does lend credibility to anyone's opinions if they've played the game at a high level. We've a tendency on here, to slag off those who played, but don't speak particularly well.  Given the choice though, I'd imagine most of us would prefer to have been given the first skill set.  I know I would.

I think a huge issue is that so many of those who played but work in the media, do not think deeply, or communicate well.  That's got a lot to do with most of them having had relatively short formal educations, as well as a culture in the game which still seems to mock research, care and articulacy. 

Having been good at the game may offset, but certainly doesn't completely compensate for, someone who is not analytical or good with words.  

It's an extreme example, but think Paul Gascoigne.  The capacity to play, even exceptionally well, is not enough by itself.

I don’t think it’s necessarily the inability to speak well (although that’s probably part of it) as much as not having an understanding of the whole game. 
 

plenty ex pros were players that understood their role, worked hard and followed instructions without necessarily understanding why one game’s instructions differed from another’s.

I don’t doubt that the proportion of ex players that have good knowledge is much higher than the proportion of fans that do. 
 

But it’s not the only way to get that knowledge and there’s plenty obsessive amateurs out there educating themselves. 
 

I can’t see that either type has an inherent advantage in being able to communicate that knowledge well or being able to get in a position to get a platform to communicate from.

I think I’m agreeing with you 

[The Master]

5 hours ago, 2426255 said:

Which journalists do you think are well learned and have something valuable to say about football - the 'best ones' that you speak of?

 

[NorthernLights]

Why a non-Old Firm title win is now a near impossible task

 

[LIVIFOREVER]

Is this not the same argument footballers have for referees making certain calls regarding fouls and handing our cards, that refs need to understand how a player moves and plays, rather than just a black and white decision based on rules alone?

[TheScarf]

1 hour ago, NorthernLights said:

Why a non-Old Firm title win is now a near impossible task

 

Is it all about just money?  The BBC asks.  Pressley says it isn't - 

"stability, consistency of high-level coaching, really good recruitment, promotion of top academy players"

Does that all come free of charge Steven?

[Monkey Tennis]

34 minutes ago, TheScarf said:

Is it all about just money?  The BBC asks.  Pressley says it isn't - 

"stability, consistency of high-level coaching, really good recruitment, promotion of top academy players"

Does that all come free of charge Steven?

Pressley could not better embody the idea that a background in playing and managing does not automatically furnish you with wisdom.

The particular difficulty with him is that he has no idea that he's a stupid person.

[Dons_1988]

36 minutes ago, TheScarf said:

Is it all about just money?  The BBC asks.  Pressley says it isn't - 

"stability, consistency of high-level coaching, really good recruitment, promotion of top academy players"

Does that all come free of charge Steven?

You missed the bit about psychology. 

You can’t buy mentality, after all. 

[Monkey Tennis]

29 minutes ago, Dons_1988 said:

You missed the bit about psychology. 

You can’t buy mentality, after all. 

Or the "phycological barrier" as our excellent piece of journalism initially identifies it.

Edited August 3, 2023 by Monkey Tennis

[The Saintee]

The OF psychology is outrageous though.

 

Nobody else wants to win as much as they do.

[AJF]

6 hours ago, The Saintee said:

The OF psychology is outrageous though.

 

Nobody else wants to win as much as they do.

It’s in our DNA. You can’t argue with genetics.

[Dirty Sanchez]

Daily Record chimes in with the revelation that Saddam Hussein was running Iran too.

 

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/derek-ferguson-claims-rangers-were-30628350?int_source=nba

 

[Miguel Sanchez]

Quote

"We were told this guy was coming to meet us and it was Saddam. I shook his hand but we didn't know who he was. Thank God we didn't know. He wasn't a big guy, he was just a wee guy like myself.

"We were encouraged to lose the second game against the Iraqi national team. It was the usual, we were giving it a bit and we got told to lay off the gas and give them a bit of the ball. And I think that was Saddam."

Is there a chance this is entirely a work of fiction?

[Jacky1990]

On 03/08/2023 at 09:09, 2426255 said:

The apparent inability from anyone to cite any examples of these mythical journalists tells it's own story. Not one measly example. I suggested Jonathan Wilson is a good example because he worked behind the scenes with Guardiola for a year documenting his methods so I respect that and will give his articles/interviews the time of day even if the subject matter is the realm of football professionals. 

Tim Vickery.

Every journalist who appears o  the Terrace podcast.

The foreign focused guys from BT  are excellent. 

Theres a guy who does the BBC deadline day shows, name escapes me, that is infinitely better and more informed than ex pros.

Dont get me wrong, theres a lot of guff journalists out there (hiya Keith Jackson), but by in large my preference is always a journalist who knows what he/she is doing.

Id agrue ex-pro pundits are 80-90% shite 

[Monkey Tennis]

43 minutes ago, Miguel Sanchez said:

Is there a chance this is entirely a work of fiction?

Yes he's probably got the wrong person, or country.

He's certainly the first to describe Saddam as a wee guy.  He was over 6 feet tall, even before the neck stretching.

[Hoose Rice]

23 hours ago, AJF said:

It’s in our DNA. You can’t argue with genetics.

Aye.  Glory hunting cuntos. 

[afc_blockhead]

On 03/08/2023 at 23:19, AJF said:

It’s in our DNA. You can’t argue with genetics.

Bigotry presumably?

[Guest]

Vickery has said the level of respect he's afforded in Brazil is humbling and he feels imposter syndrome from it because he wasn't a footballer. He's certainly earned it, though, as he wasn't fast-tracked to the top or anything. He's been there since 1994 and his opinions have made enough sense in that time for Brazilians to elevate him. Personally, I think his arguments on Brazilian national team failure since 2002 are very persuasive. He has many but the main one is that Brazil don't produce ball-playing centre mids in the Luka Modric mould. I think that was on display again in last year's world cup as their centre mid was Casemiro, primarlily a defensive player, then attacking midfielder Lucas Paqueta awkwardly shoe-horned into a deeper role.

Guillem Balague was mentioned a few comments back. He's not an analyst, more a reporter. He's into what I call football gossip. I remember his massive scoop a decade or so ago which was his Real Madrid dressing room mole had told him the Real Madrid players' bitchy nickname for Lionel Messi. That type of thing and transfer rumours are his speciality.

I listened to an interview with Frank Leboeuf quite recently where he was talking about this. He said he'd always assumed non-player analysts didn't know their arse from their elbow until he himself began working in TV analysis after retirement. He said he really had his mind changed after meeting and discussing football with some (I'm sure not all) of the non-player analysts.

We know from the evidence with managers that non-players can understand football as well as former players. Maurizio Sarri is a good current example. I think it can probably be true of some journalists too.

[2426255]

14 hours ago, Jacky1990 said:

by in large my preference is always a journalist who knows what he/she is doing.

With respect to on the pitch stuff my preference is always a manager or player who knows what he/she is doing and I'd argue that at least 90 - 100% of journalists write utter shite on the subject of football. You could say I'm more coaches voice than Sunday supplement.

That said, we're probably best to just agree to disagree and move on. You can keep yer Martin Samuels, Simon Stones and Henry Winters of this world and ill stick to the likes of Jose Mourinho, Sean Dyche and Cesc Fabregas. 

Edited August 5, 2023 by 2426255