Jump to content

The Terrible Journalism & Tom English Thread


Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, vikingTON said:

Well no - it's a thread discussing terrible journalism in Scottish football; this is his natural home then.

Given that his fail is more often than not spun out into an absolute mess of a piece for The Guardian I'm not buying this cunning, Twitter troll theory. The Inverness CT forum revelations seem to confirm that he's just an utterly tragic loser. 

 

Yes - obviously can discuss him in this thread.

But people should just ignore him - the man himself has admitted his twitter account is an exercise in generating traffic. What more evidence then that do you need???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't know if this has been discussed elsewhere, if so apologies in advance.

Read this in the print edition of the Herald earlier.  Actually think the headline was different to that which they've used online:

http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/14777788.Trivial_sporting_concerns_are_put_into_perspective_by_Rangers_supporters_bus_tragedy/

Now I don't know if the Rangers or Partick players could possibly have known about the bus crash before the game kicked off.  On balance I think it unlikely but I don't know for definite.  It seems indeed from this article nobody was aware of what exactly had happened until after the game had finished. Ultimately though what happened in that accident was a human tragedy that had no real relation to anything that happened on the pitch on Saturday afternoon one way or another and ought to be respected as such.  The actual action on the pitch was just a game, to be taken as seriously as any other football match, and to be considered in a footballing context and no other.

Consequently I find the tone of this match report to be so misguided as to be somewhat offensive.

The part of the article I have a particular issue with is language such as the below:

THE outcome of a mere football match, concerns at the performance of a team and unhappiness felt at certain unpunished challenges all seemed so utterly trivial.

The resentment which the Partick players felt at referee Stephen Finnie and his assistants failing to spot two separate fouls by Rangers centre half Philippe Senderos in the first half suddenly appeared inconsequential.

Others may disagree but I find this bizarre and completely inappropriate.  The article at length, and quite rightly, points out how meaningless football and everything that goes with it is compared to a human life.  That is something I think anybody would agree with.  The death of a Rangers fan on his way to the match is evidently deeply unfortunate and a terrible loss for his friends and family.  The game however went ahead with all parties apparently unaware of this human tragedy and it ought to be treated in the same manner as any other football fixture on that basis.  If Partick felt aggrieved by a refereeing decision that resentment is just as consequential as that felt by any other set of supporters in any other game on Saturday.  They ought not to be told they can't complain about what happened in the game because a fan unfortunately died in an unrelated incident.

By all means the journalist should point out in circumstances like these that football, in the grand scheme of things, is only a game and isn't anything like as important as a human life.  Insinuating we can't discuss or be indignant about the detail of the match as football supporters is I think entirely inappropriate.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not an unbiased observer in this one but that isn't what was said. The line you quoted said that it seemed inconsequential, it doesn't say that it shouldn't be discussed or that Partick were wrong to complain, just that when you look back after a game at the moments of controversy, after the death of a fan it's natural to think that it doesn't matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't say that was what was said, I said it was insinuated.  

I found the tone of the piece to be a bit off.  I didn't say I objected to the general sentiment but it would have been better, in my opinion, for the journalist to put forward his thoughts on the general significance or otherwise of football in the grand scheme of things and then deal with the details of the match, not clumsily try to sew them together.

What happened on the pitch is entirely removed from what happened outside the ground.  By all means say 'when you think of a human life football isn't that important'.  Everyone can agree with that.  I'm not comfortable with 'compared to a human life that particular refereeing decision was unimportant'.  You may disagree but to me that insinuates the decision ought not to be mulled over in the usual fashion.  That part of the article to me seems somewhat inappropriate.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Redstarstranraer said:

I didn't say that was what was said, I said it was insinuated.  

I found the tone of the piece to be a bit off.  I didn't say I objected to the general sentiment but it would have been better, in my opinion, for the journalist to put forward his thoughts on the general significance or otherwise of football in the grand scheme of things and then deal with the details of the match, not clumsily try to sew them together.

What happened on the pitch is entirely removed from what happened outside the ground.  By all means say 'when you think of a human life football isn't that important'.  Everyone can agree with that.  I'm not comfortable with 'compared to a human life that particular refereeing decision was unimportant'.  You may disagree but to me that insinuates the decision ought not to be mulled over in the usual fashion.  That part of the article to me seems somewhat inappropriate.

 

FWIW, I agree. 

Who was the reporter?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Matthew Lindsay, think he's meant to be 'Chief Football Reporter', but then everyone at the Herald seems to be Chief Football Reporter.


I think they get a day each as Chief Football Reporter
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sure Barry Ferguson is an interesting guy and all, but surely three stories about him on the main page of the BBC website's Scottish football page is a bit much?  I've never quite understood why we're apparently needing to know his views on everything.  Any other League 2 managers get this coverage?  Any other former Scotland captains, even? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Tulloch Gorum said:

I'm sure Barry Ferguson is an interesting guy and all, but surely three stories about him on the main page of the BBC website's Scottish football page is a bit much?  I've never quite understood why we're apparently needing to know his views on everything.  Any other League 2 managers get this coverage?  Any other former Scotland captains, even? 

Wee Baz had some brilliant moments as a player.  Interesting guy?  Have my doubts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, The_Kincardine said:

Wee Baz had some brilliant moments as a player.  Interesting guy?  Have my doubts.

hahaha.

unless you count 4 yard sideways passes as brilliant moments, he didn't.

I did find giving the vs to the tv cameras childishly amusing though. I did pretend to be outraged at the time, but I wasn't really.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He was on the sport bit on the news as well, who gives a f**k about anything he has to say. A disgrace of a Scotland captain, fairly average player and a thick bigot c**t to boot. Obviously completely broke and desperate for any crumbs the BBC/media can throw him.




Agree with a lot you have said.

Im as big an anti Sevco bigot as anyone.

But he was was exceedingly better than a fairly average player.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

He was nothing of the sort. He was fortunate to play in an era where one dimensional midfielders were given free reign in teams. Stick him in a side today and he'd be lost.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, RandomGuy. said:

He was nothing of the sort. He was fortunate to play in an era where one dimensional midfielders were given free reign in teams. Stick him in a side today and he'd be lost.

For me, that's bullshit.  In today's game, where most teams will play two holding midfielders, he'd have excelled.  Even more than he did when he played.

To suggest he was anything other than a fantastic player is nothing other than not liking the guy because of who he played for.

He should have got more Scotland caps, however, I believe him when he said he cared.  I'll remember his celebration when he scored against Italy in 2007.  That man cared.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/30/2016 at 11:29, Savage Henry said:

For a Grauniad journalist, that's batshit mental. Are you sure it was him?

 

It's absolutely true.  100%.  I remember it well.  He was also prone to calling people "son" when he was arguing with them.
I also am very very confident he'll be reading this thread too, to see what is said about him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...