Jump to content
Ludo*1

The Terrible Journalism & Tom English Thread

Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, Ron Aldo said:

Is it because someone else won it?

Tbf that's literally what the article is, just a list of teams who've knocked them out.

Incredible someone gets real money to write these things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, GNU_Linux said:

w6akkzlcbqq61.jpg

"Outstanding Journalism (excluding Tom English)" thread for reporting of this calibre.

 

Screenshot_20210403-091354_BBC Sport.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, GNU_Linux said:

w6akkzlcbqq61.jpg

Little wonder he's holding his head - must have achieved an O Grade at English, which is more than the tweeter obviously did.

Edited by Jacksgranda
Sleppnig

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My turn

"WHY HAVE DUNDEE NOT WON THE CUP FOR 111 YEARS?

Bad luck, bad management on and off the pitch and they've mostly at best been mediocre since the 60s"

£500 quid please. Ta.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kris Boyd in today’s Sun, talking about John Kennedy. 

 

 

7D4961E0-C8BE-4ECB-A9DB-76CE73F98EFE.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/56635658

Possibly wrong thread for this but following on from Rangers selfless offer of providing a colt team in League 2 to aid the development of young players for the national team, they have extended that charitable thinking by pointing out that a ban to Nathan Patterson would be damaging to the SFA and Scotland.

If only more Scottish clubs had this attitude we may have been world cup winners by now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What a load of pish. It's only a few games anyway! If he had a minor injury that saw him out for 4 weeks it would be no different.

Also no shock to see Sevco, who have so many massive advantages over everyone else save their pals across Glasgow, wanting yet even more preferential treatment. Shitebags.

Edited by DA Baracus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He’s nowhere near the Scotland team. The idea that Steve Clarke will be raging about a 4 game ban is tremendous 🤣

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the point that is clumsily being made by Gerrard is that in the context of what actually happened (5 lads from the club and their partners playing a game of Monopoly), a six game ban is disproportionate when compared to other rule breakers this season. Jones and Edmundson had a party with a pile of Glasgow influencers, trying to get their hole in the process, and only got one game more. Bolingoli actually left the country, got his end away, went back into training and shared a pitch with another club when he was most likely to be infectious and got a game less. You can argue the toss on which is more severe because there’s an element of subjectivity to interpreting these rules, but I don’t think it’s ridiculous to hold the opinion that one of those infractions is significantly less severe than the other two, yet the punishments don’t reflect that.

The bit about damaging career prospects etc. I don’t really get. Though I’ve said for a while now on here that Gerrard rates Patterson very highly, so it’s interesting to see that reflected in his comments

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, G51 said:

I think the point that is clumsily being made by Gerrard is that in the context of what actually happened (5 lads from the club and their partners playing a game of Monopoly), a six game ban is disproportionate when compared to other rule breakers this season. Jones and Edmundson had a party with a pile of Glasgow influencers, trying to get their hole in the process, and only got one game more. Bolingoli actually left the country, got his end away, went back into training and shared a pitch with another club when he was most likely to be infectious and got a game less. You can argue the toss on which is more severe because there’s an element of subjectivity to interpreting these rules, but I don’t think it’s ridiculous to hold the opinion that one of those infractions is significantly less severe than the other two, yet the punishments don’t reflect that.

The bit about damaging career prospects etc. I don’t really get. Though I’ve said for a while now on here that Gerrard rates Patterson very highly, so it’s interesting to see that reflected in his comments

 

I don't have much issue with him contesting the length of ban based on context.

The framing of it as damaging to Scotland is quite laughable, however.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, G51 said:

I think the point that is clumsily being made by Gerrard is that in the context of what actually happened (5 lads from the club and their partners playing a game of Monopoly), a six game ban is disproportionate when compared to other rule breakers this season. Jones and Edmundson had a party with a pile of Glasgow influencers, trying to get their hole in the process, and only got one game more. Bolingoli actually left the country, got his end away, went back into training and shared a pitch with another club when he was most likely to be infectious and got a game less. You can argue the toss on which is more severe because there’s an element of subjectivity to interpreting these rules, but I don’t think it’s ridiculous to hold the opinion that one of those infractions is significantly less severe than the other two, yet the punishments don’t reflect that.

The bit about damaging career prospects etc. I don’t really get. Though I’ve said for a while now on here that Gerrard rates Patterson very highly, so it’s interesting to see that reflected in his comments

 

Aye, that’s the argument I was trying to make during the week about the severity of the bans seeming disproportionate. Gerrard has really made a bad argument for it though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, G51 said:

I think the point that is clumsily being made by Gerrard is that in the context of what actually happened (5 lads from the club and their partners playing a game of Monopoly), a six game ban is disproportionate when compared to other rule breakers this season. Jones and Edmundson had a party with a pile of Glasgow influencers, trying to get their hole in the process, and only got one game more. Bolingoli actually left the country, got his end away, went back into training and shared a pitch with another club when he was most likely to be infectious and got a game less. You can argue the toss on which is more severe because there’s an element of subjectivity to interpreting these rules, but I don’t think it’s ridiculous to hold the opinion that one of those infractions is significantly less severe than the other two, yet the punishments don’t reflect that.

The bit about damaging career prospects etc. I don’t really get. Though I’ve said for a while now on here that Gerrard rates Patterson very highly, so it’s interesting to see that reflected in his comments

 

Oldfirmfacts on Twitter: "Steve Clarke announces first Scotland squad… "

Angry celebrations and civil unrest on the cards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Dons_1988 said:

I don't have much issue with him contesting the length of ban based on context.

The framing of it as damaging to Scotland is quite laughable, however.

Reading it again, i don’t know if he is saying that:

 

Quote

 

Asked if he felt the ban might hamper the right-back's hopes of forcing his way into Scotland's European Championship squad, Gerrard said: "I'm not saying that at all. 

"That's Steve Clarke's decision. I know Steve rates him. We've had a discussion over Nathan.

"He's burst onto the scene, played against top teams and individuals and you can see there is a talent and potential there.

"It's only a matter of time before he becomes an international. That's not putting any pressure on the player. But those decisions are down to Steve."

 

I dunno, it’s an odd couple of quotes that don’t really make sense. It’s pretty obvious that as soon as Clarke feels Patterson is experienced enough, he’s going to get into the squad. Partly because he’s producing at Tavernier-esque levels, and partly because we have nothing else there. I doubt those four games are going to be the difference between making the squad and not making it.

Obviously player ability shouldn’t be a factor in the level of punishment, nor should availability for Scotland.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, G51 said:

Reading it again, i don’t know if he is saying that:

 

 

I dunno, it’s an odd couple of quotes that don’t really make sense. It’s pretty obvious that as soon as Clarke feels Patterson is experienced enough, he’s going to get into the squad. Partly because he’s producing at Tavernier-esque levels, and partly because we have nothing else there. I doubt those four games are going to be the difference between making the squad and not making it.

Obviously player ability shouldn’t be a factor in the level of punishment, nor should availability for Scotland.

"I'm not too happy over that and I'm not sure Steve Clarke will be very happy as well," said Gerrard.

"Because, unfortunately, he's going to have a big ban now."

"You're talking about one of the brightest prospects ever in terms of right-back. This kid is going to go and play for Scotland and all of a sudden the SFA wants to ban him for that long. I don't get it."

You could argue about what he actually meant I suppose but it's a terrible argument for how to run a disciplinary process at the very least.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Dons_1988 said:

"I'm not too happy over that and I'm not sure Steve Clarke will be very happy as well," said Gerrard.

"Because, unfortunately, he's going to have a big ban now."

"You're talking about one of the brightest prospects ever in terms of right-back. This kid is going to go and play for Scotland and all of a sudden the SFA wants to ban him for that long. I don't get it."

You could argue about what he actually meant I suppose but it's a terrible argument for how to run a disciplinary process at the very least.

Sure is. I expect we’ll hear more about it during the week.

Gerrard certainly isn’t doing anything to cool the hype about Patterson anyway

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jings and I thought Rodgers was the biggest slaverer we've seen in recent times. Gerrard keeps coming out with utter tripe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aw! C'mon - the boy's still learning. In this case hopefully he's learned that rules/laws are in place for a reason and that ignoring them can come at a cost.  And with any luck the experience will install a wee bit more discipline in his professional life. 

"Ah know the manager said "Don't drift into the middle, stay on the wing" but ah didn't think it'd matter much, ken?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, afca32 said:

Jings and I thought Rodgers was the biggest slaverer we've seen in recent times. Gerrard keeps coming out with utter tripe.

I think he gets a bit of a bye ball 'cos he's a Scouser.

Share this post


Link to post
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...