Jump to content

The Terrible Journalism & Tom English Thread


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Kyle Reese said:

Dariusz Adamczuk. Doubt he would have needed his kit or training gear too much, so good that it was getting used, I suppose.

Aye, went to Rangers and instantly fell into a deep depression which ultimately made him retire aged around 30ish. Shame as he was top notch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Ludo*1 said:

Aye, went to Rangers and instantly fell into a deep depression which ultimately made him retire aged around 30ish. Shame as he was top notch.

Looked decent at Dundee. Shame, because it kinda robbed the division of a wee bit of quality, that ultimately sat on the Ibrox bench instead. Whatever anyone thinks of the old Rangers and their side letters and EBT’s, they had a phenomenal squad at that time, and he was never likely to get much game time. End result is another team weakened, and a good player not playing every week. Just pretty depressing when you think of all the similar cases over the years. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Hoose Rice said:

Didn’t he have online banking to view his EBTs? 

?

3 minutes ago, Kyle Reese said:

Looked decent at Dundee. Shame, because it kinda robbed the division of a wee bit of quality, that ultimately sat on the Ibrox bench instead. Whatever anyone thinks of the old Rangers and their side letters and EBT’s, they had a phenomenal squad at that time, and he was never likely to get much game time. End result is another team weakened, and a good player not playing every week. Just pretty depressing when you think of all the similar cases over the years. 

100%. It's mad the quality of the division and indeed, even our second tier had from around the mid-90s to about 2004-5ish. Some absolutely brilliant players that would waltz into the strongest of teams now a days.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Ludo*1 said:

?

100%. It's mad the quality of the division and indeed, even our second tier had from around the mid-90s to about 2004-5ish. Some absolutely brilliant players that would waltz into the strongest of teams now a days.

English football hadn’t artificially inflated wages for everyone yet. There wasn’t such a gigantic gap between what we could pay and clubs on the continent. Hearts were able to sign the likes of Salvatori, Adam, Flogel and Bruno. Now the financial disparity is enormous. It’s even worse domestically though between teams north and south of the border. EFL1 sides paying ludicrous wages for mediocre to dross players and carrying squads of sometimes around 30-40 players. Wages of around four times what the third biggest Scottish top flight club can afford. It’s absolutely destroyed Scottish Football. Coupled with our inability to get a competitive TV deal compared with other small European countries, it’s led to year upon year of reduction in quality. Can’t build a squad like we used to, because agents move your best players on so quickly, you face a rebuild year on year. It’s hard not to develop apathy. 
 

 

Edited by Kyle Reese
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, AJF said:

Why the hell are people possessed to write shite like this 😂

Apologies if that caused you some offence. But (a) look again - it does look like a salute, even it if was a high-5 (it was a throwaway flippancy (aka shite) and any possible association with any particular club didn't even cross my mind). And (b) I couldn't remember a "DA" from that time - a genuine question now answered.

I guess you are a bit stressed trying to be the voice of reason through recent events.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, House Bartender said:

Apologies if that caused you some offence. But (a) look again - it does look like a salute, even it if was a high-5 (it was a throwaway flippancy (aka shite) and any possible association with any particular club didn't even cross my mind).

Aye, that’s fair enough. I’m a bit sensitive just now 😂

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Was flicking through Sky Sports and saw that they’re covering Women’s football. Fair enough.

However, the standard is like a boys under 14 game. Sky are piling cash into it and apparently one of the Chelsea women is being paid £200000 a year! I believe they’re are Scotland male international players who don’t earn that. Without wishing to encourage attacks by femisogynists, this is really ridiculous. Good luck to the players able to command these wages, but it shows the deal signed by Scottish football for what it is. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, CambieBud said:

Was flicking through Sky Sports and saw that they’re covering Women’s football. Fair enough.

However, the standard is like a boys under 14 game. Sky are piling cash into it and apparently one of the Chelsea women is being paid £200000 a year! I believe they’re are Scotland male international players who don’t earn that. Without wishing to encourage attacks by femisogynists, this is really ridiculous. Good luck to the players able to command these wages, but it shows the deal signed by Scottish football for what it is. 

Sky supporting women's football isnt the issue and completely irrelevant to the Scottish football deal.

Sky paying literal billions for the EPL which overinflates wages across the board, increasing the cost of football to the punter and making it harder for Scottish clubs to compete is absolutely part of the issue.

A women earning £200k a year is a weird thing to get annoyed about. Absolute bang average players like Ben Chilwell earning ~£200k a WEEK is though.

Will have a stauner for days when the EPL bubble bursts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Jacky1990 said:

Sky supporting women's football isnt the issue and completely irrelevant to the Scottish football deal.

Sky paying literal billions for the EPL which overinflates wages across the board, increasing the cost of football to the punter and making it harder for Scottish clubs to compete is absolutely part of the issue.

A women earning £200k a year is a weird thing to get annoyed about. Absolute bang average players like Ben Chilwell earning ~£200k a WEEK is though.

Will have a stauner for days when the EPL bubble bursts.

Plus is being part of a UK market is a big issue when it comes to negotiating deal and promoting the league 

We will always play second fiddle even within Scotland 

See Scots who slag off our own game while wearing an Everton top sitting at home in Fife

Theyve absolutely been brainwashed into the “best league in the world” advertising  campaign 

Edited by Clown Job
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Jacky1990 said:

Sky supporting women's football isnt the issue and completely irrelevant to the Scottish football deal.

Sky paying literal billions for the EPL which overinflates wages across the board, increasing the cost of football to the punter and making it harder for Scottish clubs to compete is absolutely part of the issue.

A women earning £200k a year is a weird thing to get annoyed about. Absolute bang average players like Ben Chilwell earning ~£200k a WEEK is though.

Will have a stauner for days when the EPL bubble bursts.

In fairness to the poster, I don't think they were suggesting there was any issue with Sky covering woman's football - they even said as much in their first line.

I think they were more using it as a comparison to our TV deal. We often compare our TV deal to leagues that we consider to be weaker or in or around our level (people are often voicing their concerns that the Scandinavian, Belgian, Dutch leagues etc. get a lot more than us) - I don't see why woman's football should be excluded from that comparison.

For context though, from limited research I found that the SPFL signed a TV deal in 2018 for £125M covering 5 seasons = £25M per season. The Women's Super League has just signed a deal in March worth £24M over the next 3 seasons = £8M a season. So, we do actually have a much larger broadcasting deal than The Women's Super League. I suppose it is then subjective whether you think our value should be greater than a 200% increase on their broadcasting deal...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am a bit late to this, as I have no intention of reading the sun, but I noticed one that had been thrown away has the headline that Clarke was trying to fight the "Yellow Peril" - in reference to yellow cards.

Now, I appreciate that the sub ed, or whoever it is that sets up the headlines, never intended to hint at a racist trope, but "yellow peril" is definitely that.

It seems like lazy journalism rather than intent, and to many this will just go by them without a second thought, it's still pretty poor though.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ric said:

I am a bit late to this, as I have no intention of reading the sun, but I noticed one that had been thrown away has the headline that Clarke was trying to fight the "Yellow Peril" - in reference to yellow cards.

Now, I appreciate that the sub ed, or whoever it is that sets up the headlines, never intended to hint at a racist trope, but "yellow peril" is definitely that.

It seems like lazy journalism rather than intent, and to many this will just go by them without a second thought, it's still pretty poor though.

 

Christ, that is actually pretty poor. Can only hope the editor wasn’t aware of the roots of that particular term. It is the Sun though, so equally I wouldn’t be surprised if they did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ric said:

I am a bit late to this, as I have no intention of reading the sun, but I noticed one that had been thrown away has the headline that Clarke was trying to fight the "Yellow Peril" - in reference to yellow cards.

Now, I appreciate that the sub ed, or whoever it is that sets up the headlines, never intended to hint at a racist trope, but "yellow peril" is definitely that.

It seems like lazy journalism rather than intent, and to many this will just go by them without a second thought, it's still pretty poor though.

 

Must admit I didnt know what that phrase meant, but that is beyond poor in my opinion.

Surely an editor (or the journalist themselves) have a duty to ensure that any terms, phrases, anecdotes, etc, that they use in their writings are at the very least above board. Using that phrase isnt okay in the slightest.

I do hope this is laziness rather than anything intentional, but it takes literal seconds to google to check. Its unacceptable, even for a rag like the sun.

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...