Chelsea.....

MARKB said:
No ciggies for 3.5 months and it hasn't affected my mood at all...
Click to expand...


want one?

marlboro_lights.gif
 
MARKB said:
I agree with what you say about the press, but uk football clubs and those in UK Footy in general always talk ****e to the press anyway. How many times have clubs said "no his jobs safe" only to fire him within days or has a player said "I have no plans to leave this club" only to see they've be in advance negotiations all along.:roll::roll:

And what was that crap about from chelsea last week "He didn't resign and he wasn't sacked" - so he's either still there or he was made redundant.:lol:

Honestly, the bull**** is ridiculous. No wonder the game is so far up it's own arse nowadays.

****ing talk ****ing straight or keep it zipped. ****ers.
Click to expand...
Need a cigarette there, Mark? :lol:

The situation with Mourinho was basically akin to a conversation like:
- This isn't working out.
- Ya, you're right
- Perhaps it's time for a change
- Maybe it is
*insert several more similar lines*
- OK, maybe you should go
- Ya, maybe I should

You could say that's a sacking but the situation really was just that intractable from what I hear.

Agree with you in general about English football speak - sometimes there are business reasons behind it and sometimes people are just talking crap. Neverhtless, I've seen substantially more lies printed in the press than I've seen misinformation come out of Chelsea. I'm sure it's the same at other clubs.
 
Morbyd said:
In general, yes... I put a lot more faith in the accuracy of quotes (and corroboration by a 2nd source) in major US newspapers than in the UK press. They're a lot more careful, even though the protection laws are weaker. Their sources usually have to be someone high up in the organization, not a friend of a friend or other person with 3rd hand knowledge.
Click to expand...

This means the US papers are often much slower-moving when it comes to breaking stories.

A frivolous example, perhaps, but when the Spice Girls reunion story broke, the band and their PR minions rubbished it as the timing did not suit them, even though it was 100 per cent true.

So gung-ho irresponsible Fleet Street was on the money that time with a single source story.

Both approaches have their pros and cons, I'd say.

But one notable recent outcome of the British way of doing things has been the marked difference in coverage of Blair and Bush's handling of Iraq and the war on terror.

I know which way I'd rather that one was tackled. And it's not the American Way . . .

But back to the subject of football stories. A lot of them come from players - and even more to the point, agents - agitating for various things, usually pay rises.
 
OK then boys - are we getting some more totty in the league or not - its all I really want to know...

Oh and Mark - once you get past 4 months - its a piece of piss this stopping smoking malarky - managed an 9 hr clubbing extravaganza in all manner of states and didnt desire a ciggie once - I was so proud of myself :lol::lol::lol::lol:
 
grego said:
mvb is quite simply one of the best people to have ever graced a football pitch. he is the coolest, deadliest, classiest finisher ever. he is the epitome of total football. he tried what others feared to attempt and rarely failed either. he was a leader and inspiration to his team mates and anyone watching. he was a match winner and true champion.
Click to expand...

Well said G spot!! Greatest player i ever saw, quick, excellent in the air & with his back to goal, 2 footed, good vision, and could take the ball past defenders!!
 
Digger said:
This means the US papers are often much slower-moving when it comes to breaking stories.

A frivolous example, perhaps, but when the Spice Girls reunion story broke, the band and their PR minions rubbished it as the timing did not suit them, even though it was 100 per cent true.

So gung-ho irresponsible Fleet Street was on the money that time with a single source story.

Both approaches have their pros and cons, I'd say.

But one notable recent outcome of the British way of doing things has been the marked difference in coverage of Blair and Bush's handling of Iraq and the war on terror.

I know which way I'd rather that one was tackled. And it's not the American Way . . .

But back to the subject of football stories. A lot of them come from players - and even more to the point, agents - agitating for various things, usually pay rises.
Click to expand...
US papers aren't slower... they just report news when it happens instead of trying to anticipate things. I'd prefer to have the news accurately when it happens than inaccurately a day or two in advance (as UK papers never correct all the details they get wrong by anticipating)

The differences in Iraq coverage had nothing to do with this difference in journalistic style we're discussing. It was more editorial decisions... and in this case, I agree that the UK broadsheets covered it better.

Very true re: players/agents.

And on a brighter note, COME ON BLUES! :D
Hull 0 London 4!
 
It was only Hull though. They still managed infinitely more shots on goal against us than we did against Premiership opposition last weekend...

Still can't wait to see Avram pack his bags...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top