Football journalism

I know what I want and what I don't want (alas these rules can be broken but rarely are):

Want:
Factual data (injuries, form, etc.) that will allow me to make my own decision on a game.
Sober understanding of off the field details (i.e. finances, fanbase size and opinion, etc.)
A basic understanding of tactics. You don't have to be Jonathon Wilson but fucking hell you'd think TOO MANY writers/talking heads etc. have only just been introduced to the game.
Try to avoid bias, especially when it comes to nationalism.
An appreciation of all that happens on the pitch - sometimes a great last gasp tackle is much more important than a goal, a right back can be MOTM over a striker etc.
An interesting perspective about something that is droppin' knowledge (in a normal tone and not a 'oh these kids know nothing these days' one).
An understanding of history or perspective of what made a team what they are. I know it was only a ilx thing but the chanting Where Were You When You Were Shit to Chelsea fans discussion is a good example of how journalists need this.
Genuine enthusiasm for the game.
Genuine enthusiasm to see more to the game than the goalscorer.

Don't want:
Predictions on games like I'm not supposed to think for myself.
Flowery or forced language. I know that if Havand & Waterlooville are playing at Anfield that it is a spectacle, you can only ruin it by telling me what I already know 4000times with stupid language.
Ridiculous loss of perpective: for example - only 5 clubs at most can win the highest level championships in this country (incl. Europa/CL) and it is not the end of the world when 90 teams a season don't win them.
Mispaced idolism (i.e. the Rooney media).
Writers/talking heads not knowing shit about who they talk about. If Utd get a team of plucky part-time plumbers and window washers from Moldova in the Champions League, it is ok to not know but if someone plays in the top 5 leagues and you are professional, I'd hope you'd do more than read a wikipedia article. Or at least know who fucking Ben Arfa or David Silva is.

There is a great story about Richard Williams when he was a music writer writing about Lennon's Weddings album and favourably reviewing the engineer's test recordings of white noise that he was sent by mistake.

Now that is what I call 70s music journalism!

There is a great story about Richard Williams when he was a music writer writing about Lennon's Weddings album and favourably reviewing the engineer's test recordings of white noise that he was sent by mistake.

lolol I thought you were just joking abt it actually being him

oh cmon can we not just get music its own board or something?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/paulhayward

look at this jawdropping litany of pointless filler. i hadn't actually realised it was this bad til now since it never occurred to me he could possibly be writing three separate identical pieces on each non-subject daily.

Carlo Ancelotti on the precipice as Chelsea prepare for Old Trafford
10 Apr 2011

Even Carlo Ancelotti the cool one has been consumed by this age of rage
7 Apr 2011

What Chelsea's Fernando Torres wouldn't give for a goal celebration
7 Apr 2011

Emotional baggage brought home from Moscow still weighs on Chelsea
6 Apr 2011

hayward is dire....

not football but check this quote, used as a link in the story on bbc sport about the augusta masters

"To McIlroy's generation, Woods is the icon, the man they watched as kids, the man who changed the sport. They could be about to get their own icon"

if woods is their icon then how could they be about to get their own one? it just defies belief how shit these people are.

I understand the need for LOTS of journalism each day but does that sort of stuff really bring in more hits than a well written piece about a club less talked about? Like if you regularly picked a club with lots of fans that aren't necc. written about often, like say, modern Leeds, couldn't you in theory be more interesting AND still get mad website hits?

there's too much opinion on everything

Well, yes.

the real question is how many of us saw the title, thought fucks sake that looks shit, clicked it, read it, thought yep that was shit

advertisers arent going to care about the quality of the hits and the media can't afford not have them

don't click them then?

people always will

the only pieces that are going to negatively impact on advertiser revenue longterm are the EXCLUSIVE transfer wind-ups like the bale stunt, and even that's highly arguable

tbh im surprised how fucking many sites still run on EXCLUSIVE TRANSFER NEWS each and every day, like oh yeah you found out who Man Utd are going to spend - FUCKING HELL THAT WAS SWEET FROM EBOUE - 60m on in October, did you?

it's the tribalfootball.com model that's especially brutal - just dudes churning and churning out random flagrant lies and everyone knows it. would love to find out how much money they make

but yeah the greater point is it's folly to claim that we're totally above it. i for one can't wait til qpr reinvest the £20m taarabt money from madrid on niko kranjcar and oscar wendt this summer (all "actual" "rumours" i've seen).

i gave it up cold turkey when arsenal signed arsenal's joe cole this summer on 100k a week and it would be the best signing ever

could still happen

please!!!

That top Hayward piece is absolutely typical of the sort of stuff I hate. It's full of conjecture, it's unoriginal, it's drably written - it's pure space filler. Yes, I did read it but that's because it was about Chelsea, wouldn't have touched it otherwise.

Hayward used to be a good writer but is now burnt out. Reminds me of many music journalists. I feel a bit sorry for them, cannot possibly imagine being stuck writing on one subject, be it sport, music or football for the rest of my life.

Alan Green (of all people) was saying recently the problem with football coverage/journalism is access. Footballers don't make themselves available for interview so hacks have to fill the space with waffle. That's definitely the case with Abramovich, where nobody has a clue what he is thinking but rarely dares admit it.

In the Crampton piece on Terry he talks about the fact he liked terry because he showed common courtesy in turning up on time and then attempted to answer questions honestly and with thought.

This is quite important. Football people are diabolical at interviews. I interviewed Neil Warnock last November. He changed the interview time at the last minute and then turned up an hour late anyway. He wasn't bad when he got there, but spoke largely in platitudes. that meant he gave good quotes, but ones almost entirely lacking in depth. He didn't attempt to engage with me, didn't really answer my questions and only give the photographer five minutes. (By comparison, the next day I interviewed Marianne Faithfull, who is 100 times more famous and 100 times better to interview.)

This is typical and it's something football writers have to deal with on a daily/weekly basis. It would drive me insane.

^ excellent post

Football people don't really need the media, as individuals anyway, so the poor attitude maybe shouldn't be that surprising. They do seem better when they have something they need to promote that they actually care about - Ryan Giggs gave good copy on his Sierra Leone stuff last year.

It also doesn't help that they get such gentle lobs all the time, but then if you ask Ferguson a difficult question he just tells you to fuck off, and it's you who loses out - music journos have a bit more power that way too.

Pete W largely otm. The attitude of the football clubs towards the media is massively depressing. There is no sense of sharing the game or wanting to let it breathe in a public space, they know they are the number one sport in the UK and hence they don't give a flying fuck about anyone.

When I worked on the kids sports show in the Beeb so many other sports would set up whatever the hell you wanted, great access to pros and they'd do things for you, like we had Ian Poulter fielding questions from a bunch of kids etc...the press officers in other sports help you and want to make the game stand out.

Football clubs have massively wary and hassled press officers who you get the feeling have a nightmare job in trying to get the players to do anything, so the same vaguely media friendly guys are wheeled out over and over again.

The players themselves seem like aliens half the time, incapable of actually having a laugh or relaxing, and barely able to stop swearing or making horrible jokes for the two mins interview you wanted for kids telly. It's majorly hard to bring out a human side in so many of the pros.

There are exceptions obviously...

This is quite important. Football people are diabolical at interviews. I interviewed Neil Warnock last November. He changed the interview time at the last minute and then turned up an hour late anyway. He wasn't bad when he got there, but spoke largely in platitudes. that meant he gave good quotes, but ones almost entirely lacking in depth. He didn't attempt to engage with me, didn't really answer my questions and only give the photographer five minutes. (By comparison, the next day I interviewed Marianne Faithfull, who is 100 times more famous and 100 times better to interview.)

weirdly we did a shoot with neil warnock and he was brilliant, the press officer was really helpful and we got him to talk about being a manager and explain how it works for kids and stuff, he had a bit of a laugh and was funny. he said his kids watched the show tho so maybe he gave us more as a result.

lol this whole issue can be summed up as WHY HARRY REDKNAPP HAS A NEWS STORY ON BBC SPORT EVERY SINGLE DAY

Yeah people bitch about Wenger getting love from journos but it is only because he has a press conference every friday and will at least allow any question to be asked (whether he answers it is a different matter).

It also makes me hate that clubs are cracking down on twitter. There was a small, miniscule really, period of time when the public could see a footballer's genuine opinion on matters instead of the dull press officer nicey nicey approach (i'm looking at you darren bent etc.)

Lack of an angle unless it's one the journalist is working to death is also a problem. There was a good interview with Kalou in the Graun on Saturday though.

Actually the reaction to that Kalou interview sums it up really, he gave a thoughtful and emotional interview about the political situation in the Ivory Coast and then talked a bit about being frustrated with lack of starts. Obviously the subsequent stories are all 'SALOMON KALOU CONSIDERING CHELSEA EXIT'

chicken egg in vicious circle SHOCKAH

but i mean cmon, the press in england are, taken as a whole, probably best left the fuck alone from the pov of yr average english footballer.

“Stan Kroenke can take Arsenal forward by working with Arsene Wenger to quicken the pursuit of trophies.” – Henry Winter

http://twitter.com/#!/henrywinter

Winter's current Twitter liveblog of Pool-City is a bit of a grab bag of familiar bollocks

henrywinter Henry Winter
What. A. Goal. Andy Carroll off the mark in style for #lfc - left-foot 25-yarder that flew past Hart. Majestic strike.

What. A. Tweet.

henrywinter Henry Winter
Tevez just limped off. Huge blow for #mcfc. Must be a major doubt for FA Cup semi on Saturday. Looks disconsolate as heads down tunnel

An injury to Man City's best player: disappointing to Man City; also the player

henrywinter Henry Winter
Kuyt makes it 2-0, low drive after a series of chances for #lfc. Terrible half for #mcfc. Sky saying Tevez has a hamstring

Player has hamstring

There were 18 characters to spare in that one

lol

Manchester City fans still exercising their vocal chords though

FUCK YOU NULT ARRRGHHH

I bet that rat cunt thinks "begs the question" means "raises the question" and all

I still don't know what the real meaning of 'begs the question' is supposed to be.

Embarrassing old Roy talks all sorts of rubbish here. Unspectacular piece, but well done - the right questions, lets Hodgson do the talking, avoids the difficult stuff mostly but what're you gonna do? The problem is it should be a much longer feature I feel, Roy going in-depth on a number of those topics could be really interesting.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2011/apr/15/paul-scholes-manchester-united-manchester-city

not going to complain too much about yet another "rare" interview with paul scholes, but this piece is full of annoying shit. eg who needs to hear YET AGAIN that paul scholes doesn't like haircuts or flash cars?

Or Barcelona maybe, the side he loves to watch and that, in many ways, symbolise his own brand of pass-them-to-death football – quick, elusive and, when everything clicks, bloody brilliant.

Is this really the best he can do with words? Ah fuck it "bloody brilliant" will do.

He is talking in a quiet side room at Manchester United's training ground. Scholes, as usual, has been one of the first to arrive for work, his hair still damp from his morning shower. Training top, jeans, the same haircut he has had since he was playing for Boundary Park Juniors almost 25 years ago. Scholes has never been one for designer labels or flashy cars, and it is almost a surprise to find out he has accepted the offer of a benefit match. Already, you can imagine the adulation from the stands and the polite, unassuming little wave from a man not really comfortable with all the flashing bulbs.

Surely I'm not the only one who would actually like to know something interesting about Scholes if there is anything, or like hear him talk about his game and how he plays or who he idolised etc etc.

daniel taylor is a shit writer and a noted sycophant

Roy Hodgson is a bullshitter of the highest order. Says a lot without saying anything at all. Jeez, and the way he's portrayed as this old sage, football guru and life coach just because he's read a few books. "You can get undone very quickly in this league, and what we've got to look at in the future is the mental strength of the team so they don't get carried along by opinions about them." Mental strength a thing of the future? WTF?

yeah i think at least it can now be said hodgson isn't effective at the top level.

1807: How on earth? Arsenal's title challenge was off-bang on-and the off again all in the space of four injury-time minutes the likes of which you'll rarely see again.

off-bang on-and the off

sam lyon is the worst

the likes of which you'll rarely see again

wondering if that's some phrase that's been handed down through his family through the years, and he's oblivious to its lack of wider meaning

"how was the liveblogging today son"
"oh you know, it was a bit off-bang on-and the off"
"that's absolutely top, son"

bang and off son

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tyZspqjtG2k#t=0m57s

awww he's so nice though

everything is well-written, acerbic, detail-focused. he's done some other great videos. guardian journalism it is not, it's got a lot more bite

Maybe I'll take a look, I am trying to cut down my internet browsing outside of work hours though lol

is that his voice or is it an ai generated read of a piece he wrote?

tbh honest I didn't get too far into it by the time I stopped it he hadn't mentioned football.

It's his voice!

i couldn't decide on the right thread but this'll do, fill your boots

End of week tally: 4285 fully scanned football programmes, annuals, specials and magazines (including nearly 70 full Shoot! magazines)

To access them all in a free online library, below is the link to click and share - #oldfootballprogrammeshttps://t.co/G42qCRaf5f pic.twitter.com/6bfU7eD14U

— Miles McClagan (@TheSkyStrikers) March 29, 2024

i guess i dont love henry winter but the times making their chief football writer redundant must be noteworthy

Is it cos football is too woke now?

post itt writers you think are bad