Gb160
Well done boys. Good process
- Jun 20, 2012
- 23,726
- 93,753
Which is unfortunately , why the majority of their shows and presenters have zero integrity. It's essentially trolling .
AVB v 'Journalists' Ashton & Samuels
- Thread starter Legend10
- Start date
montylynch
Fandabeedozee
- Jun 23, 2005
- 5,829
- 4,004
I listened to their show last night, even through the Rodney Marsh bit, which was like having teeth pulled.
Goldstein never has a bad word to say about AVB, it's eveyone else on TS that has an issue with him, I bet Durham is loving all this. And the amount of times they've played the Allardyce interview, it's as if they haven't got any more news to report.
Goldstein never has a bad word to say about AVB, it's eveyone else on TS that has an issue with him, I bet Durham is loving all this. And the amount of times they've played the Allardyce interview, it's as if they haven't got any more news to report.
DEFchenkOE
Well-Known Member
- Feb 13, 2006
- 10,527
- 8,052
There are so few journalists actually worth paying attention to anyway. Most of them talk so much bs it's amazing they have jobs to talk and write about football. There's only a handful of journalists who's opinion I value and Samuel and Ashton aren't on that list.
Locotoro
Prince of Zamunda
- Sep 2, 2004
- 9,458
- 14,248
DEFchenkOE
Well-Known Member
- Feb 13, 2006
- 10,527
- 8,052
I'm not really a fan of hardly any of the red top or broadsheet journalists. They all seem pretty lazy to me and often when I read about what they have wrote about our games they write things which are inaccurate which makes me th ink they're not paying attention.
I like Tim Vickery, Jonathan Wilson, Sid Lowe and zonal marking guy Michael Cox.
Francis Gibbs
Well-Known Member
- Jul 17, 2012
- 4,326
- 4,569
lol haven't people worked out Talkshite yet? - bad guy makes ridiculously inflammatory comments to simply get the gullible to ring in - the good guy takes polar opposite opinion to flame and pro long the debate.
Beats me why anybody would listen
Beats me why anybody would listen
Donki
Has a "Massive Member" Member
- May 14, 2007
- 14,460
- 18,981
But they talk all this shit for one reason to get listeners and get calls in, I doubt half believe what they are actually saying. Talksport isn't sports journalism its sports entertainment, thats the difference and should be taken as such. I dont let it wind me up and have a laugh at it, people really shouldnt be bothered. I remember in the summer they had a "laugh at Wenger" segment or something along those lines when Wenger and Arsenal were slagged off non stop it was laughable and made Wenger out to be a joke...... they stopped that segment shortly after the league began.
I think we as fans get way to defensive and perhaps a little over paranoid. AVB is not the first and wont be the last, I dont think its personal its just "journalism" at its worst. Off the top of my head is a list of managers targeted.
Wenger
Benitez
Kegan
Hodgson
Mancini
Cappelo
SGE
There are many more and its not just us.
Donki
Has a "Massive Member" Member
- May 14, 2007
- 14,460
- 18,981
WINNER! I wouldn't be surprised if it was scripted, Im sure they have a hell of a laugh at it all.
Gb160
Well done boys. Good process
- Jun 20, 2012
- 23,726
- 93,753
Breakfast and drive time are shit for the above reasons, Colin Murray is irritating.....hawksbee and Jacobs are quality(well hawksbee is) and I find Danny Kelly good as well.
This matter reminds me of something Kierkegaard writes in his journal (my [and Googles] translation, so some flaws might occur):
The tyranny of journalism is the poorest and most infamous of all tyrannies, it is a begging tyranny – think of a beggar, to whom you initially say no, that by chasing you street up and down finally force you to give him something. If one were to imagine such a brilliantly polemical writer, which has never yet existed, and put him right across a newspaper: he must lose, unless he again will publish a newspaper, in which case he also have lost, so far as he from being an author is sunk down to become a journalist (which is like a philosopher becoming a sophist.). So then the battle begins: The brilliant polemicist now strikes, and it does not escape the reporter that the blow is deadly and decisive. The way the journalist responds shows the infinite yawning distance that is between them. However, the reporter is quite confident as he reasons the following: 'It would not be dignified for an author continually to return to the same matter, therefore he has to stop – and then I begin. I will now carry on every evening or every 8th evening, surely it will get stuck. The longer it goes on, the more nonsensical the matter becomes, and eventually the public has completely forgotten the author's article, and then the advantage is mine. It will now not be dignified for the author to come up with a new article on the same matter, and I have him therefore in my power. ' | This is what they stick to, all these wretches, discarded sentinels and wheel and spindle makers and half-educated students. The funny thing is really that every journalist in his newspaper always speaks with great importance, but were some of them disagreeing mutually then they will not have any honour or credit left for each other whatsoever – and why is that? Naturally because journalists know very well amongst themselves what capacities who hide behind the crowd's, the public opinion's, etc.: 'wide rump'.
The tyranny of journalism is the poorest and most infamous of all tyrannies, it is a begging tyranny – think of a beggar, to whom you initially say no, that by chasing you street up and down finally force you to give him something. If one were to imagine such a brilliantly polemical writer, which has never yet existed, and put him right across a newspaper: he must lose, unless he again will publish a newspaper, in which case he also have lost, so far as he from being an author is sunk down to become a journalist (which is like a philosopher becoming a sophist.). So then the battle begins: The brilliant polemicist now strikes, and it does not escape the reporter that the blow is deadly and decisive. The way the journalist responds shows the infinite yawning distance that is between them. However, the reporter is quite confident as he reasons the following: 'It would not be dignified for an author continually to return to the same matter, therefore he has to stop – and then I begin. I will now carry on every evening or every 8th evening, surely it will get stuck. The longer it goes on, the more nonsensical the matter becomes, and eventually the public has completely forgotten the author's article, and then the advantage is mine. It will now not be dignified for the author to come up with a new article on the same matter, and I have him therefore in my power. ' | This is what they stick to, all these wretches, discarded sentinels and wheel and spindle makers and half-educated students. The funny thing is really that every journalist in his newspaper always speaks with great importance, but were some of them disagreeing mutually then they will not have any honour or credit left for each other whatsoever – and why is that? Naturally because journalists know very well amongst themselves what capacities who hide behind the crowd's, the public opinion's, etc.: 'wide rump'.
Mr Pink
SC Supporter
- Aug 25, 2010
- 55,414
- 100,989
Exactly.
If you do chose to listen to it, and you're taking it seriously its saying more about you than it is them.
Stop and think about it.
Star_of_Davids
Well-Known Member
- Aug 31, 2005
- 490
- 281
Football 365 seem to see Ashton for what he is too:
There's been a bit of a contretemps between the startling Neil Ashton and the under-pressure Andre Villas-Boas. Let's stick our oar in and point out where the hack might be going wrong.
Firstly, a note to Neil Ashton on the words 'we' and 'they'. Having Googled the word 'we', included below is the definition:
'used by a speaker to refer to himself or herself and one or more other people considered together.'
Similarly, here is the definition of 'they':
'used to refer to two or more people or things previously mentioned or easily identified.'
Now, it shouldn't be necessary to clear that up for someone who is Football News Correspondent for the Daily Mail, but it appears that a man dealing in words and what they mean sometimes struggles with words and what they mean. Far be it from us ('used by a speaker to refer to himself or herself and one or more other people as the object of a verb or preposition') to suggest that if he's having problems with such fundamental words of the English language, then he probably shouldn't be doing his job, but it's not that far, obviously, because that's what we are suggesting.
Anyway, we (see above, we're not repeating ourselves), have come up with a handy guide to Neil Ashton, a personalised glossary to help him through with the rest of his career, and indeed, life. We don't want to see him lose his job, so maybe he can learn something from our guide below.
Dignity - 'the state or quality of being worthy of honour or respect.'
This is a touchstone for the paper he writes for. Now, he might not necessarily have any say or interest in the paper's editorial line, and we all have to earn our money in whatever way we can, sometimes. However, let's not forget the Daily Mail appears to many to be a borderline-racist, misogynistic paper, fuelled by ignorance and house prices. But, in reference to the definition of the above, it's also fair to argue that anyone supporting the business is not worthy of honour or respect.
Also, if we're talking about being worthy of respect, then click this link and admire the skinny tie. Dignity.
Logic - 'reasoning conducted or assessed according to strict principles of validity.'
In his Ash Wednesday column, a column name that screams dignity, of 13 November, Neil Ashton declares that he will go on to defend divers. We might, then, logically expect that the rest of the column would be a defence of divers. Using Dennis Bergkamp's argument that exaggeration of contact is necessary to be awarded fouls that the referee otherwise wouldn't give, he also brings Ashley Young into the mix. We were excited to see Neil Ashton use this statement from Bergkamp to argue that Young should dive, because otherwise he wouldn't get the fouls that referees otherwise wouldn't spot. But no.
Apparently, because Pablo Zabaleta fouled him with a crunching tackle in the Manchester derby in April, and the foul was given, he should dive when there is minimal contact. That's Ashton's argument. Let's try again. As some referees miss slight fouls, Ashley Young should dive because when he was badly fouled, the referee punished the offender. That really is it.
That's not logic, that's barely cogent thought.
Fact - 'a thing that is known or proved to be true.'
Here is Neil Ashton complaining about a flare being thrown at a linesman as Aston Villa played Spurs, invoking the obviously terrible death of a fan at the hands of a flare 20 years ago. Here is the report pointing out that the flare - that Ashton complains burns at 1600 degrees - is a smoke bomb, which doesn't burn at 1600 degrees. Still, don't let facts get in the way of making an utterly tedious argument aimed at reducing football to a joyless, eventless spectacle for those going to games, and don't let exploiting a man's death stop you getting on your high horse, Neil.
Research - 'the systematic investigation into and study of materials and sources in order to establish facts and reach new conclusions.'
Here is Neil Ashton stating that 'nobody wins the title with a string of streaky 1-0 victories'. Now, if Neil-o had done his research, or even used his brain to remember the sport he's paid to be knowledgeable about, he might have conjured up Manchester United's 2008-09 season when they won, er, the title with ten 1-0 victories. Or he might have remembered Manchester United's 1995-96 season when they won, er, the title with eight 1-0 victories, a season famous for the string of streaky 1-0 victories earned by Peter Schmeichel and Eric Cantona.
Schadenfreude - 'pleasure derived by someone from another person's misfortune.'
Here is Neil Ashton waxing hysterical about Gareth Bale failing at Real Madrid, despite admitting he was carrying an injury, and ignoring any other mitigating circumstances, like his lack of pre-season, the fact (there's that word again) he'd only played six games, or that it was only October. Here is a report of Gareth Bale's hat-trick. You can enjoy schadenfreude at Neil's expense now.
Bullshit - 'stupid or untrue talk or writing; nonsense'
There's been a bit of a contretemps between the startling Neil Ashton and the under-pressure Andre Villas-Boas. Let's stick our oar in and point out where the hack might be going wrong.
Firstly, a note to Neil Ashton on the words 'we' and 'they'. Having Googled the word 'we', included below is the definition:
'used by a speaker to refer to himself or herself and one or more other people considered together.'
Similarly, here is the definition of 'they':
'used to refer to two or more people or things previously mentioned or easily identified.'
Now, it shouldn't be necessary to clear that up for someone who is Football News Correspondent for the Daily Mail, but it appears that a man dealing in words and what they mean sometimes struggles with words and what they mean. Far be it from us ('used by a speaker to refer to himself or herself and one or more other people as the object of a verb or preposition') to suggest that if he's having problems with such fundamental words of the English language, then he probably shouldn't be doing his job, but it's not that far, obviously, because that's what we are suggesting.
Anyway, we (see above, we're not repeating ourselves), have come up with a handy guide to Neil Ashton, a personalised glossary to help him through with the rest of his career, and indeed, life. We don't want to see him lose his job, so maybe he can learn something from our guide below.
Dignity - 'the state or quality of being worthy of honour or respect.'
This is a touchstone for the paper he writes for. Now, he might not necessarily have any say or interest in the paper's editorial line, and we all have to earn our money in whatever way we can, sometimes. However, let's not forget the Daily Mail appears to many to be a borderline-racist, misogynistic paper, fuelled by ignorance and house prices. But, in reference to the definition of the above, it's also fair to argue that anyone supporting the business is not worthy of honour or respect.
Also, if we're talking about being worthy of respect, then click this link and admire the skinny tie. Dignity.
Logic - 'reasoning conducted or assessed according to strict principles of validity.'
In his Ash Wednesday column, a column name that screams dignity, of 13 November, Neil Ashton declares that he will go on to defend divers. We might, then, logically expect that the rest of the column would be a defence of divers. Using Dennis Bergkamp's argument that exaggeration of contact is necessary to be awarded fouls that the referee otherwise wouldn't give, he also brings Ashley Young into the mix. We were excited to see Neil Ashton use this statement from Bergkamp to argue that Young should dive, because otherwise he wouldn't get the fouls that referees otherwise wouldn't spot. But no.
Apparently, because Pablo Zabaleta fouled him with a crunching tackle in the Manchester derby in April, and the foul was given, he should dive when there is minimal contact. That's Ashton's argument. Let's try again. As some referees miss slight fouls, Ashley Young should dive because when he was badly fouled, the referee punished the offender. That really is it.
That's not logic, that's barely cogent thought.
Fact - 'a thing that is known or proved to be true.'
Here is Neil Ashton complaining about a flare being thrown at a linesman as Aston Villa played Spurs, invoking the obviously terrible death of a fan at the hands of a flare 20 years ago. Here is the report pointing out that the flare - that Ashton complains burns at 1600 degrees - is a smoke bomb, which doesn't burn at 1600 degrees. Still, don't let facts get in the way of making an utterly tedious argument aimed at reducing football to a joyless, eventless spectacle for those going to games, and don't let exploiting a man's death stop you getting on your high horse, Neil.
Research - 'the systematic investigation into and study of materials and sources in order to establish facts and reach new conclusions.'
Here is Neil Ashton stating that 'nobody wins the title with a string of streaky 1-0 victories'. Now, if Neil-o had done his research, or even used his brain to remember the sport he's paid to be knowledgeable about, he might have conjured up Manchester United's 2008-09 season when they won, er, the title with ten 1-0 victories. Or he might have remembered Manchester United's 1995-96 season when they won, er, the title with eight 1-0 victories, a season famous for the string of streaky 1-0 victories earned by Peter Schmeichel and Eric Cantona.
Schadenfreude - 'pleasure derived by someone from another person's misfortune.'
Here is Neil Ashton waxing hysterical about Gareth Bale failing at Real Madrid, despite admitting he was carrying an injury, and ignoring any other mitigating circumstances, like his lack of pre-season, the fact (there's that word again) he'd only played six games, or that it was only October. Here is a report of Gareth Bale's hat-trick. You can enjoy schadenfreude at Neil's expense now.
Bullshit - 'stupid or untrue talk or writing; nonsense'
felmani26
SC Supporter
- Jan 1, 2008
- 24,710
- 43,924
Rightly or wrongly, I enjoy listening to Adrian Durham purely on the basis that I don't take all his views seriously. Yes he can dangle the carrot for others to bite but he can come up with some thought provoking views.
The Tottenham fans who ring up and moan about AVB do my head in more than any Talksport presenter, including Micky Quinn!
The Tottenham fans who ring up and moan about AVB do my head in more than any Talksport presenter, including Micky Quinn!
dagraham
Well-Known Member
- Sep 20, 2005
- 19,156
- 46,154
So what you and Kierkegaard are essentially saying is that journalists are like women.... they always have to have the last word.
Philosophers eh?.....
michaelden
Knight of the Fat Fanny
- Aug 13, 2004
- 26,473
- 21,854
That was brilliant. Thank you
Absolutely.
But that doesn't make it any more right.
Not when they are telling lies and twisting words.
AVB got it bang on. Said what needed to be said. Kept his cool. Made a mug of a scumbag hack.
Perfect.
Dov67
Well-Known Member
- Jul 1, 2005
- 3,391
- 10,531
I've been an AVB fan from day 1, partly because I was glad to see the back of Harry and partly cos I thought he was badly treated at Chelsea and worth a chance. I felt thoroughly vindicated until the last few weeks when I thought some of his tactics and team selections contributed to poor performances and results.
Still i thought any talk of him being sacked after only 4 or 5 weeks of poor form and some bad luck (Krull!) was insane.
For some context, 6 weeks ago we were being talked of as potential title contenders while Man U under Moyes might struggle to even make top 4.
His press conference has got me feeling very protective of him, probably because he's one of us and when one of your own is under attack your instinct should be to defend him. Partly because of the injustice of it all - both Neil Ashton and Martin Samuel deliberately lied - they know they lied and so do we. This was no innocent mis-quote - they changed what he said to give it an entirely different meaning.
I just hope this seige mentaility.....lay off our boss......determination for him to succeed attitude is also being felt by the players. If it is, then we we have nothing to worry - we will now start to climb the table.
Still i thought any talk of him being sacked after only 4 or 5 weeks of poor form and some bad luck (Krull!) was insane.
For some context, 6 weeks ago we were being talked of as potential title contenders while Man U under Moyes might struggle to even make top 4.
His press conference has got me feeling very protective of him, probably because he's one of us and when one of your own is under attack your instinct should be to defend him. Partly because of the injustice of it all - both Neil Ashton and Martin Samuel deliberately lied - they know they lied and so do we. This was no innocent mis-quote - they changed what he said to give it an entirely different meaning.
I just hope this seige mentaility.....lay off our boss......determination for him to succeed attitude is also being felt by the players. If it is, then we we have nothing to worry - we will now start to climb the table.
ExpatFan
Well-Known Member
- May 11, 2005
- 1,879
- 1,681
Me too. I also think a few renditions of "Martin Samuel's a big fat wanker... Neil Ashton is a small thin wanker" would go down well with the faithful!
Similar threads
