Can we ban certain sources in the transfer forum?

Wumminator

The Qatar Pounder
Joined
May 8, 2008
Messages
23,626
Location
Obertans #1 fan.
I mean, I know we had those "news only threads" which didn't work, but it's a chore sometimes looking for actually good information when there's so much shite posted in the thread.

Surely articles from the Sun/Caughtoffside/tribalfootball aren't worthy of being posted in a thread. Never mind all the twitter bollocks.

Can we not just ban all of this sort of stuff from being posted?
 
Ban Twitter aswell and stick to decent sources like manutd.com & bbc sport.
 
I think this has been requested before, but I'm all in for it. It pisses me off that when I type Nasri into google news (every five minutes or so), I get these so-called 'news' sites at the top of my search results - can we fix that as well?
 
Tribal Football just reports what is on other sites, and whether Twitter is reliable is dependent entirely on who's tweeting it.
 
All the speculation generates debate, so I think it's worth keeping some of the more flaky sources for that reason alone. If we just stuck to cast iron sources there'd be very little to talk about in the transfer forum.
 
I suggest we close the transfer forum in January and during the closed season up to the end of August.

That should sort it.

I'm disappointed in myself for getting caught up in all the transfer bollocks this season as I usually ignore it all until we actually sign someone up.
 
I don't see anything wrong in banning Tribal and Caughtoffside.
 
Maybe have a big thread to put anything from those sites in and ensure the rest have more reputable sources?
 
unfortunately posters will always post what they want to post, rather than having a common sense approach to it.
 
A big improvement would be if, when people are copying their articles, they put the name of the source after the headline, eg.

United in shock Xavi raid - Caught Offside
United in talks over Nasri - The Telegraph

It would make it much easier to sort the bullshit from the stuff worth reading
 
kietotheworld said:
A big improvement would be if, when people are copying their articles, they put the name of the source after the headline, eg.

United in shock Xavi raid - Caught Offside
United in talks over Nasri - The Telegraph
Click to expand...

If you just copy and paste the entire link here, it puts the source in for you:

BBC Sport - Tottenham broke agreement, claims Luka Modric
Manchester United see Inter Milan's Wesley Sneijder as the man most likely to replace Paul Scholes - Telegraph

It does for the BBC and Telegraph anyway, which is the two main sources of sports news I use.

It seems to work for all sites:
Liverpool to Sign £18m Aston Villa Winger Stewart Downing Within 24 Hours | CaughtOffside
Arsenal boss Wenger confirms Gervinho signing | Transfer News & Rumors | tribalfootball.com
 
Twigginater said:
I mean, I know we had those "news only threads" which didn't work, but it's a chore sometimes looking for actually good information when there's so much shite posted in the thread.

Surely articles from the Sun/Caughtoffside/tribalfootball aren't worthy of being posted in a thread. Never mind all the twitter bollocks.

Can we not just ban all of this sort of stuff from being posted?
Click to expand...

:rolleyes:

Twitter is perfectly reliable as long as you use a reliable source.
 
Saying 'ban twitter news' is like saying 'ban the internet'.

It's as good as you make it with who you chose to follow.
 
It's actually becoming difficult to differentiate between good sources and bad. This is not just because many established journalists take & publish rumours from all manner of Twitter sources nowadays, but even respected non-UK sites re-publish rumours from the likes of CaughtOffside and others. Recently, even BBC journos on Twitter have been unreliable...

On another note, I doubt we want to go down the RAWK road, in which mods and members pick n' choose which sites to ban (though in light of the Hillsborough reportage, this is completely understandable in the case of The Sun etc). I would, though, trust the mods to be more discerning and sensible than those in charge of other boards.

One more thing: while we all value genuine transfer information, this is increasingly hard to find - anywhere - and if we ban all & sundry there's a danger of the Transfer Forum becoming very dull and lifeless, which would be a shame.
 
stubie1234 said:
Ban Twitter aswell and stick to decent sources like manutd.com & bbc sport.
Click to expand...

Surely you do realize than the Transfer forum would be useless, as it's mainly for transfer speculation.
 
eric le roi said:
If you just copy and paste the entire link here, it puts the source in for you:

BBC Sport - Tottenham broke agreement, claims Luka Modric
Manchester United see Inter Milan's Wesley Sneijder as the man most likely to replace Paul Scholes - Telegraph

It does for the BBC and Telegraph anyway, which is the two main sources of sports news I use.

It seems to work for all sites:
Liverpool to Sign £18m Aston Villa Winger Stewart Downing Within 24 Hours | CaughtOffside
Arsenal boss Wenger confirms Gervinho signing | Transfer News & Rumors | tribalfootball.com
Click to expand...

Yes, but a lot of articles are posted without a link to the source, means you have to google it to find out where it's from.
 
SteveJ said:
It's actually becoming difficult to differentiate between good sources and bad. This is not just because many established journalists take & publish rumours from all manner of Twitter sources nowadays, but even respected non-UK sites re-publish rumours from the likes of CaughtOffside and others. Recently, even BBC journos on Twitter have been unreliable...

On another note, I doubt we want to go down the RAWK road, in which mods and members pick n' choose which sites to ban (though in light of the Hillsborough reportage, this is completely understandable in the case of The Sun etc). I would, though, trust the mods to be more discerning and sensible than those in charge of other boards.

One more thing: while we all value genuine transfer information, this is increasingly hard to find - anywhere - and if we ban all & sundry there's a danger of the Transfer Forum becoming very dull and lifeless, which would be a shame.
Click to expand...


I agree with this

Its up to everyone in the transfer forum to self-regulate. I've seen people post stuff "I know this is bs but.." and they go ahead and post it. If you know its from a stupid source, why post it? We all know that the likes of caughtoffside.com are written by kids, so why put yourselves through it?

As for twitter, dont even get me started. I've posted rumours on there which have been passed around. Unbelievably bad site, rife for lazy journos.

Self regulation is where its at. If its rubbish, dont post it!
 
I think mention of twitter outside the 'twitter speculation thread' should be treated the same as deliberate wumming - a ban from the transfer forum.

As for Tribal Football, does no one read anyone else's posts? It collates reports from other sites, no more than that.
 
Twigginater said:
I mean, I know we had those "news only threads" which didn't work, but it's a chore sometimes looking for actually good information when there's so much shite posted in the thread.

Surely articles from the Sun/Caughtoffside/tribalfootball aren't worthy of being posted in a thread. Never mind all the twitter bollocks.

Can we not just ban all of this sort of stuff from being posted?
Click to expand...

Its been considered in the past. The problem you run into is that most sources in the transfers are complete bollocks anyway. Infact the transfer forum is 99 percent BS; a place for people to discuss conjecture. So banning certain outlets wouldn't change that.
 
Mickey said:
Thats ridiculous.
Click to expand...

Why?

If the story is broken of a trust worthy site then post it otherwise keep all the nonsensical twitter rumors to the twitter thread. That's why the thread was made.
 
711 said:
Ideally we'd have the option to automatically put anyone who quoted twitter on ignore. That would do.
Click to expand...


amolbhatia100 said:
Why?

If the story is broken of a trust worthy site then post it otherwise keep all the nonsensical twitter rumors to the twitter thread. That's why the thread was made.
Click to expand...

FFS will people educate themselves about twitter first before painting everything to do with twitter with the same brush!!


FYI, every "trust worthy" source like sky and like BBC HAVE a twitter account. If they break news before its on the fecking telly, are you going to write it off as "nonsensical twitter rumours?"

If so, youre idiots.

I honestly wish people would stop jumping on the band wagon and actually educate themselves about twitter before coming to the conclusion that everything and anything from twitter is bullshit.
 
Mickey said:
I honestly wish people would stop jumping on the band wagon and actually educate themselves about twitter before coming to the conclusion that everything and anything from twitter is bullshit.
Click to expand...

Just post twitter stuff in the twitter thread then, and everybody will be happy.

Including me, 'cos I won't read it.
 
711 said:
Just post twitter stuff in the twitter thread then, and everybody will be happy.

Including me, 'cos I won't read it.
Click to expand...

If theres something concrete and reliable im posting it in whatever thread i see fit.

If theres a tweet from sky sports saying nasri wants to join united, im posting it in the nasri thread.

If theres a tweet from the BBC saying we're closing in on modric, im posting it in the modric thread.

Those two tweets are clearly not "nonsensical rumours" because theyre from official, reliable sources.
 
I hate Twitter more than most but all the same information that ends up in "normal" media, only briefer and usually posted slightly before it hits the major websites. All the most reputable broadsheet journalists seem to tweet these days. A load of made up nonsense on there too but hey, that's no different to your average tabloid newspaper.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.