Simon Jordan on English media

DavidDeSchmikes said:
Click to expand...


Thing about Custis is he's attacking a strawman. Jordan's point wasn't that journalists aren't allowed to have an opinion, it was that they shouldn't expect managers to accept what they think anymore than managers should lecture them about writing.

As Jordan says everything they report they have been told by someone. That's fine, that's how reporting works. They have sources, they use multiple attestation to try and back up what they're told. When a journalist simply relays what they've heard they're doing their job, even if they are telling us things we don't like hearing. However why should a manager respect them when he gives a tactical analysis, as Mourinho did on Monday night, and their response is to say 'but you lost 3-0' or to laugh?

As people like Adam Bate and other statiscians have shown much of what Mou said was true: We did press high, we did commit men forward, we did create good chances. To dismiss all that with a 'but you lost 3-0' is well within the media's rights. If you're going to do that why ask Jose about the game though?
 
Last edited:
Custis is nothing but a clown.

This is why Fergie was so tough on them to keep them in check. They done just the same to LVG, I don't know why we keep inviting them into the club. Ban them all for a week or two, the fines will be worth it.
 
AaronRedDevil said:
It's completely disgusting the way the British media treats Mou and all the other managers in the league. They're like vultures, always trying to stir sh*t up with the fans and the clubs. Fights every day, spats every day, why are they allowed to lie their asses off just for clicks.
Click to expand...

Strange - I don't recall them behaving anything similar to Guardiola, Klopp, Pochettino etc...

I don't buy that it's because 'he acts out', when he's less dramatic and touchy than a Guardiola or Klopp - I think it's a campaign, and it's possible that other clubs have better PR relationships with the press and as such, protect their managers better.
 
NoLogo said:
Exactly. That's why I'm saying if you don't want to see this "sort of journalism" don't give them any views or money, problem solved.
Click to expand...

Wish it was that simple but people regurgitate what they read, you can spot a mile when it happens because 50 posters will use the same wording
 
Rhyme Animal said:
Strange - I don't recall them behaving anything similar to Guardiola, Klopp, Pochettino etc...

I don't buy that it's because 'he acts out', when he's less dramatic and touchy than a Guardiola or Klopp - I think it's a campaign, and it's possible that other clubs have better PR relationships with the press and as such, protect their managers better.
Click to expand...
Could Woodward be pushing the media to be hard on Hose to make it easier to get him out?
 
AaronRedDevil said:
Yes that's true, probably because they play good football and no one complains. But if they lose it's forgotten in a day. Utd lose we have to hear about it till the next match and repeat. Utd have been in disarray ever since SAF left and the media is praying to last a long time.
Click to expand...
Which is interesting seeing as we've won 3 major trophies during such turmoil!!
 
Journalists know sex sells. That sensationalist items sell. The agenda of the media is to sell their product. The agenda of a Journalist isn't to be objective because someone objective will not sell papers. Jose is right. If Jose fails, it will be more down to finances or attitudes in regards in the boardroom then him forgetting everything that he ever learnt and that filters down to supporters. Oh he never adapted to the changes. Oh he's past his best. Oh he's moody so he must be unhappy. Jose can't come out and say the truth. The amount he has to fix, it's an impossible job because the Glazers don't have the outlay in the current climate and the supporters are impatient. We could Sack him and the media would love it but they even enjoy this because it makes their job easier. It's easier to write any old crap and if it sounds half true it is true.
 
Last edited:
wub1234 said:
"I do not know a journalist that has ever bought a football club".

Journalists aren't as rich as me, therefore they're not entitled to an opinion.

"...ever bought a player, ever sold a player, ever picked a team".

That's because they, you know, went into the profession of journalism. If they tried to apply to become a professional football manager, while this isn't impossible, the odds are stacked massively against it without having been a professional footballer.

You could say by the same token that very few footballers and football managers have written coherent articles or books about football. In fact, most of them can't write, and require journalists to write their books and articles for them, before later complaining about them.

"...have ever had any first-hand experience of football...".

That's because (a) they weren't good enough to be professional footballers, or were prevented by their bodies, or both. I'm sure most journalists would much rather be Premier League footballers than journalists, (b) they've never had the opportunity to work as a coach or manager because most of these are selected from the ranks of professional footballers, (c) they're denied the opportunity to gain first-hand access to the football 'industry' because the clubs and those who run the clubs wish to keep everything 'in-house', (d) it's necessary for journalists to train and engage in the practice of being journalists, hence the fact that they can write books, whereas footballers cannot.

He then goes on to state that journalists are allowed to have opinions, but they're not allowed to have opinions on how football clubs are run because they haven't done it. What exactly are football journalists supposed to have opinions on then? They can't have opinions on playing because they haven't done it. They can't have opinions on managing because they haven't done it. They can't have opinions on coaching because they haven't done it. They can't have opinions on owners or directors because they haven't done it. If you take that to it's natural conclusion then what can they report other than the scoreline?

Furthermore, this would also mean that all of the paying punters are never allowed an opinion on anything, as none of them have played, managed, coached or owned at a professional level. It would mean that 99.9% of people who watch football worldwide can never offer an opinion on anything; presumably, we would be reduced to holding rattles and making encouraging noises, so that none of the poor people who work in professional football ever get offended.
Click to expand...

Excellent post. There may be a lot of journalists that attempt to make their opinion look like facts, but that doesn't validate any of his other points. Furthermore it is easy for us readers/listeners/viewers to decide for ourselves whether any given point is an opinion or a fact.
 
The media always go for the sensational headlines. If they can wind up a manager to get more headlines especially if they are easy to wind up like mourinho they will do. They are doing exactly what the editors want. If mourinho was winning and playing fantastic football, he would be courting the press and they would be picking on whoever else was doing poorly
 
I liken Simon Jordan to Barry Hearn, you listen and you can’t help thinking that the top of the game would be run a million times better if either of these two were in charge.
 
Love Simon Jordan, he drove Palace into the ground and that can only be a good thing ;)
 
Simon Jordan makes the assumption that football journalism is in any way associated with traditional journalistic standards and practice. Heck even traditional news journalism rarely adheres to traditional journalistic standards of integrity.

The value of footy journalist discourse sits somewhere between an "itk" twitter troll and the rambling opinion of your mate down the pub after 5 pints.
 
I can't believe that managers give in to the demands of the Premier League for press conferences before and after every single fecking match. An interview with Brian Clough at his peak would have been a television event, in part because of its comparative rarity. Pre-video recorders you would have had to catch it on the news or else you'd missed it. Always sympathised with Wenger when you could see he was absolutely seething with resentment at having to deal with these bloggers with a shorthand qualification. Guardiola patently can't stand giving them his time and energy as well. That said, it's probably that impatience they feel that makes managers 6 times more interesting to listen to than players. They meet the same faces in the press so often that it gets like a marriage, and inevitably there's going to be blow ups.
 
Classical Mechanic said:
Wait, if journalists know feck all.............what does us fans know? :nervous:
Click to expand...

I think part of it is the attitude that comes with it as well as the platform and readership they get.

We’re all entitled to an opinion and I’m sure at times most have presented that as fact but equally more often than not it’s open for debate.

Journalists, especially since the rise of Twitter, have a huge arrogance about them for me. The prime example is Oliver Holt who takes glee in United and especially Mourinho losing. He can do this to nearly 400k followers and retweets people who disagree and degraded them. It’s not what journalists were about.

There’s plenty of good ones, Daniel Taylor helped expose huge scandals in football but for the large part mainstream football journalism is now all about clicks and readership in what is a dying market and they have to write controversial stuff about popular things hence the constant talk and slagging off of United (Martin Samuel once admitted as much on Sunday Supplment.) Unfortunately some have let it get to their head and gone on a huge ego trip with it.
 
It's not suprising Curtis questioned Jordans criticism that they just write what they are told. Obviously, it hasn't occurred to him that it is job to investigate the integrity of his sources, or discover how true what he's been told really is. If it sounds good he'll print it. You don't need to go far to see the alarming variance in what journalists report on the same subject.
 
You can't possibly write for The Sun and simultaneously have the nerve to consider yourself as some sort of a noble defender of sport journalism.

It's a bit like being an advocate of Labor rights while being a building supervisor at the construction of the Pyramid of Giza.
 
Last edited:
ivaldo said:
It's not suprising Curtis questioned Jordans criticism that they just write what they are told. Obviously, it hasn't occurred to him that it is job to investigate the integrity of his sources, or discover how true what he's been told really is. If it sounds good he'll print it. You don't need to go far to see the alarming variance in what journalists report on the same subject.
Click to expand...

You think The Sun sports journalists care much about the integrity of their sources, really? I mean...really?

The 'actual' journalists of that paper post fiction as fact on a regular basis so i very much doubt it's sports journalism department is a bastion of integrity
 
wub1234 said:
"I do not know a journalist that has ever bought a football club".

Journalists aren't as rich as me, therefore they're not entitled to an opinion.

"...ever bought a player, ever sold a player, ever picked a team".

That's because they, you know, went into the profession of journalism. If they tried to apply to become a professional football manager, while this isn't impossible, the odds are stacked massively against it without having been a professional footballer.

You could say by the same token that very few footballers and football managers have written coherent articles or books about football. In fact, most of them can't write, and require journalists to write their books and articles for them, before later complaining about them.

"...have ever had any first-hand experience of football...".

That's because (a) they weren't good enough to be professional footballers, or were prevented by their bodies, or both. I'm sure most journalists would much rather be Premier League footballers than journalists, (b) they've never had the opportunity to work as a coach or manager because most of these are selected from the ranks of professional footballers, (c) they're denied the opportunity to gain first-hand access to the football 'industry' because the clubs and those who run the clubs wish to keep everything 'in-house', (d) it's necessary for journalists to train and engage in the practice of being journalists, hence the fact that they can write books, whereas footballers cannot.

He then goes on to state that journalists are allowed to have opinions, but they're not allowed to have opinions on how football clubs are run because they haven't done it. What exactly are football journalists supposed to have opinions on then? They can't have opinions on playing because they haven't done it. They can't have opinions on managing because they haven't done it. They can't have opinions on coaching because they haven't done it. They can't have opinions on owners or directors because they haven't done it. If you take that to it's natural conclusion then what can they report other than the scoreline?

Furthermore, this would also mean that all of the paying punters are never allowed an opinion on anything, as none of them have played, managed, coached or owned at a professional level. It would mean that 99.9% of people who watch football worldwide can never offer an opinion on anything; presumably, we would be reduced to holding rattles and making encouraging noises, so that none of the poor people who work in professional football ever get offended.
Click to expand...

They're supposed to have opinion on outcome, not method. It's that simple and a very simple distinction but shows like the Sky Sports one have given them a platform to be 'experts' when they simply can't be because of their lack of experience. They're also not supposed to push narratives and choose flimsy stories to do so but they see that as their job too.

Your last paragraph is just nonsense, anyone can give an opinion but when you're presenting yourself to the public as an expert then those opinions need to be backed up by knowldge. These journalists do not give their opinions equivalency to joe bloggs down the pub.
 
Boycott said:
It is an brilliantly articulated point many of us share.

Journalists believe they are a part of the game now.

They believe without them football is not the same.

They have an arrogance and over the top sense of worth.

And their arrogance has reached the point they don't realise it.

They are essentially glorified bloggers. I see some great opinions on this forum but they are opinions that provide discussion, not fact to provide narratives.
Click to expand...
Agree with this. They see themselves as stars, or celebrities even, and this is fuelled by twitter and the air time they are given daily. It's all about getting the biggest scoop on their rivals and creating a narrative. They think that by doing so they can influence fans to turn against their managers for example, which they have been desperately striving to do since Jose arrived. In reality they are no more qualified to write about football than any football fan. The arrogance of the likes of Custis, Winter etc is beyond laughable, they try to turn a game of picking XI players to kick a ball around once of twice a week into a 24/7 theatre with heroes and villains all tied up in some sort of epocalyptic power struggle.

Absolute wasters.
 
Fridge chutney said:
Cuntis is so enraged and riled up. It's amusing. He thinks he matters...
Click to expand...
He's infinitely baitable, and is always spoiling for a fight, or what constitutes a fight, in the kingdom of social media. Last season he was raging against Talksport's comedy double act, Hawksbee & Jakobs,after one of them had the audacity to claim that some journalist can be a "bit disingenuous" where transfer stories were concerned.

He reminds me of the quote SAF would often use about "Some people being capable of starting a fight in a phone box."
 
Smores said:
You think The Sun sports journalists care much about the integrity of their sources, really? I mean...really?

The 'actual' journalists of that paper post fiction as fact on a regular basis so i very much doubt it's sports journalism department is a bastion of integrity
Click to expand...
No I don't. That's my point...
 
Ouch, someone got offended. Of course Custis and the other fantasy authors will retaliate harshly. Admitting they are fabricating stories will bite them in the ass... Get high, conjure an article, claim info is from an inside source who must remain anonymous, repeat.

You can clearly tell who has connections, even if they are not correct 100% of the time.
 
The show when SJ ripped into Gordon Taylor (chairman of the pfa) and told him his organusation don't want to get involved in supporting clubs when they want to fine players etc was class. He questioned GT's £1m plus salary and asked what does he do to earn that much. GT shat himself and threw his toys out of the pram big time
 
Spot on. Journos now have agendas. The industry is based on selling lies to maximise revenue rather than reporting facts. They'll be rubbing their hands with glee if they can destabilize man utd with their lies cause they know we generate the most hits.

They conveniently hide behind the "sources" are protected bs, but don't bother to check their sources beforehand.

Also, people seem to forget the difference between facts and opinion. Journos now sell their opinions as gospel. Talking shit about anything they want as if they are football experts. Spurs were champions last year. Man Utd nearly got relegated. Right? Oh wait ....

Selling lies. That's what they are. And they can get away with it because nobody is keeping them in check and there is always someone who will believe their lies.
 
I found it hard ploughing through this thread because (and its very important to remember this) Simon Jordan is a complete and utter feckwit and if he was on fire, I would not waste my piss.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.