You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
A rag friend of mine, the same one who had 'no interest' in the tunnel bust up at Old Trafford, has just sent me a copy of a piece by Matthew Syed (The Times I think) headlined "Why Mourinho would not have got away with this". It pretty much fails to mention the Wigan manager let alone him confronting Sergio at half time and is based solely on the premise that Guardiola must have been the instigator and the aggressor and that poor old Jose would have had the wrath of the FA thrown at him had he done the same.
Syed frequently writes drivel sufficiently that other journalists call him out on it. Jonathan Liew in particular can't abide him.
Never happened for another team whilst they were successful, Liverpool still coveted and we have all lived under the recent press blanket that it's received for the last 25 years.A classic example of ‘tall poppy syndrome’
Whenever an individual (in this case ,Pep) or a team ( obvious who) rise above the swirling tide of mediocrity that
is the staple diet of these types of underachieving hacks, then it has to be chopped down and stamped on.
It’s the modern equivalent of the pitch-fork wielding, ignorant peasants with their lynch-mob mentality howling outside the door.
No tall poppies being stamped with those teams from 1977 onwards.
gordondaviesmoustache
Well-Known Member
His writing style is laboured and pretentious.Syed frequently writes drivel sufficiently that other journalists call him out on it. Jonathan Liew in particular can't abide him.
San Tropez
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 2 Sep 2017
- Messages
- 323
The piece says he is feeling the pressure - which is what all these nasty little writers clearly want to try to make him do.
Well they have been starved of sneering articles to write for such a lonnnnnnngggg time. Just imagine the number of in-game sneering articles they wrote that ended up not seeing light of day - v Bournemouth, Huddersfield, Southampton, West Ham, Bristol City at home, the list is endless.
The football pages of the Guardian have become barren land this season. Jamie Jackson must be suicidal.
Last season's "end of season report form" by Guardian footie writers had these gems:
1. Most disappointing manager - Pep Guardiola; this despite their having forecast at the beginning of season that PEG and Rags would win the PL.
2. Most disappointing player - Bravo
3. Best Match - Monaco v City, and Everton vs City, no mention of City v Monaco or City v Barca.
I feel really sad for football writers this season.
San Tropez
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 2 Sep 2017
- Messages
- 323
His writing style is laboured and pretentious.
Matthew Syed unlike other footie writers is an actual intellectual, he can't help writing in that style. Nobody has to "like" the way he writes, they only need get the point.
His writing style is laboured and pretentious.
Yes. Because he wants to make it clear he's far brighter than anyone else, whether it's true or not. Ed Smith does the same. Therein lies the irony that Liew can't stand him, given he really is highly intelligent.
inchy14
Well-Known Member
His writing style is laboured and pretentious.
As is his speaking, whenever he's on sky news doing the press review his every comment is dragged out, he may be bright but he was shit at table tennis.
B
B
blueinsa
Guest
Matthew Syed unlike other footie writers is an actual intellectual, he can't help writing in that style. Nobody has to "like" the way he writes, they only need get the point.
Shit at ping pong though so fuck him.
MillionMilesAway
Well-Known Member
A rag friend of mine, the same one who had 'no interest' in the tunnel bust up at Old Trafford, has just sent me a copy of a piece by Matthew Syed (The Times I think) headlined "Why Mourinho would not have got away with this". It pretty much fails to mention the Wigan manager let alone him confronting Sergio at half time and is based solely on the premise that Guardiola must have been the instigator and the aggressor and that poor old Jose would have had the wrath of the FA thrown at him had he done the same.
Jeez, that's a one-eyed piece.
San Tropez
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 2 Sep 2017
- Messages
- 323
Yes. Because he wants to make it clear he's far brighter than anyone else, whether it's true or not. Ed Smith does the same. Therein lies the irony that Liew can't stand him, given he really is highly intelligent.
That's just unfair and illogical. Everyone has a distinctive style of writing.
MillionMilesAway
Well-Known Member
Matthew Syed unlike other footie writers is an actual intellectual, he can't help writing in that style. Nobody has to "like" the way he writes, they only need get the point.
But when it's based on so much sand, there isn't that much point in the piece.
Stepping on the pitch? Mourinho, ball in play and a player about to run past him. Guardiola/Redmond - post-match.
Bottle kicking? Wenger - sent to stand (in Trafford, no less).
It's all a hypothetical hatchet job - there is no way of knowing until Guardiola actually does something. All the tunnel stuff looks strange, but clearly no-one felt anything serious happened.
San Tropez
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 2 Sep 2017
- Messages
- 323
Shit at ping pong though so fuck him.
Ha ha that's a far classier thing to say.
That's just unfair and illogical. Everyone has a distinctive style of writing.
Not unfair at all, and his writing is a reflection of him being exactly like that, not the reason. He's a pompous, self important arse.
But when it's based on so much sand, there isn't that much point in the piece.
Stepping on the pitch? Mourinho, ball in play and a player about to run past him. Guardiola/Redmond - post-match.
Bottle kicking? Wenger - sent to stand (in Trafford, no less).
It's all a hypothetical hatchet job - there is no way of knowing until Guardiola actually does something. All the tunnel stuff looks strange, but clearly no-one felt anything serious happened.
That's just about the reply I sent to my friend. When Pep steps out of his area and on to the pitch or hoofs a water bottle up the touchline and doesn't receive any sanctions for doing so, then make the comparison because, up to now, the only comparison you've got is that they've both been involved in a spat in the tunnel and neither have been charged over it.
Aye and some people are pretentious twats who want to constantly try and let people know how clever they are. Syed is one of these. Take away the ridiculous classical references and the actual content of his articles is usually that of a moronic bigot. His articles and opinions on the Eni Aluko saga alone were enough to let you know what sort of person he is.That's just unfair and illogical. Everyone has a distinctive style of writing.
San Tropez
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 2 Sep 2017
- Messages
- 323
Not unfair at all, and his writing is a reflection of him being exactly like that, not the reason. He's a pompous, self important arse.
Definitely unfair and illogical. As an intellectual, Matthew Syed writes in a certain way, he couldn't very well write like Jamie Jackson, any more than Jamie Jackson could ever hope to write like Matthew Syed.
gordondaviesmoustache
Well-Known Member
I certainly don’t consider him to be an intellectual, but I’m not entirely surprised that you do.Matthew Syed unlike other footie writers is an actual intellectual, he can't help writing in that style. Nobody has to "like" the way he writes, they only need get the point.
Definitely unfair and illogical. As an intellectual, Matthew Syed writes in a certain way, he couldn't very well write like Jamie Jackson, any more than Jamie Jackson could ever hope to write like Matthew Syed.
Do me a favour with the 'intellectual' bollocks. It's merely a term used to try and express snooty superiority. Which is exactly what he wishes people to think. I'm sorry you don't like it, but tough. Self appointed intellectualism is just arrogant snobbery.
gordondaviesmoustache
Well-Known Member
It's whiff-whaffery, mate.Do me a favour with the 'intellectual' bollocks. It's merely a term used to try and express snooty superiority. Which is exactly what he wishes people to think. I'm sorry you don't like it, but tough. Self appointed intellectualism is just arrogant snobbery.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.