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.
Duncan Castles' Match Report in The Sunday Times
- Thread starter johnny crossan
- Start date
Wexford Blue
Well-Known Member
I read it in yesterday's Times and just put the paper down when he got to the bit about Kompany being useless as both a midfielder and defender. The man obviously knows nothing about football so I wouldn't get too worked up about it. Wish I could get away with being as bad at my job though, easy money.
lafitz2008
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 21 Sep 2008
- Messages
- 1,269
Lescott a 6,what a knob this guy is.
GaudinoMotors
Well-Known Member
Posted this yesterday - read his poor journalism in total incredulity
Anyone read Duncan Castle's pathetic piece in the times?
Apparently Chelsea just had a "flakey away day" - I don't think I`ve ever read such an imbalanced and factually incorrect match report of a game I've seen - ever!
Just to add insult to injury - Nige gets a 6!! whilst Lampard, Deco, Bollock, Essien get 7s
oh and Barry gets a 5 (personally thought he was excellent yesterday.)
They are also doing a world cup watch section to each match - Ie Germany - Bollock = sublime
but of course Castle couldnt resist - Brazil - Robinho = discontented!
Anyone read Duncan Castle's pathetic piece in the times?
Apparently Chelsea just had a "flakey away day" - I don't think I`ve ever read such an imbalanced and factually incorrect match report of a game I've seen - ever!
Just to add insult to injury - Nige gets a 6!! whilst Lampard, Deco, Bollock, Essien get 7s
oh and Barry gets a 5 (personally thought he was excellent yesterday.)
They are also doing a world cup watch section to each match - Ie Germany - Bollock = sublime
but of course Castle couldnt resist - Brazil - Robinho = discontented!
Chris in London
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 21 Sep 2009
- Messages
- 13,331
This is sadly typical of much reporting of Saturday's game.
If you were there, you will know full well that we went toe to toe with one of the best teams and the world and we beat them. They were not having a flaky away day, they were not having an off-day with misplaced passes and so on, they were stifled and beaten by, on the day, a better team. Their passing and movement was still exceptional, and they opened us up rather more easily than the rags did at the swamp. Yet we made the most of our chances, didn't let things get to us when we went behind, took the fight to Chelsea and deserved our win.
In how many papers today however were we 'fortunate' to get the equaliser? Never mind that thier goal went in off Ade's arse, never mind that the corner which preceded it was conceded by Ashley Cole booting the ball out. Handball requires an intent to play the ball with the hand. In the ref's view Micah had no intent. End of. But did anyone watch Andy Gray on Sky yesterday ignore the laws of the game in favour of his own pet theory that Chelsea wuz robbed? Unbelievable.
And don’t get me started on the markings. According to James Ducker in the Times this morning the worst player on the pitch on either side was Robinho whom he gave a 5. Never mind that he was double-marked for 90 minutes, never mind that Ibramovic had to foul him three times in the first 20 minutes (and still didn’t get a card), never mind that he gave Drogba, who missed three one-on-one chances a 6 and the anonymous Deco a 7.
Still, we were there. We know how the game went. It may all come crashing back down to earth against Bolton (this is City, after all), but it does make my blood boil when the media can’t give credit where credit is due.
If you were there, you will know full well that we went toe to toe with one of the best teams and the world and we beat them. They were not having a flaky away day, they were not having an off-day with misplaced passes and so on, they were stifled and beaten by, on the day, a better team. Their passing and movement was still exceptional, and they opened us up rather more easily than the rags did at the swamp. Yet we made the most of our chances, didn't let things get to us when we went behind, took the fight to Chelsea and deserved our win.
In how many papers today however were we 'fortunate' to get the equaliser? Never mind that thier goal went in off Ade's arse, never mind that the corner which preceded it was conceded by Ashley Cole booting the ball out. Handball requires an intent to play the ball with the hand. In the ref's view Micah had no intent. End of. But did anyone watch Andy Gray on Sky yesterday ignore the laws of the game in favour of his own pet theory that Chelsea wuz robbed? Unbelievable.
And don’t get me started on the markings. According to James Ducker in the Times this morning the worst player on the pitch on either side was Robinho whom he gave a 5. Never mind that he was double-marked for 90 minutes, never mind that Ibramovic had to foul him three times in the first 20 minutes (and still didn’t get a card), never mind that he gave Drogba, who missed three one-on-one chances a 6 and the anonymous Deco a 7.
Still, we were there. We know how the game went. It may all come crashing back down to earth against Bolton (this is City, after all), but it does make my blood boil when the media can’t give credit where credit is due.
GaudinoMotors
Well-Known Member
johnny crossan
Well-Known Member
GaudinoMotors said:duncan.castles@observer.co.uk
I know it's in the Times - but we can let him know what we think here
afraid this is a dead link, try sportletters@sunday-times.co.uk
johnny crossan
Well-Known Member
Dave Ewing's Back 'eader said:johnny crossan said:Mr Castles' Sunday Times report on the Man City v Chelsea football match began incomprehensibly and finished in absurdity. In the online version it retained its absurdity but the incomprehisible opening paragraph was re-written thus:
As published yesterday in Sunday Times:
"There are some things even Mark Hughes has not been able to buy of late. John Terry – though if it was England armband commercial work Hughes was interested in he would have had more chance. And a Premier League win - until Terry and company swaggered up to Eastlands yesterday only to succumb to one of their intermittent flaky away days.
As it appeared today in the online edition:
"There are some things even Mark Hughes has not been able to buy, such as John Terry and a Premier League win, but Terry and company swaggered up to Eastlands yesterday to put the second of those right for their opponents by having one of their flaky away days."
It's an extremely poorly constructed sentence. He appears not to have a full and comprehensive understanding of how to use punctuation. In the printed version he has clearly avoided using a colon. Instead, he used a full stop, starts the next sentence with 'John Terry' which isn't really a sentence. You know what he wants to say, how desperate he is to make the point, but stumbles in his eagerness to garner full meaning.
It's an occupational hazard for most rag journos. But standards at The Times have slipped alarmingly. Not a bit of wonder folk are moving en masse to the Daily Torygraph.
I'm always terrified of criticizing others ... no others'... grammar and punctuation, its...no it's ...so risky