Universidad de Chile
Well-Known Member
A very GOOD READ worth.
Many, many thanks!!!!
Many, many thanks!!!!
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.
Interview with Daniel Taylor from The Guardian
- Thread starter Ric
- Start date
BillyShears
Well-Known Member
Interesting read. I don't agree with everything he says. In particular when he talks about the perceived negative coverage City get in comparison to other clubs. I think he's deluding himself if he thinks that City aren't either ignored or criticised, but rarely praised, whereas Chelsea, United, Arsenal, and Liverpool all get praise and criticism in relatively equal measures.
The problem with this interview is DT is actually one of the very good reporters out there who does offer balance and impartial opinions. He always comes across well and even if there's a negative it's done in a respectable manner.
Now, had we had the pleasure of Ladyman,Herbert,Ogden,Jackson,McDonnell,Dunn, Harris (both of them), Lipton, Scott and a few others I'm sure the outcome would read a bit different.
It's all well and good having bluemoons wannabe celebrity posters calling anyone who thinks there's an imbalance in how we're reported on a loon, or paranoid. I think there's been enough evidence in the agenda thread to prove otherwise (discounting the one or two who are most definitely loons and paranoid)
Anyway, well done to Ric on getting the interview in the first place, would be a good feature to have once a month using different journo's, maybe one or two of those mentioned above would like to join us for a friendly chat.. :)
Now, had we had the pleasure of Ladyman,Herbert,Ogden,Jackson,McDonnell,Dunn, Harris (both of them), Lipton, Scott and a few others I'm sure the outcome would read a bit different.
It's all well and good having bluemoons wannabe celebrity posters calling anyone who thinks there's an imbalance in how we're reported on a loon, or paranoid. I think there's been enough evidence in the agenda thread to prove otherwise (discounting the one or two who are most definitely loons and paranoid)
Anyway, well done to Ric on getting the interview in the first place, would be a good feature to have once a month using different journo's, maybe one or two of those mentioned above would like to join us for a friendly chat.. :)
How can the club get away with lying about transfer fees?
Dont the club have to announce the actual fee in the books?
Why didn't the press release the other figures? Why stop at saying Mangala was £42mill why not go back through other players fees?
Dont the club have to announce the actual fee in the books?
Why didn't the press release the other figures? Why stop at saying Mangala was £42mill why not go back through other players fees?
chris85mcfc
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 28 Jun 2013
- Messages
- 5,748
Can we close the agenda thread now then?
JoeMercer'sWay
Well-Known Member
it doesn't excuse the misrepresentation of us though, for example in terms of our spending, wage bill and FFP etc.
Why doesn't DT come out tomorrow and write a positive article, saying that actually we've been responsible financially for the past several seasons, that FFP is complete bollocks and look how clubs like United are completely battering the market and outspending us?
It's alright for him to say it to you, but until he has the balls to put it in a national paper regularly and force the standards of the press up by aligning with the fairer journalists to put pressure on the gutter press, like the guy who put a back page of us as cheats the other week despite it being proved otherwise 2 days later, until the big crap stops being spouted, and the huge lies printed about us, then all the slight criticisms are going to rile us as well, because if you're going to allow people to lie about us in the national press, and not being strong in defending us when we deserve to be, then we're going to take the stance that you want to do us down, and that will manifest itself in people picking on every little detail, because they don't trust you anymore.
So Daniel Taylor, if you truly believe what you told Ric, take a leaf out of Martin Samuel's book and write about it, and set a fair press standard that puts pressure on those who call us cheats and lie about us, and force them through peer pressure to at least be fair. If you want to criticise the club over the handling of Lampard, or over the Mangala fee, fine, if you have the evidence to support you. But for us to be labelled "FFP dodgers", is inexcusable and a leading journalist like yourself should not accept your peers damaging your industry's reputation by it. So print about us fairly, defend us when your disreputable colleagues lie about us and not only may your industry change for the better, but you'll get a lot more respect for it.
We don't want to see you slag off United either, and be biased in the other way. I think simply, the main bone of contention is that if you're going to criticise us for things, then you should equally do so when United do it worse (i.e. excessive spending, high wage bills, based in the Cayman Islands, lots of debt). It's the complete unfairness of slamming City for something, then not clubs who have done it worse, or just plain lying about us (not a claim against you personally) that riles City fans, and you and your peers who claim, as you do in the interview, to be fair and honest and have those views, should do more to make sure your profession is, well professionally, in its reporting towards all teams, including City.
Why doesn't DT come out tomorrow and write a positive article, saying that actually we've been responsible financially for the past several seasons, that FFP is complete bollocks and look how clubs like United are completely battering the market and outspending us?
It's alright for him to say it to you, but until he has the balls to put it in a national paper regularly and force the standards of the press up by aligning with the fairer journalists to put pressure on the gutter press, like the guy who put a back page of us as cheats the other week despite it being proved otherwise 2 days later, until the big crap stops being spouted, and the huge lies printed about us, then all the slight criticisms are going to rile us as well, because if you're going to allow people to lie about us in the national press, and not being strong in defending us when we deserve to be, then we're going to take the stance that you want to do us down, and that will manifest itself in people picking on every little detail, because they don't trust you anymore.
So Daniel Taylor, if you truly believe what you told Ric, take a leaf out of Martin Samuel's book and write about it, and set a fair press standard that puts pressure on those who call us cheats and lie about us, and force them through peer pressure to at least be fair. If you want to criticise the club over the handling of Lampard, or over the Mangala fee, fine, if you have the evidence to support you. But for us to be labelled "FFP dodgers", is inexcusable and a leading journalist like yourself should not accept your peers damaging your industry's reputation by it. So print about us fairly, defend us when your disreputable colleagues lie about us and not only may your industry change for the better, but you'll get a lot more respect for it.
We don't want to see you slag off United either, and be biased in the other way. I think simply, the main bone of contention is that if you're going to criticise us for things, then you should equally do so when United do it worse (i.e. excessive spending, high wage bills, based in the Cayman Islands, lots of debt). It's the complete unfairness of slamming City for something, then not clubs who have done it worse, or just plain lying about us (not a claim against you personally) that riles City fans, and you and your peers who claim, as you do in the interview, to be fair and honest and have those views, should do more to make sure your profession is, well professionally, in its reporting towards all teams, including City.
Exeter Blue I am here
Well-Known Member
Mister Appointment said:Interesting read. I don't agree with everything he says. In particular when he talks about the perceived negative coverage City get in comparison to other clubs. I think he's deluding himself if he thinks that City aren't either ignored or criticised, but rarely praised, whereas Chelsea, United, Arsenal, and Liverpool all get praise and criticism in relatively equal measures.
Yes, there was a touch of the Mandy Rice-Davis's about that answer, and the one to Ric's question about the Northern Press pack as well, where the chief football writers for 3 of the 4 broadsheets are rags - Ogden, Jackson and, despite what Taylor says, Herbert, who is to Wrexham as referee Anthony Taylor is to Altrincham. And given that Ogden has already acknowledged on Bluemoon that 'click based' articles are a staple of all papers now, DT's denial of bias rings a bit hollow. Fair play to the bloke for coming on here, but for the most part my sentiments echo those of Joe Mercer's Way above
Exeter Blue I am here said:Mister Appointment said:Interesting read. I don't agree with everything he says. In particular when he talks about the perceived negative coverage City get in comparison to other clubs. I think he's deluding himself if he thinks that City aren't either ignored or criticised, but rarely praised, whereas Chelsea, United, Arsenal, and Liverpool all get praise and criticism in relatively equal measures.
Yes, there was a touch of the Mandy Rice-Davis's about that answer, and the one to Ric's question about the Northern Press pack as well, where the chief football writers for 3 of the 4 broadsheets are rags - Ogden, Jackson and, despite what Taylor says, Herbert, who is to Wrexham as referee Anthony Taylor is to Altrincham. And given that Ogden has already acknowledged on Bluemoon that 'click based' articles are a staple of all papers now, DT's denial of bias rings a bit hollow. Fair play to the bloke for coming on here though
I can assure you Ian Herbert is 100% a Wrexham fan and a proper fan at that. Was at Wembley watching them last year and even had their fans song sung at his wedding. He is certainly NOT a rag.
Exeter Blue I am here
Well-Known Member
our tommy said:Exeter Blue I am here said:Mister Appointment said:Interesting read. I don't agree with everything he says. In particular when he talks about the perceived negative coverage City get in comparison to other clubs. I think he's deluding himself if he thinks that City aren't either ignored or criticised, but rarely praised, whereas Chelsea, United, Arsenal, and Liverpool all get praise and criticism in relatively equal measures.
Yes, there was a touch of the Mandy Rice-Davis's about that answer, and the one to Ric's question about the Northern Press pack as well, where the chief football writers for 3 of the 4 broadsheets are rags - Ogden, Jackson and, despite what Taylor says, Herbert, who is to Wrexham as referee Anthony Taylor is to Altrincham. And given that Ogden has already acknowledged on Bluemoon that 'click based' articles are a staple of all papers now, DT's denial of bias rings a bit hollow. Fair play to the bloke for coming on here though
I can assure you Ian Herbert is 100% a Wrexham fan and a proper fan at that. Was at Wembley watching them last year and even had their fans song sung at his wedding. He is certainly NOT a rag.
I never said he wasn't a Wrexham fan, merely that that allegiance conveniently obscures the fact that he favours United as well. A bit like me in fact, in so much as I support Exeter City, I still go and watch them half a dozen times a season despite having moved away, but my overwhelming passion has always been, and will always be, Manchester City