_00_deathscar Posted August 8, 2007 Posted August 8, 2007 It's on the offal - worth a read, talks about rotation. For those of you who like long articles in 10 words or less:Rotation, not all bad, as much as Mancs and Chelsea.
Benitez Posted August 8, 2007 Posted August 8, 2007 For those of you who like long articles in 10 words or less:Rotation, not all bad, as much as Mancs and Chelsea. cheers! That's all I needed to know
Flasher Posted August 8, 2007 Posted August 8, 2007 It is a good read, as ever. Certainly stuck it under the noses of Chelsea and Manure fans.
cymrococh Posted August 8, 2007 Posted August 8, 2007 Paul Tomkins really annoys me. I know he's had a hard time, but that doesn't mean we want to read about it in the middle of an article. Imagine if every journo did that?
cymrococh Posted August 8, 2007 Posted August 8, 2007 And "Ah, but in 2005/06, Benitez must of gone crazy with the rotation? " is unforgivable in any professionally written piece.
Walrus Posted August 8, 2007 Posted August 8, 2007 He's a Red and writes well (take that back about him being Kaizer)
Guest Kaizer Posted August 8, 2007 Posted August 8, 2007 (edited) Oh so a piece about stats is a good thing now, well who would have thought that. Rotation is all well and good if you have good enough quality players to rotate, thats our problem compared to the other two teams mainly covered in that article. Edited August 8, 2007 by Kaizer
The Hitman Posted August 8, 2007 Posted August 8, 2007 And "Ah, but in 2005/06, Benitez must of gone crazy with the rotation? " is unforgivable in any professionally written piece.Was just about to write that.The kind of writing you'd expect from a GCSE student.
Herbie von Smalls Posted August 8, 2007 Posted August 8, 2007 there's a 'neither... or' and a 'between four strikers' too, while we're criticising his grammar.
hideNseek Posted August 8, 2007 Posted August 8, 2007 Is he a professional though? And if people can do so much better why not have ago?
Cobs Posted August 9, 2007 Posted August 9, 2007 Is he a professional though? And if people can do so much better why not have ago? ouch
Puskas Posted August 9, 2007 Posted August 9, 2007 That's quite a good article (grammar errors aside!). It demonstrates that it is possible to make stats both interesting and relevant. The key point is right at the end - Chelsea, Man U and Liverpool rotate their squads an identical amount in the league, it's just that the Chelsea and Man U squads have been a little better than ours up to now. It was also interesting to note that Man U's squad cost double the amount ours did, and Chelsea's triple.
Will Posted August 9, 2007 Posted August 9, 2007 Paul Tomkins really annoys me. I know he's had a hard time, but that doesn't mean we want to read about it in the middle of an article. Imagine if every journo did that?An intriguing moan as he doesn't mention his problems at all in that piece, and when he does it's normally at the very end, as far as I recall
cymrococh Posted August 9, 2007 Posted August 9, 2007 An intriguing moan as he doesn't mention his problems at all in that piece, and when he does it's normally at the very end, as far as I recallI didn't read that piece properly, because he annoys me and it was so badly written. as for the "normally at the very end" bit, c*ck off Will.
JohnnyH Posted August 9, 2007 Posted August 9, 2007 ouch Apparantly it's acceptable now to start a sentance with "And". However "ago" is unforgivable.
kop205 Posted August 9, 2007 Posted August 9, 2007 Apparantly it's acceptable now to start a sentance with "And". However "ago" is unforgivable. Double ouch.
Cobs Posted August 9, 2007 Posted August 9, 2007 Apparantly it's acceptable now to start a sentance with "And". However "ago" is unforgivable. Ooooof !
Walrus Posted August 9, 2007 Posted August 9, 2007 There's nothing to criticise in the contents of the article, is there.
_00_deathscar Posted August 9, 2007 Author Posted August 9, 2007 I want a piece of the pedantic grammar pie too puhlease.
Herbie von Smalls Posted August 9, 2007 Posted August 9, 2007 There's nothing to criticise in the contents of the article, is there.well, essentially it's a long-winded analysis of some statistics that shows Rafa doesn't tinker quite as much as his reputation suggests, so no there's nothing to argue with. is it a big deal to criticise anyone who gets paid to write for their apparent shortcomings in the basics of their chosen line of work? this forum's full of examples of doing similarly with footballers.
Kahnee Posted August 9, 2007 Posted August 9, 2007 a whole thread sub-edited by kahnee. A couple of classics that have been brought to my attention recently: The Rotary Clubs of Bingley is having their Yorkshire Charity Dinner on tomorrow evening During the trip, from Tuesday to Thursday there will be a chance to experience climbing, canoeing, abseiling, biking and raft-making, all while staying in a tent
redjersey Posted August 9, 2007 Posted August 9, 2007 well, essentially it's a long-winded analysis of some statistics that shows Rafa doesn't tinker quite as much as his reputation suggests, so no there's nothing to argue with. is it a big deal to criticise anyone who gets paid to write for their apparent shortcomings in the basics of their chosen line of work? this forum's full of examples of doing similarly with footballers.He doesn't get paid to write for the official site apparently. He mentions on his website that he does it in return for a link directing readers to his books. Must admit I enjoy his articles, and I can't recall too many grammatical errors in past ones. Maybe he dictated this one and it was badly transcribed.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now