The Press

[Flight]

It seems to me that there is a 'turning' of some of the more capable journalists against the more sensational tabloid like reporting that has taken over the media, over the last few years.

 

I don't just mean they used to give us a hard time and now they are more complimentary, I mean their reporting across the board - an attempt at tactical analysis, distancing from the 'pack', not sucking up to traditionally respected figures.

 

 

Whisper it gently, lest you be carted away to the nuthouse, but the Sunday Supplement has even become worth watching over the last few weeks (obviously depending on who they have on).

 

 

Oliver Kay and Henry Winter are two examples, who I like listening to or reading. In the middle you have Patrick Barclay, who actually prides himself on being ANTI-tabloid sensationalism (but still manages to stick to it when it comes to us), numpties like Joe Lovejoy, who mutter incomprehensible lines which are guaranteed to agree with the pack and prove his lack of insight - and then the a******s, sadly having among their ranks a number of our ex-players.

 

 

I wonder if the rumored shake up at Sky has a small part to play in this. Or maybe Sky is tapping into the general feeling amongst all fans that we are sick of living on bottom feed while other countries get excellent coverage and analysis.

 

 

So which papers do you buy - I suppose that's a two parter - which papers/reporters give us a fair crack of the whip, an attempt at impartiality and which are generally good for football coverage across the board?

[Spike]

I'd prefer to say that other mediums such as radio have gone too extreme and the press twunts look rational by comparison

[sean]

When we win, I buy all sorts and read through them, smugly. When we lose I buy the Independent and that's it.

[Swipe]

Stopped buying papers for the most part.

 

I go onto the Times and the Guardian websites, and if we're doing well i'll read the football coverage.

 

If we're not, i'll more often than not skip it or just skim the football section.

 

Worse thing about online coverage is the ubiquitous opportunity for all readers to post their opinions on every single article. There's always some biased numpty who'll post something that will wind me up!

Edited March 31, 2009 by Swipe

[John am Rhein]

None of them, although I sometimes buy papers for other stuff.

 

The football coverage is a total waste of space - far more informative reading what actual match-going fans have to say on websites like this one.

[Scaryscouse]

Just the Guardian and The Observer for me (was excellent this week). I just read the net during the week. Can't always get them over here in Ireland so would sometimes grab the sunday times and the sunday mirror for thrashy reading plus my mate writes for them.

Edited March 31, 2009 by Scaryscouse

[Chili Palmer]

None of them, although I sometimes buy papers for other stuff.

 

The football coverage is a total waste of space - far more informative reading what actual match-going fans have to say on websites like this one.

 

 

same goes for me.

[charlie clown]

Have to agree with John - there is no newspaper I would buy because of the quality of it's football coverage, although I do buy the Guardian/Observer Friday, Saturday and Sunday - but it's not for the sport, at least not for the football, but I do enjoy some of their cricket and rugby writing (Vic Marks, Gideon Haigh, Mike Brearley, Eddie Butler all have their moments). There are a few writers in other papers whose work I enjoy reading, Winter being one of them, but I'm more likely to read other papers for their coverage of other sports, again cricket primarily, I like reading Mike Atherton and Boycott for example.

[matty]

Newspapers went on a 'never mind the quality, feel the width' approach from the early/mid 90s onwards. Now there is too much space that has to be filled by something. And when the facts aren't enough, it's filled by speculation. And when the speculation has no basis, you just have to become more extreme. It's not only football, but news too.

 

I've become sick of the rubbish they write about football. It's a feedback mechanism too. More idle gossip just encourages more rubbish to be spoken by those in football itself. The fact that Rafa has tried to stand above this means the media dislikes him, but he got sucked into it by the January statement.

 

Internet's full of crap too.

[Gomez]

Reading print-outs of yesterday's internet is a bit of a bizzare concept if I am honest.

Let alone paying for it.

[smithdown]

Don't really bother with papers these days. When I look through them on the net I can't really notice any real difference between the times/guardian/indy/telegraph anymore, on footy or on any other subject. That article about 'the full back' that appeared on here is about the best thing I've read in footy media for years.

[David Hodgson]

None of them, although I sometimes buy papers for other stuff.

 

The football coverage is a total waste of space - far more informative reading what actual match-going fans have to say on websites like this one.

 

What like 'The Sunday Sport' ?

[floyd]

When journalist continue compiling top 50 defenders, and Ferdinand is No.2, then if you haven't given up on them, then that shouldv'e been the last straw.

[Snookie]

I buy the Guardian and Observer on a regular basis and usually read the other broadsheets online. The quality of sports coverage in general has dropped. There is no one near the quality of Hugh Mcilvanney at his peak and its kinda sad to see how people like James Lawton and Joe Lovejoy have declined. Of the current crop I like:

 

Tim Vickery - his coverage of South American football is excellent

Marcela Mora y Araujo - she's probably the most talented sports writer around today. I can never understand how her profile at the Guardian isn't higher

Kevin McCarra - his footballing passion always comes across

Oliver Kay - far and away the best sports writer on the Times. Patrick Barclay was once as good as anyone but he's become a smug and lazy writer

Tom Humphries - the best writer at the Irish Times period

Dion Fanning - his father's only saving grace

Paul Doyle -His coverage of African football is excellent

 

I've started to read When Saturday Comes again. You see journalists who generally write toss in the nationals putting together considered thoughtful pieces. That to me says the decline has less to do with the quality of writers but the changing nature of sports coverage where papers assume that to be successful they need to give the reading public what they want. The decline in sales figures suggests otherwise

[stressederic]

I don't actually buy a paper but generally read the Guardian, Times, Telegraph and Independent online.

 

Out of all of those I generally stick with the Guardian's football coverage above the others. They've got a decent mix of love and disdain for the game which comes out in their MBM reports and The Fiver.

 

Also Sid Lowe's Spanish football coverage is excellent.

[John am Rhein]

What like 'The Sunday Sport' ?

 

No, never bought it in my life

[Gray - YPC]

If I buy a paper I buy The Mirror as whilst it's s*** I think it might piss off The S*n a little bit, so that's the only reason.

 

Papers are s****!!

[Nebraska Red]

Omaha World Herald has great Nebraska Cornhusker coverage. During the season, I will pick up the Lincoln Journal Star on a Sunday after a win.

 

Go Big Red!!!

[Stevie H]

i think the guardian's football coverage has plummeted lately in terms of quality. the fiver and those minute-by-minute reports are sneering crap cliched out by rob smyth, barry glendenning and sean ingle and their manchester united correspondent daniel taylor types his pieces from somewhere deep within alex ferguson's anus. mccarra's still alright, jonathan wilson is excellent, andy hunter's not bad but he's just reporting not commentating, sid lowe is good but he's a freelancer not a guardian staffer and i agree with snookie about paul doyle on african (and french) football. oh, and david pleat's tactical dissections are always worth reading.

Edited April 1, 2009 by Stevie H

[Montse]

I get The Times as I like it as a paper anyway but also the sports coverage is as good as any