A real crap piece of journalism
Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
- Moccha
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 4528
- Joined: Tue 09 Mar 2004 3:33pm
- Location: Two Pronged Attack
- Contact:
A real crap piece of journalism
I know this has been stated on other threads but the article wriiten in The Herald/Sun http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/sport/ ... 42,00.html by Mark Stevens is the biggest load of crap I've ever read. It seems to reek of such bias that it's a bit hard to stomach. If you want to read a balanced view thwn you should read Greg Baum's article in The Age http://www.realfooty.com.au/news/rfnews ... 38949.html. The Heral/Sun article is s*** journalism at it's best. It needs to be said. Hopefully the wanker will come on to this site looking for his next story.
Another opportunity awaits!
Re: A real crap piece of journalism
Mark Stevens has given us a great go over the last couple of years. Why would he have any bias against the Saints. Maybe he just wanted to write the article in that way afterall that is the closest anyone has got to us all year.Moccha wrote:I know this has been stated on other threads but the article wriiten in The Herald/Sun http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/sport/ ... 42,00.html by Mark Stevens is the biggest load of crap I've ever read. It seems to reek of such bias that it's a bit hard to stomach. If you want to read a balanced view thwn you should read Greg Baum's article in The Age http://www.realfooty.com.au/news/rfnews ... 38949.html. The Heral/Sun article is s*** journalism at it's best. It needs to be said. Hopefully the wanker will come on to this site looking for his next story.
Lol – which game were you watching Mark? They didn’t get within 3 goals of us.Mark Stevens wrote:If not for the odd dumb decision and turnover, they might have even won
I can play this biased game too. “If not for inaccurate kicking the Saints may have won by 7 goalsâ€
Lance or James??
There comes a point in every man's life when he has to say, "Enough is enough." For me, that time is now. I have been dealing with claims that I cheated and had an unfair advantage in <redacted>. Over the past three years, I have been subjected to a <redacted>investigation followed by <redacted> witch hunt. The toll this has taken on my family, and my work for <redacted>and on me leads me to where I am today – finished with this nonsense. (Oops just got a spontaneous errection <unredacted>)
There comes a point in every man's life when he has to say, "Enough is enough." For me, that time is now. I have been dealing with claims that I cheated and had an unfair advantage in <redacted>. Over the past three years, I have been subjected to a <redacted>investigation followed by <redacted> witch hunt. The toll this has taken on my family, and my work for <redacted>and on me leads me to where I am today – finished with this nonsense. (Oops just got a spontaneous errection <unredacted>)
Prefer 'The Age' article too.
The Herald-Sun one spends too much time glorifying StKilda as a monster of the competition with a massive track record. Look no further than Geelong, Mark !
Lines such as "StKilda finally trickling blood" (when was that?) were glorified images versus the more mundane "and seeing an ever slight sign of weakness"
Much can be written of Essendon as they took it up to us for most of the game. Did they learn more about themselves or did the competition learn more about us ? Or...did Saints learn more about there own areas for improvement ? IMHO the Saints get to reload and take some positives out of it, the Bombers get more respect but realise that crucial skill errors are why they are midtable. They also need to get more consistent, need to win 2 games in a row and need to play 4 quarters.
The Saints are no monsters, the Bombers held no bayonets and slayed no one. A bit rich for mine.
The Herald-Sun one spends too much time glorifying StKilda as a monster of the competition with a massive track record. Look no further than Geelong, Mark !
Lines such as "StKilda finally trickling blood" (when was that?) were glorified images versus the more mundane "and seeing an ever slight sign of weakness"
Much can be written of Essendon as they took it up to us for most of the game. Did they learn more about themselves or did the competition learn more about us ? Or...did Saints learn more about there own areas for improvement ? IMHO the Saints get to reload and take some positives out of it, the Bombers get more respect but realise that crucial skill errors are why they are midtable. They also need to get more consistent, need to win 2 games in a row and need to play 4 quarters.
The Saints are no monsters, the Bombers held no bayonets and slayed no one. A bit rich for mine.
-
- SS Life Member
- Posts: 2540
- Joined: Mon 27 Jun 2005 1:27pm
- Location: Abiding
- Has thanked: 173 times
- Been thanked: 385 times
It's called a "figure of speech".Moccha wrote:What is this s*** about "if it bleeds you can kill it"?
It's a game of footy isn't it?
Seriously you need to take the paranoia glasses off.
The article is fine it shows that the Saints in 09 are human and yes can be beaten.
Don't you remember 04 when people were betting on us finishing undefeated.
In a way I think the same article could have been written about how we used to be 20 or so years ago. Not quite good enough to win games but taking it right up to the good sides, who would then just do enough to win.
- perfectionist
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 9054
- Joined: Mon 30 Jul 2007 3:06pm
- Has thanked: 60 times
- Been thanked: 353 times
- B W and R all over
- SS Hall of Fame
- Posts: 2220
- Joined: Tue 09 Mar 2004 3:14pm
- Location: Northcote
- marksnsparks
- Club Player
- Posts: 506
- Joined: Sat 28 Jul 2007 8:09pm
- Location: Mentone