owlinexile Posted December 19, 2019 Share Posted December 19, 2019 1 hour ago, Bulgaria said: You should try it, the Owen Jones column really absorbs a morning after mutton vindaloo. Careful - he'll have you up for hate crimes.... 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stanningtonowl Posted December 19, 2019 Share Posted December 19, 2019 1 hour ago, Bulgaria said: You should try it, the Owen Jones column really absorbs a morning after mutton vindaloo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thewookieisdown Posted December 19, 2019 Share Posted December 19, 2019 Some hysterical comments on here. It's not a bad piece. It may not be news to people here, by and large, but people on here are more interested in Sheffield Wednesday than the average Wednesday fan. The wider public know the square root of not very much about us because in most ways we are a very ordinary non-premier league club which I am afraid these days is largely known for owning the ground where the disaster happened. That may be sad, indeed unquestionably it is sad, but there we have it. We're a similar piece written about a comparable club to us (say Birmingham or Sunderland) I'd be mildly interested. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jack the Hat Posted December 19, 2019 Share Posted December 19, 2019 3 hours ago, Hypnotiseme said: https://www.theguardian.com/football/2019/dec/19/sheffield-wednesday-sponsors-owner-not-commercially-active-dejphon-chansiri Claims of fake sponsorship... I claim fake newspaper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swfc4_sufc0 Posted December 19, 2019 Share Posted December 19, 2019 He doesn't seem to say anything that isn't actually true in the article. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stoop Posted December 19, 2019 Share Posted December 19, 2019 The guardian tho Very cutting edge running an article about something we’ve all known for 4 years Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sethman75 Posted December 19, 2019 Share Posted December 19, 2019 It's the guardian, they base their business model off bullshit and hate clicks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nero Posted December 19, 2019 Share Posted December 19, 2019 David Conn has a bit of an agenda I'm afraid. He didn't say anything untrue but he left out all the context. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jack the Hat Posted December 19, 2019 Share Posted December 19, 2019 8 minutes ago, Peacenocchio said: David Conn has a bit of an agenda I'm afraid. He didn't say anything untrue but he left out all the context. He’s trying to Conn people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sherlyegg Posted December 19, 2019 Share Posted December 19, 2019 58 minutes ago, thewookieisdown said: That may be sad, indeed unquestionably it is sad, but there we have it. We're a similar piece written about a comparable club to us (say Birmingham or Sunderland) I'd be mildly interested. It's not so much the article but the bits he's left out..being a man city fan he should clean his own wounds first. He's a first rate tw@t, which is common for guardi writers...jones, that evil tw@t tonybee and many others Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thewookieisdown Posted December 19, 2019 Share Posted December 19, 2019 Guardian has some good writers. Martin Kettle and Jonathan Freedland are sensible; John Crace and Marina Hyde funny. . But no one has ever or will ever hit the standards of people like Ian Aitken, John Cole or Hugo Young. That said, I can't think of any newspaper that has improved over the past 25 years with the probable exception of the FT; maybe The Times, which is awful compared to 40 years ago, but has got better since it went briefly way down market in the 90s price wars. It is a stretch to call Toynbee evil, but she is remarkably careless with numbers. Guardian also has the second best clutch of book reviewers, after the FT; and a decent stable of cryptic crossword setters. I don't really understand why he should write about Man C as well in this piece. I suppose if it comes to sins of omission, some account of why a club is driven to the ludicrous lengths of phantom sponsors could have been included; but it kinds of all speaks for itself. As I say, we are not the target audience for this... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buxtongent Posted December 19, 2019 Share Posted December 19, 2019 Seems to me a bit like an angry Scouser who is still wanting some cash from the club after failing to get Dukinfield hung by the Gonads. Typical Gruniad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ash77 Posted December 19, 2019 Share Posted December 19, 2019 (edited) Guardian/observer & independent propagandists after the referendum and election Edited December 19, 2019 by Ash77 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sage owl Posted December 19, 2019 Share Posted December 19, 2019 1 hour ago, Peacenocchio said: David Conn has a bit of an agenda I'm afraid. He didn't say anything untrue but he left out all the context. One of the most dishonest men I have ever encountered was an insolvency practitioner from Manchester called Stephen Conn. I assume this one's a relative. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drones club Posted December 19, 2019 Share Posted December 19, 2019 1 hour ago, thewookieisdown said: Guardian has some good writers. Martin Kettle and Jonathan Freedland are sensible; John Crace and Marina Hyde funny. . But no one has ever or will ever hit the standards of people like Ian Aitken, John Cole or Hugo Young. That said, I can't think of any newspaper that has improved over the past 25 years with the probable exception of the FT; maybe The Times, which is awful compared to 40 years ago, but has got better since it went briefly way down market in the 90s price wars. It is a stretch to call Toynbee evil, but she is remarkably careless with numbers. Guardian also has the second best clutch of book reviewers, after the FT; and a decent stable of cryptic crossword setters. I don't really understand why he should write about Man C as well in this piece. I suppose if it comes to sins of omission, some account of why a club is driven to the ludicrous lengths of phantom sponsors could have been included; but it kinds of all speaks for itself. As I say, we are not the target audience for this... Very accurate post. I write having spent 20+ years as a reporter on Fleet Street. David Conn has done some brilliant work but I fear there is something of a grudge here against Wednesday. The phrase "so what?" comes to mind. In my opinion, football is rotten. Manchester City is owned by a country committing terrible acts in Yemen and denying human rights at home. Fit and proper? Compared with Chansiri? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Socialist_Owl Posted December 19, 2019 Share Posted December 19, 2019 Useless article. Fight the good fight, tailface Conn. Instead of reporting an issue that the EFl has no issue with in the first place, how about you take down the moneyed fat cats (such as your beloved Liverpool) that have caused the classist gulf in football today? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Socialist_Owl Posted December 19, 2019 Share Posted December 19, 2019 3 hours ago, swfc4_sufc0 said: He doesn't seem to say anything that isn't actually true in the article. No, but what's the point? It's not something the EFL is concerned about, in his own words. It's disingenuous to bring this up under the ruse of "potential issues", considering the larger fight at play between the club & league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theowlsman Posted December 19, 2019 Share Posted December 19, 2019 The EFL can go feck themselves Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigthinrob Posted December 19, 2019 Share Posted December 19, 2019 5 hours ago, Hirstys Salopettes said: What an odious two hat that ‘man’ is The guy is obviously a top grade fu*k wit, but let's go a bit easy on him. He & his Grauniad colleagues are all a little bit sensitive at the moment. I hear on good authority they all received some very upsetting news last week (about 10 o clock on Thursday night apparently) & haven't really recovered since, poor dears. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
katie melua Posted December 19, 2019 Share Posted December 19, 2019 4 hours ago, thewookieisdown said: Guardian has some good writers. Martin Kettle and Jonathan Freedland are sensible; John Crace and Marina Hyde funny. . But no one has ever or will ever hit the standards of people like Ian Aitken, John Cole or Hugo Young. That said, I can't think of any newspaper that has improved over the past 25 years with the probable exception of the FT; maybe The Times, which is awful compared to 40 years ago, but has got better since it went briefly way down market in the 90s price wars. It is a stretch to call Toynbee evil, but she is remarkably careless with numbers. Guardian also has the second best clutch of book reviewers, after the FT; and a decent stable of cryptic crossword setters. I don't really understand why he should write about Man C as well in this piece. I suppose if it comes to sins of omission, some account of why a club is driven to the ludicrous lengths of phantom sponsors could have been included; but it kinds of all speaks for itself. As I say, we are not the target audience for this... Stretch?? Really https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/oct/11/baby-p-hamzah-khan-tory-vandalism-gove Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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