Printable View
Another full page in the Indo today criticising Brian Kerr! Why the campaign? Who is driving this?
No matter what anyones opinion on Kerr is the campaign from last 2 weeks is completely unjust. I've always disliked the Indo (can hardly be called Independent can it?) but evenmore reasons now.
:(
Think they did a poll and 70% of thier readers wanted him to stay
Indo Scum
Not surprising really. It's always been anti Irish. Look at their coverage of our league, look at the evening herag spouting lies about EL fans, look at their rag when something goes wrong in the league, they are almost crying with joy. Look at ****s reporting on the game like Dion Fanning. Look at how many articles are copied from england. The IRISH Independent?:DQuote:
Originally Posted by pete
Presume they want an english manager to come in?:rolleyes:
I'm always surprised at the intelligence of people that buy it to be honest.
KOH
EXACTLY NY HOOP - THE IRISH INDEPENDENT MIGHT AS WELL BE THE GUARDIAN OR SOME ENGLISH RAG. ITS A TABLOID IN DISGUISE AND PRINTS NOTHING BUT LIES AND COLUMNS BASED ON PERSON VENDATTASQuote:
Originally Posted by NY Hoop
is the man driving this and the journos have been lapping up every leak from Merrion square without questioning its validity.Its back to the bad old days folks except its one hundred times worst as the master shafter sets out to destroy Irish Soccer singlehandedly and not one Journo is brave enough to stand up to him.
Anyone see front page headline today? "Saddam lawyer blah blah blah.... was very tabloidesque. Are they taking their new tabloid version format too far?
Wasn't it the Herald that fabricated the Kerr-Keane "bust-up"? Did the Indo start the Ferguson rumour?
I'm no huge fan of Kerr & unsure if he should stay but campaigns like this would make you support him.
I never buy the Indo but has anyone stopped buying it recently?
Must be a lot of pressure on an Indo HQ with falling sales & more competition.
dont think its a question of them being under pressure as this alone wont sell any more papers - its just a question of a "house style" with the new editorial team - this is the new house style and expect it to get worse from now on in. If I read one more report with "sources said that" or observers close to said I'll get down to Merrion Sq and batter delaney
:rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by thejollyrodger
How are the Media Studies classes going?
To answer the original question of who is behind this .........Delaney of course. The flop-haired, prawn sandwich-munching useless parasite.
KOH
There's a new editor at the indo, Dunphy was saying over the last 3 weeks or so on NewsTalk that he would bring in a more tabloid outlook to the paper
O'regan, he came from the herald.
They tend to give it away free down here in the south, still not worth it though.
??what??:confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by WeAreRovers
He's talking about you calling the Guardian an "English rag". Its far from a rag, unlike practically every other British 'paper
I have to say that this mornings Independent was amateur and petty. Imagine a morning broadsheet with a "He said this, We say that" article which merely came across to all who read it as a direct sulk from the paper. It was like they were replying to a post on a forum. Very poor journalism. Then Vincent Hogan had a pot shot and add a few more Kerr slangings and you have the make up of the Sports pages of the Indo today. Its horribly obvious that someone in there had their rattle stolen by Kerr as its the textual equivalent of a grumpy child!!!
I hardly never read the foreign press, just the odd article here and there. From what I picked up on from that little Englander complaining about the Irish fotball coverage in the guardian I thought the guardian was a 'little englander' newspaper.
I sent that hogan an email before the last few matches in the WCQ because I thought he was a prat. The articles today prove that indeed he is a usless prat with a low IQ.
Having a go at the manager is acceptable providing its proper critical analysis. However printing some of the 'you say' - 'we say' stuff is childish and embarssing.
I haven't had a chance to read the article yet but even before I have, i know what to expect.....not at all surprised Hogan is in the thick of it all.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gareth
Sent him an email last week to complain about his hack journalism.....I seem to recall some posters tried to defend him?!?!:p
For the benefit of those of yee who don't want to buy the paper here's the article.
I highlighted what I tought was the weakest of all the arguments. What does preperation have to do with substitution policy?Quote:
We respond to Kerr's main points
KERR SAYS:
"It appears to me you don't have to have any qualification to write about and analyse games. Have they done the work that qualifies them to say things and analyse? They're out of touch, don't know what's going on."
WE SAY:
"Does this mean Liam Brady, employed by Arsenal, winner of two Serie A titles, 72 Irish caps and a PFA Player of the Year award has no qualification? Or John Giles, who won every domestic honour with Leeds, captained and managed his country and has commented on the sport for over 25 years? C'mon Brian."
KERR SAYS:
"It (the opinion of critics) changes with results. That's the line."
WE SAY:
"Of course, results define everything, particularly when the best team you can beat is ranked 84th in the world (Georgia), when you manage one goal in 270 minutes play at the business end of a World Cup campaign. That a team ranked outside the top 100, Cyprus, had 15 goal chances in one half is overlooked because we won. Results, as they say, define everything."
KERR SAYS:
"We have done it (the job) to the best of our ability and our preparation has been meticulous. I take comfort that the preparation was as good as it could be, we as a backroom team did everything."
WE SAY:
"Was the preparation so good, so meticulous? If so, why was Steve Finnan left out against Switzerland last week. Would Switzerland or Israel have left a Champions League winner on the bench?
"And while we're at it, what about the switch against Israel at home. Ahead 2-0, you replaced a striker (Robbie Keane) with a midfielder (Graham Kavanagh) and the match turned. Stephen Elliott was left on the bench but four days later was a star in the Faroes.
"Also, why only use one sub in three friendlies last year? Surely, those games are for blooding youngsters not about winning to move up the world rankings."
KERR SAYS:
"We were three points behind France. There were 12 games in the group between the top four teams, 11 of them were drawn. France beat us by a piece of genius by a fantastic player. It was the only result out of synch."
WE SAY:
"We salute Thierry Henry's magic but even if we'd drawn with France, we'd still have finished third in the group."
KERR SAYS:
"The knowledge I would have about the team and the selections and who was right to play in a match, and what their current form is, in many ways would be almost unique to me."
WE SAY:
"If that's the case Brian, then why claim that journalists pressing for information from you 'appear . . . to be lazy. We'll fill stuff with quotes from me'. Why not seek your 'unique' wisdom Brian?"
KERR SAYS:
"The job (media work) deserves the time I give it. With the youths or Pat's there were very few people interested. I used to hustle to get a few lines."
WE SAY:
"Comparing media commitments at 'Richer' to the Irish job is like night with day. Your predecessor Mick McCarthy, to his credit, did almost 25 press briefings, many hot and heavy, in 32 days at the 2002 World Cup finals."
KERR SAYS:
"Maybe (in the future) I'll become one of the media people criticising others."
WE SAY:
"You did that before Brian, in the 2002 World Cup for RTE and were happy to take the taxpayers' few bob."
look we've missed out on 2 major tournaments, he is bound to get stick. At least they haven't resorted to sticking pics of him hanging off a goal post like they did with Sven in the sun. Now that was sick.
Never thought I'd stoop to defending the Fianna Fail rag, but wouldn't the point be that it suggests that Kerr hadn't really prepared for the possibility that he might have to substitute a striker early in the game?Quote:
Originally Posted by Bald Student
See my "Media Studies" comment above - It'a Blueshirt rag FFS. The Independent group have 3 sworn enemies - FF, RTE, the Republican movement.Quote:
Originally Posted by Marked Man
KOH
Kerr was making a point about team preperation which (post-Saipan) was one of his main targets for improvement. The indo twisted the wording around to criticise him for not playing Elliot. The two points are completly unrelated and it shows the shallowness of the indo's argument.Quote:
Originally Posted by Marked Man
And Biran Kerr obviously...Quote:
Originally Posted by WeAreRovers
What a bloody joke. Kerr said this:Quote:
KERR SAYS:
"It appears to me you don't have to have any qualification to write about and analyse games. Have they done the work that qualifies them to say things and analyse? They're out of touch, don't know what's going on."
"I'd talk to people who really understood it and were experts. It appears to me that you don't have to have any qualification to write about and analyse the games."
...when asked about not talking to the media. What has Giles, Brady and Dunphy got to do with this?
The 2nd sentence was Kerr talking about 6 journalists turning up for an information night with Kerr and O'Reilly.
The 3rd sentence wasn't even in the bloody Irish Times article.
I'm being pedantic here but he never said "thats the line". They add it in to get their point across.Quote:
KERR SAYS:
"It (the opinion of critics) changes with results. That's the line."
eh, if you read the whole article he answered this question:Quote:
"And while we're at it, what about the switch against Israel at home. Ahead 2-0, you replaced a striker (Robbie Keane) with a midfielder (Graham Kavanagh) and the match turned. Stephen Elliott was left on the bench but four days later was a star in the Faroes.
"In the week prior to the Israel match, two weeks before it, he wasn't in the Sunderland team. I spoke extensively with people at Sunderland who said he was struggling, he'd picked up a virus in the summer and hadn't come out of it strong.
"In training, when he came with us we were waiting for him to show us something. Robbie hadn't been playing much. We needed him but there was nothing there. It wasn't Stephen. So on the day we put Graham (Kavanagh) on and Duffer up front. They got a hold and you know the rest.
"In the Faroes we had a couple of sessions and something clicked with Stephen and we had virtually no choice though but to play him. It's fine-line stuff."
Just to add to the above, Kerr said he hadn't played in 2 weeks, more like one start in 2 months.
Take out the bold bit and thats the exact quote. The bit in bold was part of a different thing.Quote:
"The job (media work) deserves the time I give it. With the youths or Pat's there were very few people interested. I used to hustle to get a few lines."
OK, from Eirebhoy's post, it's pretty clear that a lot was taken out of context. But still, how is team preparation completely unrelated to having a plan in place for substitutions? If Eliot wasn't fit to play (as the virus comment seems to suggest), why was he even on the bench? If he was fit to play, why didn't he (or at least a striker) come on for Keane? Seems to me like this is closely related to team preparation.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bald Student
None of which is to defend the Indo (still a rag, even if I haven't got its party affiliation right); even a broken clock gets the right time twice a day.
I think the Indo is bitter that not attend the press conference last week & jealous IT got the big interview this week.
I don't might papers having anti-whoever articles but could at least have someone writting Devils Advocate articles as the IT often does on serious debates.
I send email but be surprised if decent response.
They're not completly unrelated, Marked Man in that all parts of playing a game are related.
Kerr had a plan in place for substitutions. The journalist disagreed with that plan.
The point is that the journalist was unable to criticise Kerr on the point he was making so instead he twisted the words around to try to make them mean something else. It is an example of biased journalism (and a poor one at that).
Eventhough Kerr gone i expect the Indo to continue their campaign. The question is whose next?