Negative Media

**Anto McC** · 24/04/2005, 6:14 PM

Originally Posted by �anna

in fairness to the Echo, the amount of coverage has been pretty good for the last 2 years or so, since we signed a sponsorship deal with them. The quality is another matter entirely

Chief football writer there is Noel Spillane, who's record includes the following:
- misquoting players
- using quotes from players long after he was given them
- accusing the Shed of racism for booing Mbabazi about 2 years ago.

What do you think will happen when the sponsorship deal runs out?.Will it be back to the way it was before the deal.

In regards to the quality i suppose it's better than no coverage at all.

**BohDiddley** · 24/04/2005, 6:26 PM

I don't think anyone can still argue that the Irish game gets fair coverage here. Even those who do cover it tend to be hyper-critical.
Recently had to spend Friday night listening to the match reports on RTE radio. Almost every reporter seemed to think s/he would lose any credibility if he didn't tell us how dull the game was. 'No goals yet, yawn', was the main point of each report, and you could almost see the anchor rolling his eyes at the lack of a goals avalanche. You wondered when they last sat through all, rather than the carefully edited highlights, of an English prem match, or if they were more used to point-a-minute GAA or basketball.
You don't get that consistent, in-build knocking in coverage of other sports. I'd like to see some football reporters hired who don't have ADT and can get more out of a game than goals.

**Anto McC** · 24/04/2005, 6:56 PM

Originally Posted by BohDiddley

Almost every reporter seemed to think s/he would lose any credibility if he didn't tell us how dull the game was. 'No goals yet, yawn', was the main point of each report, and you could almost see the anchor rolling his eyes at the lack of a goals avalanche.

And yet if it were to end 5-4 to whichever team they would be comparing it to a childrens playground match in which the standard is so bad that the teams scored so many goals.

**CollegeTillIDie** · 24/04/2005, 7:48 PM

Well said that man. Worst match I was ever at finished 5-3 !

**ccfcgirl** · 24/04/2005, 8:07 PM

The echo in Cork do at good coverage on city games .The mirror dose a good pull out also .But people in general have a very negative view of Loi soccer .

**pete** · 24/04/2005, 8:50 PM

I think if an organistaion gives coverage to the good things about the eL then they have the right to cover the negative. Some sector of the media give virtually no coverage but will always give a spread on the negative.

**Anto McC** · 24/04/2005, 10:12 PM

The fact of the matter is that if the Eircom League got even a fraction of the publicity that the Premiersh*t got incuding the few bad incidents(no publicity is bad apparently)it might actually encourage people to get up off the barstool/armchair and go to the matches.

**Poor Student** · 24/04/2005, 10:24 PM

Working in the newsagents this morning I had a very quick scan of a few papers. The Star on Sunday who at one time had a slightly decent four page coverage of the eL are down to about two none of which were match reports. Just an interview with Leeson on the Galway job and the Rod's stupid column with him moaning about how the FAI sent someone to observe his touchline band. All that was in the Sunday World was about an inch of column space talking about Bohs' first win of the season. I don't even think there was anything in the Ireland on Sunday, Sunday People and News of the World.

**�anna** · 24/04/2005, 10:32 PM

The Sunday World had a brief one column interview with terry palmer.

**Poor Student** · 24/04/2005, 10:37 PM

Originally Posted by �anna

The Sunday World had a brief one column interview with terry palmer.

I stand corrected then, but paltry none the less. Shouldn't even small match reports be the priority and then worry about interviews? Sunday World coverage in particular seems to be very odd and random.

**�anna** · 24/04/2005, 10:41 PM

Originally Posted by Poor Student

I stand corrected then, but paltry none the less. Shouldn't even small match reports be the priority and then worry about interviews? Sunday World coverage in particular seems to be very odd and random.

absolutely. I'm not seeking to defend them, just pointing it out. They often have nothing at all. I wouldn't expect match reports to be fair, as games are finished too late for them to be covered, but previews of next weeks fixtures plus maybe one article wouldn't be too much to ask for, would it?

**hamish** · 25/04/2005, 1:54 AM

Originally Posted by A face

The hit list !!

These names have come up alot before alright ..... anyone else to add to the list. Name and shame !!

Paul Hyland - The Herald
David Kelly - The Irish Independent

My take is that alot of these guys get bouts of writers block and try and using an eL bashing article as a means of filling the space. Alot of their articles, for the most part, dont show the full facts and alot of the time are largely inaccurate and misleading. It is just a means of glossing over their own inability to practice good journalism with articles that are hoodwinking the punter. It is a classic textbook �get yourself out of the sh�te� measure that a lot of them use as a crutch. These type of articles, alot of the time are so glaringly bad, they just serve to highlight their own failings to any reader that has the slightest idea about what these guys are trying to write on.

A good measure to practice is boycott, if you know it sh�t .... then DONT buy it.

yep, A Face, you got it! I have said on another post, that I have stopped buying the likes of the Turbine, Indo, Times etc etc because I simply don't believe in their football "coverage" - I just do not believe the. At least, the Star, especially on Tuesdays, gives the local game a chance. Paul Lennon, wasn't he Drogheda PRO for a while?, is pretty positive and when he makes a criticism you might not agree with him but I feel his heart is in the right place.
To be utterly honest, I get more down to earth information and what's REALLY happening by checking up on Foot.ie several times a day. Who needs the fcuking papers!!

**monutdfc** · 25/04/2005, 9:26 AM

I think Emmet Malone is very good.

Des Cahill is my number one offender.

**Roo69** · 25/04/2005, 9:49 AM

Originally Posted by CollegeTillIDie

aido b

Spot on and one of the most negative is David Kelly in the Irish Indo.
A self confessed St. Pat's fan!

Is that the same Dave Kelly from TV3 ?

**Schumi** · 25/04/2005, 10:42 AM

Coverage generally is terrible. Sunday papers are the worst by far. The Indo has about a quarter of a page in total of cr�p match reports on Saturday's games and nothing else. The Sunday World has nothing at all usually. I haven't seen other Sunday papers but haven't heard anything good! The Times isn't great but at least has well written match reports on every game and Emmet Malone's features usually very good, just not enough of them. I don't see much of the tabloids but The Mirror's Friday pull-out is very good and i've started buying it for that alone when I remember.

**Macy** · 25/04/2005, 10:52 AM

Originally Posted by �anna

absolutely. I'm not seeking to defend them, just pointing it out. They often have nothing at all. I wouldn't expect match reports to be fair, as games are finished too late for them to be covered, but previews of next weeks fixtures plus maybe one article wouldn't be too much to ask for, would it?

How are they finished too late to get coverage? They manage to do several pages on midweek UK games. Also the Turbine used to carry match reports from Flancare by the Leader reporter on the Saturday night games (a while since I've brought a Sunday Paper, but if a Newspaper that is nearly all features rather than reports can carry it....)

Even if you buy that excuse, no excuse for Sunday Papers not having Friday match reports.

**aido_b** · 25/04/2005, 11:03 AM

Purely up to themselves of course but Im wondering if any of those who voted that The Eircom League doesn't get too much negative media could post just to say why they think this is so?!?!

**Ceirtlis** · 25/04/2005, 11:24 AM

While i think that it is wrong for some papers to only write about the eircom league when something bad happens i do not think the eircom league gets overly negative publicity. If the crowd and the atmosphere is crap and a match then say so. Do you want Setanta Sports style commentry were they refuse to say anything negative and call 2 passes put together a great move. The eircom league is getting more coverage now then it ever did with a regular program on tv3 and more live matches then before and the attendances are still pretty low. In my opinion the reason for this is because the standard of football is so low. The Sunday papers have little or no coverage about the eircom league because the average punter on the street does not give a toss. Every weekend about 20000 go to eircom league games and it is quite possible that one GAA match in their off season could attract that crowd.

**Slash/ED** · 25/04/2005, 11:48 AM

Originally Posted by Ceirtlis

While i think that it is wrong for some papers to only write about the eircom league when something bad happens i do not think the eircom league gets overly negative publicity. If the crowd and the atmosphere is crap and a match then say so. Do you want Setanta Sports style commentry were they refuse to say anything negative and call 2 passes put together a great move. The eircom league is getting more coverage now then it ever did with a regular program on tv3 and more live matches then before and the attendances are still pretty low. In my opinion the reason for this is because the standard of football is so low. The Sunday papers have little or no coverage about the eircom league because the average punter on the street does not give a toss. Every weekend about 20000 go to eircom league games and it is quite possible that one GAA match in their off season could attract that crowd.

Have you ever watched a game on Sky? That's exactly what they do as well, and it helps generate alot of interest over there. Everything is hype, they've never covered a bad game in their life and their pathetic claims the premiership is the best and most excitng league in the world are farcical, but it gets the punters in the door.

The attendences this season are up on last season, proof if as you say we're getting better coverage that better coverage = more interest = better attendences.

Papers and punters, despite what they may think, couldn't give a toss about standard of football. That is an absolute non sense argument. If standard of football was an argument Celtic wouldn't be the second most popular team on this Island and the premiership wouldn't be the most popular league, the Italian one would. They care about hype, they support the premiership and Celtic because that's shoved down their throats every day by the media here and an over exposure to the British media and Sky TV. Witness the amount of Real shirts you now see simply because Beckham signed for them and Sky started promoting their matches. Lastly, standard of football doesn't make a difference anyway. Remember the Juve Milan champions league final? Standard wise, miles better than anything you'd get in England or argubley anywhere else, standard wise it was football at it's finest. Excitement wise it was dross, and these same punters readily call it the worst CL final in recent memory. Yet I've seen EL games that were absolutley incredible games to be at, yet the standard of play was obviously well behind that which was on display in Old Trafford that day. Standard of play does not = excitement and drama and anyway the standard of play here is far beyond what the hacks would have you believe.

As for attendences, like I said they are up but to say a GAA team could attract 20,000 in it's off season is pure non sense. Dublin GAA get near EL crowds for league games, only when they start to play in Croker do the bandwagon jumpers come out, so I'd love to see what they get for off season games. Same goes for a lot of rugby clubs.

For the hacks, it's a self fulfilling prophecy. Keep calling the EL rubbish and give it no coverage, than say you give it no coverage because the interest isn't there and the general public think it's rubbish.

And anyway, if the general public don't care about the EL enough to warent decent coverage why is it whenever there's a problem, ie the current Rovers situation, it's all over the bloody pages like a rash.

**Ceirtlis** · 25/04/2005, 12:30 PM

Fair enough youve made some fair points but i still dont agree with you. While sky television has brought on a lot more interest in the English league that interest was always here. I like the majority of people in Ireland dont have Sky but still have a strong interest in English soccer. The hype on Sky does annoy me like it does most people.
The main reason that people support Celtic is because it is some sort of Nationalist agenda and they think its like supporting Ireland.
English soccer is always going to be more popular than italian because it is more exciting, it is next door and it has a lot of Irish players playing in it.
I was probably wrong to say that a match in the gaa off-season could attract 20000 but what i meant was matches that dont matter in the greater scheme of things such as the Cork County hurling final 20000 and U21 finals which get 20000+.
As for increases in attendances they are marginal and i think it is all pretty much swings and roundabouts. Shelbourne and Cork City might be increasing but Bohs and Pats are decreasing. Im a Galway United fan for the last 10 or 11 years and i have seen crowds of 6000- at Crowley Park and when the lights were put in Terryland- and i have also seen crowds of 200 the last time we were in the Premier.