Jump to content


OWTB Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by OAFCMIKE

  1. Ironically, the only misleading headline is your edited version, Kowenicki. Funny, that. 


    There was no intention to mislead. The headline and the first sentence tell the whole story. To be honest, I found it quite amusing. It’s not a Pulitzer, just a quirky little piece that, unless you’re ultra-sensitive, isn’t really having a pop at the club. 


    I went as a fan for the first time this season, yesterday. Going really well, isn’t it? 

  2. Just want to point out that Gordy was many (brilliant) things but a mole was not one of them. The issue for me is that, after getting away with it for years, I'm no longer able to justify spending any amount of time on Latics to the powers-that-be unless it's a huge story. Even then it would probably be a push. Some may say that's not a bad thing. Duly noted on perspective/prospective (!) btw, poor from me.

  3. It was a press conference to introduce a manager....


    What were people expecting? If journo's ask :censored: questions that's not anyone's fault is it?


    Lets be positive about the fact that he is positive. He actually helped the journos by giving better answers than the questions deserved.


    I like the fella so far.

    As Bozman says, you don't want to throw your best questions into the general section for everyone if you've got a separate interview on your own. And I thought mine were alright!

  4. "Kelly said that he was not political and that the matter had been blown out of proportion."


    ...reports the Hate Mail with their second 'article' in a week.

    Rummy - Let me be a bit clearer. The poster to whom I was replying said I was blocking people who disagreed with my opinion. When I responded that there was no opinion in the story, I meant from me.


    Jorvik - I do not make the news, I report on it. I did not go looking on Darren Kelly's Twitter account but when I was made aware of what was on there and the reaction to it from some (by various people) I had no choice other than to do so.


    PlayItLivo - I did not publish a piece on the political beliefs of any of our previous managers because I am pretty certain they kept them away from the public domain and had not referred to a high-profile political figure as a legend on social media.


    I am an Oldham fan. I am also of Irish Catholic descent.


    Neither of the above, however, has any impact on what is or what is not news and whether I should write a story or not. You will see that a series of other media outlets have followed up both pieces. That, to me, suggests it is newsworthy. And as for this 'right-wing Daily Mail' nonsense, I write sport stories, predominantly for our website. At no point has any pressure been put on me to take a certain angle.

  5. Thanks for the feedback - both good and bad!


    In my defence I've never commentated on a football match before (I did sideline TV in the US last season) and stepped in as a favour to Gordon and Roy who are both top men who help the press a lot. It took a bit of getting to grips with but I felt a lot more confident as it went on and ended up really enjoying it.


    Gordon won't have many 60ths and he'll be back before you can say Shrewsbury away...






    If you believe that, you'll believe anything. In the words of the great Alonzo Harris: "This is a newspaper. It's 90 per cent bull:censored:..."

    You've rumbled me. I made it all up. Koukash has no interest in Latics or Oldham rugby. I made Chris Hamilton's comments up too. It's all a cunning, devious ploy to make people click on Latics (and rugby) stories and make us millions.

  7. Bang on deyres42 - a mythbusting post if I ever saw one that will hopefully shatter some misguided agendas on here. Might be worth noting that there's already been a piece in the M.E.N. (don't think it went online) in which Chris Hamilton welcomes the interest and says he has already spoken to Dr Koukash about him taking over. His actual words were that he (Koukash) would be 'knocking at an open door'.

  8. If there's one thing football rumours should teach us, it is that there is often smoke and it is usually blowing out of Keegan's arse.

    Would you like to meet and discuss your issues with me? Because you clearly have some and I'd like to understand why. On the release clause I was told by somebody well-placed within the club there wasn't one. I have since been told that there is by someone else which is disappointing and something I've learned from. I don't make things up, as you imply and I'd be very interested in any examples you can provide to back up your comment.

  9. Come on Mike, I was specifically talking about this article being bull:censored:ted up from something that happened a while back and came to zilch.


    - Really? The post I saw was a dig at all local papers not being arsed with validity and accuracy and being more interested in 'how much attention they can get by doing as little as possible'. This is nonsense and is the opposite of the truth.


    Nobody slammed the Chron, and contrary to popular belief on here, the Chron published a seemingly more accurate story and to be honest they did a better job of reporting the "scoop".


    - The Chron story was a follow-up. They didn't know it was Latics until we revealed it and that is not a dig at them - nobody has the monopoly on news.


    "IT IS LATICS!". No Mike, it was Latics.-

    Corney had the meeting:- "four or five weeks ago.....nothing else came of it then" said Corney as mentioned in a late (19th June) report by the Chron. A day earlier on the 18th June, MEN reported Marwan is buying Latics, not was, not that he was looking into it ages ago. MEN completely blurred out the point where the meeting was a month past and nothing happened, it went down the pan over a month earlier. People picked up on that minor but significant detail and the MEN let it ride for a bit


    - Dr Koukash made the comments to the World Service on Monday. He says he 'hopefully' going to buy a football club 'in the next month or two'. We revealed that the club he is referring to is Latics. It is. I did not write that he was going to buy us - I just reported that the team he was talking about was us. And how do you know there haven't been any subsequent meetings? It's a strange thing for someone to come out and say if everything went down the pan more than a month earlier.


    Take a look at what Leveson published on regional newspapers. You might be surprised.

  10. Because they want to sell you papers and get cash for your clicks. local papers like this are not arsed about validity or accuracy, more bothered about how much attention they can get by doing as little as possible. in other words churnalism. and they're not ashamed of it either. they take you for mugs.


    Of course we want to sell papers - we are a business. Still waiting for the cash for clicks side of things to come through for us, unfortunately.


    However, your sweeping generalisation about validity or accuracy could not be further from the truth at this local paper and I'd say the same goes for the Chron.


    It's simple - if we can't back up a story we don't write it. Let's take this one as an example. Dr Koukash made the comments to the BBC World Service. I think you'll find a thread had already started on here before I did the story. I immediately spoke to a number of trusted contacts at both Salford and Latics and the man himself. The result was what you read. The team he is talking about is Latics and now everyone knows that. What happens from here is up to the man himself and we will accurately report this.


    While we're on the subject of accuracy, how many players have Matt and I linked us with who have ended up signing? How many times do you get the news first from the M.E.N. and the Chron?


    Taking people for mugs? I'd say tweeting regular match updates from up and down the country (this is something we make no money from and something neither of us has to do - we just do it because we want to keep people who can't make it updated) suggests that this could not be further from the truth.


    As for doing as little as possible, how many newsrooms have you been in? It's very misguided and bitter view that you seem to have.



    because they want to sell you papers and get cash for your clicks. local papers like this are not arsed about validity or accuracy, more bothered about how much attention they can get by doing as little as possible. in other words churnalism. and they're not ashamed of it either. they take you for mugs.


    This might be my favourite ever OWTB post.

  • Create New...