Hank Kingsley Posted August 20, 2010 Share Posted August 20, 2010 (edited) That catchy little headline is how the "Oldham" Advertiser chose to preface the non-story of Lee Hughes' altercation with Alan Hardy on Saturday. Tucked out of harms way on page 6 surrounded by adverts for people interested in a career brushing down horses and the like, the article is so unbelievably poor on so many levels as to be embarrasing. Amazingly enough it took 2 (two) 'reporters' to pen this drivel. One to read it out loud slowly and the other to type it no doubt. "It is understood Hughes...became angry after Latics beat County 3-0" wow well that explains it. Cutting edge journalism there boys, were the other ten Notts County players happy about the defeat then? "It was the first time Hughes had played at Oldham since the team got rid of him last season." Seriously. Is this a deliberate policy of dumbing down to the perceived thicko residents of Oldham by the advertiser or are the journos just crap? I've answered my own question. Don't bother applying for the vacant foootball reporter job with The Observer guys More worryingly though why run this at all ? It's a nothing story already covered by the Chron and various websites who gave it two lines tops. Contrast that to the Advertiser where Scoops Thompson and Keegan squeezed 500 words out of it. Shamefully they didn't come up with a single piece of insight into why the incident took place. All the article succeeds in doing is re-hashing old news and gossip, 10 minutes on google would have brought the same result. Investigative journalism at its best. The worst thing though is that immiediately above the Hughes drivel, a story warning vulnerable pensioners of a particularly nasty scam doing the rounds in the town is bumped to the top of the page in a font so small most pensioners probably won't even be able to read it. Fortunately they'l be able to console themselves that two of the Advertiser's finest have after what must have been, ooh, minutes delving into the facts/ searching the internet, established Lee Hughes grabbed Alan Hardy by the throat in the players tunnel last Saturday. If there's a bigger waste of paper than this rag i'd love to know. You can't even wipe your a**e on it. Edited August 20, 2010 by Hank Kingsley Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeylandLatic Posted August 20, 2010 Share Posted August 20, 2010 That catchy little headline is how the "Oldham" Advertiser chose to preface the non-story of Lee Hughes' altercation with Alan Hardy on Saturday. Tucked out of harms way on page 6 surrounded by adverts for people interested in a career brushing down horses and the like, the article is so unbelievably poor on so many levels as to be embarrasing. Amazingly enough it took 2 (two) 'reporters' to pen this drivel. One to read it out loud slowly and the other to type it no doubt. "It is understood Hughes...became angry after Latics beat County 3-0" wow well that explains it. Cutting edge journalism there boys, were the other ten Notts County players happy about the defeat then? "It was the first time Hughes had played at Oldham since the team got rid of him last season." Seriously. Is this a deliberate policy of dumbing down to the perceived thicko residents of Oldham by the advertiser or are the journos just crap? I've answered my own question. Don't bother applying for the vacant foootball reporter job with The Observer guys More worryingly though why run this at all ? It's a nothing story already covered by the Chron and various websites who gave it two lines tops. Contrast that to the Advertiser where Scoops Thompson and Keegan squeezed 500 words out of it. Shamefully they didn't come up with a single piece of insight into why the incident took place. All the article succeeds in doing is re-hashing old news and gossip, 10 minutes on google would have brought the same result. Investigative journalism at its best. The worst thing though is that immiediately above the Hughes drivel, a story warning vulnerable pensioners of a particularly nasty scam doing the rounds in the town is bumped to the top of the page in a font so small most pensioners probably won't even be able to read it. Fortunately they'l be able to console themselves that two of the Advertiser's finest have after what must have been, ooh, minutes delving into the facts/ searching the internet, established Lee Hughes grabbed Alan Hardy by the throat in the players tunnel last Saturday. If there's a bigger waste of paper than this rag i'd love to know. You can't even wipe your a**e on it. As a student with absolutely no money i'd like to disagree, but I get your point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ernie For England Posted August 20, 2010 Share Posted August 20, 2010 Nice rant! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
opinions4u Posted August 20, 2010 Share Posted August 20, 2010 If they had really wanted to go to town and sensationalise it they could have done. It could have been front page news and they could have done a hatchet job on both Hughes and Oldham Athletic. They chose not to. I think it could have been far more damaging for Latics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OAFCMIKE Posted August 20, 2010 Share Posted August 20, 2010 That catchy little headline is how the "Oldham" Advertiser chose to preface the non-story of Lee Hughes' altercation with Alan Hardy on Saturday. Tucked out of harms way on page 6 surrounded by adverts for people interested in a career brushing down horses and the like, the article is so unbelievably poor on so many levels as to be embarrasing. Amazingly enough it took 2 (two) 'reporters' to pen this drivel. One to read it out loud slowly and the other to type it no doubt. "It is understood Hughes...became angry after Latics beat County 3-0" wow well that explains it. Cutting edge journalism there boys, were the other ten Notts County players happy about the defeat then? "It was the first time Hughes had played at Oldham since the team got rid of him last season." Seriously. Is this a deliberate policy of dumbing down to the perceived thicko residents of Oldham by the advertiser or are the journos just crap? I've answered my own question. Don't bother applying for the vacant foootball reporter job with The Observer guys More worryingly though why run this at all ? It's a nothing story already covered by the Chron and various websites who gave it two lines tops. Contrast that to the Advertiser where Scoops Thompson and Keegan squeezed 500 words out of it. Shamefully they didn't come up with a single piece of insight into why the incident took place. All the article succeeds in doing is re-hashing old news and gossip, 10 minutes on google would have brought the same result. Investigative journalism at its best. The worst thing though is that immiediately above the Hughes drivel, a story warning vulnerable pensioners of a particularly nasty scam doing the rounds in the town is bumped to the top of the page in a font so small most pensioners probably won't even be able to read it. Fortunately they'l be able to console themselves that two of the Advertiser's finest have after what must have been, ooh, minutes delving into the facts/ searching the internet, established Lee Hughes grabbed Alan Hardy by the throat in the players tunnel last Saturday. If there's a bigger waste of paper than this rag i'd love to know. You can't even wipe your a**e on it. Hank - that is the story that went in the M.E.N. (ahead of anyone else) on Monday. It's clearly then been picked up by The Advertiser. You're entitled to your opinion but suggesting it was a google re-hash is wrong and, to be honest, smacks of lazy posting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Horlicks Posted August 20, 2010 Share Posted August 20, 2010 The around the pubs section of the advertiser is the highlight of my week Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
opinions4u Posted August 20, 2010 Share Posted August 20, 2010 Hank - that is the story that went in the M.E.N. (ahead of anyone else) on Monday. It's clearly then been picked up by The Advertiser. You're entitled to your opinion but suggesting it was a google re-hash is wrong and, to be honest, smacks of lazy posting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slurms mckenzie Posted August 20, 2010 Share Posted August 20, 2010 The around the pubs section of the advertiser is the highlight of my week Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
24hoursfromtulsehill Posted August 20, 2010 Share Posted August 20, 2010 Hank - that is the story that went in the M.E.N. (ahead of anyone else) on Monday. It's clearly then been picked up by The Advertiser. You're entitled to your opinion but suggesting it was a google re-hash is wrong and, to be honest, smacks of lazy posting. I thought the MEN owned the Advertiser. I know what you're saying Hank, but picking up any paper these days expecting quality journalism is a massive mistake. It just doesn't happen anymore. There are many, many structural problems in the whole industry, resulting in the kind of lazy non-story about the Hughes-Hardy bust-up. You can read similar lazy, non-stories on any topic, any day of the week, in the Times, the Telegraph, the Observer etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Markoasis Posted August 20, 2010 Share Posted August 20, 2010 I thought the MEN owned the Advertiser. They do, so what ever appears in MEN eventually appears in the Advertiser. still laughing at the headline 'soccer STAR' Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
biggie21 Posted August 20, 2010 Share Posted August 20, 2010 They do, so what ever appears in MEN eventually appears in the Advertiser. still laughing at the headline 'soccer STAR' more like soccer THUG :lol: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafcprozac Posted August 20, 2010 Share Posted August 20, 2010 Hank - that is the story that went in the M.E.N. (ahead of anyone else) on Monday. It's clearly then been picked up by The Advertiser. You're entitled to your opinion but suggesting it was a google re-hash is wrong and, to be honest, smacks of lazy posting. Did you write this article Mike? Tbh, not sure why the press are being criticised here, Oldham Athletic has done nothing wrong, so why would people interpret the club being portrayed in a negative light? The one constant in all this is Hughes' inability to control his behaviour. The club has been put through the mill by this scumbag, we gave him the chance to resume a career that many thought was wrong and he should have been allowed to rot like his victims, then he repays us by dragging the club's good name through the press with his antics at official club functions, then he has the cheek to assault the Chief Executive of that same club. If I was Alan Hardy I would have called the police and pressed charges- simples. Really don't understand the hero worship Hughes enjoys amongst many of our fanbase. I know a bit of it was siege mentality, but singing his name last Saturday was embarassing. Beckett was far more clinical, and left with his head held high - not with his tail between his legs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
biggie21 Posted August 20, 2010 Share Posted August 20, 2010 I see him struggling this season with county Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
creepy Posted August 20, 2010 Share Posted August 20, 2010 Really don't understand the hero worship Hughes enjoys amongst many of our fanbase. I know a bit of it was siege mentality, but singing his name last Saturday was embarassing. you are joking right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafcprozac Posted August 20, 2010 Share Posted August 20, 2010 you are joking right? It was cringeworthy, each to their own I suppose. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
singe Posted August 20, 2010 Share Posted August 20, 2010 you are joking right? You are joking asking, rght? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted August 20, 2010 Share Posted August 20, 2010 (edited) you are joking right? Just in case you have forgot... http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/coventr...ire/3548840.stm Giving the guy a second chance is one thing... Hero worshipping quite another... Edited August 20, 2010 by oafc0000 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
opinions4u Posted August 20, 2010 Share Posted August 20, 2010 (edited) I see him struggling this season with county He'll score goals if fit. Just in case you have forgot... http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/coventr...ire/3548840.stm Giving the guy a second chance is one thing... Hero worshipping quite another... It was an interesting conversation to have with my then 9 year old. "Enjoy him playing football, but never, ever forget what he did and how lucky he is to do what he now does. Because while he might be a very good footballer who's goals make you smile, he is also a coward who ruined many lives". Edited August 20, 2010 by opinions4u Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafcprozac Posted August 20, 2010 Share Posted August 20, 2010 He'll score goals if fit. It was an interesting conversation to have with my then 9 year old. "Enjoy him playing football, but never, ever forget what he did and how lucky he is to do what he now does. Because while he might be a very good footballer who's goals make you smile, he is also a coward who ruined many lives". My 9 year old at the time wanted his name and number on the back of his tangerine shirt, we had pretty much the same conversation. He went for Taylor...the year after, Taylor and Whitaker.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
24hoursfromtulsehill Posted August 20, 2010 Share Posted August 20, 2010 Hank - that is the story that went in the M.E.N. (ahead of anyone else) on Monday. It's clearly then been picked up by The Advertiser. You're entitled to your opinion but suggesting it was a google re-hash is wrong and, to be honest, smacks of lazy posting. Ahead of anyone else? On Monday? Not likely, mate. Pretty much everything there was to know about this incident was all over this very website on Saturday. Even if it wasn't lazy journalism, it was deathly slow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted August 20, 2010 Share Posted August 20, 2010 Good form opinions and Prozac Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
opinions4u Posted August 21, 2010 Share Posted August 21, 2010 Good form opinions and Prozac It's amazing how 9 year olds, with a fairly simple explanation, seem to be better at understanding things like this than most adults ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevie_J Posted August 21, 2010 Share Posted August 21, 2010 My 9 year old at the time wanted his name and number on the back of his tangerine shirt, we had pretty much the same conversation. He went for Taylor...the year after, Taylor and Whitaker.... Ouch! Bet you wish you'd said nowt and got Hughes on there, after all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lukers1 Posted August 21, 2010 Share Posted August 21, 2010 It was cringeworthy, each to their own I suppose. Spot on , the guys never changed. not one bleeding brain cell anywhere Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.