Journalists from the Athletic
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In | RSS Feed
 Mstrobez  20 May 21 7.56am |
  |
|---|---|
|
Just signed up for a trial with them. They did a piece on Roy that really was excellent. But generally speaking, does anyone else have a subscription with them? Reason I ask is that they seem to position themselves as journalists that are closest to the club. But Matt Woosnam, the guy who leads the Palace section said the following on March the 17th: "The Supporters Trust had a meeting with the club recently and the suggestion appeared to be that there would not be significant funds available this summer." Yet, in an article yesterday evening regarding Eze's injury: "There had been significant funds set aside to invest in the upcoming window." Bizarre.
We're the Arthur over ere! |
|
 Alert a moderator to this post |
  |
| Mstrobez 20 May 21 7.56am |
|
|---|---|
|
. Edited by Mstrobez (20 May 2021 7.57am)
We're the Arthur over ere! |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Badger11 Beckenham 20 May 21 8.13am |
|
|---|---|
|
They must be from the Daily Mail school of journalists I often see contradictory headlines side by side especially about COVID. You would think the editor would do something about that.
One more point |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Mstrobez 20 May 21 8.26am |
|
|---|---|
|
Yeah they do come across as a bit "Guardian". Hiding behind a paywall whilst presenting themselves as close sources to the club when they may well just be in the same boat as anyone else.
We're the Arthur over ere! |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| CharlieCPFC South London 20 May 21 9.48am |
|
|---|---|
|
To be fair though why would the club reveal their hand to the supporters trust? Also need to factor in that things do change from time to time, I find the Palace section on the Athletic brilliant personally.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Crazy_Eagle South London 20 May 21 11.28am |
|
|---|---|
|
I helped one with an article last year - wasn't that impressed with the outcome. I think they overhype themselves.
R.I.P. DJ Hardline CPFC2010 |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Frickin Saweet  South Cronx 20 May 21 11.45am |
|
|---|---|
|
as someone said above, it's possible that both statements were assumed to be correct at the time. Hodgson's decline may not have been foreseen when the first article was written and therefore funds were found/budgets re-done to address our immediate financial needs which look different now to back then.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
 Cucking Funt Clapham on the Back 20 May 21 3.35pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Fifield is generally reliable. Not sure about the rest.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
jeeagles  20 May 21 3.51pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Badger11
They must be from the Daily Mail school of journalists I often see contradictory headlines side by side especially about COVID. You would think the editor would do something about that. One brother worked for the Guardian, the other for the Telegraph. Smart guys though. All news is just turning into a more sophisticated version of clubcall. Click bait with fees. You aren't going to get any "stop the presses" stories from it. As the OP's quotes proves, just don't believe what they tell you until it happens. Editors main objectives are to sell stories. The truth is a minor inconvenience.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Mstrobez 20 May 21 5.38pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Frickin Saweet
as someone said above, it's possible that both statements were assumed to be correct at the time. Hodgson's decline may not have been foreseen when the first article was written and therefore funds were found/budgets re-done to address our immediate financial needs which look different now to back then. Perhaps but there’s no way both of these things could be true in this space of time. Either we’ve had "significant" funds set aside for a rebuild this summer, or we haven’t. And if we had, they would’ve been set aside prior to March of this year.
We're the Arthur over ere! |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Tom-the-eagle Croydon 20 May 21 5.51pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Radio five had a journalist from The Athletic on this morning talking about Fat Sam and West Brom. He didn’t appear to know anymore than Adrian Chiles. In fact, the poor bloke could not stop stuttering, worst bloke for radio.
"It feels much better than it ever did, much more sensitive." John Wayne Bobbit |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| braunstoneagle the middle of bumf*** nowhere... 21 May 21 8.03am |
|
|---|---|
|
in have/have had a athletic subscription mine runs out this week. i only take it up when im offered a really good deal to renew. having said that, i generally find the content on there good and all the palace based journo’s are proven reliable sources over a long period of time
‘Football isn’t instant coffee. You have to work at it. You must grow the bean, grind it.’ Ian Holloway |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Login / Register
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2023 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.