Gerrard Exclusive.

[rebel23]

this is the kind of shit you get in that paper (Andy Dunn) "Time for Benitez to deliver"

 

when is it time for Hicks and Gillett to deliver? this is why the players and manager shouldnt give them the time of day, the horrible cunts can't wait to put the boot in.

[diego]

this is the kind of shit you get in that paper (Andy Dunn) "Time for Benitez to deliver"

 

when is it time for Hicks and Gillett to deliver? this is why the players and manager shouldnt give them the time of day, the horrible cunts can't wait to put the boot in.

 

 

Why did the NOTW change the byeline on that story as between 00.14 and now. The original bye line as it appeared in NewsNow was as follows - and this is a cut and paste of the actual posting:

 

"It's time for Spaniard to bring title back to the Kop faithful News of the World 00:14"

 

That link led to the article with the same headline. The headline has also been changed in the last couple of minutes.

[Dicko]

Nah. I like quite him to be honest. Trust in Rafa and all that. If you can find a single post from me on here slagging him off I'd be surprised.

 

And that proves what?

It was a disrespectful term to use for the manager. Based solely on his antipathy towards someone you hold in regard.

 

Nothing wrong in that, just don't insult people's intelligence by denying it.

 

And with that I bid you adieu.

 

EDIT: I didn't see your previous post, so I'll take your word for it.

[RedKnight]

Nah. I like quite him to be honest. Trust in Rafa and all that. If you can find a single post from me on here slagging him off I'd be surprised.

 

It was sarcasm, mate. I was explaining the insinuation of the other poster.

[Moschops II]

It's no more 'The Sunday Sun' than The Sunday Times is. What kind of simple, simple soul thinks it is?

 

Completely separate offices; completely separate staff; utterly, utterly different entities. Ridiculous. I'm embarrassed for anyone who can't understand this. Are you the same people who won't watch Sky Sports?

 

The Sun doesn't publish on a Sunday for the same reason The Guardian doesn't, which is that its owners have another title they see as already serving the same market, and which acts as an extension of the main brand.

 

The same logic doesn't apply to The Sunday Times (or indeed Sky Sports), although it seems strange to be so dismissive of the idea of not giving your money to News International.

 

Still, chortle chortle eh.

[Moschops II]

Have you ever considered a career in politics? Let's make this dead, dead simple. Are TNOTW and The S#n the same newspaper?

 

No, I don't - I think they're two halves of a common brand. I'm not trying to be evasive, it's just that you're not really allowing for any grey areas here, whereas I think beyond The Sun itself and MacKenzie personally, there's nothing but grey areas with this issue.

[Sinos]

The first exclusive interview bascombe done for TNOTW was with Rafa Benitez, who at the time was on very good terms with bascombe, Bascombe also broke in TNOTW the klinsmann story and marches then proceded.

 

Now if Bascombe and Rafa had not fallen out, I'd say Rafa would still be doing his "exclusives" with Bascombe and TNOTW, and all this hatred towards bascombe would not be about. FACT.

 

The Mail printed the Klinsmann rumour about a month before Bascombe said a word on the mattter.

Edited August 16, 2009 by Sinos

[King Emlyn]

No, I don't - I think they're two halves of a common brand. I'm not trying to be evasive, it's just that you're not really allowing for any grey areas here, whereas I think beyond The Sun itself and MacKenzie personally, there's nothing but grey areas with this issue.

Thank you, that's all i asked.

[Moschops II]

Thank you, that's all i asked.

 

Happy to oblige. Is it all right for me not to like Gerrard giving an exclusive to the NoW then?

[JMARKH]

The general malaise towards Bascombe, some of which can be attributed to his leaving for the NOtW, but not all.

 

The way he turned on Houllier & Thompson after spending years sucking on the collective teat.

 

His treatment of Fowler, the justifications for his departure, some of which were so bad that I doubt Chris believed what he was typing.

 

He lost a lot of respect when he antagonized the support for booing and saying just because you pay your money doesn't give you the right to vent your spleen. Well yes Chris it does provided it's within reason and not grossly offensive. Also his justification for the booing of the team & manager when he was no longer in Ged's pocket rang more than a little bit of hypocrisy.

 

Houllier turned into a lunatic though so was bound to get bad press, he was dragging us down.

[diego]

Thank you, that's all i asked.

 

Both the NOTW or the SUN frequently advertises or promotes features in the other - or what they refer to as their "sister publication". They have shared stories in the past - the NOTW starting it on a Sunday as an exclusive and the Sun continuing it on in the following week using the same sources.

[Guest ShoePiss]

Happy to oblige. Is it all right for me not to like Gerrard giving an exclusive to the NoW then?

 

Boring! The intention of the thread is to expose hypocrites...

[King Emlyn]

Happy to oblige. Is it all right for me not to like Gerrard giving an exclusive to the NoW then?

Of course, i'm not overly thrilled myself, i despise one publication and dislike the other, but imo they aint the same thing, and that is something i believe to be extremely important.

[King Emlyn]

Either to NOTW or the SUN frequently advertises or promotes features in the other - or what they refer to as their "sister publication". They have shared stories in the past - the NOTW starting it on a Sunday as an exclusive and the Sun continuing it on in the following week using the same sources.

Ergo you want Gerrard to go the same way as Souness?

[1892-LFCWasBorn]

More self indulgent shit from the usual suspects

 

Repped for summing it all up in so few words so perfectly and one of the main reasons I can't be fucked to log on here as much as I used it.

[Vincent Vega]

Boring! The intention of the thread is to expose hypocrites...

 

and some oneupmanship.

 

I find this continuing argument very boring. I went off Chris Bascombe after I saw that pre-written match report after we beat Sunderland 3-0 in February 2008. I consider the NOTW to be a load of gutter driven shite but it isn't The S*n and it isn't part of the ban.

 

I don't believe our multi-millionaire players should be aloud to top up their huge incomes with tat written for tabloids and I also believe books should have to wait until their playing days are over as these can also be damaging. I also believe the thoughts of most modern footballers aren't worth a wank and I therefore steer wide of such articles and the books of the modern day player.

[King Emlyn]

and some oneupmanship.

 

I find this continuing argument very boring. I went off Chris Bascombe after I saw that pre-written match report after we beat Sunderland 3-0 in February 2008. I consider the NOTW to be a load of gutter driven shite but it isn't The S*n and it isn't part of the ban.

I don't believe our multi-millionaire players should be aloud to top up their huge incomes with tat written for tabloids and I also believe books should have to wait until their playing days are over as these can also be damaging. I also believe the thoughts of most modern footballers aren't worth a wank and I therefore steer wide of such articles and the books of the modern day player.

 

 

Heart of the matter

[Malarkey]

I think Gerrard is still on good terms with Bascombe as he was when he was at the Echo. So I think he's just doing it for Bascombe.

[Brownie]

I think it's totally down to the individual if they decide to read the NOTW, the People or whatever. Totally down to the individual.

 

I don't think anything is achieved by arguing about it either. I think John's original post is relevant though because there are some people who are being a bit hypocritical and selective when it comes to their criticisms.

 

It's a bit of a boring subject though because it's clear that certain people won't be changing their views on the matter.

Edited August 16, 2009 by Brownie

[ReddOrDedd]

The Sun doesn't publish on a Sunday for the same reason The Guardian doesn't, which is that its owners have another title they see as already serving the same market, and which acts as an extension of the main brand.

 

The same logic doesn't apply to The Sunday Times (or indeed Sky Sports), although it seems strange to be so dismissive of the idea of not giving your money to News International.

 

Still, chortle chortle eh.

 

What's funny about it?

[Scott_M]

8 pages, 180 posts & nobody has posted the said article. Brilliant.

 

This arguement has been 100 times over, what was to be gained by doing it again?

 

I'm off in the shower & then off to White Heart Lane. I'll let you virgins continue to argue & make even bigger fools of yourselves.

[Guest Numero Veinticinco]

The Sun doesn't publish on a Sunday for the same reason The Guardian doesn't, which is that its owners have another title they see as already serving the same market, and which acts as an extension of the main brand.

 

The same logic doesn't apply to The Sunday Times (or indeed Sky Sports), although it seems strange to be so dismissive of the idea of not giving your money to News International.

 

Still, chortle chortle eh.

 

I don't understand how people can argue against this. There is overwhelming evidence to suggest that it is true. The fuckin' morons that keep bleating on about sky, the times and other Murdoch owned outlets are wilfully myopic. They refuse to acknowledge that it is much more than ownership that they have in common.

[Sangria]

I think Gerrard is still on good terms with Bascombe as he was when he was at the Echo. So I think he's just doing it for Bascombe.

 

Pretty much what I thought.

[Paul]

There are so many holes in the self-righteous arguments people come out with over the boycott. The fact is that the boycott is for The Sun. The HJC stickers don't say "Don't buy The Sun and The News Of The World", they just mention The Sun. Both Hillsborough organisations urge a boycott on one paper, not two.

 

I don't mind people having an opinion about NOTW, but what I object to is people calling others every name under the - no pun intended - sun over it. Gerrard's cousin died at Hillsborough - I think he understands the issues around the boycott. And besides, if we're arbitrarily re-drawing the boycott lines, where do we stop? How about The Star? They printed a load of shite. What about extending it to the entire Murdoch empire? Ditch The Times, too. And how about Sky? Oh wait a minute, this is getting a bit too close to home - I can't watch the match then.

 

The point is that the official boycott is very specifically about one paper and one paper only. If people have strong personal views about other papers, then that's fine. What's not fine is expecting everyone else to think the same way and then calling them for not doing so.

Edited August 16, 2009 by Paul

[Guest Numero Veinticinco]

The HJC stickers don't say "Don't buy The Sun and The News Of The World", they just mention The Sun.

 

That is because it is the same paper, for fuck sake.

 

I'd be equally annoyed if a boycott of the Guardian didn't include the Observer. It is the shame that the Sun couldn't get their way and call the News of the World 'The Sunday Sun'. I'd like to see people get around that one.