Good article on Pochettino, Lallana and Shaw

[Saint-Armstrong]

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/soccer/news/20130123/southampton-mauricio-pochettino/

[Restark19]

Seems a good enough article but I saw little mention of Lallana or Shaw

[Bearsy]

the youngest average age in the league

 

Is dat true?

[Miltonroader07]

Da Bear speaks the words, he is correct

[DrZuess1979 the 2nd]

Reading that makes me think, Mr Cortese has found a gem!!!

[Golac's Cunning Stunts]

Why exactly is it a good article? Because it conforms to what you wish to believe or because it has any basis in fact? Just asking.

[Lazlo78]

Why exactly is it a good article? Because it conforms to what you wish to believe or because it has any basis in fact? Just asking.

 

"Basis in fact"? What on earth are you on about... It's a journalist's (informed) opinion which he backs up with selected data that supports it - nothing more. Did you expect a scientific proof that sacking Adkins was correct?

[Golac's Cunning Stunts]

"Basis in fact"? What on earth are you on about... It's a journalist's (informed) opinion which he backs up with selected data that supports it - nothing more. Did you expect a scientific proof that sacking Adkins was correct?

Where did I say that? The OP said it was a good article. I wondered on what basis he judged it so? How do you know it's a journalist's INFORMED opinion? There are a couple of loose quotes which I had found out myself from googling the guy when it happened. Go pat yourself on the back.

[Thedelldays]

Where did I say that? The OP said it was a good article. I wondered on what basis he judged it so? How do you know it's a journalist's INFORMED opinion? There are a couple of loose quotes which I had found out myself from googling the guy when it happened. Go pat yourself on the back.

because he agreed with it..?

[Golac's Cunning Stunts]

because he agreed with it..?

 

Yes, I was just asking why? Is it because the journo has written a piece that the op wants to believe (that we have signed the next fantastic manager in the Barcelona style) or is it because the journo has written a piece that is based in fact? Honest question...

[Thedelldays]

Yes' date=' I was just asking why? Is it because the journo has written a p[b']iece that the op wants to believe[/b] (that we have signed the next fantastic manager in the Barcelona style) or is it because the journo has written a piece that is based in fact? Honest question...

obviously...he is not going to like it if he disagrees..?

 

[Golac's Cunning Stunts]

obviously...he is not going to like it if he disagrees..?

 

 

Exactly my point

[Thedelldays]

Exactly my point

you have no point....this place is all about opinions isnt it..nothing you or I say is 100% fact...????

 

I think it is pretty reasonable to think that the title "good article......" was infact, in the opinion of the op..and you are in the opinion that it is not

[Lazlo78]

Yes' date=' I was just asking why? Is it because the journo has written a piece that the op wants to believe (that we have signed the next fantastic manager in the Barcelona style) or is it because the journo has written a piece that is based in fact? Honest question...[/quote']

 

Journo argues his opinion using selected data. OP agrees with opinion and calls article good - probably because he thinks the arguments seem solid too.

 

I see what you're getting at, and yes you may post a link to a Cortese slating article and call it good. That is how these things work...

[Golac's Cunning Stunts]

you have no point....this place is all about opinions isnt it..nothing you or I say is 100% fact...????

 

I think it is pretty reasonable to think that the title "good article......" was infact, in the opinion of the op..and you are in the opinion that it is not

 

Certainly nothing you say is even 10% fact. Fact.

[DanW]

It should be noted that Sports Illustrated actually has journalistic standards and anything he writes will be fact checked and run by multiple editors. This is not the Daily Fail we're talking about here. Thus, while he did not go to Southampton and interview MP himself, he used publicly available data for a good analysis of what the future could become under MP. Therefore, I'd call this a good article.

 

It's also intended for a national audience in the USA, which means that it has to be explanatory enough for those who don't follow the news closely or weren't heart broken when NA was sacked.

[Lazlo78]

It should be noted that Sports Illustrated actually has journalistic standards and anything he writes will be fact checked and run by multiple editors. This is not the Daily Fail we're talking about here. Thus, while he did not go to Southampton and interview MP himself, he used publicly available data for a good analysis of what the future could become under MP. Therefore, I'd call this a good article.

 

It's also intended for a national audience in the USA, which means that it has to be explanatory enough for those who don't follow the news closely or weren't heart broken when NA was sacked.

 

Yes that's all well and good, but you only write that because you think that!

 

 

[Golac's Cunning Stunts]

It should be noted that Sports Illustrated actually has journalistic standards and anything he writes will be fact checked and run by multiple editors. This is not the Daily Fail we're talking about here. Thus, while he did not go to Southampton and interview MP himself, he used publicly available data for a good analysis of what the future could become under MP. Therefore, I'd call this a good article.

 

It's also intended for a national audience in the USA, which means that it has to be explanatory enough for those who don't follow the news closely or weren't heart broken when NA was sacked.

 

So he googled some stuff and then rewrote it for a bunch of yanks who don't understand football errr I mean soccer...

[Lazlo78]

So he googled some stuff and then rewrote it for a bunch of yanks who don't understand football errr I mean soccer...

 

Maybe you could take on the task of pointing out which parts of the article you disagree with. Seeing as it is an interpretative piece based on different data, you could either fact check the data or question the interpretations of the data made by the journalist. That's two different entry points for a criticism that could potentially be more impressive than "I bet he googled it - cause that's what I did."