van Gaal QPR Press Conference

Rafabz talking balls as always. Jones has been our best player(so far).

Originally Posted by Aman27deep

Rafabz talking balls as always. Jones has been our best player(so far).

Bang on, Deepers.

Jonah has been very good despite the sea of shit around him. Will be a great player for us NQAT.

Originally Posted by Aman27deep

Rafabz talking balls as always. Jones has been our best player(so far).

He's shit.

United's best player so far. As accolades go that's up there with World's Tallest Midget. Take a bow Phil. Take a bow.

Roll on sunday.. Can't wait.. Finally we have a coach after fergie that knows what to do.. Fergie went too soft the last 5 years of his rein.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AsED3LFMS7w

Absolutely mugging off that journo

Why are the questions always such %@#$&!s? Do we not have any journalists that can ask insightful questions about football that don't always have an ulterior motive or sensationalist slant? Is this the best we can do?

Originally Posted by utd99

Why are the questions always such %@#$&!s? Do we not have any journalists that can ask insightful questions about football that don't always have an ulterior motive or sensationalist slant? Is this the best we can do?

I think you've answered your own question there. The journos in this country aren't the slightest bit interested in the actual match coming up at the weekend or things like tactics. Pre-match press conferences for them are a way to confront managers with rumours, hear-say and scurrilous leading questions. It's all about getting some tittle-tattle to splash all over the back pages for the next few days.

It's why Jose Mourinho hated Spain and Italy. The journalists there would give him a proper grilling on tactics and where players should play etc etc. Over here, Mourinho swaggers out in a tracksuit, throws the press a couple of facetious comments; something funny and they lap it up. He must think it's like playing to room full of #@&%!s.

Originally Posted by utd99

Why are the questions always such %@#$&!s? Do we not have any journalists that can ask insightful questions about football that don't always have an ulterior motive or sensationalist slant? Is this the best we can do?

We all know that the press corps is essentially a bunch of dullards with a 5-second attention span. Add to this the obsessive pressure from editors for scoops, particularly spurious transfer gossip, not to mention scandals, and that's why the football press pack doesn't write about football in any meaningful sense.

Originally Posted by Sparky***

I think you've answered your own question there. The journos in this country aren't the slightest bit interested in the actual match coming up at the weekend or things like tactics. Pre-match press conferences for them are a way to confront managers with rumours, hear-say and scurrilous leading questions. It's all about getting some tittle-tattle to splash all over the back pages for the next few days.

It's why Jose Mourinho hated Spain and Italy. The journalists there would give him a proper grilling on tactics and where players should play etc etc. Over here, Mourinho swaggers out in a tracksuit, throws the press a couple of facetious comments; something funny and they lap it up. He must think it's like playing to room full of #@&%!s.

Spot on this. Whereas say Guardiola loves the football questions, and remember what he handed out to that £#%&!wit Jackson when he tried to trap him into a dig at Moyes. He's got his priorities right. And more importantly, so does van Gaal, he answered the Welbeck question with a football answer and everyone's seeing their arse about it

Originally Posted by utd99

Why are the questions always such %@#$&!s? Do we not have any journalists that can ask insightful questions about football that don't always have an ulterior motive or sensationalist slant? Is this the best we can do?

It's typically English. It's the same mentality that has teams of pundits getting paid thousands to go to World Cups and never doing any preparation or saying anything even remotely insightful. They rely entirely on gossip, weak jokes and tired clichés and it's why there are only about two football journalists I pay any attention to. The rest I wouldn't piss on even if they had a reason why they really urgently needed someone to piss on them.

Originally Posted by Zorg

It's typically English. It's the same mentality that has teams of pundits getting paid thousands to go to World Cups and never doing any preparation or saying anything even remotely insightful. They rely entirely on gossip, weak jokes and tired clichés and it's why there are only about two football journalists I pay any attention to. The rest I wouldn't piss on even if they had a reason why they really urgently needed someone to piss on them.

Such as having been stung by a box jellyfish.

Originally Posted by utd99

Why are the questions always such %@#$&!s? Do we not have any journalists that can ask insightful questions about football that don't always have an ulterior motive or sensationalist slant? Is this the best we can do?

I was just thinking the same, the questions are so £#%&!ing boring, they literally just ask about the latest rumours/talk is and try to get a reaction to sensationalise. I bet he can't even be arsed turning up for them.

Originally Posted by Zorg

It's typically English. It's the same mentality that has teams of pundits getting paid thousands to go to World Cups and never doing any preparation or saying anything even remotely insightful. They rely entirely on gossip, weak jokes and tired clichés and it's why there are only about two football journalists I pay any attention to. The rest I wouldn't piss on even if they had a reason why they really urgently needed someone to piss on them.

And then being shown up by the 'guest' pundits, who despite not having English as their first language manage to sound more articulate, intelligent & vastly more knowledgeable about the game than their British counterparts.

Originally Posted by andyroo

Such as having been stung by a box jellyfish.

For example.

Originally Posted by Zorg

For example.

It's a good example. It's something I'd like to see happen more often, British football correspondents being stung by box jellyfish.

Originally Posted by Zorg

there are only about two football journalists I pay any attention to.

Tim Vickery and AC Jimbo are probably the only two I bother with.

Honigstein can be useful on the rare occasion, but is far too nauseatingly smug for his own good. G-Huntz knows his stuff, but definitely has self-portraits of himself all over his house.

"Would it be good to still have Rio here?"

"No."

Originally Posted by Neo

Tim Vickery and AC Jimbo are probably the only two I bother with.

Honigstein can be useful on the rare occasion, but is far too nauseatingly smug for his own good. G-Huntz knows his stuff, but definitely has self-portraits of himself all over his house.

Not sure about AC Jimbo as a journalist Top man, though.

T-Vic is top dog; outstanding journalist. Agree about Honigstein. He's good but definitely smug. I like Phillip Auclair; he's better than the French bore they have on BT. G-Huntz is a great talker; excellent on TV and radio. Wilson can be excellent or dull in almost equal measure. That's about it. No coincidence that the best journos are the ones who have actually ventured outside of British shores.