Foster, Robertson etc
-
@antipodean said in Foster must go:
I'm seeing a lot of reporting based on no press releases or conferences. Stunning insight from some shit journalists; "coach unlikely to be sacked before South Africa trip".
Tough for reporters when there is no press conference or press release.
Liam Napier is probably the most connected journo with NZR that there is.
well if he is retained I am not sure who has confidence in anyone.
A double-layered shit sandwich wrapped in stinking glad wrap shared around the picnic table. -
When the current coaching group got Covid and Schmidt took the coaching reigns, that led to the only win.
Perhaps an interim change is enough to get through the Rugby Championship, and the board doesn't need to rush to get a long term replacement (or maybe Schmidt is the guy, who knows).
@Kirwan said in Foster must go:
When the current coaching group got Covid and Schmidt took the coaching reigns, that led to the only win.
Perhaps an interim change is enough to get through the Rugby Championship, and the board doesn't need to rush to get a long term replacement (or maybe Schmidt is the guy, who knows).
So I wouldn't read too much into Schmidt's involvement in the first test win - if all it took was 2-3 days to turn the AB's around I think the would have seen Foster achieve that, unless the only issue was player respect.
-
@antipodean said in Foster must go:
I'm seeing a lot of reporting based on no press releases or conferences. Stunning insight from some shit journalists; "coach unlikely to be sacked before South Africa trip".
Tough for reporters when there is no press conference or press release.
Liam Napier is probably the most connected journo with NZR that there is.
@KiwiMurph said in Foster must go:
@antipodean said in Foster must go:
I'm seeing a lot of reporting based on no press releases or conferences. Stunning insight from some shit journalists; "coach unlikely to be sacked before South Africa trip".
Tough for reporters when there is no press conference or press release.
Liam Napier is probably the most connected journo with NZR that there is.
And even tougher when the NZR policy for what to do is "geez, I don't really know". However, in a vacuum rumour often becomes the truth given enough time in a typical organisation.
-
@Dan54 said in Foster must go:
@MN5 said in Foster must go:
@MajorRage said in Foster must go:
@BerniesCorner said in Foster must go:
Over at Stuff
"Mark Reason: The fishheads who are stinking out the All Blacks"
https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/all-blacks/300640271/mark-reason-the-fishheads-who-are-stinking-out-the-all-blacksAnyone else find this type of journalism totally unacceptable
Agree with every single thing he says.
Why do you think it’s unacceptable?
People on massive salaries get paid it because they have to accept colossal criticism when they fail to meet their kpi’s.
People who think this is unacceptable have been listening to too much Cindy.
Reason is literally saying everything that’s been said on here for ages. The ‘pasifika’ comment is a bit weird but the rest is pretty spot on.
Yep probably hit it on head, Reason is saying what he has read on internet, it's how people without real skills sell stories, find unhappy posts etc and feed the people more of that. I just saw some of that during covid etc, if a journalist wanted to get read they followed what was on net and followed that, it's how some try to stand out in a competitive market. Generally we as readers will see an ex AB say Foster has to go, and if we agree, we think that the man is a genius, if we don't he's an idiot and what does he know. Same in press , a writer who doesn't agree with us is an idiot or NZR stooge etc, and one we agree with is a great writer. It sems to of become even more prevalant since internet became a thing.
Yep, I’m certainly not going so far as to say it was an entertaining well written piece…..but he did at least tell it like it is. I don’t think he deserves to be censored for that
@MN5 said in Foster must go:
@Dan54 said in Foster must go:
@MN5 said in Foster must go:
@MajorRage said in Foster must go:
@BerniesCorner said in Foster must go:
Over at Stuff
"Mark Reason: The fishheads who are stinking out the All Blacks"
https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/all-blacks/300640271/mark-reason-the-fishheads-who-are-stinking-out-the-all-blacksAnyone else find this type of journalism totally unacceptable
Agree with every single thing he says.
Why do you think it’s unacceptable?
People on massive salaries get paid it because they have to accept colossal criticism when they fail to meet their kpi’s.
People who think this is unacceptable have been listening to too much Cindy.
Reason is literally saying everything that’s been said on here for ages. The ‘pasifika’ comment is a bit weird but the rest is pretty spot on.
Yep probably hit it on head, Reason is saying what he has read on internet, it's how people without real skills sell stories, find unhappy posts etc and feed the people more of that. I just saw some of that during covid etc, if a journalist wanted to get read they followed what was on net and followed that, it's how some try to stand out in a competitive market. Generally we as readers will see an ex AB say Foster has to go, and if we agree, we think that the man is a genius, if we don't he's an idiot and what does he know. Same in press , a writer who doesn't agree with us is an idiot or NZR stooge etc, and one we agree with is a great writer. It sems to of become even more prevalant since internet became a thing.
Yep, I’m certainly not going so far as to say it was an entertaining well written piece…..but he did at least tell it like it is. I don’t think he deserves to be censored for that
I agree MNS, not sure he needs to be censored, he writes opinion pieces. unfortunately I have opinion too. and mine is he's a click bait so called journalist,of a very low standard, so don't read him anymore, and perhaps think have a slightly less opinion of people who quote him etc. I not saying they wrong, just I find using him to base arguments etc kind of lessens the value of said argument etc.
-
@Kirwan said in Foster must go:
When the current coaching group got Covid and Schmidt took the coaching reigns, that led to the only win.
Perhaps an interim change is enough to get through the Rugby Championship, and the board doesn't need to rush to get a long term replacement (or maybe Schmidt is the guy, who knows).
So I wouldn't read too much into Schmidt's involvement in the first test win - if all it took was 2-3 days to turn the AB's around I think the would have seen Foster achieve that, unless the only issue was player respect.
@PecoTrain said in Foster must go:
@Kirwan said in Foster must go:
When the current coaching group got Covid and Schmidt took the coaching reigns, that led to the only win.
Perhaps an interim change is enough to get through the Rugby Championship, and the board doesn't need to rush to get a long term replacement (or maybe Schmidt is the guy, who knows).
So I wouldn't read too much into Schmidt's involvement in the first test win - if all it took was 2-3 days to turn the AB's around I think the would have seen Foster achieve that, unless the only issue was player respect.
And that first test was not a good ABs performance either... They got the W, but it was hardly a cohesive team effort.
-
@Kirwan said in Foster must go:
When the current coaching group got Covid and Schmidt took the coaching reigns, that led to the only win.
Perhaps an interim change is enough to get through the Rugby Championship, and the board doesn't need to rush to get a long term replacement (or maybe Schmidt is the guy, who knows).
So I wouldn't read too much into Schmidt's involvement in the first test win - if all it took was 2-3 days to turn the AB's around I think the would have seen Foster achieve that, unless the only issue was player respect.
@PecoTrain said in Foster must go:
@Kirwan said in Foster must go:
When the current coaching group got Covid and Schmidt took the coaching reigns, that led to the only win.
Perhaps an interim change is enough to get through the Rugby Championship, and the board doesn't need to rush to get a long term replacement (or maybe Schmidt is the guy, who knows).
So I wouldn't read too much into Schmidt's involvement in the first test win - if all it took was 2-3 days to turn the AB's around I think the would have seen Foster achieve that, unless the only issue was player respect.
Schmidt from what I have seen or heard didn't really have more than a supervising role for a couple of hours in first test, Brad Moaar was actually running it and Schamidt was keeping an eye on a couple of drills etc. Like the man and would be keen to see him involved, but I think we have to be realistic.
Still think it was a shame, he didn't want to get involved when he finished with Ireland, as it seems he turned down an approach as he wanted a break from rugby. -
@Kirwan said in Foster must go:
When the current coaching group got Covid and Schmidt took the coaching reigns, that led to the only win.
Perhaps an interim change is enough to get through the Rugby Championship, and the board doesn't need to rush to get a long term replacement (or maybe Schmidt is the guy, who knows).
So I wouldn't read too much into Schmidt's involvement in the first test win - if all it took was 2-3 days to turn the AB's around I think the would have seen Foster achieve that, unless the only issue was player respect.
@PecoTrain said in Foster must go:
@Kirwan said in Foster must go:
When the current coaching group got Covid and Schmidt took the coaching reigns, that led to the only win.
Perhaps an interim change is enough to get through the Rugby Championship, and the board doesn't need to rush to get a long term replacement (or maybe Schmidt is the guy, who knows).
So I wouldn't read too much into Schmidt's involvement in the first test win - if all it took was 2-3 days to turn the AB's around I think the would have seen Foster achieve that, unless the only issue was player respect.
Unless the players are hiding things well I think they do respect Foster and the plan he is is trying to implement. There aren't any signs of toleration or frustration, they seem to be blaming themselves. I very much suspect that in reviews the players are supporting him.
The assistants are another matter though. They have already come out of reviews in a poor light (presumably from the players) which is why additions were made earlier this year. Adding more voices in has probably backfired though.
A possible 'solution' here is for Schmidt to run the gameplan and have a strong say in selection to fit that plan. The assistants are told to do what he says or butt out. Foster is too close to those he has picked to assist and needs to be stronger on realising that they aren't working out.
My guess is that they will survive out the 3N for the sake of 'disruption' but Schmidt may get to pick a new team to assist on a EOYT. -
What do you know NZR have made a mess of it again!
They put out a statement about Foster hoping he would then resign. He ignores that statement and refuses to resign. Shambles.
-
@MN5 said in Foster must go:
@Dan54 said in Foster must go:
@MN5 said in Foster must go:
@MajorRage said in Foster must go:
@BerniesCorner said in Foster must go:
Over at Stuff
"Mark Reason: The fishheads who are stinking out the All Blacks"
https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/all-blacks/300640271/mark-reason-the-fishheads-who-are-stinking-out-the-all-blacksAnyone else find this type of journalism totally unacceptable
Agree with every single thing he says.
Why do you think it’s unacceptable?
People on massive salaries get paid it because they have to accept colossal criticism when they fail to meet their kpi’s.
People who think this is unacceptable have been listening to too much Cindy.
Reason is literally saying everything that’s been said on here for ages. The ‘pasifika’ comment is a bit weird but the rest is pretty spot on.
Yep probably hit it on head, Reason is saying what he has read on internet, it's how people without real skills sell stories, find unhappy posts etc and feed the people more of that. I just saw some of that during covid etc, if a journalist wanted to get read they followed what was on net and followed that, it's how some try to stand out in a competitive market. Generally we as readers will see an ex AB say Foster has to go, and if we agree, we think that the man is a genius, if we don't he's an idiot and what does he know. Same in press , a writer who doesn't agree with us is an idiot or NZR stooge etc, and one we agree with is a great writer. It sems to of become even more prevalant since internet became a thing.
Yep, I’m certainly not going so far as to say it was an entertaining well written piece…..but he did at least tell it like it is. I don’t think he deserves to be censored for that
I agree MNS, not sure he needs to be censored, he writes opinion pieces. unfortunately I have opinion too. and mine is he's a click bait so called journalist,of a very low standard, so don't read him anymore, and perhaps think have a slightly less opinion of people who quote him etc. I not saying they wrong, just I find using him to base arguments etc kind of lessens the value of said argument etc.
@Dan54 said in Foster must go:
@MN5 said in Foster must go:
@Dan54 said in Foster must go:
@MN5 said in Foster must go:
@MajorRage said in Foster must go:
@BerniesCorner said in Foster must go:
Over at Stuff
"Mark Reason: The fishheads who are stinking out the All Blacks"
https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/all-blacks/300640271/mark-reason-the-fishheads-who-are-stinking-out-the-all-blacksAnyone else find this type of journalism totally unacceptable
Agree with every single thing he says.
Why do you think it’s unacceptable?
People on massive salaries get paid it because they have to accept colossal criticism when they fail to meet their kpi’s.
People who think this is unacceptable have been listening to too much Cindy.
Reason is literally saying everything that’s been said on here for ages. The ‘pasifika’ comment is a bit weird but the rest is pretty spot on.
Yep probably hit it on head, Reason is saying what he has read on internet, it's how people without real skills sell stories, find unhappy posts etc and feed the people more of that. I just saw some of that during covid etc, if a journalist wanted to get read they followed what was on net and followed that, it's how some try to stand out in a competitive market. Generally we as readers will see an ex AB say Foster has to go, and if we agree, we think that the man is a genius, if we don't he's an idiot and what does he know. Same in press , a writer who doesn't agree with us is an idiot or NZR stooge etc, and one we agree with is a great writer. It sems to of become even more prevalant since internet became a thing.
Yep, I’m certainly not going so far as to say it was an entertaining well written piece…..but he did at least tell it like it is. I don’t think he deserves to be censored for that
I agree MNS, not sure he needs to be censored, he writes opinion pieces. unfortunately I have opinion too. and mine is he's a click bait so called journalist,of a very low standard, so don't read him anymore, and perhaps think have a slightly less opinion of people who quote him etc. I not saying they wrong, just I find using him to base arguments etc kind of lessens the value of said argument etc.
That’s ridiculous. You agree with somebodies view or you don’t.
-
@Dan54 said in Foster must go:
@MN5 said in Foster must go:
@Dan54 said in Foster must go:
@MN5 said in Foster must go:
@MajorRage said in Foster must go:
@BerniesCorner said in Foster must go:
Over at Stuff
"Mark Reason: The fishheads who are stinking out the All Blacks"
https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/all-blacks/300640271/mark-reason-the-fishheads-who-are-stinking-out-the-all-blacksAnyone else find this type of journalism totally unacceptable
Agree with every single thing he says.
Why do you think it’s unacceptable?
People on massive salaries get paid it because they have to accept colossal criticism when they fail to meet their kpi’s.
People who think this is unacceptable have been listening to too much Cindy.
Reason is literally saying everything that’s been said on here for ages. The ‘pasifika’ comment is a bit weird but the rest is pretty spot on.
Yep probably hit it on head, Reason is saying what he has read on internet, it's how people without real skills sell stories, find unhappy posts etc and feed the people more of that. I just saw some of that during covid etc, if a journalist wanted to get read they followed what was on net and followed that, it's how some try to stand out in a competitive market. Generally we as readers will see an ex AB say Foster has to go, and if we agree, we think that the man is a genius, if we don't he's an idiot and what does he know. Same in press , a writer who doesn't agree with us is an idiot or NZR stooge etc, and one we agree with is a great writer. It sems to of become even more prevalant since internet became a thing.
Yep, I’m certainly not going so far as to say it was an entertaining well written piece…..but he did at least tell it like it is. I don’t think he deserves to be censored for that
I agree MNS, not sure he needs to be censored, he writes opinion pieces. unfortunately I have opinion too. and mine is he's a click bait so called journalist,of a very low standard, so don't read him anymore, and perhaps think have a slightly less opinion of people who quote him etc. I not saying they wrong, just I find using him to base arguments etc kind of lessens the value of said argument etc.
That’s ridiculous. You agree with somebodies view or you don’t.
@MajorRage @Dan54
Reason is the stopped clock of rugby journalism. By default he will be right once every 24 times. However even when he is right, his style is really quite spiteful.
And he is a fluffybunny.
-
@MajorRage @Dan54
Reason is the stopped clock of rugby journalism. By default he will be right once every 24 times. However even when he is right, his style is really quite spiteful.
And he is a fluffybunny.
@Catogrande said in Foster must go:
@MajorRage @Dan54
Reason is the stopped clock of rugby journalism. By default he will be right once every 24 times. However even when he is right, his style is really quite spiteful.
And he is a fluffybunny.
I agree with a lot of what he says. Far in excess of 1 in 24. More like 3 in 4.
I guess Dan has no respect for me. Oh how will I go on.
-
@MajorRage have you considered you might also be a stopped clock?
-
FWIW I agreed with a lot of the article as well, and you just know Reason has been waiting his whole life to get the chance to stick the boot in like this. The Maori/Pasifica comment was weird though.
-
@Catogrande said in Foster must go:
@MajorRage @Dan54
Reason is the stopped clock of rugby journalism. By default he will be right once every 24 times. However even when he is right, his style is really quite spiteful.
And he is a fluffybunny.
I agree with a lot of what he says. Far in excess of 1 in 24. More like 3 in 4.
I guess Dan has no respect for me. Oh how will I go on.
@MajorRage TBF I think he has been writing pretty much the same shit for the last decade or more, just replace names (drop McCaw/Drop Cane)
However, since about 2018, all his BS has been getting closer and closer to the mark as NZR stumble around arrogantly, refusing to see any of the issues unfolding in front of them.
He is still a spiteful fluffybunny.
-
@mariner4life said in Foster must go:
there is the old saying that goes something like "what makes great coaches? Great players"
Maybe, if we step back and take the black glasses off, this isn't all Ian's fault. Maybe, just maybe, NZ players aren't very good any more.
Our front row players range from adequate to definitely substandard (with one possible, but as yet unproven) exception
Our 2nd rowers are putting in a shift, but do they actually contribute anything meaningful?
In the loose forwards, on the weekend perhaps our 6 & 8 had points wins over their opposite (7 clearly did not) but that is only if you ignore the fact we lost the ruck battle, and the tackle battle.
Our halfback can't kick with accuracy or depth.
there is no 10 in the country who can calmly run a game, or kick well from hand.
We don't appear to have a 12 anywhere, though playing 12 outside our erratic and unpredictable 10s must be a fucking nightmare
Our 13 is a converted winger with limitless potential but still several key questionmarks
Win seems okay
Our fullback is good under the high ball, but not much good at anything else, and loves a poor optionAnd a big issue is, who do you swap these guys out for? No one else is bashing the door down.
I'm just throwing it out there, maybe, just maybe, we lose to Ireland because they have better players than us now. And we, the NZ rugby fan, refuse to believe it because it has never been so.
While some All Black teams dominated what I remember is that we mostly used to win even when we were evenly matched with opposition, because we were good at pressure rugby. Playing the %. Kicking to corners, winning a turnover or a line out when it mattered. Mostly just hard fought games with less than a one try margin. I don’t see that hard nosed attitude in our team or tactics. We don’t do the grind anymore - reverting to the box kick or heaven forbid the cross kick all the time. Some of its tactics and some I think is hard coded into players. For me Foster has to go because he won’t make the number of changes now required. Dropping some name players, selecting specialists, stop selecting projects, changing tactics. We haven’t had a forward pack that has dominated its opposition for years. Time to face reality.
-
@Dan54 said in Foster must go:
@MN5 said in Foster must go:
@Dan54 said in Foster must go:
@MN5 said in Foster must go:
@MajorRage said in Foster must go:
@BerniesCorner said in Foster must go:
Over at Stuff
"Mark Reason: The fishheads who are stinking out the All Blacks"
https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/all-blacks/300640271/mark-reason-the-fishheads-who-are-stinking-out-the-all-blacksAnyone else find this type of journalism totally unacceptable
Agree with every single thing he says.
Why do you think it’s unacceptable?
People on massive salaries get paid it because they have to accept colossal criticism when they fail to meet their kpi’s.
People who think this is unacceptable have been listening to too much Cindy.
Reason is literally saying everything that’s been said on here for ages. The ‘pasifika’ comment is a bit weird but the rest is pretty spot on.
Yep probably hit it on head, Reason is saying what he has read on internet, it's how people without real skills sell stories, find unhappy posts etc and feed the people more of that. I just saw some of that during covid etc, if a journalist wanted to get read they followed what was on net and followed that, it's how some try to stand out in a competitive market. Generally we as readers will see an ex AB say Foster has to go, and if we agree, we think that the man is a genius, if we don't he's an idiot and what does he know. Same in press , a writer who doesn't agree with us is an idiot or NZR stooge etc, and one we agree with is a great writer. It sems to of become even more prevalant since internet became a thing.
Yep, I’m certainly not going so far as to say it was an entertaining well written piece…..but he did at least tell it like it is. I don’t think he deserves to be censored for that
I agree MNS, not sure he needs to be censored, he writes opinion pieces. unfortunately I have opinion too. and mine is he's a click bait so called journalist,of a very low standard, so don't read him anymore, and perhaps think have a slightly less opinion of people who quote him etc. I not saying they wrong, just I find using him to base arguments etc kind of lessens the value of said argument etc.
That’s ridiculous. You agree with somebodies view or you don’t.
@MajorRage said in Foster must go:
@Dan54 said in Foster must go:
@MN5 said in Foster must go:
@Dan54 said in Foster must go:
@MN5 said in Foster must go:
@MajorRage said in Foster must go:
@BerniesCorner said in Foster must go:
Over at Stuff
"Mark Reason: The fishheads who are stinking out the All Blacks"
https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/all-blacks/300640271/mark-reason-the-fishheads-who-are-stinking-out-the-all-blacksAnyone else find this type of journalism totally unacceptable
Agree with every single thing he says.
Why do you think it’s unacceptable?
People on massive salaries get paid it because they have to accept colossal criticism when they fail to meet their kpi’s.
People who think this is unacceptable have been listening to too much Cindy.
Reason is literally saying everything that’s been said on here for ages. The ‘pasifika’ comment is a bit weird but the rest is pretty spot on.
Yep probably hit it on head, Reason is saying what he has read on internet, it's how people without real skills sell stories, find unhappy posts etc and feed the people more of that. I just saw some of that during covid etc, if a journalist wanted to get read they followed what was on net and followed that, it's how some try to stand out in a competitive market. Generally we as readers will see an ex AB say Foster has to go, and if we agree, we think that the man is a genius, if we don't he's an idiot and what does he know. Same in press , a writer who doesn't agree with us is an idiot or NZR stooge etc, and one we agree with is a great writer. It sems to of become even more prevalant since internet became a thing.
Yep, I’m certainly not going so far as to say it was an entertaining well written piece…..but he did at least tell it like it is. I don’t think he deserves to be censored for that
I agree MNS, not sure he needs to be censored, he writes opinion pieces. unfortunately I have opinion too. and mine is he's a click bait so called journalist,of a very low standard, so don't read him anymore, and perhaps think have a slightly less opinion of people who quote him etc. I not saying they wrong, just I find using him to base arguments etc kind of lessens the value of said argument etc.
That’s ridiculous. You agree with somebodies view or you don’t.
Yep, and I don't agree with Mark Reason's, why I don't read him. As I said he does opinion pieces, and I find them click bait ,end of. He seems to have no more knowledge or any closer to any info than any poster on here. Not a probelm mate, if you like that kind of "journalsim" I don't have a problem, I never read his fathers stuff, ro even Stephen Jones for basically same reason.
-
@Catogrande said in Foster must go:
@MajorRage @Dan54
Reason is the stopped clock of rugby journalism. By default he will be right once every 24 times. However even when he is right, his style is really quite spiteful.
And he is a fluffybunny.
I agree with a lot of what he says. Far in excess of 1 in 24. More like 3 in 4.
I guess Dan has no respect for me. Oh how will I go on.
@MajorRage said in Foster must go:
@Catogrande said in Foster must go:
@MajorRage @Dan54
Reason is the stopped clock of rugby journalism. By default he will be right once every 24 times. However even when he is right, his style is really quite spiteful.
And he is a fluffybunny.
I agree with a lot of what he says. Far in excess of 1 in 24. More like 3 in 4.
I guess Dan has no respect for me. Oh how will I go on.
Where did I say that Major, you really making up stuff, I didn't say you couldn't or shouldn't read them, just saying if you quote his write up to back something, I think it lessens the quality of argument.
I didn't think you were the type to twist a pretty innocent statement so much,, but that's ok. -
@MajorRage said in Foster must go:
@Dan54 said in Foster must go:
@MN5 said in Foster must go:
@Dan54 said in Foster must go:
@MN5 said in Foster must go:
@MajorRage said in Foster must go:
@BerniesCorner said in Foster must go:
Over at Stuff
"Mark Reason: The fishheads who are stinking out the All Blacks"
https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/all-blacks/300640271/mark-reason-the-fishheads-who-are-stinking-out-the-all-blacksAnyone else find this type of journalism totally unacceptable
Agree with every single thing he says.
Why do you think it’s unacceptable?
People on massive salaries get paid it because they have to accept colossal criticism when they fail to meet their kpi’s.
People who think this is unacceptable have been listening to too much Cindy.
Reason is literally saying everything that’s been said on here for ages. The ‘pasifika’ comment is a bit weird but the rest is pretty spot on.
Yep probably hit it on head, Reason is saying what he has read on internet, it's how people without real skills sell stories, find unhappy posts etc and feed the people more of that. I just saw some of that during covid etc, if a journalist wanted to get read they followed what was on net and followed that, it's how some try to stand out in a competitive market. Generally we as readers will see an ex AB say Foster has to go, and if we agree, we think that the man is a genius, if we don't he's an idiot and what does he know. Same in press , a writer who doesn't agree with us is an idiot or NZR stooge etc, and one we agree with is a great writer. It sems to of become even more prevalant since internet became a thing.
Yep, I’m certainly not going so far as to say it was an entertaining well written piece…..but he did at least tell it like it is. I don’t think he deserves to be censored for that
I agree MNS, not sure he needs to be censored, he writes opinion pieces. unfortunately I have opinion too. and mine is he's a click bait so called journalist,of a very low standard, so don't read him anymore, and perhaps think have a slightly less opinion of people who quote him etc. I not saying they wrong, just I find using him to base arguments etc kind of lessens the value of said argument etc.
That’s ridiculous. You agree with somebodies view or you don’t.
Yep, and I don't agree with Mark Reason's, why I don't read him. As I said he does opinion pieces, and I find them click bait ,end of. He seems to have no more knowledge or any closer to any info than any poster on here. Not a probelm mate, if you like that kind of "journalsim" I don't have a problem, I never read his fathers stuff, ro even Stephen Jones for basically same reason.
@Dan54 said in Foster must go:
@MajorRage said in Foster must go:
@Dan54 said in Foster must go:
@MN5 said in Foster must go:
@Dan54 said in Foster must go:
@MN5 said in Foster must go:
@MajorRage said in Foster must go:
@BerniesCorner said in Foster must go:
Over at Stuff
"Mark Reason: The fishheads who are stinking out the All Blacks"
https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/all-blacks/300640271/mark-reason-the-fishheads-who-are-stinking-out-the-all-blacksAnyone else find this type of journalism totally unacceptable
Agree with every single thing he says.
Why do you think it’s unacceptable?
People on massive salaries get paid it because they have to accept colossal criticism when they fail to meet their kpi’s.
People who think this is unacceptable have been listening to too much Cindy.
Reason is literally saying everything that’s been said on here for ages. The ‘pasifika’ comment is a bit weird but the rest is pretty spot on.
Yep probably hit it on head, Reason is saying what he has read on internet, it's how people without real skills sell stories, find unhappy posts etc and feed the people more of that. I just saw some of that during covid etc, if a journalist wanted to get read they followed what was on net and followed that, it's how some try to stand out in a competitive market. Generally we as readers will see an ex AB say Foster has to go, and if we agree, we think that the man is a genius, if we don't he's an idiot and what does he know. Same in press , a writer who doesn't agree with us is an idiot or NZR stooge etc, and one we agree with is a great writer. It sems to of become even more prevalant since internet became a thing.
Yep, I’m certainly not going so far as to say it was an entertaining well written piece…..but he did at least tell it like it is. I don’t think he deserves to be censored for that
I agree MNS, not sure he needs to be censored, he writes opinion pieces. unfortunately I have opinion too. and mine is he's a click bait so called journalist,of a very low standard, so don't read him anymore, and perhaps think have a slightly less opinion of people who quote him etc. I not saying they wrong, just I find using him to base arguments etc kind of lessens the value of said argument etc.
That’s ridiculous. You agree with somebodies view or you don’t.
Yep, and I don't agree with Mark Reason's, why I don't read him. As I said he does opinion pieces, and I find them click bait ,end of. He seems to have no more knowledge or any closer to any info than any poster on here. Not a probelm mate, if you like that kind of "journalsim" I don't have a problem, I never read his fathers stuff, ro even Stephen Jones for basically same reason.
I like Stephen Jones' articles because he seems so personally offended by so many things and blows them up to the size of countries but really doesn't appear to have a constructive clue. Bombastic negativity. Great stuff!
Reason, on the hand, can make some reasonable points but you know once he thinks he has you on his side he is going to go all spiteful, and I usually go away with a sour taste in my mouth.
-
@MajorRage @Dan54
Reason is the stopped clock of rugby journalism. By default he will be right once every 24 times. However even when he is right, his style is really quite spiteful.
And he is a fluffybunny.
@Catogrande said in Foster must go:
Reason is the stopped clock of rugby journalism. By default he will be right once every 24 times
or twice unless digital
I caught a bus to RWC Final in 2011 and sat in front of Reason and Deaker.
Imagine the most loud mouthed, out of touch, reactionary, bigoted, smug old fucktards that you can. Then double down. Twice.
This wasn't to an audience or as click bait. This was who they were. I think people give them too much credit as wind up merchants. No matter how outrageous their Mr Angry stuff I reckon it's who they truly are. Oh and they didn't have a clue about the rules of the game - and all poly players are thick!
-
@kev said in Foster must go:
Dropping some name players, ..., stop selecting projects,
Are these compatible?
@booboo said in Foster must go:
@kev said in Foster must go:
Dropping some name players, ..., stop selecting projects,
Are these compatible?
Good question. In this series most would agree Codie Taylor should have been in the reserves. An example of a project would have been RTS in the final test. Lucky to make squad - can’t understand why he also got selected on bench for final test when he can only play one position and our defence was always going to be an issue.
