Daniel Taylors Guardian Blog

[Tutts]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/football-league-blog/2010/sep/03/nottingham-forest-billy-davies

Excellent piece by an excellent journalist (and Forest Fan.)

Apologies if posted elsewhere.

 

[winnits]

I was just reading that, why use one word when ten will do? Usually a fan of Mr Taylor but he seems to have jumped on the extrapolating rumours to facts bandwagon here.

At least there's a nod to it not simply being a case of blaming the board. And whilst there may be talk of a protest, it's just that really - I doubt we'll see much evidence of one.

 

[It's Baggio]

A lot of those rumours came from his sources, so I'd guess he regards them as 'fact'.

 

[winnits]

Including the nod to Vital Forest's 'planegate' silliness?

 

[Deleted User]

I agree Winnits. There appears to be no information at all there, just conjecture from someone who appears to be on the 'Doughty Out' side.

Chippers likes it though... oh dear.

 

[It's Baggio]

Including the nod to Vital Forest's 'planegate' silliness?

Well he casts doubt on that one himself, so hardly reporting it as fact. All he says is that the club investigated it, which seems sensible.

Regardless of how silly that story was, it had been picked up by all local news outlets so I don't think it's that unreasonable to include it in a blog about our dodgy summer.

 

[bwb]

Hmm there's perhaps too much hearsay and rumours in there, and he doesn't consider the possibility that we missed out on our targets this summer because Cardiff and Swansea weren't willing to sell at anything but a silly price. And the 'planegate' reference I mean please, as if that really happened!

 

[Darth Pierre]

good article capello

 

[FBS]

I normally like Taylor's stuff, but that article seems very much against Davies. Also it's articles like that that stirrup some people's emotions even further, rather than look at the bigger picture.

 

[winnits]

Well he casts doubt on that one himself, so hardly reporting it as fact. All he says is that the club investigated it, which seems sensible.

Regardless of how silly that story was, it had been picked up by all local news outlets so I don't think it's that unreasonable to include it in a blog about our dodgy summer.

I suppose not. However, he paraphrases things that might be indicative of a 'rift' and avoids the fact that both Davies, Doughty and Arthur have publicly scotched such rumours... there's an underlying biasedness coming through which I suppose is natural enough if you're trying to get a point across, but I'd expect better from a very good journalist which I think Mr Taylor is.

 

[winnits]

good article capello

:no:

 

[Deleted User]

Did someone mention perch?

 

[StuC]

good article capello

Daniel Taylor is not Capello, i'd love to know what Capello thinks of this article from DT

 

[It's Baggio]

there's an underlying biasedness coming through which I suppose is natural enough if you're trying to get a point across, but I'd expect better from a very good journalist which I think Mr Taylor is.

Maybe, although:

that article seems very much against Davies.

conjecture from someone who appears to be on the 'Doughty Out' side.

Perhaps that bias isn't so obvious. lol

 

[incapable hulk]

I normally like Taylor's stuff, but that article seems very much against Davies. Also it's articles like that that stirrup some people's emotions even further, rather than look at the bigger picture.

Just out of curiosity- what is the bigger picture?


I thought it was quite a good article, some of it is bang on, but im not sure about how he says theres so friction between davies and the board. It doesnt seem that way, beyond whats being perpetuated on forums.
It reads as more of a statement of things such as how the fans are feelings, than anything else.

It was a good read though.

 

[winnits]

Perhaps that bias isn't so obvious. lol

Haha.. I suppose bias is the wrong word, it seems to tap into the rumour-mongering without any foundation - if he does have contacts at Forest that suggest public statements made by Doughty, Arthur and Davies are untrue about their working relationship, then if he's going to intimate it, he should state it - otherwise it's no better than the stuff that gets peddled on the forums.

It will be interesting to see how (or more likely, if) the club responds to it - because a national journalist starting to stick the boot in on the way the club is working is likely to be taken more seriously than fans peddling outlandish rumours on forums or content sites.

 

[Billy Hunt]

There's no mention of MA actually coming on Radio Nottm and declaring that both Pratley and Whittingham are coming/want to come/deal almost done. Considering that as a huge drift away from the club's usual practice, it is perhaps the biggest f*** up of the lot.

 

[ShakeyRed]

I think it's a very poor article, he has written it as a frustrated fan instead of a professional journalist.

I'm afraid it does nothing more than pander to the conspiracy theorists.

 

[It's Baggio]

I think it's a very poor article, he has written it as a frustrated fan instead of a professional journalist.

I'm afraid it does nothing more than pander to the conspiracy theorists.

Well he is a Forest fan and it is on the Guardian blog.

Not much different IMO, to the chap on the nffcblog offering his opinion on the matter.

 

[TheMissplacedPassword]

I was just reading that, why use one word when ten will do? Usually a fan of Mr Taylor but he seems to have jumped on the extrapolating rumours to facts bandwagon here.

At least there's a nod to it not simply being a case of blaming the board. And whilst there may be talk of a protest, it's just that really - I doubt we'll see much evidence of one.

In the vacuum of news that surrounds the City Ground this article is the nearest thing to good investigative journalism that has appeared recently - the NEP toe the line so tightly they have lost their toenails, and Radio Nottingham perform like servants indentured to the club.

DT may or may not have sources that are telling him something is very wrong, but in the face of the paranoia that lubricates Billy's tong and clamps tight on the rest of the club's, someone needs to ask some questions. He may not make any new friends within the inner circle by referring to "Boardroom Buffoonery" but the inner circle does not seem to welcome any outside scrutiny (which is understandable considering the sheer amount of buffoonery displayed by the club over the last decade)

I think DT has his finger firmly on the pulse here - and with the lack of any official "Dont panic" or otherwise statements from the club, what else is he supposed to do? tug his forelock and bow to the squire like the rest of us?

 

[TheMissplacedPassword]

I think it's a very poor article, he has written it as a frustrated fan instead of a professional journalist.

I'm afraid it does nothing more than pander to the conspiracy theorists.

the tight lips of the board give wings to the conspiracy theorists - this blog merely asks questions that should be answered...

 

[LAEFC]

I like it. Especially when it slags off the morans that booed McKenna

 

[StuC]

Well he is a Forest fan and it is on the Guardian blog.

Not much different IMO, to the chap on the nffcblog offering his opinion on the matter.

The difference is that the chap behind nffcblog makes it clear it is his opinion, but with Daniel Taylor it is easy for some to accept that what he has put is fact given his job and the contacts he may have.

 

[Clifford]

Excellent article, you have remember as well that it is not news to us but will be to non forest fans.

It seems to me to be about as pro Doughty and Arthur as you could get away with at the moment. Seems to direct it back towards Davies a bit. DT is very well connected at Forest. Maybe this is a bit of an attempt by the board to get their side accross?

 

[ShakeyRed]

Well he is a Forest fan and it is on the Guardian blog.

Not much different IMO, to the chap on the nffcblog offering his opinion on the matter.

Yeah you're spot (Note to self - clue is in the title Shakey)

Of course he is entitled to his opinion and i was wrong to judge the article in any other way.