gjohnson

I dunno, checking out his sources would do for a start. Facts can change, new evidence can come to light, what is true one day might not be true the next. Might want to check that fact

Not in the slightest. Not blaming him for anything other than neglecting checking on his sources. In this case Amanda has told him things and he's put them out there without checking if they are true or not....at least not that anyone can see If he's going to be publishing stuff with regard to the take over of course he should have been digging deeper to confirm what he's been told, and not look like Staveley's lapdog mouthpiece You're point is still nonsense. Regularly a journalist will report what a source says without having to go and check if what they say is true or not. There are plenty of stories which simply report, for example, what Boris Johnson says about something. His comments still get reported by journalists whether hes talking shit or not. It's not nonsense at all. Just because they do doesn't make it right. Yes Boris talks balls all the time, but it's always recorded by many outlets, then picked apart and checked over the next few hours and days. George having a private chat with Amanda is not the same thing in the slightest as it doesn't have national scrutiny where everyone is interpreting every word and checking with a dozen other MPs/advisors afterwards. His bullshit is easy to pull apart precisely because people check what he is saying. Also, if something hasn't been confirmed by at least a second source, you'll generally see the term 'allegedly, or unconfirmed reports'. BBC isn't perfect by any stretch of the imagination, but anything they put out always has at least 2 verifiable sources. Speculation on their part is always tempered with 'allegedly'.

Not in the slightest. Not blaming him for anything other than neglecting checking on his sources. In this case Amanda has told him things and he's put them out there without checking if they are true or not....at least not that anyone can see If he's going to be publishing stuff with regard to the take over of course he should have been digging deeper to confirm what he's been told, and not look like Staveley's lapdog mouthpiece

Unfortunately it's a low bar. A really proper good journalist wouldn't rely on a single source, or would at least do the leg work investigating what his source had told him. George doesn't, he reports what he's told to report. It's a shame he's been reporting what we wanted to hear, but surely he should have been banging on the Reubens door to confirm, or talking to someone from PIF too. Not too say he hasn't been trying, but just spouting whatever Staveley has told him is pretty weak, and not too different to tabloids. That's bollocks tbf. He reported what he was being told, and said as much. He didn't make any bold predictions either way. It's not the job of every journalist to analyse the whole deal at all points. Why's it Bollocks? Never said anything about predictions at all or analysing the details of a deal. Just saying that a journalist should follow up on what they're being told is true before reporting it. If i were a journalist and was told from a trusted source that Donald Trump was actually a replicant from the future, I think i'd want first hand confirmation or evidence from second source before putting it in my paper. Not really. If I was a journalist and say, someone close to Joe Biden told me that, of course I'd report it. There's nothing wrong with reporting what a source tells you without delivering an opinion on it whether you think its ridiculous or not. That's not really being a journalist then is it? Caulkin's been Staveley's stenographer throughout this ordeal and he's been made to look an absolute mug, for the second time. Not once has he provided any sort of analysis or critique of what he's been fed or its reliability, he's just unthinkingly regurgitated it at every opportunity. It's pathetic to be honest. Penn gets it too

Unfortunately it's a low bar. A really proper good journalist wouldn't rely on a single source, or would at least do the leg work investigating what his source had told him. George doesn't, he reports what he's told to report. It's a shame he's been reporting what we wanted to hear, but surely he should have been banging on the Reubens door to confirm, or talking to someone from PIF too. Not too say he hasn't been trying, but just spouting whatever Staveley has told him is pretty weak, and not too different to tabloids. That's bollocks tbf. He reported what he was being told, and said as much. He didn't make any bold predictions either way. It's not the job of every journalist to analyse the whole deal at all points. Why's it Bollocks? Never said anything about predictions at all or analysing the details of a deal. Just saying that a journalist should follow up on what they're being told is true before reporting it. If i were a journalist and was told from a trusted source that Donald Trump was actually a replicant from the future, I think i'd want first hand confirmation or evidence from second source before putting it in my paper. Not really. If I was a journalist and say, someone close to Joe Biden told me that, of course I'd report it. There's nothing wrong with reporting what a source tells you without delivering an opinion on it whether you think its ridiculous or not. Yes and you'd be laughed out of the place when it was found he wasn't a replicant, and Joe Biden had fed you a line. It's nothing to do with opinion. I don't know Georges opinion. Yes he has reported what he has been told, but it is his responsibility to at least try and check what he is reporting is true. He may well have tried, but hasn't given any evidence he has. I do know that if I was writing articles based on a single source which turned out to be wrong, I wouldn't be employed as a serious journalist for too long and would probably end up at The Sun, or the National Enquirer

Cronky gets my point!

Unfortunately it's a low bar. A really proper good journalist wouldn't rely on a single source, or would at least do the leg work investigating what his source had told him. George doesn't, he reports what he's told to report. It's a shame he's been reporting what we wanted to hear, but surely he should have been banging on the Reubens door to confirm, or talking to someone from PIF too. Not too say he hasn't been trying, but just spouting whatever Staveley has told him is pretty weak, and not too different to tabloids. That's bollocks tbf. He reported what he was being told, and said as much. He didn't make any bold predictions either way. It's not the job of every journalist to analyse the whole deal at all points. Why's it Bollocks? Never said anything about predictions at all or analysing the details of a deal. Just saying that a journalist should follow up on what they're being told is true before reporting it Follow up with who? He was talking to someone directly involved in it! You want him to speak to someone less in the know? Am I just being obtuse or something here? All he would have had to say is 'i attempted to confirm with Rueben/PIF/Masters/PL/Ashley but couldn't get a comment'. That would have shown at least that he wasn't just taking Staveleys word for it

Unfortunately it's a low bar. A really proper good journalist wouldn't rely on a single source, or would at least do the leg work investigating what his source had told him. George doesn't, he reports what he's told to report. It's a shame he's been reporting what we wanted to hear, but surely he should have been banging on the Reubens door to confirm, or talking to someone from PIF too. Not too say he hasn't been trying, but just spouting whatever Staveley has told him is pretty weak, and not too different to tabloids. That's bollocks tbf. He reported what he was being told, and said as much. He didn't make any bold predictions either way. It's not the job of every journalist to analyse the whole deal at all points. Why's it Bollocks? Never said anything about predictions at all or analysing the details of a deal. Just saying that a journalist should follow up on what they're being told is true before reporting it. If i were a journalist and was told from a trusted source that Donald Trump was actually a replicant from the future, I think i'd want first hand confirmation or evidence from second source before putting it in my paper.

Unfortunately it's a low bar. A really proper good journalist wouldn't rely on a single source, or would at least do the leg work investigating what his source had told him. George doesn't, he reports what he's told to report. It's a shame he's been reporting what we wanted to hear, but surely he should have been banging on the Reubens door to confirm, or talking to someone from PIF too. Not too say he hasn't been trying, but just spouting whatever Staveley has told him is pretty weak, and not too different to tabloids. How do you know that this hasn’t happened? I don't which is why i said 'not that he hasn't been trying' But considering how many time's he's been tweeted or questioned, all he would have had to do was say 'i spoke to Jamie/Al Rumyann, and they couldn't comment', or 'i've tried to speak to other investors without success'. I've not seen or heard him say anything that hasn't come from Staveley

Unfortunately it's a low bar. A really proper good journalist wouldn't rely on a single source, or would at least do the leg work investigating what his source had told him. George doesn't, he reports what he's told to report. It's a shame he's been reporting what we wanted to hear, but surely he should have been banging on the Reubens door to confirm, or talking to someone from PIF too. Not too say he hasn't been trying, but just spouting whatever Staveley has told him is pretty weak, and not too different to tabloids.

Has Caulkin got owt right yet re. this takeover? How hard is it to understand he can only report on what he’s told. Especially by Staveley I think Staveley has just been feeding him stories. A decision to pull out of a 300m investment doesn't happen in a day regardless of how much money the investors have. Yes it's peanuts to PIF, but it's still a very substantial amount of money. Hell it took my company a month to decide to withdraw a 5K investment which would have made them over 200K within 2 years, and that's without having to deal with external pressures or different partners

Has Caulkin got owt right yet re. this takeover? Caulkin's lost all credibility wrt to this

he knows about as much as us. He has said what his paymaster has told him to say. Nothing more. Wouldn't believe any of them if they said the sky was blue

Its gone. I know :'(

Would expect if KSA complain to government, Masters will be pretty quickly up in front of a Parliamentary Committee to explain why he's damaged their relationship. They pulled Mike Ashley up for suspect working conditions Doubt KSA are bothered enough to complain to anyone. They'll just invest in a different club in a different league, with none of the chew or concessions that this deal comes with. Probably not, but if they are insulted enough to withdraw I would be expecting repercussions

Would expect if KSA complain to government, Masters will be pretty quickly up in front of a Parliamentary Committee to explain why he's damaged their relationship. They pulled Mike Ashley up for suspect working conditions

But now not making a decision is potentially going to cost the PL a minimum of £17m. How's that? Ashley gets the 17m deposit, not them

I've heard cricket is supposedly a popular sport

What a smug cow Louise Taylor is...sitting on Look North commiserating with the biggest shit eating grin on her face

Manorpark is very quiet

Only positive is that he's lost waayyy more than that on that useless Brazilian lump of shite he signed last summer. He didn't lose anything, NUFC as a club did. If anything he probably got about £20m under the table with some agent tie in. Nope. Gained 17m for nothing. Probably be our whole summer budget including wages now

"The KSA PIF group are happy to announce the acquisition of Leeds Utd who we plan to take back to the top echeclons of the Premier League

Looks like the theorised delay strategy from PL was right then. Or***s

He's probably not that stupid, no. He certainly wouldn't do that on his own. But he's probably got his best legal brains on it now (Hence why the buyers are not able to reach him), investigating if he can actually get anything out of this. Hopefully they tell him "no", and the Saudi deal goes through. Hopefully that happens soon and we have progress and good news. Worst case scenario is there's a loophole to cancel the Saudi deal and they manage to convince themselves that Mauriss is genuine. Which clearly he isn't. This is a man who requested his shops stay open in a global pandemic under the pretence of the nation's health. Maybe not stupidity, but certainly enough greed to do whatever in his bank balance interest

A kid from the U16s would have looked good against us in that match Saying that....given the almost WWE nature of the league, maybe that's our role....make all the other sides look like they play Barcelona style football so the overseas viewers think that all teams play good football, so therefore it must be the bestest league in the world