The Magedia Thread - Sunderland suck trollolololol

[ChezGiven]

And Martin Samuel joints the parade of t***s.

 

Don't get me wrong, Martin Samuel has proved himself to be a twat of the highest order for a long time now, but I don't see what is so controversial about the above article.

 

He's basically saying that everyone thinks they're special, and he's right.

 

That was the sum total of his argument yes.

 

Which of course means clubs like Napoli, Barcelona, Athletico Bilbao or even Notts Forest are no different to Wigan. Which in turn is fucking nonsense.

[Benwell Lad]

1996 a time when Eastenders & Corrie both had a bout 15 million regular viewers & the story lines were often built around problems or social issues in the real world. Now both have about half the viewers &  quiet week in the square these days is  3 murders, drug addiction, incest & a explosion in the cafe. The next new major topic has to outdo the last one & there rivials in the shock stakes but no matter what they do viewing figures are still declining.  In 1996 the sports columnists like John Sadler & Brian Granville wrote mainly ABOUT  THE FOOTBALL on the pitch & players & had a much bigger readership & it was insightful in the main. The likes of Dunn, Kidd & others are very similar to the script writers of the soaps in that they are out to shock, being sensationalist & are looking for there article to strike a new level of lowness than there rivals & like the soaps they are operating in declining market place.

 

Football journalism is rotten. Harry Harris is the highest paid football journalists & yet he never writes about a match, how f*** wrong does that seem. I watch the Sunday Supplement & is very rare that the debate is around the football. In the summer months the cricket writers takeover & they are talking about the bowlers action, players who should be picked for England, batting order, generally about the game. Football journalists have got swallowed up there own arse.

 

Top post. Very well put.

 

The ridiculous assertion in some articles that Mike Ashley wants to buy popularity are laughable. Like a guy who builds a business empire worth billions by the age of 40 would be short of people to socialise with

What they can't stand is that while he is doing so much for Newcastle United he displays very little ego. While some other "big clubs" have been bought purely for ego reasons or in order to finance other business deals - he just wants to have fun supporting Newcastle.

They hate it.

 

Anyway if Mike Ashley needs company I'll take him out for a couple of pints and I'll even pay !

 

P.S. Henry Winter excluded. He would have been a top man even when there were a lot of good football journalists around.

[robbo_11]

Funny for being such a small club they don't half devote most of the recent column space to Newcastle.

[NG32]

Funny for being such a small club they don't half devote most of the recent column space to Newcastle.

 

Indeed, and some fans seem to have a lot to say about us,  surely if we are a small club then not acknolowging us would be a start.

[Adam]

Following on from what Martin samuel's had to say about us.

 

I fail to see how we think we are special, I think most toon fans love the club and the region to an extent. Yet his article write like we are some sort of delusional idiots who believe we are the best club in the universe. I know he has been mentioned in this thread before, but he really seems to have it in for us. He really didnt like how Keegan talked about the fans wanting to be entertained after working hard all week. He really seems to dislike us, I have no idea where he is from, but he obviously has no idea what NUFC means to some people. He doesnt seem to understand that this is one city one club, and if the team does shit on a sat you can see it through the week.

 

Can someone get me Martin Samuel's address so I can send him a massive box of clues, cheers.

[Robster]

Following on from what Martin samuel's had to say about us.

 

I fail to see how we think we are special, I think most toon fans love the club and the region to an extent. Yet his article write like we are some sort of delusional idiots who believe we are the best club in the universe. I know he has been mentioned in this thread before, but he really seems to have it in for us. He really didnt like how Keegan talked about the fans wanting to be entertained after working hard all week. He really seems to dislike us, I have no idea where he is from, but he obviously has no idea what NUFC means to some people. He doesnt seem to understand that this is one city one club, and if the team does shit on a sat you can see it through the week.

 

Can someone get me Martin Samuel's address so I can send him a massive box of clues, cheers.

 

Maybe Samuel is a Theatre go-er

[Adam]

Thought so, quite like some of the responses to his article though, most of them talking about how shit it is.

[Thespence]

Can someone get me Martin Samuel's address so I can send him a massive box of clues, cheers.

 

I got Martin "fat cunt" Samuels email address from the bottom of his article & rather send him abuse, which is what these blokes get off on, I have made him a subscriber to few of weight loss mailing lists & few of well known spam sites.

 

 

[manorpark]

Even other LOCAL papers are joining in.

 

There was an article in the local evening rag for London (called the 'London Evening Standard') about us, can't find the link now though. Now, there is one from a local rag in Peterborough!

 

http://www.peterboroughtoday.co.uk/wos/King-Kev-ruler-of-Cloud.3694788.jp

 

Why are other peoples local papers as obsessed with us as the national (they are just 'other London local papers', I suppose!) papers are??

[Keefaz]

The press can stick it up their arses, they really can. Every 'pragmatic' appointment we've made has turned us into the place where football goes to die.

[Thorpinho]

1996 a time when Eastenders & Corrie both had a bout 15 million regular viewers & the story lines were often built around problems or social issues in the real world. Now both have about half the viewers &  quiet week in the square these days is  3 murders, drug addiction, incest & a explosion in the cafe. The next new major topic has to outdo the last one & there rivials in the shock stakes but no matter what they do viewing figures are still declining.  In 1996 the sports columnists like John Sadler & Brian Granville wrote mainly ABOUT  THE FOOTBALL on the pitch & players & had a much bigger readership & it was insightful in the main. The likes of Dunn, Kidd & others are very similar to the script writers of the soaps in that they are out to shock, being sensationalist & are looking for there article to strike a new level of lowness than there rivals & like the soaps they are operating in declining market place.

 

Football journalism is rotten. Harry Harris is the highest paid football journalists & yet he never writes about a match, how f*** wrong does that seem. I watch the Sunday Supplement & is very rare that the debate is around the football. In the summer months the cricket writers takeover & they are talking about the bowlers action, players who should be picked for England, batting order, generally about the game. Football journalists have got swallowed up there own arse.

 

Could not agree more, especially about the difference between the cricket and football journalism. I would love to have the intelligence and insightful thinking about the game the cricket guys have transferred into football. If you read the back pages of tabloids there is rarely anything about actual football, just about players off the field behaviour, boardroom disputes, people wanting to leave clubs etc etc. They have totally forgotten the original point of it all - what happens on the pitch.

[BONTEMPI]

Can someone get me Martin Samuel's address so I can send him a massive box of clues, cheers.

 

I got Martin "fat c***" Samuels email address from the bottom of his article & rather send him abuse, which is what these blokes get off on, I have made him a subscriber to few of weight loss mailing lists & few of well known spam sites.

 

 

 

Reminds me of Bluto from Popeye once he'd let himself go!

 

http://www.sportsjournalists.co.uk/img/samuel_and_parkinson.jpg

 

Fat Cunt

 

 

 

 

[Theregulars]

Personally think Martin Samuel's broadsheet pieces are very good. Frustrating journalist as seems to dumb down his evident intellect and pander to the masses in his tabloid pieces. What he said about us being a circus and all that isn't a ridiculous criticism from an outsider's point of view, although can't agree about us believing we are due some glory imminently. Obviously more that we know the potential of our club and just want to see a sign it is being achieved. However, one disagreement doesn't take away from the fact that he's normally pretty accurate in the broadsheets.

 

Would like to drop a piano on Louise Taylor's head.

[Theregulars]

On another note, the most annoying thing is that if Keegan's return works out and we become the Entertainers again, they'll once again adore us as everybody's second favourite team again. Problem with having a London-based media. Why don't they ever get onto Ferguson who doesn't even speak to the papers?

[madras]

was looking for a a massive condemnation of liverpool fans in this mornings rags for protesting and wanting DIC to oust the current owners.

 

but nothing there......it's almost as if,and it couldn't possibly be true,that they treat nufc differently.

 

could i request that at some time soon this thread be placed in the hall of fame so it can't be lost or wiped in any way as i've a feeling it may be needed for use in a "f****** lying b****** hypocrite's " court when they start licking nufc's arse again ?

[Guest Dr. Richard Kimble]

was looking for a a massive condemnation of liverpool fans in this mornings rags for protesting and wanting DIC to oust the current owners.

 

but nothing there......it's almost as if,and it couldn't possibly be true,that they treat nufc differently.

 

could i request that at some time soon this thread be placed in the hall of fame so it can't be lost or wiped in any way as i've a feeling it may be needed for use in a "f****** lying b****** hypocrite's " court when they start licking nufc's arse again ?

 

They'll never criticize the Sky Four bcos they're scared they'll be frozen out of the journalistic picture as well as lose the privilages and perks they get tossed.

 

 

[LoveItIfWeBeatU]

Someone should set up a website, write an offensive story about each 'journalist' who writes a story slagging us off, put the Journalist's picture next to it (usually next to their story in some papers and websites) and have the heading "<Journalist's name> is a cunt". Then email the link to them.

[Guest Elan]

I don't believe it, an attack on Arsenal 

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/sport/football.html?in_article_id=509876&in_page_id=1779&ct=5

[NG32]

Any media reports of the stuff thrown at Arsenal players taking corners last night?  Looked like coins to me.

[Dave]

Lovable rogues throwing them, obviously. Passion.

[dustynrg]

"I don't believe it, an attack on Arsenal  Shock!

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/sport/football.html?in_article_id=509876&in_page_id=1779&ct=5"

 

I always get the feeling they really don't like Arsenal (one good reason for us to like them then), after all they have too many foreigners (the journos really wish they could precede this word with black). 

 

They would love it just love it if darling whoopdedoo darling Spurs were to take Arsenal's place in the top 4, which frankly would be too much to bear. The Man U wankfest is bad enough, a Man U/Spurs wankfest would turn me to non league football.

[Paully]

Another tosser - for a "small club", these wankers spend a lot of their time "wriiting" about us.............

 

http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/32424/No-Toon-are-not-the-special-ones

[SUPERTOON]

Another tosser - for a "small club", these wankers spend a lot of their time "wriiting" about us.............

 

http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/32424/No-Toon-are-not-the-special-ones

 

The writer of this is a sunderland fan

[WarrenBartonCentrePartin]

Borrrring.

 

 

One of them should try writing something original and different for once.

[BONTEMPI]

Samual has the gaul to write this piece about another side that's going to win f*** all

 

Fat c***, choke on yer bargain bucket!

 

 

Why a club without a trophy for more than a decade are arguably the bestMartin Samuel, Sports Writer of the Year

The title of pound-for-pound champion is a peculiar thing. There is no belt or crown awarded to the holder, no tangible financial benefit. There are no bragging rights, either, considering all the experts in the world could never produce a standard formula for measuring who would come out on top if every boxer on the planet was shrunk or inflated to the same size and weight and then judged purely on ability.

 

Yet the designation of the pound-for-pound champion is taken seriously enough by The Ring, the respected boxing magazine, for there to be a permanent list in existence. The most recent, published on January 14, had Floyd Mayweather Jr, the welterweight conqueror of Ricky Hatton, at No 1, unsurprisingly considering his record of 39 undefeated contests and six world crowns at five weights.

 

Joe Calzaghe, Britain’s own super-middleweight, is fifth, his record of 44 unbeaten contests the most impressive of any boxer in the top ten. It could be argued that he deserved to be higher, which is perhaps the beauty of the pound-for-pound rankings. Because they are unquantifiable, all are subject to opinion. Nobody is right, nobody is wrong, but welcome to the debate nonetheless.

 

In reality, Mayweather would get his clock cleaned by Wladimir Klitschko, a heavyweight champion, because of his 100lb weight, 10.6inch height and 12.6inch reach advantage, but that is only an accident of birth. The Ring’s pound-for-pound table is there to give an idea of who would be best were boxing handicapped, like horse racing. There is no equivalent of this in football, but if there were the Mayweather position could well go to Everton.

 

Is there a better run, better managed, better value-for-money team in the Barclays Premier League? Is there a group of players giving more bang per buck, a team who could correlate their financial outlay and status with recent success and claim to be offering a superior return? Everton have not won anything of late, but who, beyond the elite four, has?

 

If David Moyes, the manager, can inspire a victory over Chelsea at Goodison Park this evening, the club will advance on Wembley for the first time since 1995, and that alone would be a huge achievement in the modern climate. Since 2000-01, when the Champions League expanded to include 32 teams and threw a VIP cordon across each leading European league, only nine teams from outside the elite quartet of Manchester United, Arsenal, Chelsea and Liverpool have reached the final of a domestic cup tournament (six in the League Cup, three in the FA Cup) and only two, Middlesbrough and Blackburn Rovers, have been victorious, both against teams outside the highest echelon.

 

These days it is a sad fact that achievement levels require adjustment. Just reaching a final is success, for it is generally presumed that if a big club are there and care to win, they will.

 

The same is true of league position. The days when Norwich City could sustain a place in the top three all season, as happened in 1992-93 when they went second in August, top in September and more or less remained there until dropping to third in February, where they finished, have gone.

 

Everton may have won nothing for more than 12 years, but to judge them on an absence of domestic or European trophies is akin to claiming that a failure to take on bouts in the heavyweight division is a mark against Mayweather. There are other means of assessing Everton’s progress and while it would be preposterous to attempt a definitive measurement, the present league position of fourth (above Liverpool by two points, although there is the matter of a game in hand) and final positions of fourth, eleventh and sixth since the 2004-05 season, represent sustained success at their level.

 

It could be argued that Arsenal’s resources when compared with those of United and Chelsea make the accomplishments under Arsène Wenger the best pound-for-pound return, and maybe that was once true. Certainly in the years immediately after his arrival in 1996, Wenger pulled off a small footballing miracle, rejuvenating an ageing defence and importing players such as Patrick Vieira and Emmanuel Petit, who were turned into world-beaters by his methods.

 

Yet Wenger began with certain advantages, too, not least the presence of the brilliant Dennis Bergkamp, who was by then accustomed to English football, having played a first season at Highbury under Bruce Rioch. Arsenal’s status was another plus; they had a name and a reputation beyond these shores and were located in England’s capital city. The club were always going to find it easier to attract leading players from abroad than the majority of rivals located in the provincial North.

 

Indeed, within five years of Wenger’s appointment, only financial restrictions held him back. His team were established as title contenders and regulars in the Champions League and since 2006 have played at a 60,000-capacity stadium that has cemented Arsenal’s place as London’s premier club, however many millions Roman Abramovich throws at Chelsea. The Emirates Stadium is a place where good players want to appear, making Arsenal one of the most attractive propositions in club football with financial clout that will continue improving.

 

So while there was a time when Arsenal may have laid claim to the pound-for-pound title, right now the club perform precisely as they should. With a vast stadium, an outstanding manager, an established team and a sustained record of success, Arsenal should expect to be pushing United all the way, and are.

 

Everton enjoyed finite success, too, unfortunately at around the same time as other 1980s relics, including Bronski Beat, Five Star and Swing Out Sister, and much as for Jimmy Somerville, any kudos that may have accrued from the golden years between 1984 and 1987 has long since faded. Indeed, even at the apex of achievement, Everton did not enjoy the cachet of Arsenal or United, given a position as the second team on Merseyside and the third in the North West. Just as Manchester City’s last league title win was overshadowed by United’s triumph in the European Cup in 1968, so Everton’s hopes of European domination were brought to an end by the ban on English clubs that followed the Heysel Stadium disaster in 1985.

 

In the period when Everton won the FA Cup, the Cup Winners’ Cup and two league titles, Liverpool reached two European Cup finals, winning one. Even when Everton were at their strongest, then, if there was a straight fight for a player in the transfer market they would have found it hard to see off Liverpool. And if that was the case 20 years ago, it is doubly true now.

 

Circumstances dictate that Moyes operates in the most volatile arena of all, the second tier of transfer opportunities, a place in which prices are relatively high but a return cannot be guaranteed. Pay £26.5 million for Fernando Torres, as Liverpool did, and the buyer knows what he is getting: one of the most consistent goalscorers in La Liga with a serious record in domestic and international football. That is not the case when Moyes spends £1.5 million on Tim Cahill from Millwall or £2 million on Mikel Arteta from Real Sociedad. Even some of his top-end signings such as Joleon Lescott, at £5 million from Wolverhampton Wanderers, or the hefty £11.25 million invested in bringing Yakubu Ayegbeni from Middlesbrough, qualify as huge gambles for a club with reduced resources.

 

As Kevin Keegan is surely about to discover at Newcastle United, it is hard for an ambitious club to make headway given the many disparities in the modern game. Between fourth and fifth place hides a glass ceiling. There was a time when a club of Everton’s standing might hope to hang on to a player such as Wayne Rooney long enough for him to make a difference; in the modern climate he was sold to Manchester United after two seasons at the age of 18.

 

From Tranmere Rovers, maybe, the haste would be understandable, but Everton? All the advantages are with the establishment now. In 2005, when Everton made it into the Champions League, the coefficient rankings ensured a difficult tie with Villarreal, of Spain, who went on to reach the last four.

 

The much-vaunted reforms of Michel Platini, the Uefa president, do fresh contenders from the leading leagues few favours, either, consigning them to play off against each other and making it even harder for an inexperienced club to gain entry to the competition. By keeping the coefficient system in place, however, Platini has further cemented the grip of the elite. No wonder the biggest of Uefa’s regulars did not complain about his proposals for long.

 

This evening, Everton will play Chelsea, a club who have the jump on them in every field imaginable, from geographical to financial. If Chelsea truly desire a place in the Carling Cup final it will be hard to stop them and another year will pass without a trophy at Goodison. That is the way it is these days. Some may say that Everton have failed, but in essence they have been let down by the system. Pound for pound, Moyes could have the best team in the country and it is to football’s shame that a fat lot of good it may do him.