General press coverage

[TheInfiniteOdyssey]

Was there anything significant said in the latest one regarding the takeover?

 

I can't bear to listen to them

[Yorkie]

Possibly because there is fuck all going on right now so they have to chat shit?

 

Having nowt to talk about is a stretch, there's always something to discuss. Unfunny craic is just in addition.

 

There has been some really listenable ones. Particularly enjoyed the chat with Aaron Hughes.

[Guest godzilla]

Was there anything significant said in the latest one regarding the takeover?

 

I can't bear to listen to them

 

If I recall (if I was listening properly), Caulkin said he was going to cover a few things and then the knacker hosting the show came in with something not even related and after that nothing was said.

[TheInfiniteOdyssey]

Was there anything significant said in the latest one regarding the takeover?

 

I can't bear to listen to them

 

If I recall (if I was listening properly), Caulkin said he was going to cover a few things and then the knacker hosting the show came in with something not even related and after that nothing was said.

 

[Kanji]

It's just a podcast, it's not meant to be serious investigative reporting. Its 3 blokes with fuck all to do during a lockdown discussing stuff.

[SUPERTOON]

Caulkin is pretty close to Bruce as well, so he isn’t going to write anything negative about him.

[Disco]

Subscribe to the Athletic and the written work covering NUFC is decent if sometimes a bit 'on the fencey' particularly pre-takeover rumours.

 

Clearly they're fans of Bruce, the bloke, and that's borne out in the coverage he's recieved all year.

 

The podcast is utter bilge though.

 

The 'Sergeant Waffles' craic is diabolical and actually demeans him massively like he's the work experience kid.

 

He plays that role very well, by the way, he comes across as green as fuck.

 

The bloke hosting the podcast has the worst chat of all time and Caulkin doesn't cover himself in glory.

 

I think you have a vision/opinion of an author/journo and then you hear their chat and are instantly let down. Caulkin is that for me.

 

He'd be better off sticking to written work imho.

 

Sacking the plum who hosts it off and giving Waugh a couple of years to develop then reconsider with a bit more gravitas around it.

 

couldn't agree more about the hosting and Waugh. It's almost the antithesis of the Athletic output n all, canny tabloid.

[Wullie]

Surprised Taylor Payne has time to do a podcast with all that focus on that documentary that he's definitely making.

[Minhosa]

Subscribe to the Athletic and the written work covering NUFC is decent if sometimes a bit 'on the fencey' particularly pre-takeover rumours.

 

Clearly they're fans of Bruce, the bloke, and that's borne out in the coverage he's recieved all year.

 

The podcast is utter bilge though.

 

The 'Sergeant Waffles' craic is diabolical and actually demeans him massively like he's the work experience kid.

 

He plays that role very well, by the way, he comes across as green as fuck.

 

The bloke hosting the podcast has the worst chat of all time and Caulkin doesn't cover himself in glory.

 

I think you have a vision/opinion of an author/journo and then you hear their chat and are instantly let down. Caulkin is that for me.

 

He'd be better off sticking to written work imho.

 

Sacking the plum who hosts it off and giving Waugh a couple of years to develop then reconsider with a bit more gravitas around it.

 

couldn't agree more about the hosting and Waugh. It's almost the antithesis of the Athletic output n all, canny tabloid.

 

Good point - I hadn't thought of it but it is quite 'tabloidy' with their shit sausage jokes etc etc.

 

I used to love Caulkin but for me his best work was at the Times.

 

I always thought he was a rational voice of the fans in a semi-independent sense but this season I feel his loyalty to Bruce has majorly hampered the standard of his work and to some extent his journalistic integrity.

 

He's also hardly done any anti-ashley stuff even long before the takeover was rumoured.

 

On another note, I do find it utterly laughable that the local journos have been criticial of Ashleys reign through loads of the various stories of the last few months yet said fuck all before they thought this takeover was coming.

 

Like the little weeds in the bar who hid when the fight broke out and when their mates have won, they emerge from the ladies toilet and kick the big fella lying on the deck looking like journalistic Mr Muscle characters.

 

Ryder et al are all hard men now but they were fucking silent for years.

 

Pack of spineless cunts. To a man.

[Minhosa]

Subscribe to the Athletic and the written work covering NUFC is decent if sometimes a bit 'on the fencey' particularly pre-takeover rumours.

 

Clearly they're fans of Bruce, the bloke, and that's borne out in the coverage he's recieved all year.

 

The podcast is utter bilge though.

 

The 'Sergeant Waffles' craic is diabolical and actually demeans him massively like he's the work experience kid.

 

He plays that role very well, by the way, he comes across as green as fuck.

 

The bloke hosting the podcast has the worst chat of all time and Caulkin doesn't cover himself in glory.

 

I think you have a vision/opinion of an author/journo and then you hear their chat and are instantly let down. Caulkin is that for me.

 

He'd be better off sticking to written work imho.

 

Sacking the plum who hosts it off and giving Waugh a couple of years to develop then reconsider with a bit more gravitas around it.

 

couldn't agree more about the hosting and Waugh. It's almost the antithesis of the Athletic output n all, canny tabloid.

 

Disco[/member] On Waugh, by the way, it's like he knows he doesn't belong. He's forever self-depricating to the point where you actually think 'Are you experienced enough for this gig?'. Caulkin is obviously the senior writer but Waugh genuinely comes across like the work experience kid.

 

Even in the most recent podcast he talks about writing a piece about why PIF might want to buy NUFC and whether there is an economic angle to it and almost immediately says 'I wrote this with the help of Joe Bloggs because he knows more about the finance stuff than me!'.

 

Almost like a cop-out/lack of confidence in his own work.

 

He's more Ryder than Caulkin at this moment in time that's for sure.

[Wullie]

Remember when someone dobbed Disco[/member] in to Taylor with a screenshot and he spent days tweeting about it.

[Minhosa]

Remember when someone dobbed Disco[/member] in to Taylor with a screenshot and he spent days tweeting about it.

 

No................link?

[TRon]

Subscribe to the Athletic and the written work covering NUFC is decent if sometimes a bit 'on the fencey' particularly pre-takeover rumours.

 

Clearly they're fans of Bruce, the bloke, and that's borne out in the coverage he's recieved all year.

 

The podcast is utter bilge though.

 

The 'Sergeant Waffles' craic is diabolical and actually demeans him massively like he's the work experience kid.

 

He plays that role very well, by the way, he comes across as green as fuck.

 

The bloke hosting the podcast has the worst chat of all time and Caulkin doesn't cover himself in glory.

 

I think you have a vision/opinion of an author/journo and then you hear their chat and are instantly let down. Caulkin is that for me.

 

He'd be better off sticking to written work imho.

 

Sacking the plum who hosts it off and giving Waugh a couple of years to develop then reconsider with a bit more gravitas around it.

 

couldn't agree more about the hosting and Waugh. It's almost the antithesis of the Athletic output n all, canny tabloid.

 

Good point - I hadn't thought of it but it is quite 'tabloidy' with their shit sausage jokes etc etc.

 

I used to love Caulkin but for me his best work was at the Times.

 

I always thought he was a rational voice of the fans in a semi-independent sense but this season I feel his loyalty to Bruce has majorly hampered the standard of his work and to some extent his journalistic integrity.

 

He's also hardly done any anti-ashley stuff even long before the takeover was rumoured.

 

On another note, I do find it utterly laughable that the local journos have been criticial of Ashleys reign through loads of the various stories of the last few months yet said fuck all before they thought this takeover was coming.

 

Like the little weeds in the bar who hid when the fight broke out and when their mates have won, they emerge from the ladies toilet and kick the big fella lying on the deck looking like journalistic Mr Muscle characters.

 

Ryder et al are all hard men now but they were fucking silent for years.

 

Pack of spineless cunts. To a man.

 

I have been a long time subscriber to the Times for years, used to get it delivered before the digital era, but am going to bin it off soon as I used to read it for certain journalists in particular, none of whom are there any more. I don't agree with the politics, and never have tbh, but that's not why I bought it. These days I barely even read most of it, just skim through certain sections, so I was thinking of replacing it with the Athletic, but I was a bit suspicious whether the content could be that much better.

 

 

Tbh, if journalists can't see past their friendships then it's not really worth reading what they write on NUFC. If I want matey patter I can just watch Soccer Saturday on Sky. Brian Glanville used to write for the Times, and he came across as a bit of a cunt, but he at least wrote real opinion, and he did seem to know his football. I don't think Bobby Robson was a fan, but that's what happens when you get football writers giving genuine feedback, whether it's right or not.

 

[Minhosa]

Subscribe to the Athletic and the written work covering NUFC is decent if sometimes a bit 'on the fencey' particularly pre-takeover rumours.

 

Clearly they're fans of Bruce, the bloke, and that's borne out in the coverage he's recieved all year.

 

The podcast is utter bilge though.

 

The 'Sergeant Waffles' craic is diabolical and actually demeans him massively like he's the work experience kid.

 

He plays that role very well, by the way, he comes across as green as fuck.

 

The bloke hosting the podcast has the worst chat of all time and Caulkin doesn't cover himself in glory.

 

I think you have a vision/opinion of an author/journo and then you hear their chat and are instantly let down. Caulkin is that for me.

 

He'd be better off sticking to written work imho.

 

Sacking the plum who hosts it off and giving Waugh a couple of years to develop then reconsider with a bit more gravitas around it.

 

couldn't agree more about the hosting and Waugh. It's almost the antithesis of the Athletic output n all, canny tabloid.

 

Good point - I hadn't thought of it but it is quite 'tabloidy' with their shit sausage jokes etc etc.

 

I used to love Caulkin but for me his best work was at the Times.

 

I always thought he was a rational voice of the fans in a semi-independent sense but this season I feel his loyalty to Bruce has majorly hampered the standard of his work and to some extent his journalistic integrity.

 

He's also hardly done any anti-ashley stuff even long before the takeover was rumoured.

 

On another note, I do find it utterly laughable that the local journos have been criticial of Ashleys reign through loads of the various stories of the last few months yet said fuck all before they thought this takeover was coming.

 

Like the little weeds in the bar who hid when the fight broke out and when their mates have won, they emerge from the ladies toilet and kick the big fella lying on the deck looking like journalistic Mr Muscle characters.

 

Ryder et al are all hard men now but they were fucking silent for years.

 

Pack of spineless cunts. To a man.

 

I have been a long time subscriber to the Times for years, used to get it delivered before the digital era, but am going to bin it off soon as I used to read it for certain journalists in particular, none of whom are there any more. I don't agree with the politics, and never have tbh, but that's not why I bought it. These days I barely even read most of it, just skim through certain sections, so I was thinking of replacing it with the Athletic, but I was a bit suspicious whether the content could be that much better.

 

 

Tbh, if journalists can't see past their friendships then it's not really worth reading what they write on NUFC. If I want matey patter I can just watch Soccer Saturday on Sky. Brian Glanville used to write for the Times, and he came across as a bit of a cunt, but he at least wrote real opinion, and he did seem to know his football. I don't think Bobby Robson was a fan, but that's what happens when you get football writers giving genuine feedback, whether it's right or not.

 

 

I also get the Times delivered mate - Saturdays and Sundays. Tried their online offering and didn't like it.

 

I like the content particularly on business/personal finance and travel so the politics element of it all I'm not that fussed about.

 

I'd say generally the Athletic's written coverage is decent. Some of it is outstanding.

 

IMHO Caulkin has not been at his best since he joined and I'm yet to see anything truly great like he did on regular occasions in the Times.

 

People were raving about a piece he wrote about Matt Ritchie being a radgie but it didn't float my boat tbh.

 

I'd say he'd be worth reading more if a takeover happens as presumably he'll have greater access than most.

 

I'd also say that his relationship with Bruce, like many local journos, has massively impacted his work/output imho.

 

Overall, I now think of him as one of the better journos but not out ahead on his own which he was for years whilst at the Times.

 

He's very much part of the pack now and not a trailblazer.

[TRC]

I think Waugh has been a lot better at the Athletic than he has The Chronicle mind.

 

Athletic like to take local journo's, they didn't have many options.

 

Some brilliant stuff on the Athletic mind.

[Minhosa]

I think Waugh has been a lot better at the Athletic than he has The Chronicle mind.

 

Athletic like to take local journo's, they didn't have many options.

 

Some brilliant stuff on the Athletic mind.

 

Aye but that's a bit like graduating from a nursery mate to be fair. Ryder's still biting the crayons.....with Douglas following him around every day telling him not to put his fingers in the sockets and shouting 'OOOOHHH Hottttttt' every time he goes near a kettle.

[TRon]

Subscribe to the Athletic and the written work covering NUFC is decent if sometimes a bit 'on the fencey' particularly pre-takeover rumours.

 

Clearly they're fans of Bruce, the bloke, and that's borne out in the coverage he's recieved all year.

 

The podcast is utter bilge though.

 

The 'Sergeant Waffles' craic is diabolical and actually demeans him massively like he's the work experience kid.

 

He plays that role very well, by the way, he comes across as green as fuck.

 

The bloke hosting the podcast has the worst chat of all time and Caulkin doesn't cover himself in glory.

 

I think you have a vision/opinion of an author/journo and then you hear their chat and are instantly let down. Caulkin is that for me.

 

He'd be better off sticking to written work imho.

 

Sacking the plum who hosts it off and giving Waugh a couple of years to develop then reconsider with a bit more gravitas around it.

 

couldn't agree more about the hosting and Waugh. It's almost the antithesis of the Athletic output n all, canny tabloid.

 

Good point - I hadn't thought of it but it is quite 'tabloidy' with their shit sausage jokes etc etc.

 

I used to love Caulkin but for me his best work was at the Times.

 

I always thought he was a rational voice of the fans in a semi-independent sense but this season I feel his loyalty to Bruce has majorly hampered the standard of his work and to some extent his journalistic integrity.

 

He's also hardly done any anti-ashley stuff even long before the takeover was rumoured.

 

On another note, I do find it utterly laughable that the local journos have been criticial of Ashleys reign through loads of the various stories of the last few months yet said fuck all before they thought this takeover was coming.

 

Like the little weeds in the bar who hid when the fight broke out and when their mates have won, they emerge from the ladies toilet and kick the big fella lying on the deck looking like journalistic Mr Muscle characters.

 

Ryder et al are all hard men now but they were fucking silent for years.

 

Pack of spineless cunts. To a man.

 

I have been a long time subscriber to the Times for years, used to get it delivered before the digital era, but am going to bin it off soon as I used to read it for certain journalists in particular, none of whom are there any more. I don't agree with the politics, and never have tbh, but that's not why I bought it. These days I barely even read most of it, just skim through certain sections, so I was thinking of replacing it with the Athletic, but I was a bit suspicious whether the content could be that much better.

 

 

Tbh, if journalists can't see past their friendships then it's not really worth reading what they write on NUFC. If I want matey patter I can just watch Soccer Saturday on Sky. Brian Glanville used to write for the Times, and he came across as a bit of a cunt, but he at least wrote real opinion, and he did seem to know his football. I don't think Bobby Robson was a fan, but that's what happens when you get football writers giving genuine feedback, whether it's right or not.

 

 

I also get the Times delivered mate - Saturdays and Sundays. Tried their online offering and didn't like it.

 

I like the content particularly on business/personal finance and travel so the politics element of it all I'm not that fussed about.

 

I'd say generally the Athletic's written coverage is decent. Some of it is outstanding.

 

IMHO Caulkin has not been at his best since he joined and I'm yet to see anything truly great like he did on regular occasions in the Times.

 

People were raving about a piece he wrote about Matt Ritchie being a radgie but it didn't float my boat tbh.

 

I'd say he'd be worth reading more if a takeover happens as presumably he'll have greater access than most.

 

I'd also say that his relationship with Bruce, like many local journos, has massively impacted his work/output imho.

 

Overall, I know think of him as one of the better journos but not out ahead on his own which he was for years whilst at the Times.

 

He's very much part of the pack now and not a trailblazer.

 

I read the Times on the tablet these days, works pretty well, and I got a pretty decent discount after I rang them up to tell them I was ditching it a few months ago. So I figured it was probably worth keeping it since the paper version costs a lot more for the equivalent.

 

But yeah, it's mostly the travel and culture section I read these days, glance through the sport, but it's of less interest since we turned shit over the last couple of decades. I just can't get myself that motivated enough about the Athletic since it's mainly the football I would want to read about, maybe the takeover will rekindle the interest and I will give it a go.

[Disco]

Remember when someone dobbed Disco[/member] in to Taylor with a screenshot and he spent days tweeting about it.

 

Even I don’t remember that. His personality does rub me up the wrong way mind so is entirely plausible. Wor lass has just asked me what I’m laughing at RE your documentary comment n all.

 

Agree with you Minhosa[/member] on Waugh albeit it’s slightly unusual for them to have two people for a club is it not? I’m only a fleeting reader of The Athletic as I find it very hit or miss and tbh feel a lot of the better journalists are wasted at it which is a shame for the locals and nationals but then that is their business model.

 

I’d also concur re: George’s output going downhill a bit but is that not down to their model of reporting past the news cycle compared to The Times which needs to be more timely and news cycle driven hence he can use it publicise what’s going on and that? I wonder if being able to be less neutral as you’re not writing for a national makes a difference too.

[WarrenBartonCentrePartin]

I've thought about unfollowing Taylor on Twitter like. He's taken over the Taylor and Besty handle himself (presumably because it's got such a large following) and he's *constantly* tweeting - a lot of it utter shite.

 

Besty now seems to just use his own account and is in with the GallowgateShots Brucey fan club.

[Wullie]

Remember when someone dobbed Disco[/member] in to Taylor with a screenshot and he spent days tweeting about it.

 

Even I don’t remember that. His personality does rub me up the wrong way mind so is entirely plausible. Wor lass has just asked me what I’m laughing at RE your documentary comment n all.

 

I found it, it wasn't you, it was neesy111[/member] 

 

https://www.newcastle-online.org/forum/index.php?topic=96984.425

[Yorkie]

I've still got bags of time for Caulkin and there's probably no other writer whose work I'd sooner read when it comes to Newcastle stuff. And obviously his connections with the incumbent owners have been invaluable recently.

 

I do agree that he's lost his edge since joining The Athletic, mind you. I suppose the 'problem' is that, with having dedicated club writers, The Athletic becomes a hosting platform for a bunch of fanzines, and there'll be plenty of subscribers who only read the stuff about their own club. In that sense it's basically like a (much, much higher) quality version of the Chronicle, with lots of light-hearted good news stories being written for Newcastle fans, the likes of which you'd never see Caulkin producing for The Times. At The Times, the audience was much broader and you got the feeling Caulkin was speaking on behalf of Newcastle fans - usually the disgruntled ones - rather than to them. It had a real sense of "this is what we've got to put up with, world." And that's why he was obviously so heralded on here.

 

I don't really know what his angle is supposed to be in this current format and I agree that some of his pieces haven't really done much for me. The big pieces like the away day at Everton and radgie Ritchie; I couldn't care less, to be frank, but then again I've never felt so detached from the club, and I'd just get frustrated that they weren't filling pages with more meaningful exposes on what a disgrace we were/are. Hopefully that sort of stuff will strike more of a chord when we're rid of the parasite.

 

He'll still be a legend if only for his pieces during years gone by, where I felt like he was the only writer out there who I could rely on to keep me sane, particularly during the Pardew years.

[Wullie]

I do agree that he's lost his edge since joining The Athletic, mind you. I suppose the 'problem' is that, with having dedicated club writers, The Athletic becomes a hosting platform for a bunch of fanzines, and there'll be plenty of subscribers who only read the stuff about their own club. In that sense it's basically like a (much, much higher) quality version of the Chronicle, with lots of light-hearted good news stories being written for Newcastle fans, the likes of which you'd never see Caulkin producing for The Times. At The Times, the audience was much broader and you got the feeling Caulkin was speaking on behalf of Newcastle fans - usually the disgruntled ones - rather than to them. It had a real sense of "this is what we've got to put up with, world." And that's why he was obviously so heralded on here.

 

In keeping with being the best poster on here now, I think you've absolutely hit the nail on the head there re: the Athletic in a way I've not been able to put my finger on (I'm not a subscriber as you know, but I've seen the odd piece and the headlines/bylines of articles). Stuff in a national might be written about a particular club but it's written for everyone. That doesn't seem to be the case at The Athletic, as you say it's more like a collection of fanzines but with only a couple of writers at each. That feels like a very niche audience to sustain.

[Disco]

Agree with both of you’s there.

 

Remember when someone dobbed Disco[/member] in to Taylor with a screenshot and he spent days tweeting about it.

 

Even I don’t remember that. His personality does rub me up the wrong way mind so is entirely plausible. Wor lass has just asked me what I’m laughing at RE your documentary comment n all.

 

I found it, it wasn't you, it was neesy111[/member] 

 

https://www.newcastle-online.org/forum/index.php?topic=96984.425

 

Brilliant.

[Kanji]

Yorkie[/member], good post. I've probably said this many a time on this thread that I'm a huge fan of the Athletic - I read coverage on all of my favorite teams, and then generally read interesting stories about other clubs, leagues, sports etc.

 

I get this sense that the Athletic for Caulkin was a break for him to get away from writing for a major paper, which he has done for so long. I get the sense that this is him really just writing about what he wants and how he wants to write it - in jest or not. Now, it's up to subscribers to digest or not, but I ultimately think it's been liberating for him to get rid of the traditional stranglehold and freedom he gets from the Athletic. I also get the sense that he's probably one of the top and higher regarded folks in the stable and probably relishes in that.

 

In any case, the podcast to me has always been light-hearted and I never take it all too seriously. I much prefer the Orstein and Chapman podcast for general news etc.

[Guest Carrick18]

I do agree that he's lost his edge since joining The Athletic, mind you. I suppose the 'problem' is that, with having dedicated club writers, The Athletic becomes a hosting platform for a bunch of fanzines, and there'll be plenty of subscribers who only read the stuff about their own club. In that sense it's basically like a (much, much higher) quality version of the Chronicle, with lots of light-hearted good news stories being written for Newcastle fans, the likes of which you'd never see Caulkin producing for The Times. At The Times, the audience was much broader and you got the feeling Caulkin was speaking on behalf of Newcastle fans - usually the disgruntled ones - rather than to them. It had a real sense of "this is what we've got to put up with, world." And that's why he was obviously so heralded on here.

 

In keeping with being the best poster on here now, I think you've absolutely hit the nail on the head there re: the Athletic in a way I've not been able to put my finger on (I'm not a subscriber as you know, but I've seen the odd piece and the headlines/bylines of articles). Stuff in a national might be written about a particular club but it's written for everyone. That doesn't seem to be the case at The Athletic, as you say it's more like a collection of fanzines but with only a couple of writers at each. That feels like a very niche audience to sustain.

 

As someone that's had the Athletic for two years now, both pre and post dedicated Premier League coverage, I think it has tried to latch onto where the market was heading already. The rise of fan channels on YouTube and dedicated fan media, in general, has shown supporters do like just hearing about their club. That's fine, but too often it means the Athletic writes in a way that switches off the other fan and doesn't reveal much either.

 

It pains me to admit it, but you see that with Caulkin. There's a lot more uses of 'we' and 'us' when he speaks, and the thin veil has been removed. There's nothing wrong with a Newcastle fan writing about Newcastle, but usually, a desk editor or someone provided a buffer. This is very high-end fanzine content, it's not short, sharp, newspaper stuff. It's removed some of the mystique surrounding him and his coverage. The podcast, for all its efforts, is a slog of a listen. They don't talk about football half the time, and if I have to hear one more Stewie Griffin impersonation I'm going to throw my phone against a wall.

 

What the Athletic billed itself as - dedicated coverage in a US beat style - and what it has delivered are wildly different. I'm not seeking top 10 lists or the Chronicle's guff either, but I think there's a happy medium. George has time now, but it sadly hasn't refined his process.