Off Topic Liam Rosenior

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2017/aug/05/liam-rosenior-brighton-premier-league

A busy man. Doing his coaching license, community work, and now writing a weekly column for the Graniad.

We could do worse for a manager in years to come, would love to see him back at City.

 

Agreed the lad was a credit to the club and when he spoke always put his point across very well .. plus his nan's from 'Ull

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/53195359

What about Alex Dyer?

Doing OK for himself in the management game.

Plus he bleeds black and amber.

 

Please not when Ehab is here, be an absolute waste.

 

He's not a ****ing idiot, he knows how toxic we are.

 

Does he?

I had no idea we had such in depth media coverage north of the border.

 

https://www.itv.com/news/calendar/2015-05-29/departing-hull-city-star-issues-open-letter-to-fans/

great bloke - thought Brucie was a **** - thanked everyone at the club but left Brucie out for ****ting on him

 

Oh FFS
He came here for a job and then left
The End

 

Brucie doing just fine managing a mid table PL team now.

 

Bruce lives rent free in your head doesn’t he, all roads lead to Bruce with you.

 

Simples

 

i read one of his articles and unfortunately it was full of factual errors. if it had been anyone else, i would have said it was full of lies and distortions. the guardian and the independent are written by ideologically corrupt activists, not journalists. both are as bad as the daily mail.

 

Do you have a link to the article ? How can it have been in both newspapers ?

 

he wrote blog/opinion pieces. I can’t comment on “factual errors” without you quoting examples, but there is a difference between straight reporting and opinion pieces

https://www.theguardian.com/profile/liam-rosenior

 

Thanks brownbagtiger

I'm guessing you disagree with his views then 'x' as it's an opinion piece

 

i didn't say it was in both comics. i mentioned that both are crap. it wasn't specifically about football and i'm not up for debating its content, so i'm afraid i won't be adding a link.

 

it was one specific article and his views were based on misinformation. if his views had been based on facts that would have been fine, but the article mentioned the fallacies upon which his opinions were based. the same untruths are common currency in the uk, which accounts at least partially for his bellief in them. had it been written by a regular guardian staffer claiming to be a journalist, i would have put it down to deliberate mendacity and disingenuousness.

 

I'm with Rosie on this.

 

i don't disagree with you. however, if a piece includes - as it should and did - the bases (that's the plural of basis) on which the opinions are based, it also claims these bases as factual. and many of them were not. if it appeases you to any degree, his knowledge of us politics is superficial and based on

 

So you disagree with him , fine , no problem with that .