James Piercy take a bow.

[Major Isewater]

Top journalist. 
Well done son and ‘ thank you’.

Brilliant analysing, bang on the money.

Edited November 9, 2021 by Major Isewater

[Bernard Lerring]

Do you have a link to the article?

3 minutes ago, Major Isewater said:

Top journalist. 
Well done son and ‘ thank you’.

Brilliant analysing, bang on the money.

 

[Northern Red]

Really good piece. There are a few on here who would do well to read it before spouting off any further.

[exAtyeoMax]

36 minutes ago, Major Isewater said:

Top journalist. 
Well done son and ‘ thank you’.

Brilliant analysing, bang on the money.

It’s like a scene from Yes Minister

[GrahamC]

It’s a shame he’s the editor & so not going to be writing on us nearly as much once Gregor’s replacement is in situ.

Far better journalist who writes consistently good articles.

[Major Isewater]

36 minutes ago, Bernard Lerring said:

Do you have a link to the article?

 

I am referring to his work generally. It really is a breath of fresh air after the rubbish served up by his predecessors. 

[S_C]

Agree, good article, enjoyed reading.

This is purely my opinion, of course, but I think we might be further along the road than the article suggests. I don’t blame Gould for being shaky in the RB interview, he can only say what he can say and certainly can’t offer assurances he isn’t in a position to give, but I thought his tone spoke volumes and it simply isn’t a situation the club can allow to drift.

It goes without saying, seem to say it in every post, Pearson’s health comes first. No question. However if he isn’t in a position to return to work (or definitively state he will return to work imminently) by the end of the international break then the club need to start putting feelers out for replacements. Again, purely my opinion, but I wouldn’t be surprised if that’s already happening. In fact I would go as far as saying that, in my mind, it’s possible Pearson has already told the club he requires an indefinite amount of time off and the extent of the situation isn’t being acknowledged publicly.

From the article I thought the attached was quite telling. Just wording, perhaps, but ‘disinterest’ and ‘exasperation’ caught my eye. We now know that Pearson has been {largely} absent for some time, seemingly coinciding with our dip in form. Mentioned in other places players can be a fragile bunch and if I were Fleming et al I would be using this time to asses who has the character to buckle down and lead in these difficult circumstances and who is going with the flow, absolving themselves with a ready-made excuse for underperforming.

[slartibartfast]

Excellent article, well written, considering all "known and the known unknowns" perfectly encapsulated and of course the due deference given to the man himself .

[whoklldredrobin]

It is not top journalism at all.

If he was a top journalist he would be finding out exactly what the situation is regarding Nigel Pearson's health and its ongoing effect on his position as manager. 

It is in situations like these, when official information provided is vague and uncertain, that traditionally reporters step up to the task and provide clarity for its readers (or supporters). For example, 'Nigel Pearson has been given an indefinite period of leave to recover from xxx which has left him unable to xxx. The club have / or have not a plan B in place should he not return'.

It is not his job as a reporter to toe the party line, make snide remarks about internet rumours and wait for an official club statement. 

Simply sitting back and providing an 'analysis' of the situation is called punditry. It can be done by anyone with a blog. It is lazy journalism and merely contributes to the opaque atmosphere surrounding the club at this moment in time. In fact, allowing that nebulous atmosphere to continue merely fuels the rumours he is so quick to ridicule. 

(And yes, the club and Nigel Pearson may not want certain details made public.  It could be argued in NP's case that is the morally right thing to do. That doesn't mean that scenario not be challenged and properly investigated. It may make him unpopular but journalists have never been, and should never be, official mouthpieces). 

[Rossi the Robin]

42 minutes ago, whoklldredrobin said:

It is not top journalism at all.

If he was a top journalist he would be finding out exactly what the situation is regarding Nigel Pearson's health and its ongoing effect on his position as manager. 

It is in situations like these, when official information provided is vague and uncertain, that traditionally reporters step up to the task and provide clarity for its readers (or supporters). For example, 'Nigel Pearson has been given an indefinite period of leave to recover from xxx which has left him unable to xxx. The club have / or have not a plan B in place should he not return'.

It is not his job as a reporter to toe the party line, make snide remarks about internet rumours and wait for an official club statement. 

Simply sitting back and providing an 'analysis' of the situation is called punditry. It can be done by anyone with a blog. It is lazy journalism and merely contributes to the opaque atmosphere surrounding the club at this moment in time. In fact, allowing that nebulous atmosphere to continue merely fuels the rumours he is so quick to ridicule. 

(And yes, the club and Nigel Pearson may not want certain details made public.  It could be argued in NP's case that is the morally right thing to do. That doesn't mean that scenario not be challenged and properly investigated. It may make him unpopular but journalists have never been, and should never be, official mouthpieces). 

Health is confidential and they probably aren’t sure themselves as COVID is new

Its a great piece of writing 

[Super]

49 minutes ago, whoklldredrobin said:

It is not top journalism at all.

If he was a top journalist he would be finding out exactly what the situation is regarding Nigel Pearson's health and its ongoing effect on his position as manager. 

It is in situations like these, when official information provided is vague and uncertain, that traditionally reporters step up to the task and provide clarity for its readers (or supporters). For example, 'Nigel Pearson has been given an indefinite period of leave to recover from xxx which has left him unable to xxx. The club have / or have not a plan B in place should he not return'.

It is not his job as a reporter to toe the party line, make snide remarks about internet rumours and wait for an official club statement. 

Simply sitting back and providing an 'analysis' of the situation is called punditry. It can be done by anyone with a blog. It is lazy journalism and merely contributes to the opaque atmosphere surrounding the club at this moment in time. In fact, allowing that nebulous atmosphere to continue merely fuels the rumours he is so quick to ridicule. 

(And yes, the club and Nigel Pearson may not want certain details made public.  It could be argued in NP's case that is the morally right thing to do. That doesn't mean that scenario not be challenged and properly investigated. It may make him unpopular but journalists have never been, and should never be, official mouthpieces). 

What nonsense.

[whoklldredrobin]

8 minutes ago, Super said:

What nonsense.

Why is it ‘nonsense’? 

[brady bunch]

5 hours ago, Major Isewater said:

Top journalist. 
Well done son and ‘ thank you’.

Brilliant analysing, bang on the money.

You beat me to it Major! every piece he has done on City has been insightful and brilliantly written. shame he is the main editor, wish he would continue to cover City.

I like Greg MacGreg, but JP is Prem, the greg mister is L2 (like most of city players at the mo!)

[Super]

16 minutes ago, whoklldredrobin said:

Why is it ‘nonsense’? 

If NP wants us to know he will tell us. It's his private business nobody else's.

[whoklldredrobin]

17 minutes ago, Super said:

If NP wants us to know he will tell us. It's his private business nobody else's.

Of course.

My point was that - nicely written as it is - the piece doesn’t tell us anything new. It is commentary not journalism. 
 

[Davefevs]

6 minutes ago, whoklldredrobin said:

Of course.

My point was that - nicely written as it is - the piece doesn’t tell us anything new. It is commentary not journalism. 
 

 

Edited November 9, 2021 by Davefevs

[Major Isewater]

3 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

 

And goodnight.

[1960maaan]

6 hours ago, Major Isewater said:

Top journalist. 
Well done son and ‘ thank you’.

Brilliant analysing, bang on the money.

Bang on Major, I was going to post similar. I avoid many of their articles, that may change judging by this.

[exAtyeoMax]

2 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

 

Perhaps he means investigative journalism? The article does appear to me mostly comment and speculation, unless he actually asked the players if they knew what was going on. I didn’t find it particularly good but that is more down to the essay style of writing than anything else. 

[whoklldredrobin]

2 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

 

I think the clue is the word ‘news stories’. 
 

I can read your posts - if I wanted commentary or analysis. 
 

I am not suggesting Piercey is not a good writer, or shouldn’t publish his view. I am arguing against the description of it as ‘top journalism’

as the local sports editor his job it is to move the story on - to find out information that is not currently in the public domain. To create clarity out of what is a very uncertain situation. 
 

[The Bard]

17 hours ago, Davefevs said:

 

Both definitions are too narrow. Commentary can be in written format. Political journalists are often referred to as commentators.

They are not separate - there is degree of overlap.

[The Bard]

17 hours ago, whoklldredrobin said:

I think the clue is the word ‘news stories’. 
 

I can read your posts - if I wanted commentary or analysis. 
 

I am not suggesting Piercey is not a good writer, or shouldn’t publish his view. I am arguing against the description of it as ‘top journalism’

as the local sports editor his job it is to move the story on - to find out information that is not currently in the public domain. To create clarity out of what is a very uncertain situation. 
 

You're describing investigative journalism. A type of journalism 

[Calculus]

17 hours ago, whoklldredrobin said:

I think the clue is the word ‘news stories’. 
 

I can read your posts - if I wanted commentary or analysis. 
 

I am not suggesting Piercey is not a good writer, or shouldn’t publish his view. I am arguing against the description of it as ‘top journalism’

as the local sports editor his job it is to move the story on - to find out information that is not currently in the public domain. To create clarity out of what is a very uncertain situation. 
 

Spot on, I think. The article, whilst it is well written, doesn't actually break any news. It is a long rebuttal of the wild speculation that appeared on various social media platforms. If anybody bought some or all of the speculation then fair enough this article was news. Not everybody did though - sometimes we just don't know.

[Show Me The Money!]

OMG, we literally will argue about anything on here

[Calculus]

2 minutes ago, Show Me The Money! said:

OMG, we literally will argue about anything on here

No we don't.

[The Bard]

1 hour ago, Show Me The Money! said:

OMG, we literally will argue about anything on here

It's great isn't it?

Nothing like a good honest thread hijacking. 

[Kingswood Robin]

That was well written and I enjoyed reading it. The thing that struck me is that as well as missing matches, it's stated that he hasn't been able to give it everything while he's been around. If that's not true then maybe it wasn't such a good article. If it is true, then I'm not sure what the next few weeks up to Christmas is going to tell us that we don't already know. He mentions that at some point things will come to a head. From a horribly practical point of view, I think we may have already reached that point. We cannot continue as we are and we must keep an eye on the league table. Would it be better to say take the rest of the season off and bring someone else in with a clear understanding that it will be reviewed then? People would know where they stand and it would be taking action to try and arrest the teams decline. Continuing exactly as we are isn't helping anyone.

As I say, this is all from a horrible practical point of view. I really wanted Nige when we appointed Johnson and I was more than happy when we finally appointed him. Most of all I want him well and succeeding with us.  

Edited November 10, 2021 by Kingswood Robin
Typo

[The Original OTIB]

Not so good today, ..."no mention of "trading" either, folks". Er, see Gould interview on official site: "... we may have to be imaginative, we have to trade ...". Part of broader context, but trading remains an option.

https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/sport/football/bristol-city-january-transfer-window-6187530

Edited November 10, 2021 by The Original OTIB
Addition of word for sense

[ExiledAjax]

It's a useful and largely well written summary of the events of Monday. Useful to have someone pick out and compare the relevant sections of the Post article, the RB interview, and the YouTube piece. Useful also to have that same person put them into context and to show some of the internal club reaction.

Probably the best all around summary, and quicker to read than the 40 odd pages in the thread on here.

No it doesn't add much in the way of facts, but it does add useful context, and I like Piercy's style (although there's a couple of typos tucked away in there).

[ExiledAjax]

1 hour ago, The Original OTIB said:

Not so good today, ..."no mention of "trading" either, folks". Er, see Gould interview on official site: "... we may have to be imaginative, we have to trade ...". Part of broader context, but trading remains an option.

https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/sport/football/bristol-city-january-transfer-window-6187530

A great summary of our issues in midfield in that article though.