[Albion] Argus Reporting on the Albion

[Bozza]

I'm not sure I know of a single Albion fan who wouldn't consider 17th place a successful season for us.

But that wasn't the point of the poll, nor of the many "Are Hughton's tactics right?" threads. The point of those is broadly to discuss what the best approach might be to achieve that 17th place finish we all crave.

Simply, I'm not sure there's been any revisionism at all.

The day football fans stop being touchline managers and having opinions on which players should be picked, how those players line up and what tactics should be deployed is the day football becomes considerably less interesting.

 

[Machiavelli]

If he was decent he wouldn't still be at The Argus, although his click bait is probably keeping them going right now.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

He's not a great writer, but he's obviously got decent enough contacts with the club, because his transfer information is usually accurate, and his analysis is pretty solid in my view, with today's article to the point. I also like your reviews and, even more, [MENTION=29900]Exile[/MENTION]'s. He's in a position where he's going to get shot at by oh so many wannabe reporters, just like CH is in a position where numerous numbskulls think they could do a better job. That's the nature of things, where there are so many platforms to sound off, with very little responsibility or comeback.

 

[Moshe Gariani]

As Bozza says, he has shown himself up to be clueless on statistical significance. As I recall, If you've got a sensibly broad result set to draw upon, you only need 30 data points to have 95% confidence in the results, and that poll he quotes had 236 people respond.

Not really "clueless" though, is he?

The sample of 236 is a sample only of those Albion fans who post on NSC. This is a VERY biased sample of the Albion fanbase - certainly nothing sensibly broad about it.

Furthermore the 236 are only a subset of NSC posters. A subset that liked the idea of opening a thread with a poll on the topic "Are Chris Hughton's tactics too negative?".

Naylor has this spot on. If people on NSC don't like being sneered at then they shouldn't post such rubbish that creates open goals for him...!

 

[Greg Bobkin]

There's a lovely bit of irony about fans slagging him off because he moans about fans

As with most Twitter accounts his views are his own, so why SHOULDN'T he comment about the fans (especially given the abuse he gets for merely doing his job)? Plenty on here do and we're meant to be one big happy family! Put yourself in his situation and then think about how quiet YOU could stay – the way some people address strangers – not just AN but anybody they get into a spat with – on there is disgusting. Plus it's Twitter – I take everything I read on there with a pinch of salt, to be honest.

As a reporter, I think he's good. He reports what news he gets from his sources. Yeah, it's normally the club itself, but personally I would rather that that some two-bob transfer rumour site.

 

[GT49er]

I'm not sure I know of a single Albion fan who wouldn't consider 17th place a successful season for us.

But that wasn't the point of the poll, nor of the many "Are Hughton's tactics right?" threads. The point of those is broadly to discuss what the best approach might be to achieve that 17th place finish we all crave.

Simply, I'm not sure there's been any revisionism at all.

The day football fans stop being touchline managers and having opinions on which players should be picked, how those players line up and what tactics should be deployed is the day football becomes considerably less interesting.

Exactly. 236 people voted that they'd like a little more positivity. It didn't happen at Southampton, but it did on Saturday. 236 of us got what we wanted, and were very happy, and the Albion got three splendid points. Whatever the reasons, that's what happened.

The only 'revisionism' round the place is from those people who insist on making the giant but false leap to the ridiculous assumption that the 236 people whose opinions they despise were calling for attack, attack, attack, and sack the manager if he doesn't.

 

[Barham's tash]

As ever with his mentions of the Albion fanbase, the point of the mention seems to be somewhat sneering. He also illustrates he knows very little about statistical significance.

Not to massively do a Piers on you/NSC but that’s EXACTLY the conclusion I came to [MENTION=6886]Bozza[/MENTION].

Granted you as site owner extraordinaire have every right to be mildly peeved by his take on the poll on here but I am astonished he believes that using here as his argument makes any statistical comparison to the views of the wider supporter base totally moribund!

Back on topic I’ve been very vocally critical of him in the past for the snide like remarks and total aloof views when other’s opinions differ from his own however what really gets my goat is the fact that he is so far up the club’s backside these days that he HAS to tow the line.

Never breaks ranks, justifiably criticises or expresses a contrarian view to the club and these characteristics for me are just some of what should typify the role of a local journalist in reporting in an objective trustworthy manner.

Christ if he’d have been reporting during the Archer years can you imagine, we’d have seen headlines such as:

“Albion fans should grow up, stop whining and get behind the board and support the move to Toad’s Hole valley”

Or

“Sale of Goldstone inevitable as council let down Albion’s owners AGAIN”

Or perhaps even

“Fans pathetic actions bring shame upon the club and left Archer no choice but to move club to Portsmouth/Gillingham”

Granted perhaps that’s a little OTT but Christ on a bike it would be nice to have some enlightened/balanced debate rather than the partisan claptrap he writes these days.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Moshe Gariani]

Not to massively do a Piers on you/NSC but that’s EXACTLY the conclusion I came to [MENTION=6886]Bozza[/MENTION].

Granted you as site owner extraordinaire have every right to be mildly peeved by his take on the poll on here but I am astonished he believes that using here as his argument makes any statistical comparison to the views of the wider supporter base totally moribund!

Back on topic I’ve been very vocally critical of him in the past for the snide like remarks and total aloof views when other’s opinions differ from his own however what really gets my goat is the fact that he is so far up the club’s backside these days that he HAS to tow the line.

Never breaks ranks, justifiably criticises or expresses a contrarian view to the club and these characteristics for me are just some of what should typify the role of a local journalist in reporting in an objective trustworthy manner.

Christ if he’d have been reporting during the Archer years can you imagine, we’d have seen headlines such as:

“Albion fans should grow up, stop whining and get behind the board and support the move to Toad’s Hole valley”

Or

“Sale of Goldstone inevitable as council let down Albion’s owners AGAIN”

Or perhaps even

“Fans pathetic actions bring shame upon the club and left Archer no choice but to move club to Portsmouth/Gillingham”

Granted perhaps that’s a little OTT but Christ on a bike it would be nice to have some enlightened/balanced debate rather than the partisan claptrap he writes these days.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Have you really just compared NSC whining after a run of disappointing results/performances with Archer selling The Goldstone...?

 

[Barham's tash]

Have you really just compared NSC whining after a run of disappointing results/performances with Archer selling The Goldstone...?

No I’ve used it as an exaggerative measure of the type of reporting I feel he brings to writing about our club to express my point of view and clearly stated it was OTT but anyway....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[n1 gull]

Not to massively do a Piers on you/NSC but that’s EXACTLY the conclusion I came to [MENTION=6886]Bozza[/MENTION].

Granted you as site owner extraordinaire have every right to be mildly peeved by his take on the poll on here but I am astonished he believes that using here as his argument makes any statistical comparison to the views of the wider supporter base totally moribund!

Back on topic I’ve been very vocally critical of him in the past for the snide like remarks and total aloof views when other’s opinions differ from his own however what really gets my goat is the fact that he is so far up the club’s backside these days that he HAS to tow the line.

Never breaks ranks, justifiably criticises or expresses a contrarian view to the club and these characteristics for me are just some of what should typify the role of a local journalist in reporting in an objective trustworthy manner.

Christ if he’d have been reporting during the Archer years can you imagine, we’d have seen headlines such as:

“Albion fans should grow up, stop whining and get behind the board and support the move to Toad’s Hole valley”

Or

“Sale of Goldstone inevitable as council let down Albion’s owners AGAIN”

Or perhaps even

“Fans pathetic actions bring shame upon the club and left Archer no choice but to move club to Portsmouth/Gillingham”

Granted perhaps that’s a little OTT but Christ on a bike it would be nice to have some enlightened/balanced debate rather than the partisan claptrap he writes these days.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Agree with every word.

This is highlighted with the headline "slight season ticket rise" I think we can all come to our own conclusion on that, maybe he can use that data as well?

 

[Moshe Gariani]

No I’ve used it as an exaggerative measure of the type of reporting I feel he brings to writing about our club to express my point of view and clearly stated it was OTT but anyway....

OK, I did miss the bit where you said what you had just written wasn't very accurate.

One point is surely that the past few years have been absolutely brilliant for the Albion so for Naylor to err on the side of being positive is probably justified?

 

[Gwylan]

Now Naylor appears to use the organ to snipe and sneer at fans who have views different to his own.

I have found myself defending Naylor's match reports and coverage in the past, but would agree that this sort of ill-considered and pointless sneering does him absolutely no favours at all.

Sniping and sneering at your readers generates a lot more page impressions than praising them. When I worked in-house for a publication and our traffic was dropping, I'd write something that called a section of our reader-base idiots and watch the comments come in and traffic go up... works every time.

 

[n1 gull]

Sniping and sneering at your readers generates a lot more page impressions than praising them. When I worked in-house for a publication and our traffic was dropping, I'd write something that called a section of our reader-base idiots and watch the comments come in and traffic go up... works every time.

It works for a short period of time, then you just lose your audience

 

[kennyb]

Andy Naylor appears to be assuming the Piers Morgan style of broadcasting pretending his views are so much more influential than any one elses.

 

[BBassic]

I'm sure he's a nice enough bloke but he doesn't half come across as a condescending little prick at times.

 

[Petee]

I'm sure he's a nice enough bloke but he doesn't half come across as a condescending little prick at times.

Don't tell him that, he'll end up screaming for a policeman!

 

[TSB]

Yes. I reckon half the reason NSC is so popular is that both the Argus and the official site are barely fit for purpose.

I have found myself defending Naylor's match reports and coverage in the past, but would agree that this sort of ill-considered and pointless sneering does him absolutely no favours at all. As Bozza says, he has shown himself up to be clueless on statistical significance. As I recall, If you've got a sensibly broad result set to draw upon, you only need 30 data points to have 95% confidence in the results, and that poll he quotes had 236 people respond.

To be fair to him, what has been of stastistical significance is the % of Albion fans on twitter that are absolute pricks.
Yes, some are 12 and under but a lot aren't.
It is quite painful to read some of the ill-educated drivel (and I'm not referring to Naylor) on there. And here, frankly. Even more backseat managers this season.

 

[rippleman]

Not really "clueless" though, is he?

The sample of 236 is a sample only of those Albion fans who post on NSC. This is a VERY biased sample of the Albion fanbase - certainly nothing sensibly broad about it.

Furthermore the 236 are only a subset of NSC posters. A subset that liked the idea of opening a thread with a poll on the topic "Are Chris Hughton's tactics too negative?".

Naylor has this spot on. If people on NSC don't like being sneered at then they shouldn't post such rubbish that creates open goals for him...!

I would disagree here. Whilst the sample may have come from one source ie NSC anybody who has been around as long as you must know that we on NSC have wide-ranging opinions on just about everything! Look at this thread. Some AN supporters and a greater number of detractors. It is therefore not correct IMO to suggest that the sample is screwed because that sample is taken entirely from NSC contributors.

Our diversity of opinions on NSC would suggest that there is nothing biased in the sample at all.

(For more on statistical data points look at the small number of people surveyed regarding beauty products etc that are acceptable to the ASA for marketing purposes!)

 

[Goldstone1976]

I'm sure he's a nice enough bloke but he doesn't half come across as a condescending little prick at times.

I agree with 50% of this.

 

[rippleman]

He's not a great writer, but he's obviously got decent enough contacts with the club, because his transfer information is usually accurate, and his analysis is pretty solid in my view, with today's article to the point. I also like your reviews and, even more, [MENTION=29900]Exile[/MENTION]'s. He's in a position where he's going to get shot at by oh so many wannabe reporters, just like CH is in a position where numerous numbskulls think they could do a better job. That's the nature of things, where there are so many platforms to sound off, with very little responsibility or comeback.

If only AN could write with the same depth of knowledge and understanding of the club, and with the same passion and humour as Exile! He can but dream.

 

[Not Andy Naylor]

Not to massively do a Piers on you/NSC but that’s EXACTLY the conclusion I came to [MENTION=6886]Bozza[/MENTION].

Granted you as site owner extraordinaire have every right to be mildly peeved by his take on the poll on here but I am astonished he believes that using here as his argument makes any statistical comparison to the views of the wider supporter base totally moribund!

Back on topic I’ve been very vocally critical of him in the past for the snide like remarks and total aloof views when other’s opinions differ from his own however what really gets my goat is the fact that he is so far up the club’s backside these days that he HAS to tow the line.

Never breaks ranks, justifiably criticises or expresses a contrarian view to the club and these characteristics for me are just some of what should typify the role of a local journalist in reporting in an objective trustworthy manner.

Christ if he’d have been reporting during the Archer years can you imagine, we’d have seen headlines such as:

“Albion fans should grow up, stop whining and get behind the board and support the move to Toad’s Hole valley”

Or

“Sale of Goldstone inevitable as council let down Albion’s owners AGAIN”

Or perhaps even

“Fans pathetic actions bring shame upon the club and left Archer no choice but to move club to Portsmouth/Gillingham”

Granted perhaps that’s a little OTT but Christ on a bike it would be nice to have some enlightened/balanced debate rather than the partisan claptrap he writes these days.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

He was reporting during the Archer years. And the Dick Knight years, when club and chairman frequently failed to see eye to eye.

It's supposed to be a badge of honour for local paper reporters to be banned by the clubs they report on from time to time, but I'm not sure that's very good for those papers' business these days. I imagine a lot of people who buy the Argus do it for the Albion content, which includes post-match player access, which would disappear with a ban.

Of course, some papers have found creative ways around bans. When Gillingham banned the Kent Messenger, they decided to report on Charlton (who were then in the Premier League) instead. Bournemouth banned the Echo, so the Echo banned them right back, refusing to mention them at all or even record their results.