[Football] Fabrizio Romano

[Jim Van Winkle]

I'm sure this is a common opinion in the Andy Naylor fan club.

The only thing missing from jcdentons post was "... and he's pretty ****ing hot too."

*inserts sad face*

 

[Swansman]

I dont think i ever said romero wasnt reciving info from Cucus agent, I said that what was being reporeted as "done" and "bids in the next day" were simply not true- it was reported as it were fact and it demostrably wasnt-no moving goal posts,
The difference between Romeros posts and Naylors "facts" are that Naylor is reporting on what HAS happened (sources checked) and Romero is reporting on what Cucus agents WANTED to happen- dont you see the difference Simple example for you- Romero on Thursday rposts the Chelsea deal is sorted- Naylor checks with the club and then reports AS FACT- the deal wasnt completed and that Cucu hadnt been sold= a factt then verified shorly after by the club itself calling out the BS

The fact that the deal was tied up 24 hours later is immaterial- Romero was wrong, Naylor was right, and Owen

Contrary to your belief, Im no Naylor fanwhore, I just recognise the difference between a reporter, and a internet wannabe in the pocket of various clubs pushing their own agenda- Romero undoubtedly gets a huge amount right- thats great but why for the love of all things good, cant you admit that on this one transfer he was being played by city and cucu and was burnt

However we wont agree, and you are obviously enamored with Romero even more than those you perceive to be Naylor fanboys , so I wont waste anymore time on this, Im off to look at the pretty guys in skimpy rainbow trunks in town

Yes, Romano reported the Chelsea deal as sorted. Naylor and the club said no. 24h later Cucurella was a Chelsea player. Of course - if you really, really want to - that makes Romano wrong. Others, like me, knew that it was going to happen once the dull "here we go" was out there. If I understand it correctly Paul Barber also said during the poetry slam/fan meeting that Cucurella wasn't having a medical with Chelsea - which must have been a lie considering when the deal was completed.

Agents are not always trustworthy. Neither are clubs. They all act in their own interests. If lying or concealing the truth can help a big business move or public perception or whatever, there's always room for some of that.

You're saying "I just recognise the difference between a reporter, and a internet wannabe in the pocket of various clubs pushing their own agenda" which is... Well, lets start with the "a internet wannabe" - all reporters use the Internet. It is the greatest source of information in the history of mankind. There's no library, no newspaper archive, no nothing that contains the same information as the Internet. Putting your text in a newspaper does not make it any more real/better/informative than putting it online.

Second, "in the pocket of various clubs..." - from what I've been told here, Naylor only reports what Brighton tells him to report, and avoids reporting things Brighton do not want him to report. If this is the case, no one is in a pocket more than Naylor. Romano quite clearly made the club pissed while Naylor, who quite possibly knew the same things Romano did, couldn't report freely on it because it would hurt his relations with the club. That is a journalistic sin, the greatest of all arguably. Imagine a political reporter who can only report what the Tory party says but won't give any inside information because of the fear that his relation with Boris Johnson would take a hit - it would be considered completely unacceptable, which is entirely right. If you can't report things you're "not supposed to report" or because it could make the subject (in this case Brighton) of "investigations" unhappy... then you're arguably too much in bed with the subject you're supposed to independently investigate.

Fabrizio Romano is not on the City payroll - in that case he wouldn't have spent half of the summer talking about Bernardo Silva and Barcelona. He's a useful tool for agents, and this makes him a bit of a **** as they're *****, but it also makes him more independent than anyone running errands for a particular club (or politician or company or whatever). He'll never write a bad word about the stinking agent business and could never be trusted on such a topic, but as a news source for transfers he is among the best. People complain about Romano and other Twitter-journalists not always getting it right, but go back 15 years to the days when the tabloids were doing all the reporting and got it right no more than 15-20% of the times, and these new "wannabe journos" are a lot more accurate.

 

[Questions]

On a side note: I never thought I’d see the day The Albion sold a player for £60M

Can we relax now after giving Dean Saunders away for peanuts

 

[dazzer6666]

Yes, Romano reported the Chelsea deal as sorted. Naylor and the club said no. 24h later Cucurella was a Chelsea player. Of course - if you really, really want to - that makes Romano wrong. Others, like me, knew that it was going to happen once the dull "here we go" was out there. If I understand it correctly Paul Barber also said during the poetry slam/fan meeting that Cucurella wasn't having a medical with Chelsea - which must have been a lie considering when the deal was completed.

Agents are not always trustworthy. Neither are clubs. They all act in their own interests. If lying or concealing the truth can help a big business move or public perception or whatever, there's always room for some of that.

You're saying "I just recognise the difference between a reporter, and a internet wannabe in the pocket of various clubs pushing their own agenda" which is... Well, lets start with the "a internet wannabe" - all reporters use the Internet. It is the greatest source of information in the history of mankind. There's no library, no newspaper archive, no nothing that contains the same information as the Internet. Putting your text in a newspaper does not make it any more real/better/informative than putting it online.

Second, "in the pocket of various clubs..." - from what I've been told here, Naylor only reports what Brighton tells him to report, and avoids reporting things Brighton do not want him to report. If this is the case, no one is in a pocket more than Naylor. Romano quite clearly made the club pissed while Naylor, who quite possibly knew the same things Romano did, couldn't report freely on it because it would hurt his relations with the club. That is a journalistic sin, the greatest of all arguably. Imagine a political reporter who can only report what the Tory party says but won't give any inside information because of the fear that his relation with Boris Johnson would take a hit - it would be considered completely unacceptable, which is entirely right. If you can't report things you're "not supposed to report" or because it could make the subject (in this case Brighton) of "investigations" unhappy... then you're arguably too much in bed with the subject you're supposed to independently investigate.

Fabrizio Romano is not on the City payroll - in that case he wouldn't have spent half of the summer talking about Bernardo Silva and Barcelona. He's a useful tool for agents, and this makes him a bit of a **** as they're *****, but it also makes him more independent than anyone running errands for a particular club (or politician or company or whatever). He'll never write a bad word about the stinking agent business and could never be trusted on such a topic, but as a news source for transfers he is among the best. People complain about Romano and other Twitter-journalists not always getting it right, but go back 15 years to the days when the tabloids were doing all the reporting and got it right no more than 15-20% of the times, and these new "wannabe journos" are a lot more accurate.

If Romano had simply said ‘close’ rather than ‘done’ he’d look far less of a **** and the club wouldn’t have felt the need to post

 

[BBassic]

Romano is an arrogant bellend.

There. I said it.

 

[Stat Brother]

Romano is an arrogant bellend.

There. I said it.

Seemingly it goes with the job.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

If Romano had simply said ‘close’ rather than ‘done’ he’d look far less of a **** and the club wouldn’t have felt the need to post

Even having a medical doesn't make the deal 'done'. Remember the poor player who came here for a medical and our doc found a heart condition, the lad didn't even know he had.

It's the date the ink is used on the contract that makes a deal done. As we know with Stephen Ward and Pritchard, players can change their minds even after saying yes.

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

Had never heard of the guy or his stupid here we go thing before the Cucurella extended smoke and mirrors shambles. Fair play to the boy tho if he wants his career to be primarily defined as being an agent-centric useful idiot at transfer window time. Maybe get a proper job?

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Had never heard of the guy or his stupid here we go thing before the Cucurella extended smoke and mirrors shambles. Fair play to the boy tho if he wants his career to be primarily defined as being an agent-centric useful idiot at transfer window time. Maybe get a proper job?

I think he knew of Jahanbakhsh before we got him.

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

I think he knew of Jahanbakhsh before we got him.

Clearly an intrepid fiercely-independent journalist with no skin in the game then

 

[British Bulldog]

Even having a medical doesn't make the deal 'done'. Remember the poor player who came here for a medical and our doc found a heart condition, the lad didn't even know he had.

It's the date the ink is used on the contract that makes a deal done. As we know with Stephen Ward and Pritchard, players can change their minds even after saying yes.

Trying to think of the midfielder who failed his medical on a knee issue the same summer? edit remembered him. Renato Neto

 

[Super Steve Earle]

Presumably posted tongue in cheek ? After all, he is a journalist, not a scout.

Naylor also thought Wayne Henderson was a good goalkeeper. I actually argued to his face how Kuipers was better, but to no avail. Sure enough Calamity Wayne proved me right. Other than that, he's not bad for a Stoke fan and doesn't go out on a limb with giesswork.

No, not tongue in cheek. He really thought Calamity Wayne was a good keeper and defended him in print as a journo

 

[Seagull58]

Yes, Romano reported the Chelsea deal as sorted. Naylor and the club said no. 24h later Cucurella was a Chelsea player. Of course - if you really, really want to - that makes Romano wrong. Others, like me, knew that it was going to happen once the dull "here we go" was out there. If I understand it correctly Paul Barber also said during the poetry slam/fan meeting that Cucurella wasn't having a medical with Chelsea - which must have been a lie considering when the deal was completed.

Agents are not always trustworthy. Neither are clubs. They all act in their own interests. If lying or concealing the truth can help a big business move or public perception or whatever, there's always room for some of that.

You're saying "I just recognise the difference between a reporter, and a internet wannabe in the pocket of various clubs pushing their own agenda" which is... Well, lets start with the "a internet wannabe" - all reporters use the Internet. It is the greatest source of information in the history of mankind. There's no library, no newspaper archive, no nothing that contains the same information as the Internet. Putting your text in a newspaper does not make it any more real/better/informative than putting it online.

Second, "in the pocket of various clubs..." - from what I've been told here, Naylor only reports what Brighton tells him to report, and avoids reporting things Brighton do not want him to report. If this is the case, no one is in a pocket more than Naylor. Romano quite clearly made the club pissed while Naylor, who quite possibly knew the same things Romano did, couldn't report freely on it because it would hurt his relations with the club. That is a journalistic sin, the greatest of all arguably. Imagine a political reporter who can only report what the Tory party says but won't give any inside information because of the fear that his relation with Boris Johnson would take a hit - it would be considered completely unacceptable, which is entirely right. If you can't report things you're "not supposed to report" or because it could make the subject (in this case Brighton) of "investigations" unhappy... then you're arguably too much in bed with the subject you're supposed to independently investigate.

Fabrizio Romano is not on the City payroll - in that case he wouldn't have spent half of the summer talking about Bernardo Silva and Barcelona. He's a useful tool for agents, and this makes him a bit of a **** as they're *****, but it also makes him more independent than anyone running errands for a particular club (or politician or company or whatever). He'll never write a bad word about the stinking agent business and could never be trusted on such a topic, but as a news source for transfers he is among the best. People complain about Romano and other Twitter-journalists not always getting it right, but go back 15 years to the days when the tabloids were doing all the reporting and got it right no more than 15-20% of the times, and these new "wannabe journos" are a lot more accurate.

Barber said the deal wasnt done and stories that Cucurella had a medical that day were false. Barber was correct. The deal was done the next day, yesterday, as was the medical. Romano said Cucurella was in London on Thursday with his agents having a medical. He then backtracked and said he didn't say he was having a medical that day.

 

[Billy the Fish]

They are weird. Almost like a bunch of religious zealots.

That describes most accounts on twitter with big followings, especially the political ones.

To paraphrase Joshua: "Strange game is twitter, the only winning move is to not play"

 

[Vaughan Storm]

I'll be grateful for fab telling us all the transfer fees and informing us about potential which otherwise we would never know about, don't know why the club won't do something as simple as confirming the transfer fee

 

[American Seagle]

This guy has come out of this looking a right idiot. Hard for anyone to take him seriously after this.

 

[Weststander]

but he wasnt correct was he? He wants to go to man city, he only wants man city, its a deal- all sorted, terms agreed, city making a bid immenently etc for weeks. Then when a bid was made, it was again deal done, and yet in the end it wasnt, he went to chelsea, and even then he got it wrong, saying the deal was done when it wasnt untill the next day

Its hard to see where he was actually right? Club wrong, amount consistently wrong, timings wrong, he actually only got it right after it was announced by everyone else!

Revealing the major limitation in being a disciple of Romano or anyone similar. There is no “go to” person for football transfer news, they don’t exist.

Chelsea and the Albion fed him zilch, so he was ultimately stuffed. Like all other glorified gossips, the curve ball from nowhere sent his “special Guardiola” spin into the garbage bin.

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

Revealing the major limitation in being a disciple of Romano or anyone similar. There is no “go to” person for football transfer news, they don’t exist.

Chelsea and the Albion fed him zilch, so he was ultimately stuffed. Like all other glorified gossips, the curve ball from nowhere sent his “special Guardiola” spin into the garbage bin.

He did manage to reel in the Blue Moon forum to the tune of 1200 pages of garbage though. Worthwhile for that alone.

 

[A1X]

Also, has a “gimmick” on his Twitter account? Get in the ****ing sea.

 

[GloryDays]

He's a bellend.