: Wed Mar 04, 2009 5:54 am  

Jonesy's a Legend wrote:

was that when tries were worth 3 points and not 4?

ouch!

Re: Andy Wilson of the (Manchester) Guardian : Wed Mar 04, 2009 10:09 am  

Vic Mackey wrote: What's his problem with Peacock - as a professional journalist maybe he should watch the match again (and notice that Perry throws the first punch - albeit one that is partially concealed by being one the blind side of the camera)... First we have this in the match report... Then after Peacock is not in trouble with the disciplinary authorities we have this bitchy piece today Is he just a bitter Lancastrian? I notice the Guardian no longer allow comments on Wilson's articles...coincidence? No, just a long suffering, bitter Wiganer...

Vic Mackey wrote: What's his problem with Peacock - as a professional journalist maybe he should watch the match again (and notice that Perry throws the first punch - albeit one that is partially concealed by being one the blind side of the camera)... First we have this in the match report... Then after Peacock is not in trouble with the disciplinary authorities we have this bitchy piece today Is he just a bitter Lancastrian? I notice the Guardian no longer allow comments on Wilson's articles...coincidence? No, just a long suffering, bitter Wiganer...

: Wed Mar 04, 2009 12:21 pm  

The main clue is he writes for The Guardian, I wouldn`t wipe the dogs bottom with it.

: Wed Mar 04, 2009 2:02 pm  

I used to think Wilson was decent enough and thought he was just the kind of journalist to promote League to a wider audience.

Not so sure anymore; after his coverage of the end of last season he does seem less than enthusiastic about the success of Leeds.

: Wed Mar 04, 2009 2:13 pm  

G1 wrote:

Strange double standards by the author. I don't necessarily disagree with his comments about Peacock. There is an issue when its' twice in 4 games and he is lucky to escape sanction.

Why then, having taken such a stance against foul play, does he go on to describe Watmough's foul on Burrow as "a spectacular Anthony Watmough tackle". It was a foul that was penalised.

Therefore I have concluded that the article is biased and the author is a fekktard.

Considering he is an RL journalist, he spends plenty of time talking the game down.

: Thu Mar 05, 2009 4:17 pm  

This makes it 3 articles in one week on a minor punch up by the bitter wiganer...get a life man!! Arguably this is the most pathetic of the lot. This one is open for comments...anyone fancy contributing?!

This makes it 3 articles in one week on a minor punch up by the bitter wiganer...get a life man!! Arguably this is the most pathetic of the lot. This one is open for comments...anyone fancy contributing?!

: Thu Mar 05, 2009 4:31 pm  

These two posts hit the nail on the head for me:

TDR wrote:

I used to think Wilson was decent enough and thought he was just the kind of journalist to promote League to a wider audience.

Not so sure anymore; after his coverage of the end of last season he does seem less than enthusiastic about the success of Leeds.

getdownmonkeyman wrote:

Considering he is an RL journalist, he spends plenty of time talking the game down.

Wilson seems to
a) have a problem with Leeds' success; and
b) have been taken with depression over the last couple of years (maybe linked to Wigan's fall from grace?) and now has a tenancy to come accross as a miserable nice guy (which is the last thing League needs in a major national - we have enough knockers in the Union old boys network as it is)