he doesn't know our players, so he assumes they can't be any good. It's exactly the same kind of lazy journalism seen in the world cup, when most "expert" pundits could have written their collective knowledge of half the teams in the first round on the back of a matchbox with a magic marker.Mr Angry wrote:None taken.Volvicanus wrote:No offense- but why would you do such a thing? Surely the man is entitled to his opinion. I don't agree with it - you don't agree with it - but it's not like he's defamed us in some way.Mr Angry wrote: If he has the balls to attend a game at our place, in order to get to the media area he has to walk up a set of newly created stairs to the gantry......and past me.
I will enjoy giving Mr Lawrensen a piece of my mind.
I would ask him why he rates 2 teams that finished 16 and 25 points respectively below us, and why he thinks they have more class than us; his only possible explanation would be that they have bought in players who have bridged that game to which i would point out that they are, for the main part, journeyman championship players who, according to the ACTIM index, were nowhere near as good as our players.
I would then offer him a £1000 bet that we would stay up, and see if he had the balls to take it.
I don't mind them being ignorant as everyone makes ill-informed predictions in football, fans certainly being no exception. What does annoy me is that they are being paid money for the benefit of their supposedly superior knowledge, yet the average man on the street has just as much knowledge about the three promoted clubs (or the teams of Ecuador or Ghana etc - the BBC & ITV both seemed convinced a player being black was enough to make them an expert on African football at the world cup) as half of these experts. Would it really be so terrible for one of them to say "I really haven't seen enough of them to make a judgement", as clearly asking them to earn their money is asking too much.
