Devries4 Posted August 16, 2008 Share Posted August 16, 2008 http://www.heartsfc.premiumtv.co.uk/page/Match/MatchReport/0,,10289~45558,00.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Imeantasong Posted August 16, 2008 Share Posted August 16, 2008 Nope. But the people that matter at Hearts might not say anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rudolf's Mate Posted August 16, 2008 Share Posted August 16, 2008 Sorry but it just wasn't good enough IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John S Posted August 16, 2008 Share Posted August 16, 2008 A good report; could have mentioned how rankers got a free kick which led to the goal, that said still a cleverly written report. Well done to the author. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoldierPalmer Posted August 16, 2008 Share Posted August 16, 2008 usually the 'official site' reports are 'fairly' pc and neutral - think this games been the straw on the camels back - time the refs 'bias' to the OF was stopped and we played on a level playing field Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dodemac Posted August 16, 2008 Share Posted August 16, 2008 http://www.heartsfc.premiumtv.co.uk/page/Match/MatchReport/0,,10289~45558,00.html how can you read that ??? or is it me just getting auld???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craigieboy Posted August 16, 2008 Share Posted August 16, 2008 The away fans were singing straight from the restart and were roundly jeered by the Ibrox faithful, who were perhaps unable to grasp the concept of supporting your team through thick and thin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackdog35 Posted August 16, 2008 Share Posted August 16, 2008 usually the 'official site' reports are 'fairly' pc and neutral - think this games been the straw on the camels back - time the refs 'bias' to the OF was stopped and we played on a level playing field The report looks like it was written by someone with a huge chip on their shoulder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alwaysthereinspirit Posted August 16, 2008 Share Posted August 16, 2008 The report looks like it was written by someone with a huge chip on their shoulder. It's supposed to read like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Ross Posted August 16, 2008 Share Posted August 16, 2008 usually the 'official site' reports are 'fairly' pc and neutral - think this games been the straw on the camels back - time the refs 'bias' to the OF was stopped and we played on a level playing field Exactly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Burgundy Posted August 17, 2008 Share Posted August 17, 2008 A good report; could have mentioned how rankers got a free kick which led to the goal, that said still a cleverly written report. Well done to the author. Agreed.Good subtle digs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eckauskas Posted August 17, 2008 Share Posted August 17, 2008 The report looks like it was written by someone with a huge chip on their shoulder. Makes me wonder why you don't sympathise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mat1874 Posted August 17, 2008 Share Posted August 17, 2008 Agreed.Good subtle digs. Nothing subtle about it. Reads like sour grapes. A fanzine piece. Not the sort of thing that should be on an official website. Probably written by Lawrence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S.N.T.H. Posted August 17, 2008 Share Posted August 17, 2008 To people who say it's like a 'fanzine piece'... So what FFS? It's the Hearts website.. deal with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mat1874 Posted August 17, 2008 Share Posted August 17, 2008 To people who say it's like a 'fanzine piece'... So what FFS? It's the Hearts website.. deal with it. If the Hearts website was also critical of guys like Ivaskevicus and all the other dross that has played for the club then they would be entitled to a biased 'fanzine' type piece. The fact is it is so maroon tinted it's embarassing. I look for unbiased, balanced reporting whether it's on tv, radio, newspapers or websites. Each to their own though, if people want biased fanzine pieces then the official website definitely caters for that market. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eckauskas Posted August 17, 2008 Share Posted August 17, 2008 If the Hearts website was also critical of guys like Ivaskevicus and all the other dross that has played for the club then they would be entitled to a biased 'fanzine' type piece. The fact is it is so maroon tinted it's embarassing. I look for unbiased, balanced reporting whether it's on tv, radio, newspapers or websites. Each to their own though, if people want biased fanzine pieces then the official website definitely caters for that market. Some people just like moaning........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mat1874 Posted August 17, 2008 Share Posted August 17, 2008 Some people just like moaning........ I didnt start the thread. ANd forums would be a pretty boring place if a) people didnt post their opinions everyone agreed! Like I said, each to their own. I dont read the official website as I dont like it's style. I only read the article because it was linked on kickback. ANd those that prefer that sort of report don't need to read newspapers. Plenty of media outlets available to suit everyone's tastes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dingus Posted August 17, 2008 Share Posted August 17, 2008 Whether or not it's over-biased in Hearts' favour, it's really not well written, and that's more embarrassing for an official site than anything else. The wit is puerile and the schoolboy sarcasm is cringeworthy... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackdog35 Posted August 17, 2008 Share Posted August 17, 2008 Makes me wonder why you don't sympathise. Probably because posting a shall we say a tad biased report like that on an official website is not only unprofessional but it allows the weegie media to easily dismiss concerns of OF refereeing bias very easily. The problem is that if people think you are paranoid they stop listening very quickly even if you sometimes have a legitimate gripe. The result of this is that things will never change. You have to seperate the really legitimate gripes from the ones that are just seen by a maroon tinted specs wearer. If a professional case and evidence can be presented like evidence of Dundee Utd's penalty that was turned down and Miko's first yellow yesterday they have to take notice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S.N.T.H. Posted August 17, 2008 Share Posted August 17, 2008 I didnt start the thread. ANd forums would be a pretty boring place if a) people didnt post their opinions everyone agreed! Like I said, each to their own. I dont read the official website as I dont like it's style. I only read the article because it was linked on kickback. ANd those that prefer that sort of report don't need to read newspapers. Plenty of media outlets available to suit everyone's tastes I bet when you come on Kickback, you're shocked that it's soo pro-Hearts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Statto Posted August 17, 2008 Share Posted August 17, 2008 Rangers' match report is more bias; http://http://www.rangers.premiumtv.co.uk/page/Match/MatchReport/0,,5~45558,00.html Their first goal described as "delightful", only to Rangers fans!!! And speaking of unprofessional, Boyd "slammed the ball" at the penalty. It sounds like a basketball term. The ****s even thought it was Driver who brought down the "Scotland Star" Miller, they could have at least had a second look to make sure they got the ******* name right! And for all who were there, did Mendes "steal the show"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.