I don't. But I remain critical (as in thinking) of all things that are written. I don't take them at face value...I evaluate them versus the evidence that I see, and that I know about, and relative to the known or stated sources.
My judgement, on that piece, is that it's largely a load of fluffy old promotional bollocks.
Can't it be both? Journalist researches and writes piece on how the new manager has settled in and concludes that the new manager is a competent professional who has settled in quite well.
Do you any evidence that Percy has taken information from one source, not verified it, and written what he suspects (or should) is not the objective truth?
Obviously only one guy's opinion, but it gives me hope that the football world might not be united in its hatred of the vile crime we have perpetrated against it.
Ah, but he’s missing the point. Yes.. what we did was spend a bunch of our owners money to try and compete against teams established at the level we had reached. But this is exactly what the rules are trying to prevent.
...of course it's always interesting to hear random nobodies unsubstantiated opinion. Whether you do, or don't, agree with him that the rules are an arse. But that wont alter the criteria under which the premier league ship refer you to the independent committee for a breach of the rules. Nor the criteria that the commission will apply in levying a punishment.
The point is that if a writer is asking one source for information, and then printing that, they are not doing journalism. They are doing something else. If they are not even asking, they are just being told what to write, then that's something else again.
Sort of on the same subject, Hodge seemed a little puzzled, and maybe even slightly irritated, when Fray failed to quiz the manager after the game about the left-back selection and how that impacted on the first half.
Especially so because the two of them had discussed it at some length in the commentary and Hodge had even said it would be interesting to understand Nuno's thinking in the post-match chat.
When David Jackson asked Hodge straight after Fray's interview for his thoughts on what was said, he replied quite abruptly that he'd not learned anything from his answers and mentioned again it would have been good to hear what Nuno believed went wrong at the start (which Fray didn't get into at any point).
Strange because Fray's really good but it was hard not to see where Hodge was coming from. The post-match interview, on this occasion, was a bit of a waste of time for all involved.