Tale from the past that makes you question certain journos motives regarding John Stones coverage

[BoysInBlue]

Clubs call in favours.

Kenwright called in favours from Martin Samuel & Oliver Holt in the last few days.

Mark Ogden is Man Utd's journo-de-rigeur, and wrote repeatedly about Baines going there last summer.

Martin Lipton, in the Mirror with his 'Rotten Luk' headline in the Mirror the morning after we'd signed him, after previously constantly saying we couldn't afford him.

This isn't just tabloids being tabloids, this is certain individual journalists using their position to act as unofficial club mouthpieces in order to keep the story in the public domain, and crank up the pressure on the player/club in the hope they sell/hand in a transfer request. It's important because the vested interests involved, be it standing to personally make a profit from the transfer, is a breach of journalistic ethics and can result in dismissal and/or legal action, as shown by the Nixon scandal.

Matt Law of the Telegraph is the journo who appears to be like a dog with a bone, breaks the initial Chelsea story, and gives a blow by blow account of Chelsea's motives. Doing so to stay in the good books of a powerful elite man like Mourinho, in order for access, perhaps to ghostwrite his autobiography down the line... There can be multiple reasons for his actions.

People can think what they like but there's a precedent in Nixon.

 

[Tubey]

I think it just comes down to journos needing stuff to write about to sell papers and get ad views online.

The bigger the club, usually the larger the fan base, therefore more readers etc.

So they all have a vested interest in writing crap. There won't be many journos who have a need to present even a balanced view of the situation here.

 

[BoysInBlue]

Of course we would. It would mean they're not very good.

Nobody ever fumed that Carl Tiler was never linked away to bigger clubs. Because he wasn't very good.

They only link our players with moves because they are good.

I'd be delighted if no-one ever wrote about our players.

I don't see Chelsea or City fans upset that papers don't write about their players going elsewhere. I don't need a paper to make me feel good that we have good players.

 

[ijjysmith]

I'd be delighted if no-one ever wrote about our players.

I don't see Chelsea or City fans upset that papers don't write about their players going elsewhere. I don't need a paper to make me feel good that we have good players.

If you think it's that simple then fair enough. You're wrong like but hey.

We aren't Chelsea or City (who do get players linked away but whatever). They are at the top. We aren't. Sadly.

Our players get linked with moves away because they are good. If our players weren't good they wouldn't get linked away.

Mitch Ward was never linked away. John Stones is linked away.

 

[ijjysmith]

I suppose it's absolutely fine for us to be linked in the press to Barney player though yeah?

 

[jazzy]

There is no conspiracy.

Everton are less newsworthy than "the big 4 " in the eyes of the general public and they want Stones.

It would be a good story if a young British player went for a big fee to the Champions.

 

[MrGrumpy]

We've had this the last few season...Bains/Barkley/McCarthy and now Stones. Shows we have good players the bit that annoys me is the "want to go/willing to join" crap they say.
Take Mirallas, he wanted to join West Ham was quoted a few times. Why would you leave Everton for West Ham.

Sterling didn't do us any favours signing for City so quick.

With the Stones one it seems when it's drying up they throw in Utd and City want him to relight the fire

Martinez has said at least 3 times "He is not for sale" and has accused Chelsea of leaking the story and tapping his player up.

 

[formerly manx toffee]

So get used to watching junior referees and officials disallowing a "small team's" goal at Anfield, and allowing the home side a clearly-offside winner. The Premier League needs to maintain it's 4 CL places at all costs, and therefore needs the same 4 teams to qualify and improve year-on-year. The RS has to be one, so if I was an Arsenal fan I'd be worried...

this is the sort of tripe that makes us look like a small club.

 

[Pat's Van]

I suppose it's absolutely fine for us to be linked in the press to Barney player though yeah?

who's that?

 

[ijjysmith]

who's that?

Rubble mate. He hates it when Everton are linked with BamBam in the press.

FFS. meant Barnsley!

 

[bignev23]

I suppose it's absolutely fine for us to be linked in the press to Barney player though yeah?

Ha, they're looking at everything with big massive thick NHS blue glasses and they've became paranoid everything is perceived as a wrongdoing against us and they're outraged. Its a bit cringey for my liking.

 

[MrGrumpy]

Stones to Chelsea is the only big deal about. Sterlings gone to City, Ramos is staying at Real, the Bale/Ronaldo to utd were just rubbish. De Bruyner to City isn't happening. Arsenal are linked with Benzima now and again. So they only have Stones to Chelsea to go on as they have bidded for him and they need to sell papers. So until a bigger deal comes along or the window shuts, were stuck with this

 

[oldblue]

Clubs call in favours.

Kenwright called in favours from Martin Samuel & Oliver Holt in the last few days.

Mark Ogden is Man Utd's journo-de-rigeur, and wrote repeatedly about Baines going there last summer.

Martin Lipton, in the Mirror with his 'Rotten Luk' headline in the Mirror the morning after we'd signed him, after previously constantly saying we couldn't afford him.

This isn't just tabloids being tabloids, this is certain individual journalists using their position to act as unofficial club mouthpieces in order to keep the story in the public domain, and crank up the pressure on the player/club in the hope they sell/hand in a transfer request. It's important because the vested interests involved, be it standing to personally make a profit from the transfer, is a breach of journalistic ethics and can result in dismissal and/or legal action, as shown by the Nixon scandal.

Matt Law of the Telegraph is the journo who appears to be like a dog with a bone, breaks the initial Chelsea story, and gives a blow by blow account of Chelsea's motives. Doing so to stay in the good books of a powerful elite man like Mourinho, in order for access, perhaps to ghostwrite his autobiography down the line... There can be multiple reasons for his actions.

People can think what they like but there's a precedent in Nixon.

there are precedents all over the world and definitely in UK that money brings corruption. it tends to survive on the fact that as football fans we tend to be romantic dreamers and very trusting. obviously certain fans of certain clubs don't come into this category so they probably think its ok anyway. I mean I am not a conspiracy nut and if I start to mistrust what I am seeing in the game it is a big part of my life gone, so I would love not to feel like this.
I mean though journalists and agents... we aren't talking about nurses and firefighters here. is it a shock to find out some would do anything for cash?

 

[PhilM]

Stones to Chelsea is the only big deal about... So until a bigger deal comes along or the window shuts, were stuck with this

Pretty much sums the situation for me.

Yes there may be bias from certain papers. Journalists may have ulterior motives. Some even may be the mouth piece of certain clubs.

However, the story is continuing to appear primarily because it is one of the only major transfer rumours, and he's English which always adds to it.

It may not be an ideal situation for us Evertonians and maybe John's head has been slightly swayed by it all, but this isn't anything new.

If you take off your blue-tinted glasses and look a bit wider, then this isn't the huge injustice or conspiracy that some people are making out.

It's a club wanting a player and the press will milk it as much as they can. Happens all time times; we don't moan when we're linked with people.

 

[MrGrumpy]

You also have to look at how the media see's us. "Punching above our weight" "Small club" "poor" "Pluckly little Everton" most media think Newcastle are a bigger club than us.
The fact is we are a bigger club than Chelsea and City. Were just not Billionaire like them, and money now equal size not history