Infamous five

[GreenCastle]

Riordan

Miller

Stokes

Zemmama

Murray

According to the Scotsman :greengrin

http://sport.scotsman.com/hibernianfc/Motherwell-13-Hibernian-Infamous-five.5681978.jp

[EasterRoad4Ever]

Riordan

Miller

Stokes

Zemmama

Murray

According to the Scotsman :greengrin

http://sport.scotsman.com/hibernianfc/Motherwell-13-Hibernian-Infamous-five.5681978.jp

Decent quality in SPL terms :agree:

[GreenCastle]

If these five play well every week - we will win more than we lose :agree:

Just need to sort the defense out and GK position :agree:

[Dashing Bob S]

Do the Scotsman employ anybody with a rudimentary knowledge of the game? Talk about coming up with a daft hypothesis and bending the facts to fit it! This is quite possibly the worst ever article written about a football match.

[aliman82]

Do the Scotsman employ anybody with a rudimentary knowledge of the game? Talk about coming up with a daft hypothesis and bending the facts to fit it! This is quite possibly the worst ever article written about a football match.

Read it last night and threw the paper down in exasperation. When has Zemmama failed to cut it at a big club?

Shoddy reporting.

[KerPlunk]

If you log on to the Scotsman website, you'll see that Bath's original article has been seriously chopped to exclude his references to misfits / outcasts / rejects.

Comments from outraged Hibbies have also been deleted.

Joke of a newspaper.

[Peevemor]

If you log on to the Scotsman website, you'll see that Bath's original article has been seriously chopped to exclude his references to misfits / outcasts / rejects.

Comments from outraged Hibbies have also been deleted.

Joke of a newspaper.

The original link no longer takes you to the story - only the comments.

They did exactly the same a couple of weeks ago re. the accounts. Their original report put a negative spin on things, they saw by the comments that they were talking guff, deleted the original story and republished it with a more positive slant.

Very weak editorial work.

[Hank Schrader]

Having looked at the comments following the article I find it stunning how utterly deluded some of the Hearts supporters who use the Scotsman website are. Rolland takes delusional fuddery to an enormously high level. An absolute tit.

[Hibercelona]

Having looked at the comments following the article I find it stunning how utterly deluded some of the Hearts supporters who use the Scotsman website are. Rolland takes delusional fuddery to an enormously high level. An absolute tit.

Some of the complete eejits you get on that site.... :agree:

I don't waste my time with it anymore....

I would say its probably down there with the Daily Rag. :jamboak:

[littleplum]

The article can now be found here:

http://sport.scotsman.com/hibernianfc/Motherwell-13-Hibernian-Infamous-five.5682161.jp

"a quintet of players who have all arrived with tainted reputations"

"an outfit of rejects, men who've tried and failed with the big teams and have found themselves pitched back into the SPL"

"motivated misfits"

:yawn:

[--------]

Do the Scotsman employ anybody with a rudimentary knowledge of the game? Talk about coming up with a daft hypothesis and bending the facts to fit it! This is quite possibly the worst ever article written about a football match.


The match reports aren't much better, Bob. THIS para, for instance?

"Nish was denied a penalty when he had his heels clipped by Motherwell defender Steven Saunders as he bore in on John Ruddy in the home goal again, perhaps a victim of the diving storm which has engulfed Scottish football in recent weeks and possibly made referees less reluctant to award spot-kicks, Steve Conroy later waving away further claims for Hibs when the outstanding Miller went down under a challenge from Giles Coke. If inconsistency is a problem for Hibs, so, too, is a certain fragility when the opposition throw the ball in high from either flank, Motherwell getting their equaliser as Mark Reynolds rose to nod home Jim O'Brien's corner with goalkeeper Graham Stack rooted to his line...."

Now if the recent "diving storm" has made referees "LESS reluctant" to award penalties, shouldn't that mean that Nish would have got the spot-kick he deserved?

As for Graham Stack being "rooted to his line" - well, he would be, wouldn't he, with a Motherwell player more or less sitting on top of him?

And no mention of the clear tug on Zouma which should also have led to a Hibs penalty.

As for the "infamous five" - SoS (EEN's sister paper) ran an interview with Liam Miller which explains very clearly how LM's falling-out with Roy Keane happened. Journos should talk to one another. Deek and Stokes have been in the papers for the wrong reasons recently, but "infamous" is an adjective applicable to a serial killer, not a couple of laddies out on the town. Murray and Zouma? Whit? Model professionals as far as i can see.

Here's a headline: EDINBURGH SNOT-RAG OFFERS EXCLUSIVE EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES TO PLOOKS, TWONKS AND MORONS.

[KerPlunk]

The article can now be found here:

http://sport.scotsman.com/hibernianfc/Motherwell-13-Hibernian-Infamous-five.5682161.jp

"a quintet of players who have all arrived with tainted reputations"

"an outfit of rejects, men who've tried and failed with the big teams and have found themselves pitched back into the SPL"

"motivated misfits"

:yawn:

Plum, that is not the original article, that is the chopped version I referred to in my earlier post.

The original piece of doggerel was much worse. If you know anyone who has a copy of the SoS........:dunno:

[--------]

Plum, that is not the original article, that is the chopped version I referred to in my earlier post.

The original piece of doggerel was much worse. If you know anyone who has a copy of the SoS........:dunno:


I got a late edition of SoS yesterday, which was word-for-word with the one on your link.

They must have either had complaints, or the sports editor came in after the first edition went out, seen it, and made the plonker revise it. Chic Charnley might have been termed a 'mis-fit', but not any of the players this twonk's listed.

(Come to think of it, Chic would probably have gone after this journo with an empty vodka bottle or a samurai sword....)

[bathhibby]

I commented on both articles in a fairly polite yet critical manner - result both comments deleted.

This Rag is worse than sickbag