TOPIC:

the late Geoff Christian was the best local one for mine. Not many around like him.

Nationally , Patrick Smith is quite good, but don't really follow much of it.

You can expect fewer and fewer journos and quality stories as newspaper and media profits plummet, they are cutting staff all the time.

Bazza wrote: the late Geoff Christian was the best local one for mine. Not many around like him.

Nationally , Patrick Smith is quite good, but don't really follow much of it.

You can expect fewer and fewer journos and quality stories as newspaper and media profits plummet, they are cutting staff all the time.

Mark Duffield is by far the best IMO , (and ex country footballer to boot) and also very good on ABC Sportstalk. On another on that show Paul Haselby has come from nowhere into the media, and now cannot tune in without hearing him (seems to be on everything)

mark Duffield was on the grog Saturday after the footy in Freo, had a quick chat to him.

Cant say he is stand out writer , but OK I guess, think he was the only one that hooked in re the eagles drugs scandal.

anchorman wrote: To me with out doubt it has to be Mark Duffield.

He is a tool of the worst kind. I refuse to read anything the turkey writes. It's all "the world according to mark".

58shark wrote:

anchorman wrote: To me with out doubt it has to be Mark Duffield.

He is a tool of the worst kind. I refuse to read anything the turkey writes. It's all "the world according to mark".

Yeah we know you swear by Hackdorn.

58shark wrote:

anchorman wrote: To me with out doubt it has to be Mark Duffield.

He is a tool of the worst kind. I refuse to read anything the turkey writes. It's all "the world according to mark".

Sure does not sound like that when he is on Sports Talk, comes over very knowledgable and has some good ideas and does not tow a company line with the AFL

Peter North wrote:

58shark wrote:

anchorman wrote: To me with out doubt it has to be Mark Duffield.

He is a tool of the worst kind. I refuse to read anything the turkey writes. It's all "the world according to mark".

Yeah we know you swear by Hackdorn.

And you know that do you? You've read one of my posts where I said "I swear by Hagdorn" have you? Or are you just making it up as you go....again. That's one of your problems Pete, you read something and put your own uninformed spin on it without putting the brain into gear. Your limited grasp of another person's opinion makes you a tiny person Pete.

kirbs wrote:

58shark wrote:

anchorman wrote: To me with out doubt it has to be Mark Duffield.

He is a tool of the worst kind. I refuse to read anything the turkey writes. It's all "the world according to mark".

Sure does not sound like that when he is on Sports Talk, comes over very knowledgable and has some good ideas and does not tow a company line with the AFL

Fair enough kirbs, your opinion. My opinion is that if anyone differs from his views then they're "on another planet". I believe he's another reporter that fills in the gaps in the interest of a story.

Bazza wrote:

swan42 wrote: Personally I can't think of one quality sports journalist. For the supporters of K Hagdorn and others of his ilk, list the players that he has said would be coming to Freo and the players he said would be leaving and indicate whether he was correct or not. Perhaps you can start with Lachie Neale.

As an example of the lack of quality of the sports journalists read the link below by Steve Butler:

au.sports.yahoo.com/rio-2016/a/32336153/...-rio-campaign/#page1

What a hack piece. Where were the comments about how successful the Kookaburras have been over the past 40 years. How many countries had won a Men's hockey medau since 1992? How many countries have done it? Since they started playing on artificial turf in 1976 how many countries have won more than one Men's Hockey Gold medal? Anyone who knows anything whatsoever about hockey would not have used the term "raging gold medal favourites". The line between success and failure at Men's Hockey tournaments at the Olympics is very fine. For example, the Gold medal winner and the Silver medal winners in the Sydney Olympics would not have even made the fnals but for two major upsets in the last round of the qualifying matches.

By any measure the Kookaburras have been one of if not the most successful Australian sporting team in the last 40 years.

Swan I don't get your point, the story is clearly about the performance at THESE games, no about the History of the Kookas, theres no point sugar coating a crap performance this time around , worst in decades - talking about ancient history of past glories, The story is all about Rio 2016 - fact is as stated they went in raging favs and flopped very badly, sadly it seems a trend at these games, the Hockeyroos followed on their heals, and that's before we get to the swim team. Stingers went out as well with no medal which was first for them in a number of games. A hack piece would of been some jingoistic band aid job covering it up with past performances.

Your comment about it all being about Rio is patent nonsense. Butler chose to mention that the Kookaburras have only won one Gold medal. That is is his article and quite clearly has nothing to do with the Rio Olympics. He CHOSE to ignore that only two countries from 1976 have won more than one Gold medal. He CHOSE to ignore the FACT that Australia was the only country to win a medal in the previous 6 Olympics. He made the ridiculous claim that they were raging hot favourites. Patent nonsense given that in the past couple of years the Kookaburras had not played a full strenght Dutch or German team.

No-one is disputing that it wasn't a good performance at the Rio Olympics. Equally one can't deny that it is typical of the once every four years journalists who report on the hockey at the Olympics and have to put it mildly NO IDEA.

swan42 wrote:

Bazza wrote:

swan42 wrote: Personally I can't think of one quality sports journalist. For the supporters of K Hagdorn and others of his ilk, list the players that he has said would be coming to Freo and the players he said would be leaving and indicate whether he was correct or not. Perhaps you can start with Lachie Neale.

As an example of the lack of quality of the sports journalists read the link below by Steve Butler:

au.sports.yahoo.com/rio-2016/a/32336153/...-rio-campaign/#page1

What a hack piece. Where were the comments about how successful the Kookaburras have been over the past 40 years. How many countries had won a Men's hockey medau since 1992? How many countries have done it? Since they started playing on artificial turf in 1976 how many countries have won more than one Men's Hockey Gold medal? Anyone who knows anything whatsoever about hockey would not have used the term "raging gold medal favourites". The line between success and failure at Men's Hockey tournaments at the Olympics is very fine. For example, the Gold medal winner and the Silver medal winners in the Sydney Olympics would not have even made the fnals but for two major upsets in the last round of the qualifying matches.

By any measure the Kookaburras have been one of if not the most successful Australian sporting team in the last 40 years.

Swan I don't get your point, the story is clearly about the performance at THESE games, no about the History of the Kookas, theres no point sugar coating a crap performance this time around , worst in decades - talking about ancient history of past glories, The story is all about Rio 2016 - fact is as stated they went in raging favs and flopped very badly, sadly it seems a trend at these games, the Hockeyroos followed on their heals, and that's before we get to the swim team. Stingers went out as well with no medal which was first for them in a number of games. A hack piece would of been some jingoistic band aid job covering it up with past performances.

Your comment about it all being about Rio is patent nonsense. Butler chose to mention that the Kookaburras have only won one Gold medal. That is is his article and quite clearly has nothing to do with the Rio Olympics. He CHOSE to ignore that only two countries from 1976 have won more than one Gold medal. He CHOSE to ignore the FACT that Australia was the only country to win a medal in the previous 6 Olympics. He made the ridiculous claim that they were raging hot favourites. Patent nonsense given that in the past couple of years the Kookaburras had not played a full strenght Dutch or German team.

No-one is disputing that it wasn't a good performance at the Rio Olympics. Equally one can't deny that it is typical of the once every four years journalists who report on the hockey at the Olympics and have to put it mildly NO IDEA.

They are ranked No 1 in world ...of course they would be favorites. First time in 44 years they fail to make the medal rounds, thats the story not a rehash of past glories...

Like i thought , you wanted a sugarcoated version, which would of been patent nonsense, he chose to ignore all that gunk you dragged up because its irrellevant.