Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

[Albion] Argus's assessment of last night.







Triggaaar

Well-known member
Oct 24, 2005
50,206
Goldstone
it says a draw is "arguably the most" Albion deserved, not "more than" we deserved - ie a draw would have been fair; we didn't deserve to win.

That's not the same as saying we "should have lost"!
That's not what it means when you say 'the most' or 'the least'. If they meant to say a draw was a fair result, they'd have said so. If they'd have meant to say we deserved to lose, they'd have said so. They said a draw was the most we deserved, which means they thought we deserved to either lose or draw.
 


Wozza

Shite Supporter
Jul 6, 2003
23,630
Online
They said a draw was the most we deserved, which means they thought we deserved to either lose or draw.

Yes, which is not the same as we "should have lost" which is what OP said Argus wrote.
 


Tim Over Whelmed

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Jul 24, 2007
10,197
Arundel
Don't know why people give this guy the click bait he craves?
 


Triggaaar

Well-known member
Oct 24, 2005
50,206
Goldstone
Yes, which is not the same as we "should have lost" which is what OP said Argus wrote.
Yes, true, I was just referring to your post in isolation. You are right, it's not the same as saying we should have lost, but you weren't right to say "ie a draw would have been fair", it's not quite the same.
 




Easy 10

Brain dead MUG SHEEP
Jul 5, 2003
61,772
Location Location
People should stop quoting, following and reading Naylor. He is irrelevant and just on a constant wind up.

I've blocked him on Twitter and general just ignore him...he's no better than a 14 year old web troll trying to get attention.

You'd only need to actually BLOCK someone on Twitter if you kept on receiving unwanted tweets from them - something I very much doubt you were getting from Naylor. I take it you mean you simply unfollowed him.

As for the usual anti-Naylor tone on this thread from many posters here - I don't really get why people find him so odious. He's a pretty standard journo in my opinion. His match reports and analysis are of a decent standard, I find myself agreeing with him more often than I don't. And if I don't agree with something he's written, I don't think its because he has some kind of agenda against the club, why on earth would he ? It can't be easy filling column inches day in, day out when sometimes there really isn't any Albion NEWS to write about.

As for wanting some kind of Albion fan / cheerleader writing about the Albion in the Argus - no thanks. I much prefer an impartial view thats NOT been coloured or sugar-coated by someone who holds the club dear to his heart. If I wanted that, I'd just read the programme (I never buy programmes btw, they bore the tits off me).

We get good coverage in the Argus IMO. Could do a LOT worse.
 








portlock seagull

Why? Why us?
Jul 28, 2003
17,113
"It looked like they would have to settle for a point, which was arguably the most they deserved."

We weren't great in the second half, but saying we should have lost seems very harsh. Before scoring we controlled the game well IMO.

With the exception of the Lansbury chance Forest created little.

Hemed was denied a goal by an excellent save. He looked knackered but kept plodding on.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Except he hasn't said that at all and yet another Naylor bashing commences....I do wish people would stop looking for or in this case making up reasons to hate the Argus! It's pathetic really. And boring. Move on. Nothing to see here.
 












El Presidente

The ONLY Gay in Brighton
Helpful Moderator
Jul 5, 2003
39,713
Pattknull med Haksprut
Well it's a simple mistake I guess not a "lie" but it has provoked the usual unwarranted attacks on him so I'd feel annoyed
Brian Owen wrote it not Naylor . "Proof" here http://m.theargus.co.uk/sport/14420111.Sidwell_fires_late_winner_as_Albion_keep_heat_on_top_two/

1: I got it wrong in linking the copy to his name and have said sorry to Andy.

2: He's accepted the apology.

3: He has posted inflammatory comments in the past IMO (such as his defence of Barton and the comments about the quality and quantity of the fan base). Some criticism of him is fair, some is unwarranted.

If I was a fan who had travelled hundreds of miles and paid a fortune to watch the Albion, I'd be hacked off with some of his post match comments, and indeed have been. Fully understand how click bait works, just as much as he does though.

The Stoke City issue is an easy stick to beat him with, it seems bizarre to me for someone who grew up in Woodingdean not to support his local club yet seek out a career writing about them.
 






Titanic

Super Moderator
Helpful Moderator
Jul 5, 2003
39,104
West Sussex
...The Stoke City issue is an easy stick to beat him with, it seems bizarre to me for someone who grew up in Woodingdean not to support his local club yet seek out a career writing about them.

and he invites the 'stick' with comments like... "Trust a Stokie to come up trumps!"

 


Greg Bobkin

Silver Seagull
May 22, 2012
14,854
Except he hasn't said that at all and yet another Naylor bashing commences....I do wish people would stop looking for or in this case making up reasons to hate the Argus! It's pathetic really. And boring. Move on. Nothing to see here.

I hate the paper because of the glorification of the Shoreham Airshow incident and the sensationalist "The day it rained fire" headline on the front page the Monday after 22/8. As such, I've not been near a copy since, and the only time I will read any output from Andy Naylor is on here.

I've not got a problem with him – just his employers – and actually think he talks a lot of sense. As a reporter, I think he does a pretty decent job. I'd rather him cover the Albion that some unqualified or inexperienced goon who can't string a sentence together, or an over-emotional fan whose output makes North Korean media outlets seem objective :dunce:
 


Tricky Dicky

New member
Jul 27, 2004
13,558
Sunny Shoreham
"It looked like they would have to settle for a point, which was arguably the most they deserved."

We weren't great in the second half, but saying we should have lost seems very harsh. Before scoring we controlled the game well IMO.

With the exception of the Lansbury chance Forest created little.

Hemed was denied a goal by an excellent save. He looked knackered but kept plodding on.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I thought we were very lucky to get anything. We controlled it up until we scored, but were poor after that. We were so much better against Burnley.
 




marshy68

Well-known member
Jul 10, 2011
2,868
Brighton
Yup, deserved at least a point.
However.....to get the lead early on and playing so well against such woeful and uninspired opposition only to let them slowly build up confidence and momentum to the point where they were the most likely to win was just madness.
I hope we do it the more straight forward way against Fulham.

You do know that wont happen don't you.....
 


marshy68

Well-known member
Jul 10, 2011
2,868
Brighton
Naylor being supportive as ever then. We bossed the first half, Forest played better second half. As the home team, I should think so too really. They did not create much though, neither did we to be fair, but that was a win that every team wishing promotion grinds out. Burnley seem to do that every game at the moment. It is GREAT that we are doing it too - he should concentrate on reporting about that.

Blackstock missed a sitter (AKA Hemed) and Lansbury really should have scored. For the majority of the second half I could only see a forest winner. Having said that this team has some fight and spirit.
 


Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here