Compare the journalism on Toovey.

  • We had an issue with background services between march 10th and 15th or there about. This meant the payment services were not linking to automatic upgrades. If you paid for premium membership and are still seeing ads please let me know and the email you used against PayPal and I cam manually verify and upgrade your account.

niccipops

un echidna spillo mia bevanda
Premium Member
Read these two articles on our new coach who's put in an outstanding effort this year considering what he's had to deal with.

The stories are on the same topic. The first from the tele - note the headline and what they focus on.

The second is from SMH, a totally different tone,
For me this is very affirming that the tele has an agenda against Mighty Eagles and will report any stories in a negative manner, where possible.

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sport/nrl/manlys-senior-players-told-toovey-to-be-more-demanding/story-e6frexnr-1226460224061

http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/league-news/chocs-full-of-praise-for-toovey-20120828-24yu0.html

I conclude, daily telecrap, that you suck.
Go the Mighty Sea Eagles.
 
Have a look at this one on Toovey at http://www.nrl.com/toovey-plays-down-top-four-for-manly/tabid/10874/newsid/69559/default.aspx

How come the journalist seems ignorant that the ARL had this top 8 system in 1995 when 6th placed Bulldogs beat Manly in the grand final and in 1996 when 7th placed Dragons lost to Manly in the grand final????

Toovey surely remembers the Bulldogs were not in the Top 4 in 1995.
 
There appears to be an agenda against the Sea Eagles each time the DT report on Manly.
Kent, Massoud, Rothfield and that skanky b1tch alcoholic just can't help themselves.
 
He is saying no AFL team from outside the top 4 has made the Grand Final since they have been using a top 8.
 
Chip and Chase said:
He is saying no AFL team from outside the top 4 has made the Grand Final since they have been using a top 8.

And fails to talk about 1995 and 1996 when the ARL had it.
 
WAMF said:
There appears to be an agenda against the Sea Eagles each time the DT report on Manly.
Kent, Massoud, Rothfield and that skanky b1tch alcoholic just can't help themselves.

Indeed, the only Telegraph reporter who is balanced in regards to Manly is James Hooper. Unfortunately he only writes for the Sunday Tele.
 
Gee some of you lot are sensitive, nothing wrong with that DT article in my eyes
 
Noticed further down the DT article the Robbo got married last weekend in Venice.

All the best for you and your missus Wang man!
 
One can write anything with a particular slant to their own feelings.

A bit off the topic but, try this on as an example:

"Woman without her man is useless."

Pretty derogatory to women would you agree? But read it again with punctuation:

"Woman; without her, man is useless."

Same words different slant and totally different meaning.

Sorry - not trying to be high-brow but it illustrates the point some writers will stoop to get a particular editorial point across rather than the facts.
 
Accolades to the senior playing group looking to Tooves for guidance.

Maturity beyond their years.

Know exactly where they are coming from.

What a team. Go Manly
 
Strange, I have been told Tooves is pretty explosive....especially to the younger guys.

That being said, we have started to grind back into that machine like culture under him, so kudos from me. Especially considering I was one of his biggest critics.

I can admit, as a coach, he seems to be making the right moves, and I may have been wrong about - nah - I was wrong with where I thought we'd end up under him.
 
Disco said:
Gee some of you lot are sensitive, nothing wrong with that DT article in my eyes
I agree that a journalist can put whatever slant they want to their article.
Imo the tele article infers by it's headline that the current situation is that Tooves is rattled not in control at Manly. In the article they do clarify that quotes by Watmough are referring to Tooves at the start of the year.
The difference is the choice of headlines by the journalists.
And yes, I am a sensitive lot regarding Manly and media and I do give in to the occasional opinionated rant. Go Manly, and I love the Snake! Love the club in general actually.
 
The Tele article is basically saying that it was the senior players pulling Tooves along and leaves you with the impression that the senior players are the reason we are 4th not Toovey. Dean Ritchie again talking smack. The guy is a jerk!
 
conanu said:
The Tele article is basically saying that it was the senior players pulling Tooves along and leaves you with the impression that the senior players are the reason we are 4th not Toovey. Dean Ritchie again talking smack. The guy is a jerk!

Apparently Choc was telling Perry what to do as well, that's why Manly has managed to re-sign nearly everyone.
 
Ryan said:
Strange, I have been told Tooves is pretty explosive....especially to the younger guys.

That being said, we have started to grind back into that machine like culture under him, so kudos from me. Especially considering I was one of his biggest critics.

I can admit, as a coach, he seems to be making the right moves, and I may have been wrong about - nah - I was wrong with where I thought we'd end up under him.
I didn't criticise him but I did have some private doubts about Tooves. Like you, I admit my doubts were unfounded.

Coming in straight after a great coach like Hasler, who had guru status and was loved by the players, was a very tall order. To put it in perspective, I reckon even a lot of good coaches with plenty of experience might have struggled in that scenario. He's been fantastic.
 
The terrorgraphs coverage of the lead up to the GF last year really got under my skin. Remember the 'sea evils' headline. They even had some pathetic editorial after the GF that said that "at least sydney's worst can beat New Zealand's best'. Its the standard guff you get when you read the Murdoch papers though so I expect more of it soon.
 
Team P W L PD Pts
3 3 0 48 6
4 3 1 28 6
3 2 1 10 6
4 2 2 39 4
3 2 1 28 4
3 2 1 15 4
3 2 1 14 4
2 1 1 13 4
2 1 1 6 4
3 2 1 -3 4
3 1 2 0 2
3 1 2 -5 2
3 1 2 -15 2
3 1 2 -22 2
3 1 2 -36 2
2 0 2 -56 2
3 0 3 -64 0
Back
Top Bottom