The athletic

[superspurs]

A former Arsenal fanzine editor who routinely produced malicious mischief about Spurs. His reward for that was a similar role at The Telegraph. All sorts of chiseling, sniveling twaddle about Spurs. Must have stood his round and then some at the journo's pub nights. When this issue was expressed to the Athletic upon his hiring, we were assured that the editor reviewing his copy, Alex Kay-Jelski, would be overlooking every article and that we would have nowt to fret about.

I didn't give the first flying fcuk what assurances they offered. Nowhere in this world would the opposite situation - an ardent, gloating Spurs brute on the Arsenal beat - be permitted to exist. The Arsenal section consists of toe sucking sycophants.

Good to know, f*ck him.

 

[Jordinho]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1530831051932704768

 

[thfcsteff]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1530831051932704768

Silliness!!!!!

 

[90sSpursBook]

A former Arsenal fanzine editor who routinely produced malicious mischief about Spurs. His reward for that was a similar role at The Telegraph. All sorts of chiseling, sniveling twaddle about Spurs. Must have stood his round and then some at the journo's pub nights. When this issue was expressed to the Athletic upon his hiring, we were assured that the editor reviewing his copy, Alex Kay-Jelski, would be overlooking every article and that we would have nowt to fret about.

I didn't give the first flying fcuk what assurances they offered. Nowhere in this world would the opposite situation - an ardent, gloating Spurs brute on the Arsenal beat - be permitted to exist. The Arsenal section consists of toe sucking sycophants.

I'm going to double down on Charlie Ecceleshare as has been discussed in other threads.....I had no idea of his existence prior to joining the Athletic and View from the Lane podcast. Were it not for comments like this I would have no idea he was an Arsenal fan as I find he always speaks very positively about Spurs - he has been unflinching in his belief since about January that Spurs would finish top 4. If I didn't know better I would assume he was a Spurs fan.

 

[superspurs]

I'm going to double down on Charlie Ecceleshare as has been discussed in other threads.....I had no idea of his existence prior to joining the Athletic and View from the Lane podcast. Were it not for comments like this I would have no idea he was an Arsenal fan as I find he always speaks very positively about Spurs - he has been unflinching in his belief since about January that Spurs would finish top 4. If I didn't know better I would assume he was a Spurs fan.

This was my assumption too, especially on the podcasts The Athletic does, I swore he was a Spurs fan, perhaps as Norf says, if his copy is being reviewed he may have toned down his Goonerisms.

Not hard to find stuff out there where he outright states he's a Gooner, here for example: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2018/03/02/arsenal-fan-view-stayed-away-emirates/

You have Gold and Kilpatrick to read if you want a Spurs fan writing your coverage I suppose. I already don't read Pitt-Brooke in the Athletic and now I won't read Eccelshare and unless it's silly cheap again I won't renew my Athletic sub.

 

[iggyfog]

I really like the Athletic's Tottenham coverage. I like the dynamic of the view from the lane with Danny Kelly and James Maw being the voice of the fan and Jack Pitt Brooke and Charlie providing the balanced independent journalist view. The correspondents for teams, will often support another team, i.e. Dominic Fifield being a palace fan but the Chelsea correspondent. You can't get a balanced view from a fan.

I am surprised to hear that Charlie is a Gooner, he was always saying that we would finish fourth as Arsenal were so inconsistent. He really trumpeted that. Does a great job of hiding that!

The podcast's on the Athletic (Football Podcast, Totally Football Show, View from the Lane) are a good listen. I am really not a fan of the talksport style of debate on football where it feels like you are just listening to two old men in a pub take a contrarian view for the sake of it.

The fact that there is a consistent stream of spurs articles with obviously good sourcing and insight makes it a must have subscription imo

 

[90sSpursBook]

The podcast's on the Athletic (Football Podcast, Totally Football Show, View from the Lane) are a good listen. I am really not a fan of the talksport style of debate on football where it feels like you are just listening to two old men in a pub take a contrarian view for the sake of it.

Football Cliches is a great listen (and regularly involves Eccleshare). I really think that the number of high brow, sensible, podcasts (including Game is about Glory of course!) has really dated Talksport. Even 5Live goes down the gutter route with its current iteration of 606 with Savage and Sutton which is essentially O'hara and Cundy without the adverts.

 

[Lilbaz]

Football Cliches is a great listen (and regularly involves Eccleshare). I really think that the number of high brow, sensible, podcasts (including Game is about Glory of course!) has really dated Talksport. Even 5Live goes down the gutter route with its current iteration of 606 with Savage and Sutton which is essentially O'hara and Cundy without the adverts.

Simon jordan is the only one worth listening to on talksport. Laura wood is worth watching though.

 

[iggyfog]

Football Cliches is a great listen (and regularly involves Eccleshare). I really think that the number of high brow, sensible, podcasts (including Game is about Glory of course!) has really dated Talksport. Even 5Live goes down the gutter route with its current iteration of 606 with Savage and Sutton which is essentially O'hara and Cundy without the adverts.

I like (occasionally) listening to BBC's football podcasts, but I fined that Sutton and Micah Richards can do my head in sometimes. I like the insight that they bring, but I feel like they can start arguments for the sake of it and just becomes really pendantic.

I do actually like listening to Simon Jordan.

 

[glorygloryeze]

Simon jordan is the only one worth listening to on talksport. Laura wood is worth watching though.

Yeah, but as worth watching as Natalie Sawyer still is? I think not...

 

[greatwhitenorf]

I really like the Athletic's Tottenham coverage. I like the dynamic of the view from the lane with Danny Kelly and James Maw being the voice of the fan and Jack Pitt Brooke and Charlie providing the balanced independent journalist view. The correspondents for teams, will often support another team, i.e. Dominic Fifield being a palace fan but the Chelsea correspondent. You can't get a balanced view from a fan.

I am surprised to hear that Charlie is a Gooner, he was always saying that we would finish fourth as Arsenal were so inconsistent. He really trumpeted that. Does a great job of hiding that!

The podcast's on the Athletic (Football Podcast, Totally Football Show, View from the Lane) are a good listen. I am really not a fan of the talksport style of debate on football where it feels like you are just listening to two old men in a pub take a contrarian view for the sake of it.

The fact that there is a consistent stream of spurs articles with obviously good sourcing and insight makes it a must have subscription imo

Eccleshare's previous stints were laden with all sorts of juvenile mischief towards Spurs. He dug in and seemed to revel in creating antagonism. He was very good at it, clearly enthused with his work and I will not easily forgive him. The bright red spots still adorn his hide. I know the Telegraph had ardent gooner John Ley writing football for many years and he professionally concealed it until retiring but Charlie was right out there on all levels.

When the Athletic came along, the (for lack of a better term) print side of sports journalism changed as they chucked great sums of money about to recruit talent. No doubt, Charlie boy must have been fun down the pub with his fellow journos and managed to snag a late berth before the ship sailed. Some immediately complained and a football editor assured readers that Charlie would be closely monitored. When later articles struck readers as unfair, commenting bans were imposed on them. Thin skins there.

We would/will never see Arsenal covered by an equally outspoken Spurs fan. Yet Spurs fans have to endure coverage from media entities who put Arsenal fans on the Spurs beat - Sami Mokbel at the Daily Mail, for one.

Eccleshare is crafty about his Spurs coverage, very good at drawing out negative aspects of Spurs play, tactics or management and inviting further criticism about Spurs from readers. You don't see similar approaches taken with articles about Chelsea or Arsenal. Especially Arsenal where it's just a load of soft, tender fluff. I don't want to see those sort of pom-poms waving with Spurs coverage. As well as Jack Pitt-Brooke, they've had numerous other writers cover Spurs and I've had no issue with the tone of those articles. They did quite well when Eccleshare was on parental leave.

Spurs now have an excellent manager in place, Champions League football to look forward to and, with all their resources coming to bear, a real sense of building something strong and sustainable. On the heels of a remarkable turnaround season, they've given their beat reporters so much that's positive to work with. It could well be a cruel form of punishment to cover this while being an ardent gooner. He's now a parent and needs this job, so I don't expect him to screw it up. Thankfully, I can keep tabs on it without having to pay to read it.

 

[Lemonade Money]

I like (occasionally) listening to BBC's football podcasts, but I fined that Sutton and Micah Richards can do my head in sometimes. I like the insight that they bring, but I feel like they can start arguments for the sake of it and just becomes really pendantic.

I do actually like listening to Simon Jordan.