consistency is everything

[Chris Smith]

What point are you trying to make?

That the reporters don't seem to have a grasp of which goalkeeper plays for which team.

Same as we don't seem to have a grasp of the role of a sub-editor.

I would imagine that the sub-editor would be checking the grammar and stylistic content as he or she wasn't at the game, they would be relying on the reporter that was at the bloody game to at least know which goalie plays for which team!

In that case they wouldn't be doing their jobs correctly. As I said part of their role is to check that things are factually accurate. For all we know the journo might just put "saved by GK" and the sub then puts in the detail.

[villasjf]

http://www.clubcall.com/match-reports/aston-villa-2-2-fulham-1161443.html
they even rename the scorers here certainly one anyway

[bob]

What point are you trying to make?

That the reporters don't seem to have a grasp of which goalkeeper plays for which team.

Same as we don't seem to have a grasp of the role of a sub-editor.

Doesn't take away from the point that two newspapers have made the same error with something that should be very easy to get right. We're not employed to know what all the roles at a newspaper entail.

Thats' my point it is the sub-editor, not the reporter, who has fucked up as they're supposed to ensure, amongst other things, that articles are factually correct.

However, it really isn't that important. I don't imagine that there are loads of people wandering ariround scratching their heads thinking, "perhaps the keepers forgot to change ends at half time".

Or does it mean that the press hate us and Martin O'Neill told them to print it incorrectly?

Eh?

Are you saying that it's not important that they get players names right? Or that it's not important if it was the reporter/sub-editor/editor that got it wrong?

Your  final sentence makes your post look a bit silly in my opinion. Or are you joking?

[Chris Smith]

Bob, I tried to explain that it was the sub-editor that was at fault as a response to the posts blaming the reporter. I don't happen to think it is that important that they got the goalies name wrong but clearly some of you do.

The last sentence was just means as a piss take becaue there has been a running theme on here in recent weeks that the press are against us because of Martin O'Neill.

[usav]

What point are you trying to make?

That the reporters don't seem to have a grasp of which goalkeeper plays for which team.

Same as we don't seem to have a grasp of the role of a sub-editor.

I would imagine that the sub-editor would be checking the grammar and stylistic content as he or she wasn't at the game, they would be relying on the reporter that was at the bloody game to at least know which goalie plays for which team!

In that case they wouldn't be doing their jobs correctly. As I said part of their role is to check that things are factually accurate. For all we know the journo might just put "saved by GK" and the sub then puts in the detail.

How could the sub-editor possibly know the report is facutually correct if they weren't at the game?   

[Dave Cooper please]

How could the sub-editor possibly know the report is facutually correct if they weren't at the game?   

It's the sub-editor's job to check facts, such as how to spell factually.

[usav]

How could the sub-editor possibly know the report is facutually correct if they weren't at the game?   

It's the sub-editor's job to check facts, such as how to spell factually.

Which is what I already said.

If the sub-editor for the football section of a sports paper were to factually check every aspect of the games in their paper, we would be waiting until next week for the paper to come out.

[VillaZogmariner]

What point are you trying to make?

That the reporters don't seem to have a grasp of which goalkeeper plays for which team.

So I've just noticed - I really shouldn't read threads when I've only had about 2 hours kip!

[rutski]

manure would have sold i dont know how many programmes last tuesday night and on the front cover in big bold letters was the date 02/02/10.

[Chris Smith]

How could the sub-editor possibly know the report is facutually correct if they weren't at the game?   

It's the sub-editor's job to check facts, such as how to spell factually.

Which is what I already said.

If the sub-editor for the football section of a sports paper were to factually check every aspect of the games in their paper, we would be waiting until next week for the paper to come out.

The line ups are printed in the paper, he doesn't need to be there to know who was in goal for Villa. He wouldn't be able to check opinion such as "it was a world class pass by Smith" but he would be able to check facts such as "the keeper, USAV, conceded 23".

[Astral Weeks]

I can't be bothered to look it up now, but I think both match reports were by the same journo, Barney Ronay.

[Archbishop Herbert Cockthrottle]

I can't be bothered to look it up now, but I think both match reports were by the same journo, Barney Ronay.

Well he's got Egon his face now.

I'll get my coat.