bmck

http://www.gersnetonline.net/newsite/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=475&Itemid=1 Is it a bird? Is it a plane? Is it the last bastion of objectivity in the Scottish press? Is it a Rangers hating sensationalist who earns a living condemning sectarianism while taking every opportunity to fan its flames? Well, it depends who you talk to, but one thing I can say about Graham Spiers is that he writes horribly. Some Rangers fans get really worked up after reading some of Mr. Spiersââ?¬â?¢ articles, but I wonder where they get the energy ââ?¬â?? by the time Iââ?¬â?¢m finished Iââ?¬â?¢d be more likely to have the energy for strong emotion having necked a few jellies: they have that same somniferous effect. Iââ?¬â?¢m willing to allow for the possibility that itââ?¬â?¢s just me (itââ?¬â?¢s unarguable heââ?¬â?¢s written for various high-brow newspapers and has no doubt won awards and the like) - but Iââ?¬â?¢ve read some of the best and worst of humanityââ?¬â?¢s legacy in literature and havenââ?¬â?¢t found a writing style quite as irritating and sleep-inducing as Grahamââ?¬â?¢s. For quite a while I couldnââ?¬â?¢t put my finger on exactly what it was I didnââ?¬â?¢t like ââ?¬â?? Iââ?¬â?¢m a student of literature so I can hardly moan at him for his tendency to use big words, and given that I amble on myself I canââ?¬â?¢t really blame him for meandering from the point. But then I realised that I didnââ?¬â?¢t mind Nietzsche using big words because complex situations demand big words but Graham seemed to continuously use them borderline out of context just to remind us that heââ?¬â?¢s intelligent and knows them. And I also realised I didnââ?¬â?¢t mind Wittgenstein spanning a sentence over a whole page because the difficult subjects he was discussing demanded that every statement be fully qualified in its textual and environmental context; but if a sentence takes up a whole paragraph when discussing the comparatively simple matter of a football match then the chances are youââ?¬â?¢ve got your linguistic head up your own arse. So, hereââ?¬â?¢s my theory ââ?¬â?? I donââ?¬â?¢t know about your primary school, but at mine the teacher gave us words we had to use in a sentence as homework. To encourage you to develop your vocabulary at that age you got nice gold stars and ticks and whatnot for writing longer sentences with more obscure ââ?¬Ë?describing wordsââ?¬â?¢. Of course, when you get to secondary school they start to teach you the value of ââ?¬Ë?showingââ?¬â?¢ rather than ââ?¬Ë?tellingââ?¬â?¢, and how when grownups write itââ?¬â?¢s just silly to use a big word where an ordinary everyday small one will do, and how they shouldnââ?¬â?¢t write a million words where five will do. Reserve those big words and prosaic grand sounding sentences for where they are most effective and required, otherwise youââ?¬â?¢ll just sound like youââ?¬â?¢re trying to convince people you are intelligent, and sound all poncy. Or, if you want to be really clever, they say, you can use big words ââ?¬Ë?ironicallyââ?¬â?¢ by putting them beside slang ââ?¬â?? like I did in the opening paragraph with ââ?¬Ë?somniferousââ?¬â?¢. (This is all a lie, incidentally, but had my teacher been teaching the syllabus instead of stopping people attacking each other with chairs, Iââ?¬â?¢m reliably told that this is what she would have been saying). I think Graham has essentially stuck to the primary school style of writing mixed with archaic grandiose sounding phrases. So, letââ?¬â?¢s put my theory - that Graham Spiersââ?¬â?¢ writing is like a studious primary school childââ?¬â?¢s homework - to the test. A short while ago I read his article entitled ââ?¬Å?Hughes manages to focus on positives after goal rushââ?¬Â [1]. I didnââ?¬â?¢t realise that this was actually a Spiers article, and the promising snappy opening sentence did nothing to give the game away: ââ?¬Å?Every so often football has a pleasing habit of throwing up a match like thisââ?¬Â. Lovely. By the end of the second sentence (and, incidentally, the entire first paragraph) I was in no doubt of the author. It is a single sentence that includes the phrases ââ?¬Å?poured goalsââ?¬Â, ââ?¬Å?late splurgeââ?¬Â, ââ?¬Å?three in the final five minutesââ?¬Â, ââ?¬Å?sent the Rangers fans home happyââ?¬Â, ââ?¬Å?poor John Hughesââ?¬Â, ââ?¬Å?the Falkirk managerââ?¬Â, ââ?¬Å?groping around for a postmatch perspectiveââ?¬Â, ââ?¬Å?famously verbalââ?¬Â and quite ironically concludes that ââ?¬Å?Big Yogiââ?¬Â was ââ?¬Å?talking gibberishââ?¬Â. Iââ?¬â?¢m not sure if he read this back to himself; but if youââ?¬â?¢re going to summarise the match, make the unlikely comparison of the Rangers fansââ?¬â?¢ reaction and the Falkirk mangerââ?¬â?¢s, and conclude that someone is talking gibberish, all in a single sentence, then you probably want to do it in one that, at very least, Stephen Fry wouldnââ?¬â?¢t struggle to say aloud. At this point he doesnââ?¬â?¢t condescend to let us in on the gibberish Big Yogi was talking, but weââ?¬â?¢ll take his word for the moment. The next paragraph is entirely concise and to the point. To be fair this might be because it largely constitutes a quote from Walter Smith. Graham Spiers is definitely at his most concise when quoting. Perhaps for dramatic effect this brief flash of brevity is followed by one of the most astoundingly inappropriate sentences Iââ?¬â?¢ve ever seen committed to print when discussing a football match: ââ?¬Å?So let us examine more keenly this peculiarity of a gameââ?¬Â. As a general rule you shouldnââ?¬â?¢t write (unless youââ?¬â?¢re a poet) something you wouldnââ?¬â?¢t say in real life. I find it hard to believe that the top man in Oxford University in Jane Austenââ?¬â?¢s time would say ââ?¬Å?So let us examine more keenly this peculiarity of a theoryââ?¬Â with a straight face, never mind Graham Spiers discussing a football match whose only ââ?¬Ë?peculiarityââ?¬â?¢ to be ââ?¬Ë?keenly examinedââ?¬â?¢ was the fairly common scenario that the scoreline didnââ?¬â?¢t quite reflect the difference between the teams. After a fairly straightforward analysis of the game we build towards the climax hinted at in the first paragraph: that the score was so bafflingly unrepresentative of the game that it reduced poor Big Yogi to the incoherence of someone who had just survived a trainwreck. The quote chosen to represent John Hughesââ?¬â?¢ ââ?¬Ë?maniaââ?¬â?¢ and ââ?¬Ë?babblingââ?¬â?¢ reads like this: ââ?¬Å?We played some good football and make no mistake, we are a right good football side,ââ?¬Â he said. ââ?¬Å?At 3-2, I thought to myself, ââ?¬Ë?oh-ho, here we go, weââ?¬â?¢ll get right back into this.ââ?¬â?¢ Weââ?¬â?¢ve done something that few clubs ever do ââ?¬â?? weââ?¬â?¢ve come to Ibrox and taken two goals off Rangers.ââ?¬Â Iââ?¬â?¢m not sure about you, but that makes perfect sense to me. It certainly makes more sense than Spiersââ?¬â?¢ assessment of our new singing Cousin.... who is... wait for it.... ââ?¬Å?extremely decentââ?¬Â. Iââ?¬â?¢m not quite sure who edits these articles (I know Spiers was the sports editor at the Herald, so I assume if this is anything but a downwards step he must be at the Times) but you would think that this phrase making no sense in the English language would be good enough reason to re-think it. Players can be extremely good, or extremely bad, but not extremely decent ââ?¬â?? just like water can be extremely hot, or extremely cold, but not extremely lukewarm. The word ââ?¬Ë?decentââ?¬â?¢ implies no extremeness one way or the other. I mean, if John Hughes was ââ?¬Ë?babblingââ?¬â?¢ speaking shortly after the game, youââ?¬â?¢ve got to wonder how someone whoââ?¬â?¢s had at least 24 hours and the benefits of an editorial process can come out with something that makes absolutely no sense in our native tongue. So, to wrap up then, I donââ?¬â?¢t read Graham Spiers not because I have anything personally against him, but because I find his writing sometimes cringeworthy, sometimes sleep inducing. Itââ?¬â?¢s part of the staple diet of sitcoms to parody essentially unintelligent characters by making them speak in Ye Old English and use big words out of context. I get the same sense of akwardness when I read a Graham Spiers article ââ?¬â?? but perhaps this is what The Times readership is after? Maybe thereââ?¬â?¢s a whole stratum of society I have no access to where people go around speaking like this to each other. The problem is, though, that even if he used all these grand phrases poetically, and properly, he would still be talking about a game of football. He hasnââ?¬â?¢t picked up a secret and super-intellectual slant on the game all us mere mortals have missed, heââ?¬â?¢s basically just said ââ?¬Å?the score didnââ?¬â?¢t reflect the gameââ?¬Â with all the hyperbolic flair of a wean who gets good marks in their primary school homework because theyââ?¬â?¢ve said an ordinary thing in a prolix way. Its all the insight of a tabloid phone-in (that Iââ?¬â?¢m sure Graham would never associate himself with) couched in the language of someone parodying Ye Old English. Man, if I ever meet you Iââ?¬â?¢ll quite happily give you a gold star, but I wouldnââ?¬â?¢t pay Ã?£1 or whatever it is for The Times to hear what I heard in the pub after the game in un-necessarily verbose language. I donââ?¬â?¢t think the ââ?¬Ë?high-browââ?¬â?¢ readership of The Times will be fooled by it either. And as much as Iââ?¬â?¢d love to know what happened between PLG and Barry Ferguson I donââ?¬â?¢t think my sanity could handle English used in this way for a couple of hundred pages, and Iââ?¬â?¢ll be very suprised if people can in general. [1] http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/football/scotland/article2288780.ece

i think he's wrong. but at least its polemic.

:uzi: but yes you's were.

yup. me too. i was wrong, walter was right.

really? you dont rate ferguson? :devil:

i think hemdani's attitude is first class. i had my suspicions at the start - werent there whispers about him refusing to train and stuff - but he's totally won me over. in europe he's even shown unfrench fiestyness in several challenges. he just said this about novo: shows he's thinking about the interests of the club and stuff. despite his relaxed veneer, i think he's turning into a bit of a rangers fan.

there's probably no youtube link for this, is there?

great read frankie. i'd really be interested in cammy's thoughts on it - to yin out that yang on the subject.

i'm not sure beattie. i didnt do it - perhaps the two were posted at the same time? i tend to just delete one when two appear at roughly the same time. i imagine someone's done the same.

aye - my first drink in three months and a general great laugh and day. what more can a man ask? :devil: :cheers: it'd have been worse if you'd gave him the whistle then headed out the pub though man!

after spending time in the tbo i cant understand how anyone could be anywhere else in the ground. it was just a continuous party (an albeit at times nervous and altogether wet party) where everyone just had good natured madness for the whole game. i think at one point 'walter smiths blue and white army' was sung for about 15 minutes solid. there's far, far too much apathy kicking about in society in general these days - i dont understand why someone would rather sit solemnly and observe the football for 90 mins (its hardly a masterclass in tactics and counter-tactics is it?) rather than get properly right into it and just have a bit of party, supporting the team, whilst watching the game. good to see another singing section maybe there'll be a reply to 'can you hear the coapland sing?' soon enough.

but for one capital letter you would have been another of those dob racists.

so no one thinks darcheville's good enough for a regular start?

i cant believe how much his fans hate him.

seconded. lets not become bitter. wistful magnamony (?) is the way forward.

i actually once got money off a mixer i was buying because i had a gun in the room. didnt realise i'd been showing it to my mate before i came in and he was kind of sitting just looking at it. i wasnt thinking about it as i forget stuff often - he said "here m8, you can have this for X" and left ASAP. never occurred to me - i quickly turned the thing on to make sure it wasn't dodgily wired. but it was perfect. and THEN it occurred about the gun. worked out quite well in the end but he must have got a strange impression. it was a compressed-gas-as-firing-mechanism semi-auto pistol, but it did look very real to be fair.

agreed and welcome to the site!

agreed. cuellar is the best defender we've had at ibrox in yeeeeaaaaarrrsss. the thing i like about thomson is that he puts a graft in and will play the simple ball when the game's tight, but when the play opens up, he has a different range of passing. i think he's got better judgement in this respect than even ferguson.

exactly right s_a. in the current market conditiosn we've no need to sell a first team regular for 1 mil. nutters.

barstewards!!!!! :uzi: :uzi: :uzi: :uzi: ^ isnt it magic how they turn from text as you type it magically into little pictures when you see it? magic i say...

^ think thats a cracking quote. v/funny. i've thought about this before though. the world wouldnt be a boring place is we all had the same opinions because there would be no word for boring, or, indeed, interesting because it would just be things-as-they-are. for instance, if we all lived in an entirely orange world we probably wouldn't have a word for orange. so if we lived in a world where everyone's opinion was the same we wouldn't have anything to compare it to, so we couldn't call it boring. i've not been to sleep since ages ago.

do you really think so? we were the only team who had any chance of scoring - we completely dictated the play.

that was the most accomplished i've seen rangers in europe. took the pace out the game and stepped up when the opportunity was there. no squeeky bum time.

we've handled ourselves well. easy first half.

i heard that in glasgow more young people die of suicide than anywhere else in the uk, and ahead of most other causes. about two people in the last ten years have died of 'sectarian' (or as level headed people call it - thuggish) violence. why is it all i hear is about the latter?