Brent's Herald on overload

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

and the brenties are quick to give the thumbs up

That load of shite soon got sorted on FreeChat

alannotivvy wrote:

That load of shite soon got sorted on FreeChat

How do you smell?

Quite a good debate on Freechat actually, it didn't descend into the normal name calling.

Still, I'm sure someone will report it and the multis will be on the attack.

one question I would ask, why did he mention the AFT vote on buying the ground and not the Herald own poll.

BBC1 wrote:

alannotivvy wrote:

That load of shite soon got sorted on FreeChat

How do you smell?

perfume ponce

A solid six years of fourth division football with a solid six years of Grandstand bullshit, yep Jimmy's been great.

Brent In

It interesting how the 8 comments are being received on this article on their web page.

More pro brent filth being spewed out by the hearald see they have finally nailed there colours to the mast but we all new that .

Les Miserable wrote:

Brent In

Shouldn't there be another 'N'....remember he is an Hotelier......

PlymptonPilgrim wrote:

Quite a good debate on Freechat actually, it didn't descend into the normal name calling.

Still, I'm sure someone will report it and the multis will be on the attack.

It is a good debate.
Will be interesting if Journo Andy comes back and answers any questions.
Or could it just be an exercise for intelligence gathering on the freaks and weirdos, on what their questions and hang uos are, and the relevant pages of our dossiers can be filled in?

Whilst recognising that the article in question is an opinion piece and not actual reportage that article is rather staggering in its complete lack of journalistic rigour.

We've long since given up on any objectivity from our national press but it would appear that the local press has gone down the pan too.

When the local rag, which is basically Plymouth's paper of record, becomes as passive and subservient as this to a vested interest it can be little wonder that its sales are dropping as alarmingly as its relevance.

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Whilst recognising that the article in question is an opinion piece and not actual reportage that article is rather staggering in its complete lack of journalistic rigour.

We've long since given up on any objectivity from our national press but it would appear that the local press has gone down the pan too.

When the local rag, which is basically Plymouth's paper of record, becomes as passive and subservient as this to a vested interest it can be little wonder that its sales are dropping as alarmingly as its relevance.

I am loathe to click on this publications website, those adverts really get on my man boobs.
Could you tell me fine Sir, did this article make it into the printed version of the newspaper?

BBC1 wrote:

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Whilst recognising that the article in question is an opinion piece and not actual reportage that article is rather staggering in its complete lack of journalistic rigour.

We've long since given up on any objectivity from our national press but it would appear that the local press has gone down the pan too.

When the local rag, which is basically Plymouth's paper of record, becomes as passive and subservient as this to a vested interest it can be little wonder that its sales are dropping as alarmingly as its relevance.

I am loathe to click on this publications website, those adverts really get on my man boobs.
Could you tell me fine Sir, did this article make it into the printed version of the newspaper?

The Ad Block Plus browser add-on (it's free too!) will stop all the ads for you.

Buy a Herald? Are you stark, raving bonkers?

Why would I want to do that?

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

BBC1 wrote:

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Whilst recognising that the article in question is an opinion piece and not actual reportage that article is rather staggering in its complete lack of journalistic rigour.

We've long since given up on any objectivity from our national press but it would appear that the local press has gone down the pan too.

When the local rag, which is basically Plymouth's paper of record, becomes as passive and subservient as this to a vested interest it can be little wonder that its sales are dropping as alarmingly as its relevance.

I am loathe to click on this publications website, those adverts really get on my man boobs.
Could you tell me fine Sir, did this article make it into the printed version of the newspaper?

The Ad Block Plus browser add-on (it's free too!) will stop all the ads for you.

Buy a Herald? Are you stark, raving bonkers?

Why would I want to do that?

To wrap up your fish and chips?
You could always read a copy in the library I suppose.
And of course, you know the answer to the stark raving bonkers question only too well. Yes I am.

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

BBC1 wrote:

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Whilst recognising that the article in question is an opinion piece and not actual reportage that article is rather staggering in its complete lack of journalistic rigour.

We've long since given up on any objectivity from our national press but it would appear that the local press has gone down the pan too.

When the local rag, which is basically Plymouth's paper of record, becomes as passive and subservient as this to a vested interest it can be little wonder that its sales are dropping as alarmingly as its relevance.

I am loathe to click on this publications website, those adverts really get on my man boobs.
Could you tell me fine Sir, did this article make it into the printed version of the newspaper?

The Ad Block Plus browser add-on (it's free too!) will stop all the ads for you.

Buy a Herald? Are you stark, raving bonkers?

Why would I want to do that?

Thanks for the Ad Block heads up.
That was a better experience.
Still shit stirring from the Journo though. And his colours are firmly nailed to the mast.

It was purely a provocative piece to get people talking about a 'Herald' story.

The Herald and its journo's aren't choosey, (and neither can they afford to be) about where the clicks come from.

That why we should have copy and paste, less click for that rag.

For posters who have not read the piece of sh*t

Quote

Why Plymouth Argyle chairman James Brent deserves the benefit of the doubt

And the headlines he start the same piece on PAFC

At risk of starting world war three.. (to stir up more trouble)

News that Plymouth Argyle had exchanged contracts on the sale of Home Park last week reopened an old and frankly tired debate on some club forums – whether Pilgrims chairman and owner James Brent has been detrimental to the club.

Despite having put together a consortium which have taken over the club and pulled them out of the financial mire, there are those who point to various current issues as being systematic of what they consider to be poor ownership.

Yes, Argyle's grandstand is dilapidated and in urgent need of rebuilding. Yes, the team are in League Two and have been for the past five years.

And, yes, the issue of stadium ownership is a divisive one – though the club were never likely to get everyone on the same side with that one.

READ MORE: Plymouth Argyle board can't win over Home Park buy-back

But is it fair to blame these problems solely on the chairman of the club? Do managers, players, and other club staff – not to mention directors – share some responsibility of the ailments of the club?

Bearing in mind the fans' protests at Charlton v Coventry City on Saturday, most Argyle fans will likely consider themselves lucky that it was Mr Brent who came along and not another owner.

He has never treated the club like a cash cow, or ridden roughshod over the concerns of fans. Even the thorny issue of stadium ownership followed an independent consultation among more than 1,000 fans – the majority of whom came out in favour of a buy-back.

It's always seemed, to me, to be so unfair to blame Mr Brent for these issues that I've been reticent to report on the issue in the pages of The Herald.

It is a very vocal minority of supporters who even consider Mr Brent's ownership to be a problem. Giving them the megaphone of publicity could end up making it worse.

READ NEXT: James Brent wants new Home Park grandstand by 2020

But now that we're talking about it, I think it should be said that James Brent and his board deserve the benefit of any doubts we have, and should be allowed to continue running the club as they have been.

The purchase of Home Park will hopefully lead to redevelopment plans. The team are at the top of League Two with a good manager who looks capable of guiding them to a higher division.

There is a good infrastructure in place including a decent academy and links with the community via the Argyle Community Trust which is the charity partner of the club.

All of this is not to say that those in charge of the club have a completely flawless record in charge – letting John Sheridan draw up the retained list days before departing is one error which can be recalled.

But are there many, no ANY, clubs whose owners have a flawless record?

I'd struggle to name one.

So, for the sake of moving forward and focusing on the things which do matter, let's get behind the owners – at least until there is a genuine reason not to do so. Brent IN.

Bet they dont print a article to balance things up why brent should go..as jezza kyle would say theres two sides to every story ..but i wouldnt hold your breath with that rag