Puel in, but the debate should be there.

[isleofwightfox]

On 12/11/2018 at 11:22, ian_marshall said:

@Suzie the Fox 

The only other thing I would say, is that reading the article I really think your nephew could benefit from reading not only more, but also a broader spectrum of material from journal's through to academic publication's across many differing subjects. This would massively increase his repertoire of writing styles and allow him to be more adaptive depending on the subject written about. 

 

 

Speaking as a Lecturer in English Lit, I can't agree with this statement more. The best journalism comes from good writers, not just good journalists. My favourite piece of sports journalism is David Foster Wallace's essay on Federer! That shows how a great writer can further enliven a subject already sparks love in so many people. One problem that I see from a lot of young writers is that they write quite colloquially (ie. "He has adapted has Morgan".) A lot of football journalism is written by ex-players without a background in writing, and this has caused non-players to slip into the same habits. To nitpick, I also wasn't sure about the headline; it sounds as though he was going to tell us where the debate should take place. Perhaps 'the debate should continue'?

 

All in all, I wouldn't be upset to read that on a sports news site. Most news outlets would edit the article anyway, to strip out colloquialisms and imprecision. 

 

Nice work.

[Domsdad]

Hello everyone. If I can introduce myself I am the Father of the aspiring young journalist. Which also means I have the privilege of being the Brother of @Suzie the Fox

I just wanted to come on and thank everyone for their honest assessments of his article. Yes I had read it first and spotted the mistakes but I wanted a "warts and all" opinion which he has got. He is a massive City fan, and we were season ticket holders until he left home for Uni. 

Thanks again,  Domsdad

[bmt]

14 minutes ago, Domsdad said:

Hello everyone. If I can introduce myself I am the Father of the aspiring young journalist. Which also means I have the privilege of being the Brother of @Suzie the Fox

I just wanted to come on and thank everyone for their honest assessments of his article. Yes I had read it first and spotted the mistakes but I wanted a "warts and all" opinion which he has got. He is a massive City fan, and we were season ticket holders until he left home for Uni. 

Thanks again,  Domsdad

Get him to keep posting his articles in a thread somewhere on here. Can get feedback and gives him an audience.

[Trav Le Bleu]

Former journalist and editor here.

 

My only criticism (and remember, criticism isn't bad, it's pointing out areas for improvement, which is good) would be the title, which makes no sense. He seems to be using but as a conjunction, but with no comparison.

 

The line, he's adapted fairly well has Morgan, is it meant to be fairly well, as has Morgan?

 

Aside from that, and the carve/calve typo, seems fine. My advices would be to always re-read an article a couple of times out loud and if something sounds off, it's probably because it is.

[Suzie the Fox]

54 minutes ago, Trav Le Bleu said:

Former journalist and editor here.

 

My only criticism (and remember, criticism isn't bad, it's pointing out areas for improvement, which is good) would be the title, which makes no sense. He seems to be using but as a conjunction, but with no comparison.

 

The line, he's adapted fairly well has Morgan, is it meant to be fairly well, as has Morgan?

 

Aside from that, and the carve/calve typo, seems fine. My advices would be to always re-read an article a couple of times out loud and if something sounds off, it's probably because it is.

Thanks for the reply Trav and constructive criticism is why we put it on here. Having people who have no family bias towards the writer and can understand the context of the article & offer tips is one of the best ways of improving.

 

There have been some amazing replies, the community on this forum surprises me everyday. Its very heartwarming.   

 

 

[KingsX]

2 hours ago, bmt said:

Get him to keep posting his articles on here ... gives him an audience.

 

 

Great idea.

[Bunyip]

3 hours ago, HighPeakFox said:

It's good that you've allowed the goodwill and bonhomie following the tragedy to alter your posting style. 

Cheap shot and nothing to do with the debate. Still well done it seems it's not changed your style either. Move on eh?

Edited 13 November 2018 by Bunyip

[Bunyip]

3 hours ago, weller54 said:

What odds did you get? 

Good odds. Check it out. It's worth a flutter if you can afford a big wedge.

[HighPeakFox]

1 hour ago, Bunyip said:

Cheap shot and nothing to do with the debate. Still well done it seems it's not changed your style either. Move on eh?

There is no debate here. If you'd bothered to realise what the thread is about, it's about helping someone with their writing style. So I rather think you've missed the point to take your cheap shot at Puel, so you do a great line in irony. 

 

As for my style, if you'd been on the forum since the crash, and bothered to read, you'd know I've been taking great care what I've said to people. You got away with mild sarcasm, I chose not to be outright rude to you. 

[Bunyip]

18 minutes ago, HighPeakFox said:

There is no debate here. If you'd bothered to realise what the thread is about, it's about helping someone with their writing style. So I rather think you've missed the point to take your cheap shot at Puel, so you do a great line in irony. 

 

As for my style, if you'd been on the forum since the crash, and bothered to read, you'd know I've been taking great care what I've said to people. You got away with mild sarcasm, I chose not to be outright rude to you. 

So why does so-called " mild sarcasm get to you so much?  I think a bit of retrospective thinking may clear you egotism a little. The irony is all in your response  The heading had nothing to do with the tragedy you chose to bring that up. Ps if you have had to take great care on what you said to people then you are holding back on your true nature. I also choose not to be outright rude to you. more sympathetic.