Sports writing

[Slipperduke]

The biggest problem the industry faces is the growing gulf between quality writers and news-hungry hacks. There are some excellent journalists like Rob Sheppard and Ian McGarry who can suck stories out of the ether and turn over robust copy from anywhere at anytime. That doesn't necessarily make for good reading though.

With so many cutbacks to staffing levels and expenses, you're more likely to find writers being stretched too far and asked to provide too many stories in a day. There's less in the pot to pay for quality comment and editors are keener to hire hacks than writers. You don't get many Glanville/Wooldridge types these days because everything's moving at a faster pace with less support.

The Sundays are usually the best place to find the quality, but even there it's changing. Joe Lovejoy has been told that he'll be redundant at the end of the season, which is shocking. He's one of the best in the business.

 

[Yorkshire Blue]

Forgot to say, my favourite newspaper cricket writer at the moment is Scyld Berry. I don't always agree with him, but he challenges me to think with some off-beat suggestions.

I'm beginning to warm to Mike Selvey in the Grauniad as well.

Outside of the newspaper regulars Gideon Haigh is excellent, which reminds me, I got one of his books for Christmas that I still haven't started.

Cricinfo have also got a really good stable of writers.

There are some superb US sportswriters. Michael Lewis is fantastic (eg probably the best sports writing I've read this year and Joe Posnanski is a brilliant columnist.

Where are their English equivalents?

 

[canveyshrimper]

Kimmage (if that is how you spell it) is superb and was going to be the first name I mentioned in the new thread.



That doesn't do it for me.



Who does Nasser write for? A lot of Atherton's stuff is now "in conversation with". It's a real shame as when he can be bothered to actually pen a piece he is a good writer. Hussain is a good perceptive commentator (and I hope those headhunters have sounded him out about the England coach's job)

You mentioned CLR James before as well, and I've had his View From the Boundary on my library wishlist for some time.

Nasser writes in The Mail, and a few items are "interviews". I agree with you about Nasser's commentary, he's improved a whole lot.

CLR James and his View From the Boundary is IMO one of the best cricket books written. A book I read as a schoolboy and really started my love affair with the game. And FWIW I also like Paul Haywood.

 

[Yorkshire Blue]

The biggest problem the industry faces is the growing gulf between quality writers and news-hungry hacks. There are some excellent journalists like Rob Sheppard and Ian McGarry who can suck stories out of the ether and turn over robust copy from anywhere at anytime. That doesn't necessarily make for good reading though.

With so many cutbacks to staffing levels and expenses, you're more likely to find writers being stretched too far and asked to provide too many stories in a day. There's less in the pot to pay for quality comment and editors are keener to hire hacks than writers. You don't get many Glanville/Wooldridge types these days because everything's moving at a faster pace with less support.

The Sundays are usually the best place to find the quality, but even there it's changing. Joe Lovejoy has been told that he'll be redundant at the end of the season, which is shocking. He's one of the best in the business.

Sadly true, but glad to see you bucking the trend!

 

[Interpol Shrimper]

Paul Kimmage (Sunday Times) is an excellent interviewer

It's a real shame a certain famous cyclist won't indulge PK and grant him an in-depth interview, to discuss certain rumours that just won't go away.

His book 'A Rough Ride' of his career as a pro cyclist in the 80s is also very thought provoking, especially if you can get hold of the post Fetina affair editions.

 

[EastStandBlue]

I think the biggest problem in the industry, especially broadcast journalism, at the moment is how inflated it is with ex-professionals with very little intelligence. They're hired purely to be a recognisable face on a panel, when their are hundreds of journalists out there who could do a better job.

I watch Paul Merson on a Saturday and can't help but think he's kept his job purely for a comedy factor. He's a circus clown hired for the cheap gags. Sadly, it's not a problem limited to television. How Russell Brand and Tim Lovejoy have columns in a broadsheet newspaper is beyond me. I'm not disputing the fact that their are ex-Pro's who do a fantastic job... Collymore always comes across very well on TV and Radio... But when you have Steve f*cking McManamman and Tim Sherwood as regular pundits on a Football show, you know you've crossed the line.

The irony isn't lost on me how, in an industry that's lifeblood is a sport that emphasises so much on youth, Sports Journalism is so backwards on giving young journalists a chance.

 

[Rusty Shackleford]

I think the biggest problem in the industry, especially broadcast journalism, at the moment is how inflated it is with ex-professionals with very little intelligence. They're hired purely to be a recognisable face on a panel, when their are hundreds of journalists out there who could do a better job.

I watch Paul Merson on a Saturday and can't help but think he's kept his job purely for a comedy factor. He's a circus clown hired for the cheap gags. Sadly, it's not a problem limited to television. How Russell Brand and Tim Lovejoy have columns in a broadsheet newspaper is beyond me. I'm not disputing the fact that their are ex-Pro's who do a fantastic job... Collymore always comes across very well on TV and Radio... But when you have Steve f*cking McManamman and Tim Sherwood as regular pundits on a Football show, you know you've crossed the line.

The irony isn't lost on me how, in an industry that's lifeblood is a sport that emphasises so much on youth, Sports Journalism is so backwards on giving young journalists a chance.

It's a fair point ESB, but I feel the success of Sky's Saturday show owes an awful lot to the 'comedy factor', and if it tried to smarten up the content, it wouldn't be half as enjoyable. Having Merse, Stelling and Kammy fumble their way through describing the action is the next best thing to listening to your drunken mates' accounts of the goal you missed whilst you were having a slash.

 

[Napster]

Russell Brand's column is actually not bad.

 

[EastStandBlue]

It's a fair point ESB, but I feel the success of Sky's Saturday show owes an awful lot to the 'comedy factor', and if it tried to smarten up the content, it wouldn't be half as enjoyable. Having Merse, Stelling and Kammy fumble their way through describing the action is the next best thing to listening to your drunken mates' accounts of the goal you missed whilst you were having a slash.

I agree to an extent... Soccer Saturday is brilliant and the roving reporters, Kamara and Charlie Nicholas especially, are great entertainment, but some people push the limit. John Solako has the charisma of a wooden spoon and Paul Merson has begun to play up to his loveable moron role so much it's cringe worthy at times.

Jeff Stelling though is a fantastic presenter and completely deserves the accolades he's been recieving lately. Worth noting that he his background is purely journalistic, and he's now Sky's numero uno.

Russell Brand's column is actually not bad.

It's OK I feel... For someone I'm not too keen on to say the least he does well to make it readable, but it's just how much up his own arse he is with pointless, flowery language that gets to me.

 

[Uncle Leo]

I'm a huge fan of US writer Bill Simmons. A lot of the humour comes courtesy of his slightly unhinged readership, but he's always worth a read.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=simmons/090306

 

[Matt the Shrimp]

Russell Brand's column is actually not bad.

Hmm. I gave up half-way through when I read one, on the basis that the article seemed to consist of him saying, in different ways, "Me, me, me, me, me." I suppose it doesn't help that I think he's an utter tool - I'm deeply antipathetic to him before I've even started reading.

I was very impressed - not least because I didn't expect to be impressed - by a piece that Duncan Fletcher did in Friday's Grauniad. There was nothing flowery about it; instead, it was a brutally frank appraisal (impressively, without sounding like sour grapes; just refeshingly honest) of a number of England's weaknesses, and in particular some bowling issues. He all but said that he thought Harmison's international career was over - and that can't have been easy for him to say, given how pivotal Harmy was in his sides, especially in 2005.

As for other writers - I've always liked Vic Marks, also in the Grauniad; and I used to like Simon Barnes in the Times, although suspect that he's started to believe his own hype recently.

Matt

 

[Yorkshire Blue]

Hmm. I gave up half-way through when I read one, on the basis that the article seemed to consist of him saying, in different ways, "Me, me, me, me, me." I suppose it doesn't help that I think he's an utter tool - I'm deeply antipathetic to him before I've even started reading.

I was very impressed - not least because I didn't expect to be impressed - by a piece that Duncan Fletcher did in Friday's Grauniad. There was nothing flowery about it; instead, it was a brutally frank appraisal (impressively, without sounding like sour grapes; just refeshingly honest) of a number of England's weaknesses, and in particular some bowling issues. He all but said that he thought Harmison's international career was over - and that can't have been easy for him to say, given how pivotal Harmy was in his sides, especially in 2005.

As for other writers - I've always liked Vic Marks, also in the Grauniad; and I used to like Simon Barnes in the Times, although suspect that he's started to believe his own hype recently.

Matt

Damn, forgot to mention Fletcher. He's not a great writer but his analysis is unfailingly brilliant and it is clear why he was the best thing to happen to English cricket. I get neckache from reading his columns, from all the nodding my head in agreement.

Don't have much time for Vic Marks.

 

[Rusty Shackleford]

I'm a huge fan of US writer Bill Simmons. A lot of the humour comes courtesy of his slightly unhinged readership, but he's always worth a read.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=simmons/090306

Great example comes right from the foot of that column:

Q: We've all seen "Cast Away" and, of course, remember the emotional scene as Wilson the Volleyball floats away from Tom Hanks in the middle of the ocean. It's time to admit to ourselves those two were more than just friends. I mean come on … four years on an island together … no female or any other sexual outlet around. Hanks did the deed with the Volleyball and probably regularly.
-- Carl F., Merrimack, N.H.


SG: Yup, these are my readers.

It was about time we got another Sports Guy Mailbag. Good work US.

 

[Thorpe Groyney]

The Sundays are usually the best place to find the quality, but even there it's changing. Joe Lovejoy has been told that he'll be redundant at the end of the season, which is shocking. He's one of the best in the business.

That really is surprising. Amongst the finest of reads football-wise. I also used to enjoy David Lacey in The Guardian and, as far as match reports themselves were concerned, liked the cut of Matt Dickinson's jib.

Stephen Jones's offerings in the Sunday Times rugby union section are always entertaining, especially in view of his antipathy of all things South of the Equator (I've never known a Welshamn crow as much about an England win over Australia as he did in 2007). Eddie Butler has his moments, too, but he tends to want to put in a one-liner at the end of each papragraph.

 

[Matt the Shrimp]

Eddie Butler has his moments, too, but he tends to want to put in a one-liner at the end of each papragraph.

You see, Eddie Butler annoys the sh*t out of me, mostly because when he's on the TV, he comes across as rabidly anti-English (and, when he gives free-rein to it, pro-Welsh). He's as bad as Brian Moore - who occasionally makes me snigger in school-boy fashion, so ludicrously one-eyed is he; but who is an appalling commentator/summariser when it comes to being objective about England.

Of the TV rugby pundits... Lynagh and Davies cut it; Fitzpatrick, Guscott, Dallaglio and Woods are fair but a bit dull; and Campese, Chilcott and Moore are risible.

One person I'd like to hear more of in a rugby sense is Ian Smith, for whom I have a lot of time in a cricket sense.

Matt

 

[Thorpe Groyney]

It's funny how different people get different impressions. When Wales play England I always think Eddie Butler is trying so hard not to be biased (bearing in mind he captained Wales) he ends up completely pro-England.

Like you, though, I cringe every time I hear Brian Moore's voice. Totally myopic, gives no consideration to the worthiness of England's opponents when they've beaten them (in fact he doesn't acknowledge their existence half the time) and for someone who was a front row exponent his lack of insight is embarrassing, a classic example of a pub bore. Jonathan Davies, by comparison, is just a Wales fan with a microphone but at least he gives the opposition credit when they play well.

Oh, for the days of Bill McLaren. You'd never have known he was commentating on his son-in-law half the time, such was his impartiality. A man with a deep love and understanding of the game, the laws and the players, which he conveyed beautifully.

There is one form of sports media, though, that stands head and shoulders above all else and has done for decades. I have it on now. "Test Match Special" is more than a radio programme, it's part of English culture, it's everything that is great about sport without actually playing the game itself. Aggers and CMJ can write a more-than-decent page or two as well.

 

[Yorkshire Blue]

Brian Moore is a must for any England v France rugby union clash.