My mistake, I didn't realise this was a Ross Heppenstall thread. I thought it was a thread about how poor the T&A was in general

it's easy to blame the journo but has it ever crossed your mind that it's the editor or sub editor who usually decides what goes to print ? - the journo will put down what he or she actually sees, hopefully in an unbiased way but he or she has no idea if the report sent in will be embellished or twisted or completely changed or ignored by the powers that be.

as a matter of interest,most journos who make contributions to the weekly RL papers are not professional journos,just fans like you and me who make a report usually for nothing when the travelling costs are taken into account,and quite often with expense to themselves so it's really a labour of love - now,as an exercise,next game you watch live at whatever level, take a notepad and pen and take down details and make out a report of that game - print it out and read the result and see if you find it as easy as you intimate ?

I'm not trying to big up one of my own, but the journalism trade is not all as bread and butter as people think it is.

The comments from sanjunien re: sub-editors and such are very accurate.
And we couldn't have a better T&A man than Ross at the mo. been here before, has the club (and the industry) at heart, and is very well respected.

I think people need to get off his back a little here.

I'm not on his back. My beef is with T&A (which was my original post) which needs to start reporting something of interest, rather than the drivel we have received thus far

But your OP was an accusation of "lazy journalism" and listing quotes as examples, and Heppenstall is the only journalist on Bulls matters.

do me a favour and do as I suggested - next game,take a pen & notepad,make your notes of moves,infringements ,changeovers,scores, missed opportunities and anthing else which you may feel the reader would find of interest then transcribe that into a match report (use any paper as a guide) in time for the sunday deadline of about 1600 hrs for the weekly papers on a monday morning and se how you get on

(then read the published report and see how much it differs from the copy you sent to the sub editor...)

it's easy to criticise - try it yourself and see how easy it [ireally [/iis !

I assisted Mick commentate once last year; even trying to expalin live action while watching the game is difficult enough, never mind taking your eyes off the game to write things down. Incredibly Mick appear to manage both. I think there is an extra person within that huge coat of his. And one for those who bag refs, try running quickly for 80 minutes in busy traffic while keeping up an inntelligent conversation. I was only captain a few times, but trying to continually communicate with your team mates is like rubbing your stomach while patting your head while exhausted.

have you read the OP's original post? there isnt any criticism of the match reports, which you keep going on about, the criticism is about the articles we keep getting between matches which are largely regurgitated with minor variations week after week.

You will have to join me again mate to see how I've progressed the commentary.

Would love to mate, thanks, if only to see how I haven't.

Dave wasn't a liar and I think the rep he got was more than a little unjustified. He's a good writer and a decent bloke, hence why he's now working for one of the largest regional papers in the country.

In terms of current coverage, Ross is between a rock and a hard place when it comes to doing pieces with players. He can ill afford to provoke controversy or write deliberately sensationalised reports as it would cause irreparable damage to his relationship with the club - one which is absolutely vital to his job as the local rag's Bulls correspondent. Any interviews he conducts with players will be overwhelming bland because modern sportsmen are trained to answer questions without a jot of personality, insight or opinion but he has to report what they say in a factual, straightforward manner.

On the other hand, he faces the challenge of keeping coverage fresh and entertaining so must find a balance in his relationship with the club where he can't be afraid to question within reason. Usually, opinion pieces, features and match reports are the best vehicle for this so they're an important tool for any local journo. Ultimately, compare the content in the T&A with any other local paper up and down the country and much of it won't be too dissimilar.

Did it ever occur to anyone that the reason that the T&A weekday reports can be a bit bland is that there usually isn't much to say that is interesting?

You can't report what isn't happening - not without making stuff up, which I'm sure we all agree would be a bad things.

I suspect that most weeks the team are just getting on with training and preparing for the next match. There simply isn't all that interesting to report. So we either have nothing at all in the T&A or the kind of generic interviews that we get. Which would people prefer?