Watford Observer v WD Sport

I was quite a regular on the WD Sport site when it first came out, especially the twitter feed, but I had to end up unfollowing as it became far too much about them. As someone else mentioned reporting speculation as fact, then re-tweeting opinions that back their views up, but ignoring any comments which disagree.

Then to imply the Wobby article about potential closure of the SEJ would have led to people staying away/not buying tickets for the opening day was ludicrous. I mean it was an article up for about 4 hours, to try and 'blame' the Observer for empty seats seemed so petty.

And now this spitefulness regarding articles. Why does it matter? If the articles are good,I'm sure there are enough fans who'll visit both sites frequently. Right now it feels far more like a fan site than an online news source

 

Indeed.

As I posted in another thread, the WO is not a sport-exclusive publication so any comparison in terms of total output isn't particularly fair, especially when WD Sport's non-Watford FC coverage is limited to watching Anthony Joshua box on Sky Sports and posting a few Cricket scores taken from the Internet.

I don't like the way WD Sport posts rumour as fact, as with the Vydra 'buy clause' and the click bait nature of their Twitter posts (the latest on the Balotelli transfer for example). The rolling blog is pointless in the week and only relevant on match days and the fact it's littered with links to its own website is pretty awful.

They were shown up on the Guedioura transfer as they called it 'dead in the water' several times over the summer and then tried to explain it away as 'it was' and 'only went through' as we didn't sign someone else.

A little bit disrespectful and arrogant IMO, much like its bitter leader.

 

Agree. WO report online in a format built for a newspaper. Twitter, live blogging, mobile optimised content is where they are getting beaten.
I still think Affleck needs to strike a careful balance between good opinion based journalism and the type of stuff that will turn the club off as we grow and they need to be more protective with their output.

 

As someone who's edited a couple of large magazines and newspapers in my time, the funding question is completely besides the point - there are as many funding approaches to media (esp. new media) as there are publications. Even hardened journos like myself struggle with understanding how things are kept afloat - let's not pollute a football forum with pointless media funding speculation, eh?

For what it's worth, content-wise (the only discussion here worth having) WD Sport is crushing the WO, esp. with the live blogging. Affleck seems like the sort who could go rogue, though. A good journo, but a bit of a social media maverick, which is something we firmly keep an eye on nowadays.

 

WDS is good only as a media portal IMO. Afflecks articles are pretty average and his writing style is pretty dull, which is why I think NewsNow is just as good if not better.

 

Out of habit I still buy the print version WO but its WFC coverage is dire. Whoever is responsible for agreeing to publish Olly Phillips' increasingly incoherent and ill-informed ramblings each week should be fired immediately. I'm not sure that it was any better when Smith was on the payroll. Does anyone remember the paper's limp-wristed interviews with Bazzini when it was obvious to most people that our former chairman's motives where less than philanthropic? WD Sport may not be perfect but it is streets ahead of the WO when it comes to WFC content. Plus, it comes with the added bonus that it doesn't feature the ******ous 'fans' comments that makes with WO's online version so repellent too.

 

Is he still going? He was incoherent and ill-informed about 15 years ago.

 

How do you know which niche of mail order bride to get?

 

The observer lost me when it went tabloid.

 

It seems an age since WD Sport has been updated. Has it been discontinued?

 

Think it might cache a bit strangely on certain browsers/devices which makes it look like it hasn't been updated.

It generally has 2 or 3 stories a day and has been updated with stories today, the latest being this one:

http://www.wdsport.co.uk/2015/10/miguel-britos-sought-loan-move-before-watford-bow-at-stoke/

There's also this page for live mini updates: http://www.wdsport.co.uk/2015/07/live-rolling-hornets-news-bites/

This link may be better for getting the latest stories just about Watford FC http://www.wdsport.co.uk/category/watford-fc/

 

I find them pretty good tbh.

I read their rolling news page a couple of times a day. Then they have their longer articles page which is good - they have one on Flores squad choices and a Troy interview from the last few days amongst others. Also they monitor these forums for tittle tattle from time to time

 

Thanks - you hit the nail on the head. I use Safari on an iMac and am now getting the updates. It is a site I very much like.

 

"21:55 Sadly we can’t bring you any player reaction from tonight’s thrilling 3-3 draw, where the Hornets twice came from two goals down, because no player is allowed to speak and communicate to the fans just how pleased they are at the result."

Oh dear. Sounds like WDSport & the club might have had a bit of a falling-out.

 

It's all got a bit stale, think WD need to move the whole media game on and start rummaging through players bins to find stories

 

That's so 1980's. I want to see them tapping phones & hacking voicemail.

 

1) They might have been relieved, but I doubt they were pleased - plenty of chances missed and some very average defending in my view.
2) I doubt that too many Hornets fans have had their week wrecked because they are unable to read the post match thoughts of our U-21s.
3) WDS is a welcome addition to the range of media covering WFC, but these occasional petulant outbursts do them no credit.

 

Agreed. Would be more professional to say nowt, you'd think they'd know that.

 

How do you come back twice from 2 goals down in a 3-3 draw? Wouldn't need to be at least 4-4?

 

0-2 & 1-3

 

More accurate to say that we were 2 goals behind on two occasions

 

Taxi

 

As I said on the other thread WD Sport have probably got in a huff about it because that's blown their content for the rest of the week apart. Usually Tuesday to Thursday is them drip feeding articles and comment based on things said at some sort of midweek event (open training, golf day, U21 match...) They're in grave danger of having nothing to write about until the friendly press pack go to London Colney and get a couple of one on one interviews with first teamers.

 

WD Sport started well but now is worse than the Wobby.

 

The fact that they have petulant outbursts shows why they are nothing less than glorified bloggers.

FIND OUT JUST HOW MUCH MARIAPPA LOANED DEENEY HERE! OMG HOPE YOU DIDN'T CHARGE INTEREST AIDY!

 

I know more than both the Wobby and WD40.

 

The last couple of articles I've read in the Wobby have been littered with spelling errors.

 

Latest headline on WDS rolling news:

"10:17 They really are pushing the Hornets Shop this week"

Referring to a couple of different first team players being present at the shop each afternoon this week!

 

So according to this thread we have the tabloid Watford Observer, a glorified blog in WDSport... Who's up for the Golden Boys' broadsheet? Proper subeditors, no spelling or grammar issues, all quality journalism. Investors please PM me.

 

I'm thinking of something like the Daily Planet in the Superman movies, but only covering Watford FC. A skyscraper office with hundreds of reporters, photographers and an old, weathered, cigar chomping chief who just wants evidence that Spider-Man is a criminal.

 

What you've done there is confuse Marvel & DC into one weird cross contaminated promotion. Your arguments are confused and for that reason I'm out.

 

Superman vs Spiderman.

Who would win?

 

Already been done mate:

 

Why go to the Observer or WD, (or hissyfitsports as I call them). All the news and decent opinion is here.

 

Meridensi could be sub editor