The Guardian’s Version of Saha’s Injury

Now did I miss this or what?

The Guardian reports that Saha is now not expected to play until November. The plot thickens.

Ok, who are we kidding? Let me get this straight. When I first started out (not with this blog but general reading of newspapers etc) I came to believe that The Guardian is among those few good papers in the tabloid-ridden British media.

Of late, they are pissing me off. And that too with alarming frequency. The only thing these days that makes me return to their pages is the few decent writers that inhabit their site. (I wonder why they are still there. Surely they must know a lot of stuff in their paper is unadulterated trash.) But I digress.

Here, let me run you down through another example of their lazy reporting. The prime culprit on this occasion (and many such past occasions is Daniel Taylor. He is an obnoxious cunt, I assure you.) This is how the article starts off:

Sir Alex Ferguson’s desire to find a new striker has been heightened by further bad news about Louis Saha’s seemingly endless injury problems. The Frenchman has had a knee operation and Manchester United’s doctors do not expect him to play again until November at the earliest.

All this we have heard. The article says Manchester United doctors do not expect him to get well in time. This means two things:

1. There has been some official confirmation from the doctors.

2. Doctors may have told some newspaper or channel.

There has been no official word at least on Manutd.com. And if the doctors had in fact talked to any newspaper, then there is nowhere in the article where this fact is being acknowledged.

Now what bugs me to no end is that when Saha’s representatives have issued a statement saying that he will be ready for the start of the season, it remains as the ‘most official’ statement on his injury status, at the time of writing of this post (as well as the Guardian’s post). Why second guess his medical condition with the speculation that he will not make it before November?

True, his medical condition might deteriorate, or the leg may take longer than predicted to heal (hey, we can’t predict the future), but who are we (and by we I mean all third parties – not involved with Saha – including Mr Taylor) to say that he will remain crocked till November.

Now that Danny has, by his own logic, proved his point about Saha’s injury, he goes on to rattle off transfer targets just to fill up space on the page. The names thankfully aren’t anything new. And towards the end of the article he writes:

Saha’s advisers have insisted he will be fit to start the season, but Ferguson’s information is that the 28-year-old will miss at least the first three months

Again use my two-point rule. You get the point. Ferguson’s information?

The only point that looks reasonable enough is when he writes:

[…]the manager has serious misgivings about relying on a player so susceptible to injury

Sadly that is more of an opinion which should belong to a column rather than an article that was meant to report facts. At least that’s what it was written like to start with.

We have had our own share of discussion about Saha’s injury here. On a related note where we talk a bit about uncertainty and how the media plays to its advantage, we focussed on Alan Smith (who also has an uncertain future at OT).

And before I end this rant, here is an interesting quote I found in the Guardian website. Apparently Daniel Taylor’s mediocrity hasn’t even escaped Sir Alex’s notice:

“He’s not a journalist – he looks more like the bass player from Oasis.” Strangely, he took this as a compliment.

Kinda explains everything doesn’t it? (And what about him taking it as a compliment, you ask? Well you must put that question to the exact variety of pot he was on at that point in time to get an answer)