JM slams MJ

[mump boy]

the ever more brilliant jon mulkeen has torn into marion jones in an column in Athletics weekly this week.

he not only takes her to task for her dubious history but gives us 'Jones' tainted timeline' and hilariously places the article next to an advert for WADA !!!

Jon your piece is spot on.

unfortunately she's gone and pulled out of World Cup so Flump and i won't be able to give her outr double wammy but never mind, Jon's done us proud

:-)

[eldrick]

if that's the case, then i'm disappointed in aw

i don't recall aw publishing similar articles on the gdr machine in'70's/'80's ?

a respected publication shoud be prescient enough to know about publishing a -ve article citing only innuendo, hearsay, guilt by association or whatever, about an athlete

do you ever see such articles in magazines like t&f or runner's world ?

[Clive]

"Ever more brilliant" JM? Sorry (and no disrespect) - I read his preview of the WJ championships and it left a little (to say the least) to be desired.

Give him another 20 years before we call him brilliant. Isn't he only about 20?

[eldrick]

"Ever more brilliant" JM? Sorry (and no disrespect) - I read his preview of the WJ championships and it left a little (to say the least) to be desired.

Give him another 20 years before we call him brilliant. Isn't he only about 20?

well, i remember reading watman's predictions for the '83 wc & they weren't that good either !

judged on the "yardstick" of watman ,the doyen of british writers, he's doing fine !

anyhows, even using prediction contests is a bit of a waste of time to judge people - probably the best performer in prediction contests in the past 1y has been nevetslim - & he's just turned 16 & only been following the sport since athens og !!!

[Clive]

I was not referring to JM's predictions, more journalistic style.

I agree that predictions are pointless - no yardstick at all to measure knowledge.

Watman is great and Steven Downes is outstanding. Peter Matthews is top notch (and a great meet announcer). My personal favourite will always be the late Cliff Temple, however.

[Jon]

The WJCh preview was not intended to be an award-winning piece of writing, Clivan. It was just a brief run-down of 10 international junior athletes who looked set to perform well and I was limited in the amount of space I had to write about each one.

Re: Watman, do you know how old he was when he started at AW?

[eldrick]

i've read some of jonno's articles in aw ( & i've had enough arguments with him in past 5y not to be accused of being biased in his favour !) & often read a lot of the article before even checking the author, & they come across as well-researched, knowledgeable , witty & with a good balance between praise/criticism for athletes ( albeit i disagree with the premise that a hatchet-job is justified on marion in light of her -ve test ( a test which we shoud never have even heard about ! ) )

his demonstrated ability is certainly the equal of anyone they've currently got on their staff

[Clive]

Re: Watman, do you know how old he was when he started at AW?[/quote]

I don't know - but old enough to be objective, informative, balanced, educational and wise in his views, I suspect (not to menton being an actual trained journalist, of course).

[Jon]

i disagree with the premise that a hatchet-job is justified on marion in light of her -ve test ( a test which we shoud never have even heard about ! )

The piece I wrote is pretty much along the lines of this article:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0, ... 53,00.html

I.e. Marion is cleared by law, but she is not yet free from suspicion and her reputation is already shot.

[Jon]

Re: Watman, do you know how old he was when he started at AW?

I don't know - but old enough to be objective, informative, balanced, educational and wise in his views, I suspect (not to menton being an actual, trained journalist, of course).

He was 16 years old (and no, not a trained journalist).

You'd perhaps be surprised to learn just how many (or few, as the case may be) track writers are not 'trained journalists'. And I know GH can back me up on that one.

[Clive]

I stand corrected on MW. As for training, I would be surprised if most athletics journalists/broadcasters did not have at least an English degree, or some writing experience, as background.

Was MW writing at 16?

[eldrick]

i disagree with the premise that a hatchet-job is justified on marion in light of her -ve test ( a test which we shoud never have even heard about ! )

The piece I wrote is pretty much along the lines of this article:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0, ... 53,00.html

I.e. Marion is cleared by law, but she is not yet free from suspicion and her reputation is already shot.

i know, but the fact that the test was strictly a "non-event" in terms of the doping guidelines, means same situation applies to her now as in '03, so it was just a re-hash of the same stuff that's been bandied about her for 3y

[MJD]

I stand corrected on MW. As for training, I would be surprised if most athletics journalists/broadcasters did not have at least an English degree, or some writing experience, as background.

Was MW writing at 16?

Looks like you could stand a lot of correcting.

[Jon]

I would be surprised if most athletics journalists/broadcasters did not have at least an English degree, or some writing experience, as background.

Prepare to be surprised.

Was MW writing at 16?

Yes. I can provide proof, if you like...?

[eldrick]

I stand corrected on MW. As for training, I would be surprised if most athletics journalists/broadcasters did not have at least an English degree, or some writing experience, as background

what for ?

gh here has a background of a degree in molecular biology

not affected his authoritativeness in being the editor or a meet anouncer