Waching daily Sep 27 2018

Martin, that was naughty. You took part of my post out to make a point – the bit where I said 'not the prime time pundits (we know who they are)'

So, of course I don't mean Paul Scholes, Rio Ferdinand or anyone like that. I mean the likes of Jason Cundy or Craig Bellamy who will not have a clue what is happening and will go on the radio or a lunch time slot on Sky and regurgitate whatever they've read in the papers

You knew full well what I was saying, and what you did is exactly what your junior writers have done to Jose Mourinho since the summer

I tried to exclude you from what I consider Mourinho's problem with the media. Not cricket Martin, not cricket

Lewis, Manchester. Lewis, I'm a journalist not a deciphering service. If you mean Bellamy and Cundy, say Bellamy and Cundy, and then I'll understand

And there was nothing in your post about prime time pundits that I could see. In fact, I barely altered your words at all, apart from small grammatical and punctuation changes

Here is your post, unedited: 'So effectively you're saying that because Man Utd keep themselves to themselves the press create stories all week

Man Utd sells, so it needs to be written, I get that, but how do you hope to improve that relationship with that stance? I don't believe that opinion pieces like yours are what Mourinho talks about what he talks about lies, I believe it is the avalanche of these stories stating "fact" about the camp as a whole and other things

It's these stories that brain dead ex players read drinking their coffee that morning before they do a spot on sky sports news and perpetuate it all

Instead of doing things properly this mob culture attempts to hold people to ransom to do interviews and let people in

It's a catch 22. But thank you for being honest, it is much appreciated and opens up a proper conversation

' And here's what I used: 'So effectively you're saying that because Manchester United keep themselves to themselves the press create stories all week

Manchester United sells, so need to be written about, I get that, but how do you hope to improve that relationship with that stance? I don't believe that opinion pieces like yours are what Mourinho talks about when he talks about lies, I believe it is the avalanche of these stories stating 'facts' about the camp as a whole

It's these stories that brain dead ex-players read drinking their coffee that morning before they do a spot on Sky Sports News to perpetuate it all

Instead of doing things properly this mob culture attempts to hold people to ransom to do interviews and let people in

It's Catch-22.' I edited out 22 words; 16 of which were praise for me. I do not understand how I am supposed to extrapolate Bellamy and Cundy from Ferdinand and Scholes in your mention of 'brain dead ex-players'

I make alterations around style; I can't improve content. I changed Utd to United, because I believe a column should have a standardised format

I capitalised where necessary, took out superfluous words such as 'that'. I like tidy copy, Lewis

It holds the attention of readers, speeds the conversation along. I'll correct facts, correct spellings, change childish insults – Flopp for Klopp, which is the new Maureen for Mourinho – all to try to help the flow

I never change a point, I invariably remove any praise for a column I've written, and unless a poster is truly objectionable I never go for anyone over spelling, grammar or factual errors

In other words, I try to be fair. I do reserve the right to edit, however, because it makes for a better read

For instance, your follow-up post here, changed tack completely in the final sentence to make a point about England

I've removed that because it's irrelevant to this discussion. As for what you said about Cundy and Bellamy, even had you been clearer and named specific names I still would have disputed the argument

Cundy appears very regularly on Talk Sport and I recently saw Bellamy as one of the three guests on Sky's live Sunday football, so I think both might be considered mainstream; and even if they are not in comparison to Scholes or Ferdinand, do you seriously believe Bellamy cannot become informed about events and emotions at Manchester United in one phone call to, say, his Welsh team-mate Ryan Giggs? Football people speak all the time; they share agents, friends, coaches, colleagues

It doesn't make them expert on every club or every incident, but they often know more than you or I, or more than they can say publicly

That's why it's more than just rabbit. Unlike this. Chas Hodges was so much more than a singalong piano player

He was one of the most gifted session musicians in London, he played with Joe Meek; the vocal interplay on this alone is quite astonishing

RIP. Five points up next. Is Mick McCarthy briefing you, Martin? No mention of Ipswich by you for ages, then three come along in two weeks

There is no tension at Portman Road, just good wishes that Paul Hurst gets his win

It's a new beginning and no one is expecting miracles this season. I was a McCarthy supporter but his stultifying tactics while trying to neutralise the opposition rather than playing to his strengths alienated fans

Marmite50, Reading. I wrote about Ipswich on several occasions last season, mostly in defence of McCarthy given his budgetary restrictions – I thought he overachieved

I followed that up this year now it turns out he wasn't doing such a bad job after all

Ipswich are in the relegation zone and I note that on Saturday, they failed to win their fifth straight home game of the season, despite Bolton – who haven't won since August 22 – going down to 10 men after 34 minutes

Worse, Ipswich had two attempts on goal all game. Maybe, far from failing to play to his strengths, McCarthy was merely doing the best with what he had

I liked Hurst at Shrewsbury and hope he will come good, too – but you've got to admit the job McCarthy did is looking better with hindsight

Not that all of us required hindsight. On May 10 this year in your column, you were talking about random fixture generations from a computer and how moving fixtures is right

'The thing is, what the Premier League cooks up doesn't harm its competition in the least,' you wrote

I remember this as I was thinking about commenting that a tough start can be very, very hard to recover from and sorting out the top six for the TV folk might be extremely detrimental to other clubs

Then here you are writing about fine margins and early momentum for smaller clubs

This point I completely agree with. The margins are often small, hence the scrutiny for all the Premier League's decisions

As a West Ham fan I always view the start of the season with trepidation. We have seen before that a tough start is hard to recover from

Given these margins and swings in a season, maybe the manipulation of fixtures should be looked at more closely? Big Me, Wokingham

Yes, but the May column was about the fact the top six do not play each other in the first week or the last, not about a whole run of games

So, OK, the fact West Ham played away at Liverpool on day one makes a good start less likely – although West Ham won first game out at Arsenal in 2015 – and the fact Manchester United can't meet a major rival might be considered beneficial

Yet it is home defeats by Bournemouth and Wolves that really set West Ham back, and United have so far contrived to drop points against Brighton, Tottenham and Wolves – so what are we to read into this? That was the basis of the May 10 piece

That the fixtures and calendar become uncontrollable as the season unfolds anyway, so big matches are often rearranged late and random cycles occur, and that the form book can make separating teams into categories meaningless

For instance, Burnley have played Watford and Bournemouth this season – two teams that have been consistently in the top five

By contrast, after Saturday, Watford will have played both Manchester United and Arsenal – with neither of these elite clubs in top-five form

So the tiniest slice of stage management by the Premier League is insignificant, and I stand by that

Having said all this, whoever gave Newcastle fixtures against Tottenham, Chelsea, Manchester City and Arsenal in their first five games, must have a granny on Wearside

Mr Samuel, I am glad you take note of our comments but the hate mob mentality from the online paper, not just towards Jose Mourinho, but to Arsene Wenger, Antonio Conte, trying to get people the sack – you act like a pack of hyenas

And what's it all about? Advertising click bait. What Goes Around, Preston. First of all, let me say that you lot aren't as valuable as you think

The idea that online advertising revenue is worth more than newspaper readers – I'd check the numbers

Anyway, as I explained, I do not advocate the sacking of managers and am far more likely to defend them – the much-maligned McCarthy a case in point

If you would like to find the column in which I advocated the sacking of Mourinho, for instance, be my guest – but it would be as much as waste of your time as constantly reiterating the same points again and again is of mine

Mr Samuel, it's so obvious that the press cannot stand Manchester United. It's pointless going through it all as it will only get shot down and ferociously denied as always

But there's plenty of proof in my statement, and it's even easier to spot these days as the Daily Mail has such a shameful lovefest with Liverpool

The press never mention the fact that Mourinho has won three trophies – four if you count the Community Shield, which I don't – while Jurgen Klopp is still struggling to win one

It will be so interesting to know which team will next fall under the bitter and twisted words of Martin Samuel, and his cronies

Brooksey1, United Kingdom. Liverpool have won seven of seven games at the time of writing; Manchester United four of eight

Just a hunch, and far be it from me to shoot down some really top class dribble with facts and stuff, but maybe that is why they are getting more praise

Oh, and just saying, there's plenty of proof for your statement without bothering to provide any does not in itself count as proof

It marks you out as an intellectual lightweight. Brooksey, you talk about 'the press' as if they are a single entity rather than a huge and varied collection of people

And your hatred of Liverpool, including giving their manager a childish name, is far more virulent than anything written in the media about your team

Dave the Silhilian, Solihull. He wrote Flopp rather than Klopp, and I changed it for the reasons I explained in the introduction, and because it really is the most tired and unoriginal play on words

And Dave's point about the press is well made. Given the size of Manchester United's fan base, does it not occur to their more paranoid fans that there will be more supporters of United in the press than any other club? You wrote of Mauricio Pochettino: 'He was very snappy, again, after the defeat

he doesn't like to be asked footballing questions.' No, that is not the reason. This may be because like many of us, he sees the English press as rabid attack dogs who continually bait managers and players, who see it as part of their job to destroy their careers and reputations and then try them in a kangaroo court, where there is only one predetermined outcome, decided by the press

The court where the media make all the rules, control the information and frame the debate as they please so the selected victim cannot possibly win

The same media who present themselves as the real victims, point the finger at people and pronounce them guilty and sentence them to life without any chance of parole – career over

Maybe you should consider that this is why certain people get snappy with the media

Cloughie2000, United States. Oh Lordy, what a lot of overwrought, hysterical drivel

I was very specific in my anecdotes about Pochettino, detailing the polite way questions were framed and the gentle probing managers received, and contrasting that with his irritable replies

I even cited Klopp's view of the English media – as very polite but too distracted by trivia – as evidence

Yet off you go, in such ridiculously lurid terms – rabid attack dogs, kangaroo courts, victims, life sentences

Look, Pochettino has had little but praise since he went to Tottenham. No trophies but universal acclaim and, outside White Hart Lane, his greatest champions are in the press

Anyway, on the subject of rabid outbursts and traducing reputations, I've checked your track record, mate

You're the bloke who posted in June 2017 that Wayne Rooney was never the same player after 2004, that maybe Manchester United 'ruined' him or it was 'the injury'

What, a broken metatarsal in 2006? To list what Rooney won with United after this ruination would take far too long, so I'll just say that I'll take the rabid attack dogs of the media rather than your ill-informed rantings any day

Imagine if you were in my position and wrote that Manchester United ruined their all-time greatest goalscorer? Some credibility you'd have

Meanwhile, on the subject of rabid attack dogs, this guy was always one of the most unhinged

RIP Lux Interior (and Nick Knox). Journalists 'don't make up stories about Manchester United, but they survive on scraps in that patch, so obviously the space is filled with opinion or conjecture which is more likely to be negative if results are poor'

I can't believe Martin Samuel actually wrote that statement because it would be the most damning admission of guilt by a top journalist on behalf of his colleagues

People don't make up stories, they just write conjecture? WTF? Obviously my grammar is pretty shambolic, so please would Mr Samuel enlighten me on the difference between conjecture and making things up? 'Opinion

is more likely to be negative if results are poor'. Wow. So please tell us Mr Samuel, how poor is three decades of failing to win one league title, one FA Cup in 10 years and zero trophies in three seasons? That's Liverpool and Klopp's sequence of results

So why aren't they harangued and hounded day and night? Your logic is suspect here, sir

Flopist Klopist, United Kingdom. It's not your grammar that's poor, but your knowledge of the language

Conjecture is any opinion or statement based on an incomplete version of events. So it can be guesswork, but it can also be having most of the story but not all of it

So the writers in Manchester that have been detailing the deterioration of Paul Pogba's relationship with Mourinho, for instance, might be kept at arm's length and not in possession of all the facts: it doesn't, however, make them wrong or liars, because clearly there is a problem and they are doing their best to scrutinise it, given the available information and with some excellent digging

As for Liverpool, the lack of finite success is a familiar theme around the club and having attended all of Klopp's finals as Liverpool manager, I can assure you he was asked about it every time

This season, however, Liverpool look a very strong team, which Manchester United do not

That would explain the marked difference in coverage, and is certainly not conjecture

Oh, and congratulations on noticing that Klopp rhymes with Flopp. It never grows old, that one

Honestly. Hysterical stuff. If Lionel Messi and Cristiano Ronaldo are kicked then the opponent gets booked

If Hazard gets kicked then every other player on the team gets to kick him two or three times more until the referee finally books someone in the 93rd minute

If you want Hazard to shine then book the players unfairly stopping him. Bluto, London

Agreed. But I think that applies to a lot of creative players, not just Hazard. We play a version of the rules in this country, unlike Spain

While I agree that Hazard doesn't have the consistency of Messi and Ronaldo, it has to be taken into account that in the most recent examples of his slumps he has been playing in teams that have sacrificed attacking football and he suffered for it

Ellswade, Guildford. In some games, yes – Chelsea's visit to Manchester City last season was an acute example – but not all of them

And in that dismal year under Mourinho, I thought Chelsea were desperate for Hazard to get them going, rather than stifling him

For whatever reason, he did not accept that challenge. How many goals did Ronaldo score in the Premier League each year? La Liga and the Premier League are two totally different competitions

Michael, New York. Indeed. Even so, Ronaldo averaged a goal every 2.47 games for Manchester United, Hazard is on 3

25 for Chelsea. Remember, too, that Hazard arrived in England as a fully-formed first-team player, as opposed to Ronaldo's coltish beginnings at Manchester United

Oh, and Hazard's best club season – 19 goals – still pegs him four goals off Ronaldo's third best for United

So different leagues, but not a different outcome. What people don't understand about Hazard or football is that there's more to the game than just goals

How did the ball get from the goalkeeper to the back of the net? Like some people have said, Messi and Ronaldo have had teams built around them, that support them

At Chelsea, we don't build around a player, rather we build a team capable of winning

In Hazard's case, the team isn't necessarily constructed to fit him: it's just the fact he stands out from the bunch

Yes, he scores goals, but what about dribbles, take-ons, the ability to create space for your team-mates, chances created, dictating the tempo

RaulM, Los Angeles. And yet when West Ham stopped Hazard last Sunday, Chelsea disappeared, so maybe it's built around him a little more than you think

And I'd say many of us can understand football without helpful lectures from you, Raul

Certainly we understand that Messi and Ronaldo are quite good at dribbling, creating space, creating chances and dictating tempo, too

I don't know what a take on is, so you can have that one. Maybe it's a forward run

Anyway, as far as how the ball gets into the net, here are some other statistics that may help understanding: Messi 255 career assists, Ronaldo 209, Hazard 59

I may not know much about football, or even maths, but I know two hundred and something is bigger than 59

A lot bigger. Hazard averaging 49 games a season isn't that impressive when you compare it to Ronaldo's 49

1 games. Oh dear, Martin. CFC4, London. No, the point was that you'd expect to see Ronaldo and Messi being protected: instead they actually play more games than Hazard, if only by a little

An unprovoked article on the best player in the league. Sensing a Chelsea title, are we? Dancing Tyrant, Zambia

The Daily Mail are just sad they haven't forced Hazard into a Real Madrid move. Sir Didier, London

Think about it, dopey. Why would we want one of the Premier League's best players – the scorer of a quite sensational goal against Liverpool last night – going to Spain? How would that help sell newspapers? Hazard one season on and one season off? Yet he has consistently finished first or second in the PFA Player of the Year in three of his six full seasons at Chelsea: 2013-14, 2014-15, 2016-17

He has either been Player of the Year, Young Player of the Year or in the Team of the Year in nine of his 11 professional seasons

One bad season does not mean inconsistency. Time to drop that myth. The Liquidator, United Kingdom

Er, three out of six is exactly one on, one off, actually. But forget that. I didn't refer to Hazard's early years in Ligue 1 but specifically to his last four in England

And that has been one on, one off, because it includes the two when he failed to make a team of the season or win a player award

I think the point stands. Anyway, here's some ska. They like this stuff over the Bridge

Until next time