Guti’s leg definitely knacked says Argentina doctor. Shola’s foot a mystery.

Posted on August 28th, 2009 | 22 Comments |

Definitely knacked, but how bad's Shola?
Definitely knacked, but how bad's Shola?
Well it looks like Toon wing wizard, Jonas Gutierrez has definitely sustained a significant injury. Argentina team doctor, Donato Villani has officially announced that he will be out of next month’s World Cup qualifiers against Brazil and Paraguay with leg muscle problems. This comes in the wake of Newcastle United’s tough clash with the Terriers of Huddersfield, where a reluctant Chris Hughton was forced to bring on some of his bug guns to eventually triumph over tenacious opposition.

Villani announced to the AFA (Argentine Football Association):

“Jonas Gutierrez suffered a muscle injury in his right leg playing for his club and will not be able to take part in the national team’s next commitments against Brazil and Paraguay, scheduled for September 5 and 9,”

The situation regarding Fenham hitman, Shola Ameobi, is somewhat more vague however. Chris Hughton’s assessment, made in the wake of the Carling Cup clash with the ‘Udders was:

“Shola has turned his ankle and to be fair to him he came straight off the pitch when he felt it so hopefully that has minimised any damage.”

Meanwhile Joe Kinnear’s best friend and renowned symbol of journalistic integrity, Simon Bird, has since reported that Ameobi’s foot is the problem, not his ankle. He rabidly reports in his piece, “Newcastle rocked by new Shola Ameobi injury blow”:

“Newcastle have been hit by a new hammer blow with striker Shola Ameobi suffering a suspected broken foot – leaving a massive hole in their weakened squad.”

He then goes on with the usual “club source” guff, reporting that his alleged contact deep inside the bowels of the Barrack Road beast has said:

“Hughton has been told to restock his Newcastle squad WITHOUT spending a penny over the weekend.”

Meanwhile, The Times’s George Caulkin hit the cut and paste shortly after, repackaging Bird’s fantasies in slightly more eloquent prose in his remarkably similar “Newcastle suffer double injury blow“.

Recycling isn’t always a good thing, George.

NUFCBlog Author: workyticket workyticket has written 1088 articles on this blog.

Related Posts:

Posted on by workyticket in category: Chris Hughton and Jonas Gutierrez and NUFC gossip and speculation and Shola Ameobi and Workyticket , with tags: , , , , ,
Comment on this post

22 Responses

  1. Hmm, the injuries are worrying.

    In retrospect it’s easy to wonder if we should have bothered putting Ameobi and Jonas on to try and win a league cup game given the small squad and the fact that the Championship is way more important.

  2. “Rabid” reporting? Symbol of journalistic integrity. Caulkin hit the cut and paste…..
    Er, what are you trying to say here.
    Surely it was your site who his the cut and paste and nicked the story from the newsnow site, like most other pathetic blogs, who then go on to criticise real newspapers without ever having any new info themselves.
    You are amateurs who clearly have no idea of libel laws when commenting on two of our most trustworthy journalists’ work.
    George Caulkin and Simon Bird and a couple of noteable others have consistently written excellent articles on Newcastle and tapped into the feelings of us fans.
    I hope they take legal action and close your pitiful site down. You comments do not help our cause.

  3. Dear blobroberts

    Although I agree somewhat with your comments please ensure that when writing comments about journalistic impropriaty you use your spell checker.

  4. Recycling … ? Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha. Q: Has anything that’s appeared on this woeful site NOT been recycled from elsewhere? A: No! Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha.

  5. Purple Ronnie: Regarding your comment about the spell checker: You spelled impropriety wrong. Oh the irony.

    Blob Roberts: Get over yourself. There isn’t a website that doesn’t borrow, or a journalist who doesn’t take to us with a stick every now and then.

  6. The difference between this site and a national newspaper is that the people who write for the news papers get paid extortionate amounts of money to do so. You also have to pay if you want it in paper form.
    As far as I am aware no one gets paid anything to write on this site. I also believe the not one of the article writers is a professional journalist either. So, for someone who is supposed to be a pro and is being paid to do their job, it is fair comment to have a swipe at them for just copying another jorno’s work.

    Cannylad, blobroberts – if you don’t like it here, then leave. You can have a full refund of your subs. Perhaps you should set up your own site. At least then you will have full control over what is posted and you can make sure that everything you have on your site is original, right down to any images you use.
    To answer your question, I think you’ll find that the only articles that contain information that may be on multiple sites are the news related ones. The rest are all original articles.
    Your refund check is in the post.

  7. One more thing, blobroberts, who obviously knows jack about liable laws. Just what can the author of this blog be sued for?

    I can’t believe I’ve just bitten to two mackem wind ups. Oh well.

  8. I love irony, me. All that steam and freshly pressed cotton.

    Sheesh, you’ve touched some nerves somewhere worky!

    I’m glad we’re all clear now that we’re amateurs. I’ll have to send my brown envelopes back though worky, for all those expenses.

    For the record, I’m grateful to worky for putting the site together in view of Ed Harrison’s plans to fold his site. worky carried on so as not to waste the work he’d put in and so a few of us write about our football club.

    I’m fairly sure when I’m writing, journalistic integrity isn’t upper most on my mind. Though I’d like to see some evidence where I’ve personally cut and paste something. But of course we borrow stories from the media for discussion. That’s the whole point? We’re not journalists selling stories. We’re readers who read and judge them. That’s what they get paid for. Most of the media talk tosh at one time or another when they put their own slant on a situation. Being a non-member of the media, I talk tosh most of the time, the difference being I’m happy to admit. I still wouldn’t openly criticise individuals on a whim. So to generalise about the contributors to this site is a bit off.

    I’d distance myself from the Caulkin comments anyway, because I enjoy his stuff. Other than the Kinnear episode I’ve not read much of Simon Bird’s work so it would be unfair to comment. That’s the view of this particular article write and it’s his prerogative. We haven’t changed laws in the western world have we? We’re still allowed opinions?

  9. MT – I got distracted (with work of all things) and didn’t send this before refreshing so you’d pretty much said it for me. Including the bit about the bite!!

  10. Libel is indeed dodgy ground and it’s important for anybody, including blog writers with a small audience, to consider whether something they are writing is defamatory….in law the onus would be on the author to prove the comments were NOT defamatory…..not the other way around.

    Having said that – even if the people named in this article were offended and felt defamed, and even if they could find a legal eagle willing to pursue the matter, and even if it came to court – the punishment would be geared to fit the crime……ie small blog, small audience small punishement (in relative terms..)

  11. “Small punishement(sic)”

    A spanking?

    Perhaps you should be more defamatory worky? Though I guess it depends on who’s carrying out the punishment. I’m thinking blonde, hair tied up, steely look in her eyes.

    “Small blog, small audience”!! How very rude.

    Aye, fair enough.

  13. Libel is actually quite hard to establish because one of the defences is that the comments are ‘fair’, which doesn’t mean they necessarily have to be true but would reflect opinions that a reasonable person might hold, even if they’re false, and thus would not cause any undue defamation (which is necessary for libel to be committed).

    Most libel threats are just that and it’s usually only people with very expensive lawyers and an extremely good cases that will pursue it through the courts.

  14. I was just checking you didn’t mean punishment relative to the crime. ;)

    I think it’s still in it’s infancy but maybe that’s being optimistic. I’m happy either way like. If people don’t like my stuff they can blog off. Or comment on how they don’t like it (whichever they prefer)…..

  15. Hmm, just discovered this blog, believe it`s been set up by WORKEYTICKET, congratulations !
    Some very familiar names here, wondered what happened to y`all.
    Appreciate the effort and will be checking out the blog on a regular basis.

  16. I am actually a lawyer so know a bit about libel.
    The test is if you “rubbish someone in their business profession or trade” you have committed a libel.
    You would have to plead justification to win the case. Ie justify their story is wrong.
    The “fair comment” defence would not count.
    I suggest the way you rubbished the work of these two journos and inferred their story is untrue is a libel. I may contact them to offer no win no fee advice.
    You had better pray that shola plays on Monday and is fit.

  17. Blobroberts you are as much a lawyer as I am an astronaught. You would be better off directing your energy into supporting your shambolic football club that will always be in our shadow no matter what division we are in. It must boil your noodle having a life long toon fan as your manager.

  18. But since this is a blog, OPINION would count as defense and it is easily the hardest one to take action against. You should know this, no?

    The two journalists would also have to prove their own credibility when it came to their publications and that would open up a massive can of worms for them so they’re hardly likely to take you up on your “no win no fee” offer.

    You’re as much a “lawyer”, (we call them solicitors), as I am a premier league footballer.

    I would try and sell your bullsh*t elsewhere.

  19. Let’s be honest, there are enough opinions on t’internet these days that you could clean up. I’m just surprised nobody has done it yet…..

    If it works out, perhaps you could buy the club?

  20. chuck says:
    August 28, 2009 at 11:53 am

    “Hmm, just discovered this blog, believe it`s been set up by WORKEYTICKET, congratulations !
    Some very familiar names here, wondered what happened to y`all.
    Appreciate the effort and will be checking out the blog on a regular basis.”

    Thanks Chuck. Hope you’ll be chucking in the odd comment too!