| So, according to Stu Watson 13:52 - Aug 18 with 5086 views | hype313 | "As things stand, the Blues have been put off by Leverkusen's valuation of €35m (£30m) and are exploring other centre-midfield options." But we've now been told a second bid has been rejected. Someone isn't being truthful. |  |
| |  |
| So, according to Stu Watson on 19:41 - Aug 18 with 623 views | Joey_Joe_Joe_Junior |
| So, according to Stu Watson on 16:42 - Aug 18 by Cheltenham_Blue | “ I just don't understand how he can say 'We understand, however, that Ipswich have had no contact with Rennes” As I said. It’s guesswork. “We understand” is incredibly ambiguous, it’s not a definite ‘yes’, but not a definite ’no’ either |
What do you expect him to write. I just got off the phone with Mark Ashton? The club give them a steer if they want to. |  |
|  |
| So, according to Stu Watson on 19:44 - Aug 18 with 588 views | Gary_Knows | If Stuart Watson told me the sky was blue I’d still go outside and check. |  |
|  |
| So, according to Stu Watson on 21:19 - Aug 18 with 387 views | DavoIPB |
| So, according to Stu Watson on 19:36 - Aug 18 by Bellevue_Blue | Isn't that the whole point of journalism, that it isn't guesswork? That's why what he says about transfers has more credibility than what you and I say. Because it is sourced. “We understand” doesn't mean “we're guessing”. It's standard journalistic language for reporting information they've been given or established through their sources. From the information available to them, they do not believe that we have bid for Palacios or are in talks with Embolo. Also, why would you guess totally against the general feeling? Everyone is saying these things are happening, and he's suggesting they're not. An odd position to take based on the little to no information he apparently has! [Post edited 18 Aug 19:38]
|
Yep, he is a proper journalist and would not publish if didn't have a reliable source that could be backed up. |  | |  |
| |