Cricket Web Content - Feedback

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Just quickly skimmed it, but I found the intro a bit weak. While it's a feature article, so doesn't require the "hard angle", it still didn't draw me in that much.

Yep, I agree. I wrote the intro last. I write articles in segments according to inspiration and I couldn't find much inspiration when I tailed back to add the intro.

 

[AndrewM]

AndrewM was on the Staff for, what, 2 months?
When I first joined the Staff seemed to be never-changing.
If I'm wrong, please tell me - just seems that there is a good deal of short-term memberships at present.

I joined the team in about June last year and left at the start of this year. I guess 6 months is short-termish..

I am thrilled people still acknowledge my work in absentia!

 

[vic_orthdox]

Yep, I agree. I wrote the intro last. I write articles in segments according to inspiration and I couldn't find much inspiration when I tailed back to add the intro.

Is this Rich Edmunds on Liam's account?

 

[Smudge]

Is this Rich Edmunds on Liam's account?

Ban both of them!!!

 

[open365]

I'm not sure if i should say this hear, but i'm a bit diss apointed that the Shane Warne scandal got coverage on the front page, you said yourself this is a family site and i think it's crap news anyway

 

[Barney Rubble]

I'm not sure if i should say this hear, but i'm a bit diss apointed that the Shane Warne scandal got coverage on the front page, you said yourself this is a family site and i think it's crap news anyway

I covered it relucantly, and I tried to play it down as much as I could. Note "scandal" in speech marks. We (that being myself and James) felt that as sites like cricinfo felt it was newsworthy, it was probably in our interests to cover it too. We did try to make sure we sensationalised it as little as possible, though - no quotes in the story, no names apart from Warne's, mention of how doubtful the source is, etc etc. I'm not bothered about it and neither was James.

 

[Smudge]

I'm not sure if i should say this hear, but i'm a bit diss apointed that the Shane Warne scandal got coverage on the front page, you said yourself this is a family site and i think it's crap news anyway

The forum is a family site. http://www.cricketweb.net is a news site.

 

[James]

I'm not sure if i should say this hear, but i'm a bit diss apointed that the Shane Warne scandal got coverage on the front page, you said yourself this is a family site and i think it's crap news anyway

Just echoing when Matt (Voltman) said, if it's a big news story which this was, we'll cover it, which is in our best interests.

Similar to what we did with the Richardson/Fleming saga really. If we think something is of interest to visitors we'll cover it.

 

[benchmark00]

Just have to say that the picture you're using of Watson on the front page is brilliant.

 

[James]

Thanks

 

[AussieDominance]

Yes very interesting photo of Watto