« The Cost of The Spy in the Meter | Main | No one ended up only injured so success for Health and Safety »

De mortuis nil nisi bonum dicendum est

I know nothing of Bobby Robson and I'm sure his death is a sad loss to his family. But, but half the front page of The Times, a twelve page pull out special on him, an obit, a leading article and a double page spread in the news? Is that proportionate? I have leafed through them to try and work out why and seems to my uneducated eye to have been a man who was moderately successful in a dull game in a dull era in a dull part of the country. What am I missing?

Comments

Mainly that football (even though we usually lose) is more cheering news that politics politics politics !

Need I add, where we ALWAYS lose lose lose ?

Alan Douglas

I do think that the coverage in the press is somewhat over the top, even though I do admit to being a long admirer of Sir Bobby. It is terribly sad that he has died, and a lot of people who knew of his campaign to improve facilities for cancer sufferers in the North East feel that they have lost an important figurehead.

What has come across to me, however, is not so much the footballing angle (despite being a long suffering NUFC supporter myself) nor the cancer care campaigner, but the fact the country seems to have lost one of the last remaining gentlemen. He was very, very well liked by anyone who came into contact with him, and as this was a huge number of journalists across all areas of broadcasting, it is perhaps unsurprising that many of them wished to eulogise. It is also perhaps unsurprising that this has been slightly over the top in some quarters.

It's not often I quote from Sickipedia, but "you know a man was a legend when his death doesn't spark hundreds of jokes on Sickipedia."

Post a comment