Talk:Stephen Hunt (footballer, born 1981)

The Petr Čech incident

I'm not sure how to do it yet but when the dust settles on the accident with Petr Čech it might make sence to move some of the 'discussion' type material to the talk page. There needs to be some reference to this accident in the article but surely not at the level of detail we have at the moment. JoeWiki 12.16, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

This section needs some tidying up.

• "The injury nearly cost Čech his life" - Although reported in the Mirror as such, this is mearly conjecture. It would be more acurate to say that "The injury was potentially life threatening"
• Čech has suffered intense headaches - The link for this citation refered to a news in brief page on the Mirror website. As such, the page has since been updated. This link holds a better article [1]
• "will be out of the game for a year" - This was a quote from Cechs father and as such is hardly a neutral POV. Infact, Cech played against Liverpool on 20/1/2007 [2] giving him a total period out of the game of 3 months

Given that a hamstring injury can put a player out of action for a lot longer than this, this section gives the impression that the injury was a lot worse than actually transpired Munta 10:10, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

This is disgusting how the Reading fans have tried to gloss over this shameful incident. First, Cech was on the ball well before Hunt; there was no need for Hunt to be that close to Cech. Also, it is quite apparent that Hunt drags or dips his knee so it will clip the keeper. Hunt probably did not mean to injure Cech but that means little. The defense of Hunt usually centers around Cech is back playing already, most observers aren't objective enough, and the FA have cleared him. I cannot stand Chelsea but this is more than any neutral can bare. Reading have had a fine season but this incident is up there, if not the top, of the most shameful of the season—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.72.115.75 (talk • contribs) 21:02, 30 April 2007.

Aye Hunt is an animal like —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.153.1.169 (talk) 22:42, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Death threats

Is it not relevant to the death threats made following the Chelsea match [3] that Uefa has previously branded Jose Mourinho the enemy of football when Swedish referee Anders Frisk and his family received death threats in hate mail from Chelsea fans following their team's Champions League meeting with Barcelona [4]? In February 2006 Norwegian referee Terje Hauge was also threatened by fans using the official Chelsea internet message board after he sent off Asier del Horno during a match against Chelsea [5]. I believe it shows a disturbing pattern and it is relevant to the Stephen Hunt article. JoeWiki 15.11, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. The content added relates to the pattern emerging that Mourinho makes false accusations, and Chelsea fans then make death threats. However, that is POV. What isn't POV is adding something to effect that there have been previous death threats made by Chelsea fans. I guess we should leave out the bit about Mourinho, but include references to the previous death threats. robwingfield ^«T•C» 15:31, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

First, to clarify some information: UEFA did not call Mourinho an "enemy of football". It was the chairman of their Referee's Committee, Volker Roth, and UEFA distanced themselves from his comments.[6]

We do not know that these were Chelsea fans. They are alleged to be Chelsea fans. It could be any moron seeking to cause trouble. The journalist from the Reading Chronicle who originally broke the story was on TalkSport last night and even he said it wasn't 100% certain that it was Chelsea fans.

The idea of a "disturbing pattern" seems to be POV and borderline original research. It can equally be argued that there's a "disturbing pattern" between two goalkeepers being stretchered off the field with concussion after collisions with Reading players during the same match... In any case, why do details of previous death threats belong on the Stephen Hunt page? On the same basis, why not add references to other controversial challenges by Reading players?

Btw, I should point out that it wasn't me who originally deleted the comments, since I've only returned to Wikipedia today.SteveO 21:37, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

The atmosphere leading to the issue of these death threats is something we have seen before at Chelsea and this has been the cause of the problem. You are absolutely right that you can always find any idiot looking to cause trouble and I agree that whoever they are they're not real football fans. It makes sence to discuss this before any replacement of the deletion. JoeWiki 22.13, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

The atmosphere was not entirely Chelsea or Mourinho's fault. I think the extensive media coverage of it played a part. I would imagine that far more people learned of what he said from the newspapers than from his press conference. Mourinho also said "I am not saying the intention was to send my player to hospital. That is something only the Reading player can say. He says that it was not intentional and I believe players"[7], but that one generally went unnoticed. A manager criticising a referee or an opposing player is hardly a unique occurence. They all do it. SteveO 12:59, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

There will always be idiots like Oliver Holt (no excuse though to vandalise his entry on wikipedia) scratching around for a story. Those in a position of authority need to be careful what they say. Perhaps this is why a Member of Parliament tabled an Early day motion asking Chelsea Football Club and its manager to reflect quietly on their behaviour adding that he was "extremely disappointed that Chelsea and its manager behaved in a short-sighted and petulant way." JoeWiki 16.17, 04 February 2007 (UTC)

If you want people to assume good faith with your edits, calling someone an idiot is not the way to go about it. I agree that those in authority need to beware of what they say and do, particularly if what they say and do is likely to get exhaustive coverage in the media. Imagine if Mourinho had done this: [8]

PS. On the subject of Early Day Motions, I have another, tabled by the late member for West Ham, Tony Banks, which begins: "this House condemns the view of Volker Roth, Chairman of the UEFA referees committee, who branded the Chelsea manager as an 'enemy of football'..."[9] SteveO 20:40, 04 February 2007 (UTC)

Condensing the Hunt-Cech incident

That said, I do agree with JoeWiki's comment at the top of the page that this article could do with trimming. Currently, about 2/3rds is dedicated to one incident, which is excessive, imo. My suggestion would be to remove all non-essential information, such as the list of pundits involved and what each had to say, and simply leave the references, so an interested reader can look at the original articles. Resulting in something resembling this:

On 14 October 2006 Hunt and Chelsea's goalkeeper Petr Čech challenged for the ball during a league game at the Madejski Stadium, resulting in Čech's head colliding with Hunt's knee and leaving the Czech Republic international concussed. After immediate replacement by Carlo Cudicini, Čech was taken to hospital and underwent surgery for a depressed fracture of the skull.

Chelsea manager Jose Mourinho was critical of the challenge, saying: "He [Cech] is lucky to be alive", sparking a debate among pundits in the media, during which Hunt was both supported and condemned. Mourinho sparked further controversy by criticising the Reading ambulance service. The FA confirmed that no action would be taken against Hunt. It was announced on 15 November 2006 that both Hunt and Sonko had received deaths threats from alleged Chelsea fans.

Any thoughts? Obviously the wording and details are up for discussion, but two paragraphs should suffice for the whole incident. SteveO 01:32, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

If I were a Chelsea fan like you then I would be more than happy with the edits you are making to the Stephen Hunt article. If you want people to assume good faith with your edits then you should also include text that is less favourable on Chelsea and its manager. For example, what happened to the edits to record Hunts attempts to contact Čech through Chelsea [10]but did not receive a reply. JoeWiki 09.12, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Then again, you are a Reading fan, so it seems we're both tainted when it comes to this article. On the issue of bias, bear in mind that I'm not the one who thought this was vandalism. Isn't mentioning the criticism of the Reading NHS trust and death threats unfavourable to Chelsea? I also left out the stuff about Cech suffering severe headaches and almost losing his life, Chelsea's vow to punish any Chelsea fans found to be involved in the threats (something which, to my knowledge, is yet to be proven) and Lampard's criticism of Hunt for not visiting Cech. SteveO 12:43, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

You did ask for any thoughts and I gave you mine. JoeWiki 14.06, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Indeed you did. But if this article is to be improved some sort of compromise will have to be reached. Btw, there's no need to add wikilinks to my comments. I'm quite capable of doing that myself if I so choose. SteveO 14:12, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Leaving out Lampard's criticism of Hunt is hardly showing evenhandedness given that Lampard's criticism was illinformed and incorrect ! I believe references elsewhere show the attempts of Hunt to contact Cech and the blocks put on these attempts by Chelsea...General Factotum 22:29, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Seeing as how this information takes up a significant proportion of this page, and also the Petr Cech page, wouldn't it be feasible to create a Stephen Hunt/Petr Cech Incident page? If all the information was merged, it would ensure non-bias (as opposed to the Hunt page being pro-Reading, and the Cech page being pro-Chelsea) and might also help to focus the two players' pages on information about themselves, rather than flooding them both with information about the incident. Just a suggestion. Johno000 12:02, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

I don't think it needs its own article. Who will remember it in five years' time? I think all it needs is a paragraph or two in Cech's entry talking about the consequences for him, his recovery and his protective hat and two sentences here. One saying that Hunt was involved in the incident and one saying that a lot of hot air was generated both for and against (but saying it in more wiki-type language) included death threats whose seriousness was unclear. Then the footnotes can simply give where a load of press statements and articles can be found, if someone is actually interested in following it up this long after the incident itself. No doubt he will still be booed at the Bridge, but this isn't something that deserves 80% of the space in an article on someone who's played over 200 first team games. --Peter cohen 17:52, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

My typing finger is gatting itchy and, bearing in mind Wikipedia:Be bold in updating pages, I'm tempted to revise over the weekend this and the Petr Cech pages in line with what I've proposed, unless someone comes up wiht counter-proposals. --Peter cohen 12:30, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

I suggested condensing the Hunt-Cech incident months ago. See above for the response it got. Your plan wouldn't have any objections from me, though. SteveO 13:59, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

I think comments about Cech being considered to be lucky to be alive and his being concussed are actually to do with Cech and not Hunt. Here' my take:

On 14 October 2006 Hunt and Chelsea's goalkeeper Petr Cech challenged for the ball during a league game at the Madejski Stadium, resulting in Čech's head colliding with Hunt's knee and the Czech Republic international undergoing surgery for a depressed fracture of the skull.[1] Following the incident officials and players of both clubs , pundits and even MPs expressed views both for and against Hunt [2][3][4][5][6][7][8]. The FA eventually confirmed that no action would be taken against Hunt[10] but, in the mean time, both Hunt and team-mate Sonko, involved in a collision in the same match with Čech's replacement Carlo Cudicini, had received deaths threats from alleged Chelsea fans.[11]

Okay, it's three sentences, not the two I had originally proposed, but I think it covers the four key points of Hunt's knee and 's head colliding with serious consequences for the keeper, lots of hot air, the FA clearing Hunt and the death threats. --Peter cohen 15:04, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

That's fine for me. SteveO 15:35, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Right! I've carried out my threat to prune the text. The next thing to consider is whether I've left in too many references. I'll leave that in the air for a while. I'll inspect the Čech article later today. I know it had some trimming from someone else.

Looking at things, this incident still take up roughly half of the article's space. That's a definite improvement, but perhaps a Reading fan could consider adding more about Hunt's playing style or talk about how important he is or is not as a member of the PRemiership squad. --Peter cohen 13:00, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

References

Inline refs

There were a ridiculous number of inline citations about the Cech incident last year, so I removed most of them to make the text more readable. Catchpole 22:58, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Stephen Hunt (footballer, born 1981). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090814172737/http://www.skysports.com/story/0%2C19528%2C11661_3029366%2C00.html to http://www.skysports.com/story/0%2C19528%2C11661_3029366%2C00.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:51, 10 May 2017 (UTC)