2 of 2 people found the following review helpful
Verified Purchase(What is this?)
This review is from: Four Weeks in Montevideo: The Story of World Cup 1930 (Paperback)
I read this book with an open mind.
However, I must admit to being slightly confused as to how it is that a journalist is walking one day in Montevideo in 1999 (the year I was there too) and comes across a man with a diary from the first World Cup. Why would that person give his diary to a journalist? Why not to AUF? Or, for that matter, FIFA? Where is this diary? And how come it corresponds so well with 'official' versions of the event?
I read through the book and noticed the biography section. Surprise, surprise! Entries that I have written in wikipedia have been included in the biography section, word for word.
I doubt the veracity of this book.
Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-4 of 4 posts in this discussion
Initial post: 10 Aug 2010 18:18:10 BDT
Last edited by the author on 30 Jan 2012 20:20:00 GMT
A response to the review by Ashley Hyne:
AC Hyne says: "I read this book with an open mind."
Publisher's reply: Given your errors in the review, and the cynicism in your previous reviews (which were deleted by Amazon for legal reasons), there is little evidence that you gave the book any more than a casual glance.
AC Hyne says: "However, I must admit to being slightly confused as to how it is that a journalist is walking one day in Montevideo in 1999 (the year I was there too) and comes across a man with a diary from the first World Cup."
Publisher's reply: Confused? Really?! The book explains exactly how the author met the man with the diary. It's pretty clear. There is no ambiguity. You should have read the book properly instead of just casually. And what has your trip to Montevideo got to do with it?!
AC Hyne says: "Why would that person give his diary to a journalist?"
Publisher's reply: You're wrong again, Ashley; the diarist didn't give his diary to the journalist. He allowed the journalist to look at the diary. And why not? If a journalist chances upon somebody with a diary and asks to see the diary, what is the problem? This is all in the book. You should have read it before reviewing it.
AC Hyne says: "Why not to AUF? Or, for that matter, Fifa?"
Publisher's reply: Why would an old man think his diary is of any value to organisations such the the AUF or Fifa? Does Fifa regularly issue advertisements saying: "Wanted: World Cup diaries from 1930"? Maybe in your world but not in the real world. I know of somebody who has a diary from the 1962 World Cup, but he has neither offered it to Fifa nor to the Chilean FA. I am sorry, Ashley, your cynicism has got the better of you.
AC Hyne says: "And how come it corresponds so well with 'official' versions of the event?"
Publisher's reply: Actually, it doesn't; you're wrong again, Ashley. The main "official" version of the event has been discredited. Please refer to the official World Cup 1930 report (if you're really an historian, as you claim, you should have a copy or at least should have read a copy). This official report, while beautiful and significant in so many ways, is riddled with errors. And it certainly doesn't correspond with the diary. How many players does the diarist mention? How much match action? The diarist actually provides little information about matches.
AC Hyne says: "Surprise, surprise! entries that I have written in wikipedia have been included in the biography section, word for word."
Publisher's reply: You're deluded, sir - quite seriously deluded. Actually, the book went through an anti-plagiarism computer programme (as all books do these days) and came through it without any problems whatsoever. The author used every conceivable research tool during the course of writing the book, as any author would. He actually owns many dozens of original copies of Mundo Uruguayo, El Grafico, El Diario, Le Miroir des Sports, and - most significantly - an original 1930 World Cup report. With such a wealth of primary source material, the author was well positioned to tell many of the stories of World Cup 1930. The author also has a library of more than 1200 football books.
AC Hyne says: "I doubt the veracity of this book."
Publisher's reply: Essentially, however, the book is based on a real meeting with a real person on a real day. But as you, Ashley, have already admitted that you write and disseminate false information on Wikipedia (as you stated in your previous reviews, which were deleted by Amazon for legal reasons), are you really the best person with whom to discuss veracity? Of course you're not. In my view, maybe you should spend your time writing a novel about birdwatching. The author has already admitted there were problems with reconstructing the diary (there always are in such circumstances).
In the meantime, Ashley, you should return your book to the publishers who will provide you with a full refund and will compensate you for the postage and packaging. If I doubted the veracity of a book, and the publishers offered me a refund, I would take up that offer.
In reply to an earlier post on 7 Jun 2012 19:14:37 BDT
G. Thompson says:
For what it's worth mate i read the book last year on holiday and thoroughly enjoyed it. Given that it's an account of a time in the far off past i think it captured the period and mood well. There was no sky TV or such back then so an old fella's memory will do for me!
In reply to an earlier post on 8 Jun 2012 09:20:50 BDT
Last edited by the author on 8 Jun 2012 09:52:59 BDT
Ac Hyne says:
I'm hardly a 'mate' as you call me. This is the first time I've revisited this review site having read the 'review' of my review from Gareth only just today and, frankly, I'm amazed at how precious he is about the sodding book. I've never had anyone dissect any review I've made and if he wishes to go to those lengths rather than letting the book stand or fall on its own merits then there's clearly immediate concerns in my mind about the whole thing. I'm glad you enjoyed it. I thought it was a waste of money personally but there you are.
In reply to an earlier post on 8 Jun 2012 15:12:06 BDT
Last edited by the author on 10 Jun 2012 10:59:34 BDT
G. Thompson says:
Sorry for being presumptuous and assuming you wouldn't mind me referring to you as "mate". It's a Manchester-ism I'm afraid. So i'll apologise for any offence caused there first. I'm amazed that the pair of you have got in such a lather about the book. As i said i read it, found it interesting, left it in the hotel room came home and forgot about it really until i read the review of it the other day. Given that the tournament in question was over 80 years ago i don't suppose we'll ever get anything more accurate re that particular world cup unless a 14 minute black and white FIFA film fits the bill. Just out of interest do you think the book is a figment of someone's imagination or just inaccurate owing to an old mans fading memory? Gary..............
PS How did you enjoy Montevideo, Positive? Intend to visit one day hopefully.
‹ Previous 1 Next ›