I'm the only Unofficial Man in this village!

by Rupert Insider


Have a look at this from Koptalk:


I must say it doesn’t surprise me when I read the local media taking swipes at Salif Diao because he earns an “astonishing” £20,000-a-week. What’s “astonishing” about that?

It’s easy to make digs now that we know he’s not Liverpool class but for crying out loud, considering his transfer fee, £20,000-a-week isn’t “astonishing” at all in the Premier League.

When he refused to move overseas in the summer because the move didn’t suit him, he was labelled a mercenary, had he been a local lad in a similar situation we’d have been told he was showing character and that he had determination to prove himself. “He wants to fight for his place” is what we would have been fed.

Now don’t get me wrong, I don’t want Salif to stay at Anfield, nor do I rate him. But I’m defensive of him because he’s a Red. He didn’t set his transfer fee, others did. It didn’t work out for him but he hasn’t been the club’s worst player. I just wonder why people want to single him out. Maybe it’s because it’s an indirect way of taking cheap shots at Gerard Houllier.

I’m glad I don’t p*ss in the same pot. I prefer to remain 100% unofficial and I’m happy to distance myself from the agendas. I’m happy that KOPTALK continues to have the balls to be impartial and the fact that doesn’t make you popular doesn’t concern me one bit.

We’ll never toe-the-line or say things that others want to say, with or without the incentives that have previously been offered.



So what’s it all about – Salif Diao ?

No. Its about Fatty Oldham.

What’s he saying?

I’m the only Gay Unofficial Man in this village!


Because he was not asked by LFC’s Official Site to join the representatives of other unofficial sites, to give his opinion on “The 100 players who shook the Kop”. And this is because he is more unofficial than the unofficials.

It came up a couple of days ago on the Koptalk members only forum. See “I did it MY way- Dunk bans the Official Site”


When asked by one of his few remaining members why the club excluded him from the list of unofficial sites whose opinion was sought – given that he claimed to be the No. 1 unofficial site and close to LFC and given that he claimed the Offficial Site offered him a position earlier this year – he implied, without exactly stating, that he could have been included but did not agree to the conditions being imposed. He said that this proved he was genuinely “unofficial”.

He then contrives this artifical piece about Salif Diao to come back to the subject. In this, his second attempt in one week to re-write history, he implies that he was offered “incentives” but refused. And then repeats his insinuation that the unofficial sites which did cooperate with the club they support compromised themselves and are not therefore, genuinely “unofficial“.

Hence Fatty is now the only Unofficial Man in the village.

Is that all?

No, he’s also using this fluff piece to pursue another personal vendetta. But he hasn’t the balls to spell out what he means – he hides behind codes.

But we know who he means when he refers to “local media” don’t we? Its the guy who called him out for his “outrageous lie” about Fowler and asked this blog the famous question “Koptalk – is that still around? I thought it was closed down years ago!”

The truth is Fatty doesn’t care about Salif Diao or LFC. As he’s told us before, in this “internet lark” he only cares about No. 1


I’ve found a musical collage about it. But its also in code.

You have to replace “Daffyd” with “Fatty“:

gay” with “unofficial“:

Myfanwe” with the name of that last bar maid he chatted up – what was it – oh yes “tart

Barcardi and coke” with “Woodpecker cider

a bit of cock” with “a bit of respect

and a few other obvious changes, and it all begins to makes sense.





24 Responses to “I'm the only Unofficial Man in this village!”

  1. Alan Says:

    How has fatty been allowed back on newsnow, its obvious he is cheating it, his one “comment” is second in the top stories. No one reads his stuff, are newsnow just stupid?

  2. rupertinsider Says:

    Why not spend a few minues writing directly to the guy at New Now who deals with this.


    Best to be polite and to make specific points.

    That said one of our contributors not only asked them that precise question you asked but also demonstrated how “stupid” they were. Their ranking system is technically open to abuse despite their earlier denials. He showed them precisely how.

    They’re stupid in another way. Koptalk is their competitor. When Oldham gets a vistor from a News Now link, he then tries to keep that visitor within the Koptalk News Service referring them to other stories. Those stories are mainly stolen from News Now. So News Now misses out on clicks that ought to have been theirs. Oldham then tries to sell the visitor a membership.

    Oldham gets that first reference from News Now by putting out stories with misleading headlines. He knows more people will click on the phrase “Liverpool target” than “Lucas”. Not that the Lucas story is uninteresting. But most people will have read it in one of the many versions of the wire story. (Koptalk is always behind the other sources). Most people would not want to click if they knew the story was something they had already read.

    News Now has been free of Koptalk junk for some time. As a result it has been able to feature a wider variety of sources and no one source has dominated the Top Stories like Koptalk used to do all the time by cheating the system.

    This article today may have slipped through as an abberation. But it may be that News Now has decided to give him renewed access for his articles (but not his podcasts). If so, it may be time for us to take the gloves off with respect to News Now. We have spent an enormous amount of time with them.

    They had told us his podcasts were banned. They also suspended his articles because too many of them were leading to pages with errors. They did not actually ban his articles permanently but offered to ban him if we could point out any that involved abuse of copyright – even if he doctored them or their headlines in order to disguise what he was doing.

    So if he does get on regularly again, please write to Struan Bartlett at the above address pointing out the url to the News Now story and to the site from where he stole it.

    I think LFC supporters have been too patient with News Now for too long. It may be time to take some direct action. But let’s see what they do next.

  3. Mudface Says:

    I’ve sent a complaint into NewsNow via their contact form. How shoud ‘struan’ be addressed, Rupert? Mr Struan?

  4. fat_boy_fat Says:

    Seems that all fatty is has left to do is make sly digs at all his enemys and make excuses of why no-one likes him. Poor Fatty Twatty

  5. rupertinsider Says:


    His name is Struan Bartlett. I understand he is Head of Public Relations. (Someone else who has corresponded with him says he is Managing Director).

    I have had long “frank” correspondence with him. He is open to pursuasion because he claims he is relatively new to the job.

    He says his predecessor conceded that Oldham’s defence might have merit – that complainants were “jealous rivals”. He argued that News Now was not in a position to decide between Oldham and the complainants. (Some on here have suggested that Oldham was paying the predecessor – but I don’t know about that – I think he was just stupid ).

    (Edit: Since posting the above, I have seen records that state that Struan Bartlett is the main shareholder and has been with the company since it started in 1997. He is described as “a Managing Director”. At first sight, that information seems at odds with his explanation in correspondence that he was new to the job of vetting contributors and that he was unaware of the substance of the complaints News Now has been receiving for years about Koptalk. Although he did acknowledged that there had been lots of complaints.)

    He insisted that News Now ranking of the Top Stories could not be manipulated and so Oldham was earning his hits even if it was contrary to common sense that his advertisments for Koptalk would outrank important stories from the Echo, and the mainstream press or that Koptalk’s stolen version of an earlier story would outrank the original story. On the weekends Koptalk represented 50%-75% of the Top Stories.

    But as I said above, a contributor to the blog demonstrated to him precisely how Oldham could be manipulating their rankings – and that did cause Struan Bartlett to look again at the complaints.

    I argued that Oldham was not only ripping off LFC supporters of a wider source of news, and LFC journalists and other unofficial sites, but also ripping off News Now. I have explained above how he steals the News Now links, doctors the stories a little, and then puts the doctored verison back on News Now. He would do this to Chris Bascombe’s and other i/c stories within 5 minutes of them appearing on the i/c site. After Koptalk got a visitor from News Now Oldham would then offer them the other stories he had stolen from News Now. It may be that News Now did not realise that they were feeding their customers to a competitor.

    I have also pointed out that News Now has been the agent for Koptalk giving wide dsitribution to its slanderous campaigns against LFC players and directors and executives. The last one we pointed to was his Bellamy lie which became the top story on News Now. News Now can’t shrug their shoulders and say its not their responsibility. Nor can they transfer responsibility to their readers – and claim that we must monitor their site for them (however I would encourage people to do just that).

    With respect to stories that Koptalk claims as its own “as confirmed by local media” , many of them would have needed Koptalk to be physically present at Anfield or Melwood and to have contact with the club. I challenged News Now to pick up the phone and call the Head of Press at LFC to check whether it was feasible that Oldham could have had such first-hand knowledge and contact. News Now ought to have done that years ago when it first began to receive complaints about Koptalk.

    News Now has been uncritically advertising all Oldham’s stolen content from the Official Site and everywhere else for years even with complaints and warnings ringing in its ears. One of the oddities of News Now was that the Official Site – which was the source of much of Oldham’s stolen content – was barely given a mention on News Now.

    So Struan Bartlett knows all the arguments, but it is just as well that people write in with their own points.

    (Edit: All my remarks assume that News Now is essentially an ethical organisation. But if I am wrong and it turns out that News Now is only interested in the hits that Koptalk brings – even if the hits are generated by stolen stories, or old stories hidden behind tantalising and misleading headlines, or slanderous stories – then this will require a fresh look at how we deal with News Now).

  6. Bobo Says:

    What age are yee that your calling people “fatty” and “fat master” this looses credit with you guys.

  7. phil harris Says:


    I think that this blog has a ‘private eye’ type style. Just because criticisms contain ‘fatty’ type insults doesn’t render them ‘unreliable’ as info concerning Oldham’s antics : one takes some elements as ‘humour’, but it it is incumbent upon one to extrapolate the very real claims underlyinng the humour.

  8. bob Says:

    no, no it doesnt. He’s a fat odious conman who deserves to be called every name under the sun.


  9. LSM Says:

    He’s the only odious S*n loving, LFC hating fatman in the village.

  10. rupertinsider Says:

    “What age are yee that your calling people “fatty” ”

    Oldham is about 5’10 and 22.5 stone (about 275 lbs) by his own accounting. That may not be fat where you come from but it is in the UK.

    Oldham thinks its fat. He likes to be called “Chunky” because it suggest he’s cuddly. But he often refers to himself as “fat man”. In fact he flaunts his obesity. When he squats (ouch) on the sites of his “rivals” he leaves behind a picture of a pork pie – you know like Zorro leaves an Z.   He publishes pictures of the hot dogs and hamburgers and pizzas he eats in the Koptalk office. On his radio show you can hear him eating and burping and he never stops talking about his pies and peas and gravy. He makes his fatness a central part of the personality cult he tries to force down the thoat of the users of his site. When he gives unsolicted tips to his members on how to pick up women in bars he explains how clever he is in exploiting his fatness to win their sympathy.

    So who are you to deny him the spotlight he wants to put on his obesity?

  11. Chunky Says:

    Strange that he’s been blabbing about people speaking out and not towing the party line but if you did that on Kontalk you’d ‘ban yourself.’

  12. bobo Says:


    Lovely put and a fine response to my question. Taking the piss out of his fatness is one way to divert real slaggings on him. Pulling women in the bar, is he for real unless the blind society monthly night out is on when he’s out

  13. bobo Says:

    Kraptalk server is down now at this time 10:09am i wonder is it down permantly as he’s claim during the week that him and Steve are gone to “Malta” on holidays and done a runner

  14. fat_boy_fat Says:

    I prefer to call him Fatty Twatty because thats exactlly what he is. If he was a respectable bloke doing good for the LFC community then this blog would not be here and people would refer to him as Mr Oldham or Duncan.

    But since he is a FAT bloke who rips off and cons LFC fans then i think he is also a TWAT.

  15. Insider Insider Says:

    Re calling people fatty…

    Have to echo what’s said above – Oldham sees his weight problems as something positive. He’s morbidly obese and won’t live as long as he’d like to. That assuming he doesn’t carry out one of his rip-off scams on one of his infamous hitman mates / contacts. If they existed.

    Writing “morbidly obese” and “almost twice his ideal weight” gets tiresome.

    I find most of his actions range from mildly irritating to seriously annoying. His actions against our players and his arrogant disregard of the S*n Boycott make me quite angry, although “angry” is probably not the right word. Most of his bullshit is now exclusively heard only by a maximum of about 150 members, including his own family, his own aliases and people who are reading his site in full knowledge of how much of a bastard he really is.

    If I wrote all the time about how annoyed I was by him I don’t think anyone would read. The blog started off originally to have a laugh at his expense at his made up and stolen “exclusives” and his clear lack of contacts. He’s overweight, he makes stuff up. Like those optical illusions you sometimes see, once you’ve either been shown the illusion or had it pointed out to you you can’t miss it. And you find future “illusions” easier to spot. When you get to that stage most of what he does is extremely funny. Not intentionally so, but that’s how it works out.

    Seriously, where did this “buying Chris Waddle’s house in Melwood” bullshit come from? What about the “buying a hotel in Liverpool” story? And the offer of free accomodation for all his gold club members whenever they wanted it. Thirty quid a year for as many overnight stays in Liverpool as you need – bullshit so clear that he must have made it so easy for his own members to spot the “illusion” without our help.

    His regular referrals to “the local media” and “rival sites” is another method by which he’s brought traffic to this site and others that make it easier again to spot the “illusion”.

    If Dunk was genuinely worried about his weight problem nobody would know about it, but he’s not bothered in the slightest. He thinks he’s invincible and doesn’t believe he might only live another 10 or 15 years. He could be dead of an illness brought on by his fatness before his youngest lad has left full-time education. We’re not talking about someone slightly overweight, we’re not talking about a bit of a beer gut, we’re talking the type of fatness normally reserved for US TV documentaries. He’s probably impotent by now as well, which might be an extra reason why his wife left him. Maybe he’s always had that problem, hence the need to advertise for someone to shag his wife whilst he films it.

    He’s also as thick in the head as he is around the waist. He does try to deny that one (in the same kind of phrases as he uses to deny being homosexual) but let’s face it, it’s pretty obvious that his IQ is another of his weak points. It’s funny watching each stupid blunder he makes when he thinks his latest “cunning plan” will fix everything. So we call him thick.

    So, on a serious note, he needs to stop boasting about being morbidly obese and start getting to grips with his weight problem. Cancel the papers and go collect them. Walk the dogs instead of driving them to a field to let them have a run round. He ought to consider whether continuing to pretend he’s right and we’re wrong will actually work after all. He’s convinced himself that “Dunk knows best” since we started this blog, yet his knowing best has seen his site fall into a permanent state of collapse. Could he contact us and make us stop? He could have done at the start of the summer and would have saved his site. It’s as the summer’s gone on we’ve worked out more and more about him and so the list of reforms he needs to make has grown and grown. I’m still waiting for him to contact me with his response, his chance to give his side of the story.

    So Dunk’s fat and thick. Chubby and stupid. Words we throw in that are true and obvious descriptions of him, just a bit of humour to add to the serious stuff.

  16. Fat Tax Says:

    Considering that this blog is out there as a source of information about Duncan and his numerous errant activities, Bobo’s point that endless childish insults regarding Duncan’s weight and so on will not impres senior staff from any of the organisations encouraged to visit the blog.

    There’s more than enough to have a go at without needing to resort to playground tactics – nothing will make this blog look more like a bunch of disgruntled whining tarts (which I KNOW it isn’t) than a load of “hurr hurr, he’s a fat cunt” comments. It just plays into his hands and reduces the chances of people like Mr Bartlett taking our concerns seriously. I’ve been guilty of that in the past myself and am going to confine my comments to constructive areas from now on.

  17. Fat Tax Says:

    Sorry, that should read that I think Bobo’s point is valid, obviously.

  18. rupertinsider Says:

    Fat Tax: (is that “fat” as in “fat”?)

    You say you agree with Bobbo’s point. But Bobbo withdrew his point, as I understood him. In fact he went on to make a fat joke at Oldham’s expense.

    We are here to deal with Oldham in all his manifest unpleasantness. That means preparing information digests, analysing his techniques and mocking his pretentiousness.

    Our lampooning causes him to react and to reveal more than he would otherwise. It also causes his hangers-on to consider their position. Who wants to be the confidant of a figure of fun.

    The best recipe is a mix of prosecutorial briefs and mockery.

    We don’t consult each other about what we are writing. Considering all the limitations we get the balance about right although this or that piece or comment may not sit well with everyone. We have certainly been effective in what we set out to do. Still its good to be reminded to check our limits.

    As for the subject of the lampoons – much of what he does is histrionic – such as his snit about being the only truly unofficial site. Its laughable. Why should we treat him seriously? He’s a wannabe cult-master not an established world religion.

    We have explained the occasional remarks about his obesity (and they are occasional – you give the wrong impression). I suggest you compare this week’s output, or the entire blog’s output, and see how little, relatively speaking, is about his obesity – even though he insists on bringing it up (no pun intended) and rubbing his readers noses in it.

    The “Shop Oldham” piece did not mention his obesity.

    News Nows found the content of his podcasts to be smutty and vulgar and irrelevant, after we asked them to listen to them, and then they banned them. We would also like them and others to know how much of Kotpalk is about Oldham’s obesity and rampant appetite and lack of physical movement and ignorant opinions and much else that is irrelevant to LFC. Perhaps News Now should also stop and think why they are giving such wide distribution to a guy who talks incessantly and aggresively about his obesity and his appetite and his favourite food and drink and repeatedly posts photos of it.

    We are not here to impress Struan Bartlett. He has had scores of well-researched and serious minded complaints over several years and ignored them all while he made money out of Oldham’s shady traffic. He only suspended Oldham when I and another contributor engaged him in correspondence. And with all our serious analysis and preparation of digests he has let him back in again – at least temporarily. Why cut our cloth to suit somebody who has profited from Oldham’s practices and promoted them? Why sanitise Oldham? It is for blog contributors to follow up our efforts and make their own points to News Now and others.

    As for the cops, tax inspectors and other potential investigators – contributors need to lodge their suspicions like we have. They can refer to any article in the blog. I assume they will refer to the factual briefs rather than the lampoons (although I think it would help to motivate the inspectors if they read some of the lampoons and ranting comments. It would be good for them to get a taste of the anger and disgust Oldham generates).

    I think the potential investigators are professional enough to be able to tell the difference between a “Shop Oldham” article and a rant. And the lampoons could prepare them for the operatic and shrill “I’m the only gay in the village” type of defence Oldham will hit them with. If they read this blog they will be prepared for all his histrionics, his claims that his critics are jealous rivals who attack his children, and that Koptalk is a hobby because he loves LFC so much and is willing to sacrifice the easy life he could have as a window-cleaner. They would also be better able to assess why he claims to be poorly all the time. And they would be prepared for any attempt to bribe them with pork pies, peas and gravy.

  19. Giles Says:

    :nitpick: 22.5 stone is 315 pounds :nitpick:

    Fatter than Howlin’ Wolf :-O

  20. rupertinsider Says:

    Correct – when I wrote that I intended to give a range – because I recalled that he had variously given his own weight as 20st-22.5st (280-315 lbs) But in the editing it got left out and I finished giving him the benefit of the doubt.

  21. An Observer Says:

    Check out http://www.lfcwire.com similar to newsnow but it has standards and isn’t open to all site to join, hence filtering out the copy and pastes you get on newsnow.

  22. Toby Says:

    I think we need to make Newsnow aware of LFCwire.com and our desire to have a Koptalk-free newsfeed, regardless of who provides it. There are more people who don’t want to see Koptalk headlines than do now, so let’s let Newsnow decide where their priorities lie.

  23. rupertinsider Says:


    I just did in a long letter.

  24. rupertinsider Says:

    The person behind http://www.lfcwire.com is known to the blog and is a genuine supporter who has set that site up in response to the blog article calling for a Koptalk-free news service.

    There are others also preparing similar sites and I will write a follow-up to the original blog article when I have something definite to report.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: