I was told by people at the club that Chammas had a beef with Madge. There was a lot of anti-Madge stuff from Chammas the past two years. I was also told that the club does not share information with Chammas.
Aside from that, there is a clear difference between having an opinion about Madge (or anything) versus making a claim of facts about Madge (or anything). I very rapidly lose respect for journalists who try to conflate their opinion or guesswork with an article written as if it's based in fact. This is the realm of Pooper, Buzz, Chammas, Weedler - the "sensationalist" journos who attempt to portray that they have inside information, without revealing any facts or sources.
It then becomes a big deal if you find out that those journalist may have an agenda. For example is Buzz Rothfield mates with Shane Flanagan and pushing a certain narrative to assist his mate getting a job? And then it does become very relevant if that journo is also proven to have lied or made stuff up, or be totally incorrect in a statement they make - they lose all credibility.
Whether or not a journo has valid opinions is an entirely separate discussion.
I Remember Jimmy Smith on SEN discussing on air last year regarding a Chammas article....
That it's almost to the point of a personal vendetta