The article discusses the installation of a new gray fence around the auxiliary football pitch at the Public Sports Center MOK in Koper, Slovenia. The fence was installed at the request of FC Koper, which fully covered the investment cost. The purpose of the fence is to provide greater privacy and isolation for the first-league team during high-level training sessions, as the environment can sometimes be distracting. While public access to the pitches is not completely restricted, the facility emphasizes that the sports infrastructure is primarily intended for the execution of the annual sports program for clubs that apply for funding. Remaining free time slots are available for the market. The director of the Public Sports Center, Duško Madžarović, states that training sessions on the remaining pitches will continue undisturbed, though many coaches prefer to conduct sports activities without parental presence, which they consider a distraction.
Bias read (Center): The article presents information from both the club's perspective and the public authority's stance without overtly favoring either side. It includes quotes from the director of the Public Sports Center and explains the rationale behind the fence's installation while acknowledging public concerns. S
Why factuality (75): The article reports on the installation of a new fence around a sports field at MOK, citing the club FC Koper as the sponsor and stating that the fence was installed on their suggestion. It mentions the director's statement about improved training conditions and the choice of gray color by players.
Why objectivity (68): The tone is somewhat supportive of the club's initiative, using phrases like 'novost pa enostavno omogoča več zasebnosti' which implies a positive assessment. While the article presents both sides (public access vs. privacy), it leans slightly towards acknowledging the club's rationale, which may re






