krissyboy31 Posted 11 December, 2009 Share Posted 11 December, 2009 I suspect The Echo will have been issued pictures and details with came with an embargo date that they broke. That being the case the Echo have only got themselves to blame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Bates Posted 11 December, 2009 Author Share Posted 11 December, 2009 As Master Bates created a thread on here re the planning application before the news conference, in order NC is seen to be consistent, he too should be banned from St Marys !!!!! The Echo need SFC more, so suggest they swallow, apologise for stealing their thunder and move on Nooo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EastleighSoulBoy Posted 11 December, 2009 Share Posted 11 December, 2009 (edited) See where impatience gets you eh? Press conf was called but no, the Echo has to "spill the beans" for the sake of what? Thought it was strange that a PC was called but all the news was reported the day before the PC. The Echo had to 'spill the beans' for a...um...a..... What exactly did they have to spill the beans for? They will now seek political gain from this though and those who are not aware of how unprofessional the Echo can be at times will swallow it, hook line and sinker. I just wonder what certain posters may make of this also in an effort to besmirch the current regime in favour of those who have moved on from the sacred hallow that is SMS. Edited 11 December, 2009 by EastleighSoulBoy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minty Posted 11 December, 2009 Share Posted 11 December, 2009 Frankly, it's all a bit pathetic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Bates Posted 11 December, 2009 Author Share Posted 11 December, 2009 THE Daily Echo has been banned from St Mary's Stadium by Southampton Football Club. It comes following a story which was ran on Tuesday about the club's plans to redevelop the Staplewood training ground in Marchwood. http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/sport/saints/news/4789376.Daily_Echo_banned_by_Saints/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrant Posted 11 December, 2009 Share Posted 11 December, 2009 I suspect The Echo will have been issued pictures and details with came with an embargo date that they broke. I'm reliably informed that the Echo got all their information from the New Forest District Council website in the same way as we did on here. They used public documents, so there's no copyright issue to overcome, and there was no "embargo" as such. Cortese asked the Echo to hold their coverage of it, but they (rightly, IMO) believed it was pointless doing so because it was already in the public domain and the readership would be rightly questioning why they hadn't reported on it. Sky Sports News were the first to report on it, anyway. I bet they don't get banned... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verbal Posted 11 December, 2009 Share Posted 11 December, 2009 Nicola - a word of perhaps unwanted advice. You have your job to do - and I don't know anyone who thinks other that you're doing it brilliantly. The Echo, for all its faults, has its job to do too. Sometimes that will annoy you. But when this happens, isn't it best to take a deep breath, count to ten, say you're unhappy, even - then move on? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
INFLUENCED.COM Posted 11 December, 2009 Share Posted 11 December, 2009 Sky Sports News were the first to report on it, anyway. I bet they don't get banned... Even before MB ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrant Posted 11 December, 2009 Share Posted 11 December, 2009 Even before MB ? The first news outlet, anyway And it actually appears as though Yahoo! Eurosport were the first, which is somewhat random. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minty Posted 11 December, 2009 Share Posted 11 December, 2009 MB got it from someone on 606 I believe... bottom line is it was publicly available via the NFDC website and whoever saw it first was gonna broadcast it, via forums like 606 or this one, and then media would pick up on it from there. Verbal's advice is spot on IMO. If something is publicly available, no matter what part of whatever website it might be on, it *will* be found and posted and discussed, and the Echo, love them or hate them, can quite rightly publish the details. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hectors house Posted 11 December, 2009 Share Posted 11 December, 2009 I like to think I am pretty loyal to my team and ultimately if pushed I will back the club on this - but more on "blind faith" than sound opinion. The Echo is a newspaper - it's job is to report news and that's all it did on this occasion. As it stated the news was already in the public arena so all they did was provide a more detailed report for what was very much a local interest story. Not sure what they did wrong and personally, based on the facts I have available, I think the club are being a bit silly. I suspect that maybe there is more to this than meets the eye. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Bates Posted 11 December, 2009 Author Share Posted 11 December, 2009 MB got it from someone on 606 I believe... bottom line is it was publicly available via the NFDC website and whoever saw it first was gonna broadcast it, via forums like 606 or this one, and then media would pick up on it from there. Verbal's advice is spot on IMO. If something is publicly available, no matter what part of whatever website it might be on, it *will* be found and posted and discussed, and the Echo, love them or hate them, can quite rightly publish the details. Correct, from 606 and I agree, Verbal's advice is spot on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie Wayman Posted 11 December, 2009 Share Posted 11 December, 2009 Let's all take a calm-down pill including our new Chairman. We have a free press in this country thank God and nobody should deny their freedom to publish what they want and to collect their news however thay have to. Do we really want our press controlled by background mandarins who can decide what and what not you are allowed to publish. Publish and be damned say I. We live in a democracy still (just about). OK maybe there are some boundaries when it comes to personal stuff but being quick off the mark to publish news of Staplewood is hardly damaging any particular individual. Quite the contrary in fact as it puts the new management team in a very positive light - a refreshing change for this City and Club so why would The Echo not wish to spread the good tidings to us all at this time of the year especially? They'll find a way around it once some kin passer-by picks all the toys up and oputs them back in the pram. Come on children behave nicely or Santa Claus wont be coming this Christmas! No wisecarcks about old-age either please.. This is no laughing matter... Ho! Ho! Ho!. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fitzhugh Fella Posted 11 December, 2009 Share Posted 11 December, 2009 I'm reliably informed that the Echo got all their information from the New Forest District Council website in the same way as we did on here. They used public documents, so there's no copyright issue to overcome, and there was no "embargo" as such. Cortese asked the Echo to hold their coverage of it, but they (rightly, IMO) believed it was pointless doing so because it was already in the public domain and the readership would be rightly questioning why they hadn't reported on it. Sky Sports News were the first to report on it, anyway. I bet they don't get banned... I had to laugh at the Echo statement that said "the ban won't effect our coverage". Does that mean then that the guy who does the write-ups of the games doesn't actually go to the matches? That would explain a few things. This isn't about Staplewood. It's a power struggle between 2 egos. I heard the relationship was not too good a couple of months ago when we were discussing with the club what book to bring out next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom28 Posted 11 December, 2009 Share Posted 11 December, 2009 I like the fact that Saints conduct their business in private. Its professional. The Echo acted unprofessionally, and therefore they've been cut-off. The Echo needs Saints more than Saints need The Echo at the moment. Cortese realises that and is laying ground rules; I like it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Give it to Ron Posted 11 December, 2009 Share Posted 11 December, 2009 The relationship between the club and the Echo has been awful for years. I remember talking to a reporter at Staplewood at a reserve game....in fact I was stood next to Theo and his dad at the time....(name dropper) and he said that Rupert and the echo's relationship was awful and had hit big problems and he had banned them coming to the ground etc. All the requests had to go via Saints pressroom and were getting rejected. The coverage during our recent struggles was abysmal....if the echo want to get into a war with Nicola there will be only one winner. The fans will back the person responsible for getting us out of the mess not a third rate rag of a paper that I stopped buying years ago due it being so rubbish with its sports coverage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrant Posted 11 December, 2009 Share Posted 11 December, 2009 I had to laugh at the Echo statement that said "the ban won't effect our coverage". Does that mean then that the guy who does the write-ups of the games doesn't actually go to the matches? That would explain a few things. I think he meant that it won't affect the angle of coverage - they're not suddenly going to go on the attack. That said, I did also laugh for the same reason This isn't about Staplewood. It's a power struggle between 2 egos. I heard the relationship was not too good a couple of months ago when we were discussing with the club what book to bring out next year. Would explain it, the situation as it has been laid out in black and white makes no sense at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patrick Bateman Posted 11 December, 2009 Share Posted 11 December, 2009 The Daily Echo could cease to exist and I wouldn't even notice. This isn't a go at the Echo, but the press in general; but as the standards of writing and grammar get worse and worse, I refuse to buy the papers and therefore, wouldn't care if it didn't exist in the future either. The BBC has got a lot worse recently too with bad pronunciation, often Amercianised for example, saying 'pri-vacy' instead of 'priv-acy'. Just annoys me! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The9 Posted 11 December, 2009 Share Posted 11 December, 2009 This isn't a go at the Echo, but the press in general; but as the standards of writing and grammar get worse and worse, I refuse to buy the papers and therefore, wouldn't care if it didn't exist in the future either. The BBC has got a lot worse recently too with bad pronunciation, often Amercianised for example, saying 'pri-vacy' instead of 'priv-acy'. Just annoys me! You can have a go at the Echo for it too if you wish, they've already amended "the story was ran" to the correct "the story was run" since the link originally appeared... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saint_mears Posted 11 December, 2009 Share Posted 11 December, 2009 The Daily echo should of waited because the official words had not been spoken. They like all the other media outlets did not know the full story. The club give all the exclusives to them on a plate. The Saints coverage keeps the newspaper from closing down. Out of respect they merely had to wait 24hrs and get the 'full' story. This newspaper thinks they can do what they want and then cry foul afterwards. If i was Nicole Cortese i would just let the Echo from now on do the match coverage. All exclusive stuff should go through the club website. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
christineb Posted 11 December, 2009 Share Posted 11 December, 2009 Ian Murray has chosen to make a big story out of this, he could have kept quiet and tried to resolve the matter privately. Nicola Cortese and the club have said nothing so why has he done a full page story? If he had not 'gone public' we probably wouldn't have known anything about this matter. His last paragraph is very telling and certainly won't help resolve the problem. I'm definitely Team Cortese!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shirleysfc Posted 11 December, 2009 Share Posted 11 December, 2009 I'm reliably informed that the Echo got all their information from the New Forest District Council website in the same way as we did on here. They used public documents, so there's no copyright issue to overcome, and there was no "embargo" as such. Cortese asked the Echo to hold their coverage of it, but they (rightly, IMO) believed it was pointless doing so because it was already in the public domain and the readership would be rightly questioning why they hadn't reported on it. Sky Sports News were the first to report on it, anyway. I bet they don't get banned... I heard that they'd known about it for a while but had kept quiet until this week. Two sides to every story I suppose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The9 Posted 11 December, 2009 Share Posted 11 December, 2009 I've not heard of a single newspaper that makes an income from their website. No paper - no website. No ? Ok, here goes, from Nov 30th... http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8385342.stm One of the UK's biggest newspaper firms is to charge for access to online content from six of its titles. The Johnston Press websites will either ask users to pay £5 for a three-month subscription to read the full articles, or direct them to buy the newspapers. Johnston is the first regional publisher in the UK to trial asking readers to pay for its online news. Sites in the pilot scheme include the Worksop Guardian, the Ripley & Heanor News and the Whitby Gazette. The Northumberland Gazette is also included in the trial. In Scotland, the Carrick Gazette and Southern Reporter are taking part. And there are millions of websites that don't have their own newspaper... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank's cousin Posted 11 December, 2009 Share Posted 11 December, 2009 Uhm... The Echo only exists to make money - as do all local rags. They need to sell copies to ensure tehir ABC is high so they can command the best advertising revenues... if you remember that then you will understand that whoever is in the boardroom the Echo will never have a stable relationship with teh club.... because they are NOT in the game of printing what they think the club want or what the is best for the club, just what they think will sell most copies - such as scoops etc. Sometimes this means as now, they do something prematurely and they **** the club off, other times its info that the club are happy to see 'released' as we saw with some of teh spin that previous boards 'leaked' ... so its nothing to get worried about really... more up and downs in this relationship that in a cheap brothel... just remember al journos are whores and we wont get confused... ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The9 Posted 11 December, 2009 Share Posted 11 December, 2009 To be honest I can't see that this is going to affect their reporting anyway, loads of clubs have done this to various regional papers and they just get their stories unofficially through other sources, so it's a total storm in a teacup. Cortese looks touchy given that the info is out there, and the paper looks petty for bringing Lowe into it. Just out of interest, how was there a letter objecting to the development already on the file when we were linked to it if the development was so hush hush ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wade Garrett Posted 11 December, 2009 Share Posted 11 December, 2009 Ian Murray is a muppet. Have you ever read his editorials? He is a condascending ***t. Mr Cortese, stick to your guns and keep this irrelevant rag away from the club. Hopefully the paper will cease to exist and my missus won't be able to waste my money buying that inane sh*t anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nineteen Canteen Posted 11 December, 2009 Share Posted 11 December, 2009 I couldn't give a ****! If I had to choose between Cortese and the Echo, I know who I would go for! I agree but at the moment it is a worrying development and the Echo did not exactly breach a confidence as the information was there for all to see in the planning application. I hope Mr Cortese reconsiders because although an excellent job he may be doing he cannot control the press or the media and the right to freedom of speech. It's imperative that our media, TV, Radio and newspapers give us their reports on the club based on their observations and contact with the club. To start banning them because of what looks like a control issue IMO then that I'm afraid does give cause for concern. Perhaps Mr Cortese would like to buy a local radio station or the Echo but until then he needs to respect the service the media provide. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Bates Posted 11 December, 2009 Author Share Posted 11 December, 2009 The Johnston Press websites will either ask users to pay £5 for a three-month subscription to read the full articles, or direct them to buy the newspapers Only 3 months! Blimey, you get 12 months on here. :smt040 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scummer Posted 11 December, 2009 Share Posted 11 December, 2009 Just out of interest, how was there a letter objecting to the development already on the file when we were linked to it if the development was so hush hush ? No-one is saying it was hush hush. And very local residents will have been informed through the post, details normally go up on lampposts as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackFrost Posted 11 December, 2009 Share Posted 11 December, 2009 I agree but at the moment it is a worrying development and the Echo did not exactly breach a confidence as the information was there for all to see in the planning application. I hope Mr Cortese reconsiders because although an excellent job he may be doing he cannot control the press or the media and the right to freedom of speech. It's imperative that our media, TV, Radio and newspapers give us their reports on the club based on their observations and contact with the club. To start banning them because of what looks like a control issue IMO then that I'm afraid does give cause for concern. Perhaps Mr Cortese would like to buy a local radio station or the Echo but until then he needs to respect the service the media provide. True but atthe end of the day we haven't heard Cortese's side of the story yet. I haven't seen the report, are we sure the Echo's report hasn't reported anything they couldn't have got from the public domain? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wes Tender Posted 11 December, 2009 Share Posted 11 December, 2009 You can have a go at the Echo for it too if you wish, they've already amended "the story was ran" to the correct "the story was run" since the link originally appeared... You picked that up too then. For some time they ought to have employed a decent proof reader on that rag, somebody with a reasonable command of grammar and spelling. One gets the impression that half of the articles have been written by pimply youths straight out of college on work experience. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minty Posted 11 December, 2009 Share Posted 11 December, 2009 Just to clarify, the application was received on 19th November and published on their website on 25th November, so it's been 'public' for over two weeks now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4737_carlin Posted 11 December, 2009 Share Posted 11 December, 2009 I do think its important to point out as someone above has said that the Echo get given all the 'scoops'. Thats why i imagine Mr Cortese is peed off that they run around doing what they want. The Club do not need the Daily Echo anymore. But the Echo are in desperate need for articles to sell newspapers. They could of easily waited to correct the full story. They now look like a bunch of amateurish cry babies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
forever a red and white Posted 11 December, 2009 Share Posted 11 December, 2009 i think the point has been lost on most people here. Yes the info was in the public domian, however SFC and the ECho have a realtionship to ensure the best for both parties. Cortese made a request, the Echo went against it, perfectly jusitifed. Echo broke the trust not Cortese. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Bates Posted 11 December, 2009 Author Share Posted 11 December, 2009 Just to clarify, the application was received on 19th November and published on their website on 25th November, so it's been 'public' for over two weeks now. I like the way the Echo move areas, for example last week they reported about a house being burgled in Sullivan Road, Bitterne. Sullivan Road is only a few seconds walk from my house, in Sholing! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4737_carlin Posted 11 December, 2009 Share Posted 11 December, 2009 Just to clarify, the application was received on 19th November and published on their website on 25th November, so it's been 'public' for over two weeks now. Totally immaterial at the end of the day. The club wanted to do a proper press release with quotes and the daily echo should of waited. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nineteen Canteen Posted 11 December, 2009 Share Posted 11 December, 2009 True but atthe end of the day we haven't heard Cortese's side of the story yet. I haven't seen the report, are we sure the Echo's report hasn't reported anything they couldn't have got from the public domain?[/QUOTE] If they had I doubt they would be making a fuss as I would not want to go into a legal battle with Mr Liebherr's millions against me if I was the Echo. The Echo like TV and Radio have a duty to report to those of us not in the know, issues that affect us be it football clubs through to MP's expenses. No doubt there will be many fans who do not use the internet or forums or who check planning applications and rely on public news to be provided by the various agencies and no matter what Mr Cortese feels he cannot or should not control that IMO. The club must have known the application was being released and I'm sure it would not have taken a lot of effort to work with NDC and have a press release ready for the day the plans went public. It seems to me the Echo were doing the job you expect from them in return for the price of the paper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4737_carlin Posted 11 December, 2009 Share Posted 11 December, 2009 i think the point has been lost on most people here. Yes the info was in the public domian, however SFC and the ECho have a realtionship to ensure the best for both parties. Cortese made a request, the Echo went against it, perfectly jusitifed. Echo broke the trust not Cortese. Exactly !! If you give some one exclusive articles to print you expect something in return. Asking to wait 24hrs is peanuts. The Daily Echo have scored a massive own goal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The9 Posted 11 December, 2009 Share Posted 11 December, 2009 No-one is saying it was hush hush. And very local residents will have been informed through the post, details normally go up on lampposts as well. But it does make a ban for reporting information in the public domain that much more ridiculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nineteen Canteen Posted 11 December, 2009 Share Posted 11 December, 2009 Totally immaterial at the end of the day. The club wanted to do a proper press release with quotes and the daily echo should of waited. Immaterial? Surely it was a surprise this did not break earlier and the club have had 2 weeks to release the story before the press did it independently. Agreements between news reporters and those who make the news should not exist IMO and Rupert Murdoch is a classic case in point regard heavily weighted reporting bias. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nineteen Canteen Posted 11 December, 2009 Share Posted 11 December, 2009 But it does make a ban for reporting information in the public domain that much more ridiculous. Ridiculous is one word you could use, it seems more concerning to me given the circumstances. I'm no fan of the Echo and out of their catchment area so don't even read it regularly but in this instance and IMO they acted as I would expect any newpaper to act and report items of interest to their readers. It's bad enough papers forming allegiances with political parties. What next the FT to form an allegiance with UK banks to help protect their pay structures with positive reports about the roles of millionaire bankers? I want the Echo to have a healthy relationship with the club but I don't want them to be in their back pocket either and the inevitable suggestion this would bring that news relevant to their readers would be supressed. Mr Cortese needs to back down on this and quickly IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wes Tender Posted 11 December, 2009 Share Posted 11 December, 2009 We have not heard Nicola Cortese's side of things yet and because he is a damned sight more professional than those who run the Echo, it is quite possible that he will not stoop to their level to do so. Even on that basis, on the evidence of what I have seen of the way that the club go about their business since his arrival, I am quite content to credit him with being on the moral high ground in this matter. The Echo has attempted to convey the impression that they are the injured party, whilst probably gleefully anticipating an increase of sales to those who might be pursuaded to read about in their rag. But it will be a Phyrric victory, as it cannot be in their best interests to have a poor relationship with a business that generates so much custom for them in the local vicinity. It is also quite feasible that if they persist in this childish posturing, they might lose existing readers who are Saints fans and that the scoops and exclusives are denied to them in future and given to the Nationals instead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The9 Posted 11 December, 2009 Share Posted 11 December, 2009 You picked that up too then. For some time they ought to have employed a decent proof reader on that rag, somebody with a reasonable command of grammar and spelling. One gets the impression that half of the articles have been written by pimply youths straight out of college on work experience. Picked up on it ? I whinged about it on my Facebook page and the spent part of the morning educating myself on participles and tenses from Wikipedia because I knew it was wrong and wasn't able to explain why... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wes Tender Posted 11 December, 2009 Share Posted 11 December, 2009 Mr Cortese needs to back down on this and quickly IMO. How can you make that decision without knowing the exact circumstances from his perspective? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minty Posted 11 December, 2009 Share Posted 11 December, 2009 Totally immaterial at the end of the day. The club wanted to do a proper press release with quotes and the daily echo should of waited. Can i just state that I'm not defending the Echo here or taking sides, because if there is any kind of agreement or understanding between the Echo and the Club then they should at least discuss the fact they want to publish it. Also, having worked for the Echo, had articles edited by the Echo such that they have a different meaning, and got into sh!t because of the Echo, I would be the last person to defend them... However... as has been stated, the Echo exist to make money and they do that by selling papers and they do that by having news that people want to read, ideally before anyone else has it. So, I can understand why they published it, because any 'exclusive' in this instance would've effectively been lost already. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
debbiemc Posted 11 December, 2009 Share Posted 11 December, 2009 You picked that up too then. For some time they ought to have employed a decent proof reader on that rag, somebody with a reasonable command of grammar and spelling. One gets the impression that half of the articles have been written by pimply youths straight out of college on work experience. In the team line up for last Saturday, according to the Echo we had two players with the surname of James. My 12 year old son picked that mistake up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patrick Bateman Posted 11 December, 2009 Share Posted 11 December, 2009 You can have a go at the Echo for it too if you wish, they've already amended "the story was ran" to the correct "the story was run" since the link originally appeared... Brilliant, exactly the sort of example I mean; do people no longer proof read? I must sound like a broken record at work with it as well, our esteemed colleagues in Internal Comms are forever putting appallingly badly worded statements with wrong spellings/grammar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SFC1906 Posted 11 December, 2009 Share Posted 11 December, 2009 Ian Murray is a muppet. Have you ever read his editorials? He is a condascending ***t. Mr Cortese, stick to your guns and keep this irrelevant rag away from the club. Hopefully the paper will cease to exist and my missus won't be able to waste my money buying that inane sh*t anymore. He certainly is. Did anyone else just hear his interview on Wave FM? He came across as a complete ****, making a joke of the whole thing - esp the Lowe bit. He joked that that they would probably just all sit round a table and 'have a bit of a cuddle' and all would be fine. Which I expect is true - it's just the way he was saying it that made me say out loud 'Shut up you condescending *****!' If he relly wants to **** NC off he is definately going the right way about it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wes Tender Posted 11 December, 2009 Share Posted 11 December, 2009 In the team line up for last Saturday, according to the Echo we had two players with the surname of James. My 12 year old son picked that mistake up. Perhaps with their unparalleled prowess in local sporting knowledge, they thought that one of them was playing in our goal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miffy Posted 11 December, 2009 Share Posted 11 December, 2009 We have not heard Nicola Cortese's side of things yet and because he is a damned sight more professional than those who run the Echo, it is quite possible that he will not stoop to their level to do so. Even on that basis, on the evidence of what I have seen of the way that the club go about their business since his arrival, I am quite content to credit him with being on the moral high ground in this matter. The Echo has attempted to convey the impression that they are the injured party, whilst probably gleefully anticipating an increase of sales to those who might be pursuaded to read about in their rag. But it will be a Phyrric victory, as it cannot be in their best interests to have a poor relationship with a business that generates so much custom for them in the local vicinity. It is also quite feasible that if they persist in this childish posturing, they might lose existing readers who are Saints fans and that the scoops and exclusives are denied to them in future and given to the Nationals instead. I had never heard the term Phyrric victory before. Just looked it up, I quite like it. This forum is most educational! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now