alpine_saint Posted 12 December, 2009 Share Posted 12 December, 2009 Well, it seems pointless commenting on this much more without knowing Cortese's side of things, and frankly I think it's all a bit silly. The longer it goes on, the sillier it is, and whilst it's not exactly a big black mark on either party, it's still an annoying blemish on what has been a positive, progressive season. In the great scheme of things, it matters not, unless it develops. 3 points today is all that matters right now, so that's all I'm gonna worry about for the rest of the day. Look at how quiet this site is now mid-week, when we have won. Look at the digs certain posters receive about only coming on and posting if we have lost. The fact is, that the Echo must have mixed feelings about our renaissance - they probably sell more papers when we lose so need to scratch around for other, not necessarily positive news - and the only one of the two parties involved here in this spat who can unequivocally be said to be working for the good of the team and club 100% of the time is NC... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4737_carlin Posted 12 December, 2009 Share Posted 12 December, 2009 The club can't 'tell' someone not to public documents. They do not have the right, even if the document relates to something they are doing. That's the law, because it is the whole point of a public document. I dont think you are getting the bit about the club relationship and the supply of articles to print. They merely asked them to hold back 24hrs and roll with the official press release. If you give someone plenty of exclusives to print for their benefit, you should at least respect the supplier when he wants you to wait 24hrs. The Daily echo have blundered badly and should never recieve any exclusives until Murray is history. Their gripe is that they have lost out to the internet and not got the exclusive on staplewood. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verbal Posted 12 December, 2009 Share Posted 12 December, 2009 Amazed how some fans think the Echo can do what they want ! If the club ask them to hold fire for 24hrs that is what they should of done. Its immaterial it appears on other media outlets. The Echo goes straight out to Southampton to around 20,000 people a day ? They get given plenty of Saints news directly to them only. They should have showed some respect and waited for the press release. Amazed that you think they can't - and it's not 'immaterial' that other media outlets had covered the story. As trivial and local as this all is, it wouldn't be much of a banner for press freedom if it read: 'If someone says a newspaper can't print a story, then it can't.' Follow that all the way up the food chain to the nationals, and you'd have a situation where a government spin doctor gets uppity (as they always do) because a story is broken early or not told in the 'approved' manner - and the spin doctor has some sort of moral right to get his or her way. Of course, there are probably some decent reasons for the club wanting to be careful about this. There are local sensitivities to consider - not least the objectors, one of whom had her legal rights (under the Data Protection Action) trampled on by the local council. This is, in other words, the kind of thing that can blow up in your face. And however ineptly the Echo has handled its response to the banning, it could equally be argued that the club should have anticipated this by pulling any announcement up to around the time of the submission to the council. Either way, it's still a pretty trivial thing - and I'd expect differences to be buried in a week or so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearsy Posted 12 December, 2009 Share Posted 12 December, 2009 The fact is, that the Echo must have mixed feelings about our renaissance - they probably sell more papers when we lose so need to scratch around for other, not necessarily positive news - and the only one of the two parties involved here in this spat who can unequivocally be said to be working for the good of the team and club 100% of the time is NC... It'll be very good for the Echo if we make it back to the Prem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jam Posted 12 December, 2009 Share Posted 12 December, 2009 Look at how quiet this site is now mid-week, when we have won. Look at the digs certain posters receive about only coming on and posting if we have lost. The fact is, that the Echo must have mixed feelings about our renaissance - they probably sell more papers when we lose so need to scratch around for other, not necessarily positive news - and the only one of the two parties involved here in this spat who can unequivocally be said to be working for the good of the team and club 100% of the time is NC... I don't agree that the Echo would have mixed feelings on our renaissance; I believe that if we continue to improve and get more of a reputation for being a winning team then people will come back, the pride will return (for those who lost it ) and interest will rise. And the Echo is the number one source for printed information. Regarding the one party 'who can unequivocally be said to be working for the good of the team and club 100% of the time' being NC. This is definitely the case but surely that is the way it should be? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nineteen Canteen Posted 12 December, 2009 Share Posted 12 December, 2009 If the Echo were hoping to divide the fanbase they've certainly won over the resident fruitcake on this forum. No offence 19C, but you are so predictable. Go on admit it, you're really a Skate on a wind up aren't you? No offence Dune but could you quantify your accusations. Being predictable = resident fruitcake. Plenty of other predictable posters on here and my view that in this case the club is wrong seems fairly reasonable are we all fruitcakes those who hold similar views? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nineteen Canteen Posted 12 December, 2009 Share Posted 12 December, 2009 We're not 'divided' - don't be over-dramatic. It's just a difference of opinion being argued sensibly. And why the abuse? 19C surely has a point - it's just not the same as yours. Thank you . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CB Fry Posted 12 December, 2009 Share Posted 12 December, 2009 The fact is, that the Echo must have mixed feelings about our renaissance - they probably sell more papers when we lose so need to scratch around for other, not necessarily positive news - and the only one of the two parties involved here in this spat who can unequivocally be said to be working for the good of the team and club 100% of the time is NC... Well the Echo would sell a hell of a lot more papers if we get to the play-off final, or the JPT Final or both, and they'd sell more papers if we were in the Prem. Successful football club = feelgood factor in city = good for newspaper circulation. And I am getting a bit annoyed with a constant refrain on this thread, that the Club have somehow upset the club by slagging them off, or looking for bad news stories. The Staplewood story was a good news story, presented positively, with no other agenda. Saints moving onwards and upwards. It was Cortese who has got arsey about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 12 December, 2009 Share Posted 12 December, 2009 Well the Echo would sell a hell of a lot more papers if we get to the play-off final, or the JPT Final or both, and they'd sell more papers if we were in the Prem. Successful football club = feelgood factor in city = good for newspaper circulation. And I am getting a bit annoyed with a constant refrain on this thread, that the Club have somehow upset the club by slagging them off, or looking for bad news stories. The Staplewood story was a good news story, presented positively, with no other agenda. Saints moving onwards and upwards. It was Cortese who has got arsey about it. Yes, because the Echo were trying to steal his thunder. How do you think Lawrie Mac would have felt if his signing of Keegan had broke in the Echo rather than at that memorable press conference ? Btw, I discovered this week you have named yourself after a Nazi sympathiser. Explain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John B Posted 12 December, 2009 Share Posted 12 December, 2009 Yes, because the Echo were trying to steal his thunder. How do you think Lawrie Mac would have felt if his signing of Keegan had broke in the Echo rather than at that memorable press conference ? QUOTE] Slightly different I would have thought as the whole thing about the Training ground was already in the public domain it was not as though it was a secret Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CB Fry Posted 12 December, 2009 Share Posted 12 December, 2009 Yes, because the Echo were trying to steal his thunder. How do you think Lawrie Mac would have felt if his signing of Keegan had broke in the Echo rather than at that memorable press conference ? Btw, I discovered this week you have named yourself after a Nazi sympathiser. Explain. Behave. It was elsewhere already and you are seriously not comparing the redevelopment of Staplewood with LM signing Keegan are you? You'll notice the almost zero interest the actual redevelopment has had on here or anywhere. It's hardly earth shattering stuff is it? As for my namesake, no idea to be honest, I'm not an expert. Pretty sure he was a Liberal politician though. If it's a case of educated posh Englishman in the 30s facinated with Hitler, then he's not alone. One King of Britain at the time was too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 12 December, 2009 Share Posted 12 December, 2009 This point about it being "already in the public domain" is a red-herring, imo. Not many Saints fans keep themselves apprised of current NFDC planning approvals, FFS. This was not really in the public domain for the audience it was intended for. NC was intending to send out a message reaffirming his and MCs long-term committment to the club I think. And the Echo, with a direct line into the consciousness of the people of the city, shat on their own doorstep. Anyhow, this was almost certainly a straw that broke the camels back... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Le God Posted 12 December, 2009 Share Posted 12 December, 2009 Well said Alpine Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John B Posted 12 December, 2009 Share Posted 12 December, 2009 This point about it being "already in the public domain" is a red-herring, imo. Not many Saints fans keep themselves apprised of current NFDC planning approvals, FFS. This was not really in the public domain for the audience it was intended for. NC was intending to send out a message reaffirming his and MCs long-term committment to the club I think. And the Echo, with a direct line into the consciousness of the people of the city, shat on their own doorstep. Anyhow, this was almost certainly a straw that broke the camels back... It was posted on here and apparently was on Sky and the BBC that seems to be in the Public domain If I am wrong then I agree with you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Le God Posted 12 December, 2009 Share Posted 12 December, 2009 It was posted on here and apparently was on Sky and the BBC that seems to be in the Public domain If I am wrong then I agree with you Only a small amount of text on Sky and the BBC. The Echo showed images of the development against the wishes of the club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John B Posted 12 December, 2009 Share Posted 12 December, 2009 Only a small amount of text on Sky and the BBC. The Echo showed images of the development against the wishes of the club. OK the club may have a point but I still think banning the Echo is a bit over the top. Mind you I dont really see what all the fuss is about the whole situation appears fairly cloudy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Le God Posted 12 December, 2009 Share Posted 12 December, 2009 OK the club may have a point but I still think banning the Echo is a bit over the top. Mind you I dont really see what all the fuss is about the whole situation appears fairly cloudy As Alpine said, this incident may be the straw that broke the camels back. We have only heard what happened from the Echo so far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John B Posted 12 December, 2009 Share Posted 12 December, 2009 As Alpine said, this incident may be the straw that broke the camels back. We have only heard what happened from the Echo so far. Yes I made that point earlier Anyway another good win today so lets get back to the football Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickG Posted 12 December, 2009 Share Posted 12 December, 2009 Look at how quiet this site is now mid-week, when we have won. Look at the digs certain posters receive about only coming on and posting if we have lost. The fact is, that the Echo must have mixed feelings about our renaissance - they probably sell more papers when we lose so need to scratch around for other, not necessarily positive news - and the only one of the two parties involved here in this spat who can unequivocally be said to be working for the good of the team and club 100% of the time is NC... Victories improve their circulations hugely Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John B Posted 12 December, 2009 Share Posted 12 December, 2009 Victories improve their circulations hugely I dont like reading reports when we have lost Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ruffo Posted 12 December, 2009 Share Posted 12 December, 2009 Cortese did ask to meet with the Echo, before banning them so full respect to him. The Echo like all newspapers are leeches and need to keep on the side of the people that give them stories that sell the paper. overall a storm in a tea cup Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saints Pedro Posted 12 December, 2009 Share Posted 12 December, 2009 If it was 'in the public domain' already then surely asking the Echo to wait 24 hrs before going to print was hardly 'gagging the press'. It was hardly an exclusive was it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clifford Nelson Posted 12 December, 2009 Share Posted 12 December, 2009 I remember Harry Gration, the best phone in guide Radio Solent ever had, being banned from anything to do with the club for having the temerity to be a bit critical. I also remember his riposte that he had been banned from bigger clubs than this in the past and certainly didn't intend to keep his mouth shut. During the years the Echo's Saints coverage have been made by journalist who have tried to keep the peace. Maybe not to much success and irritating most fans. This move by Cortese is not good. A newspaper, even a local one, is there to cover the news, not to be the mouthpiece of the club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickG Posted 12 December, 2009 Share Posted 12 December, 2009 Don't really care. A petty argument coming out in public. The Editor sounded a pompous **** in his article and sulking like a kid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fitzhugh Fella Posted 12 December, 2009 Share Posted 12 December, 2009 Don't really care. A petty argument coming out in public. The Editor sounded a pompous **** in his article and sulking like a kid. I find it strange that people come on here and say "I don't care". Why not say nothing Nick? You do come across as the sort of subservient person that will have nothing said against your club....whatever. I have given this a lot of thought today, I am no supporter of the Echo and I don't like Murray one little bit. However I think Cortese to be completely out of order on this issue. To deny the Echo the right to report on Saints (even though their reportage is crap) is undemocratic, and an insult to all those who can't get to matches and rely on the local newspaper. Cortese is being the pompous ass. But NickG you can keep on wiping his arse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saintandy666 Posted 12 December, 2009 Share Posted 12 December, 2009 I find it strange that people come on here and say "I don't care". Why not say nothing Nick? You do come across as the sort of subservient person that will have nothing said against your club....whatever. I have given this a lot of thought today, I am no supporter of the Echo and I don't like Murray one little bit. However I think Cortese to be completely out of order on this issue. To deny the Echo the right to report on Saints (even though their reportage is crap) is undemocratic, and an insult to all those who can't get to matches and rely on the local newspaper. Cortese is being the pompous ass. But NickG you can keep on wiping his arse. Saints were happy to let them in and give them the extra info and all that if they just waited 24 hours, but they couldn't. Their fault really to be honest. And they can still report on saints, they haven't banned the reporters from attending matches full stop, they just won't get any extra priviliges anymore. Their decision, their fault. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Le God Posted 12 December, 2009 Share Posted 12 December, 2009 However I think Cortese to be completely out of order on this issue. To deny the Echo the right to report on Saints (even though their reportage is crap) is undemocratic, and an insult to all those who can't get to matches and rely on the local newspaper. Cortese is being the pompous ass. You have not heard both sides of the story, yet accuse Cortese of being pompous! We have only heard what happened from the Echo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beatlesaint Posted 12 December, 2009 Share Posted 12 December, 2009 You have not heard both sides of the story, yet accuse Cortese of being pompous! We have only heard what happened from the Echo. Totally agree.....and by the way Duncan, check on the Echo website for their match report You do puzzle me sometimes Duncan, you really do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fitzhugh Fella Posted 12 December, 2009 Share Posted 12 December, 2009 Totally agree.....and by the way Duncan, check on the Echo website for their match report You do puzzle me sometimes Duncan, you really do. Sorry you have lost me. I have just got back from the match. The only view I have is I think it wrong for the club to "ban" the Echo because it did not "conform" to their way of thinking. NC is acting like a spoilt prima donna. Sorry I realise to criticise Saints on this forum is not acceptable to some. I am totally puzzled why you should be puzzled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Gotsmanov Posted 12 December, 2009 Share Posted 12 December, 2009 Am with Duncan on this. Whatever you think of the Echo, anybody who cuts off the press is out of order. In history, people who have tried to control the press tend to be fascists, communists or unsavoury dictators. Cortese has a good story to tell he should let it be told. He has done a lot of good to date so why bother. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fitzhugh Fella Posted 12 December, 2009 Share Posted 12 December, 2009 (edited) You have not heard both sides of the story, yet accuse Cortese of being pompous! We have only heard what happened from the Echo. Cortese has had more than 48 hours to give his side of events but hasn't. So that is now my fault because I dared to criticise? Edited 12 December, 2009 by Fitzhugh Fella Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John B Posted 12 December, 2009 Share Posted 12 December, 2009 Cortese has had more than 48 hours to give his side of events but hasn't. So that is now my fault because I dared to criticise? Although I tend to agree with you it is such an over the top response that there maybe more behind the banning Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Le God Posted 12 December, 2009 Share Posted 12 December, 2009 (edited) Cortese has had more than 48 hours to give his side of events but hasn't. So that is now my fault because I dared to criticise? So because Cortese hasn't issued a statement that makes it ok to read an editorial in the Echo and decide it must be Cortese that is pompous? Maybe Cortese hasn't issued a statement yet because the Echo may be having legal proceedings for using copyrighted pictures of the development without permission(Sky and the BBC didn't use pictures) or maybe he doesn't think he needs to respond in public and this is being dealt with behind doors. There is much more to this I feel than the version of events given in the Echo which you seem to be basing your opinion soley on. If I took your route and were to choose the side to sit with without evidence, I'd with the saviours of the club that have in a short time already had results rather than media hacks with ulterior motives of selling copies of the paper at any cost. Edited 12 December, 2009 by Matthew Le God Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilko Posted 12 December, 2009 Share Posted 12 December, 2009 Once the documents are in the public domain, the club can't expect the Echo not to write about them. That's as far as it goes. All this crap from PR people about press releases is just that - crap. Any journalist worth his or her salt would write the story and it would be doing the fans a disservice not to run with the story. The club is being naive and will go crawling back sooner or later. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benjii Posted 12 December, 2009 Share Posted 12 December, 2009 FFS. He's not trying to "control the press". He's not trying to keep Saints matches a secret is he. He is merely making a point to spite the Echo. Quite what they have done to annoy him so much seems a bit unclear and it could be an overreaction but I have only heard one side of the story so will refrain from making a judgment. I will say that I would hope this is not just pettyness and they have actually done something out of order. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Le God Posted 12 December, 2009 Share Posted 12 December, 2009 (edited) Once the documents are in the public domain, the club can't expect the Echo not to write about them. That's as far as it goes. All this crap from PR people about press releases is just that - crap. Any journalist worth his or her salt would write the story and it would be doing the fans a disservice not to run with the story. The club is being naive and will go crawling back sooner or later. Any crawling will be by the Echo not the club. The Echo needs the club for sales of papers far more than the club need a local paper when football is covered by hundreds of media outlets. If the images of the development were protected then the Echo would have no right in doing what they did and printing them. No other media outlet(Sky, BBC etc) printed/showed images of the training ground before the press conference. In printing the images against the wishes of the club it took the thunder from the press conference. If protected by law the Echo could be in some serious trouble. The Echo has "possibly" done something it was asked not to do. If it agreed not to do it then why can't you see that the club would be upset about it "if" the Echo went against its word? Edited 12 December, 2009 by Matthew Le God Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilko Posted 12 December, 2009 Share Posted 12 December, 2009 Any crawling will be by the Echo not the club. The Echo need the club for sales of papers far more than the club need a local paper when football is covered by hundreds of media outlets. If the images of the development were protected then the Echo would have no right in doing what they did and printing them. No other media outlet(Sky, BBC etc) printed/showed images of the training ground before the press conference. The Echo has "possibly" done something it was asked not to do. If it agreed not to do it then why can't you see that the club would be upset about it "if" the Echo went against its word? The Daily Echo will still get stories about Saints. There are not hundreds of media outlets covering Saints in any great depth. Goodwill between news outlets and organisations is a too way street and in this situation the club is just being naive. Once the documents are on the planning website, they're in the public domain. The club ballsed up by not arranging the press conference before the application went live on the website. Skates recently banned The News from the ground for not writing enough 'positive' stories. The media must be editorially independent and the banning of journalists from football clubs is a worrying trend. We are heading toward a future in which the only news people receive is the official, spun, watered-down version of events. This is what the PR-driven press release culture is creating and it applies to football clubs as much as it applies to local authorities, the Government and businesses. I suggest you stick to researching for computer games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Le God Posted 12 December, 2009 Share Posted 12 December, 2009 The Daily Echo will still get stories about Saints. There are not hundreds of media outlets covering Saints in any great depth. Goodwill between news outlets and organisations is a too way street and in this situation the club is just being naive. Once the documents are on the planning website, they're in the public domain. The club ballsed up by not arranging the press conference before the application went live on the website. Skates recently banned The News from the ground for not writing enough 'positive' stories. The media must be editorially independent and the banning of journalists from football clubs is a worrying trend. We are heading toward a future in which the only news people receive is the official, spun, watered-down version of events. This is what the PR-driven press release culture is creating and it applies to football clubs as much as it applies to local authorities, the Government and businesses. I suggest you stick to researching for computer games. again... You are taking what the Echo said in the editorial for the reason for the ban as FACT. If the club were upset about details going out before the press conference then it would ban all the press. They however did not and only banned the Echo. That begs the question "What did the Echo do differently?" On the face of it the only thing the Echo did differently to the other media that ran the story before the press conference was to show pictures of the development. In printing these pictures it make the Echo stand out as it stole the impact of any following press conference the next day. Yes, these pictures are available on the NFDC website, however this doesn't mean that the Echo has the right to print them without the clubs agreement. Saints fixture list for example is unable to be published or copied and pasted into a thread on this forum as it would break laws, yet it is able to be viewed by the public. As for your comment about researching for computer games...don't be so petty and grow up and learn to debate like an adult Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TNT Posted 12 December, 2009 Share Posted 12 December, 2009 Once the documents are in the public domain, the club can't expect the Echo not to write about them. That's as far as it goes. All this crap from PR people about press releases is just that - crap. Any journalist worth his or her salt would write the story and it would be doing the fans a disservice not to run with the story. The club is being naive and will go crawling back sooner or later. Far from being crap as the club employ a media pr firm on the basis of controlling the clubs media. The club never said do not print it merely asked for a delay to cover the official press release. Some people on here clearly do not understand how things work and the involvemet of pr companies supplying articles to newspapers. The Echo like many local newspapers around the country will have a 'working relationship'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TNT Posted 12 December, 2009 Share Posted 12 December, 2009 Am with Duncan on this. Whatever you think of the Echo, anybody who cuts off the press is out of order. In history, people who have tried to control the press tend to be fascists, communists or unsavoury dictators. Cortese has a good story to tell he should let it be told. He has done a lot of good to date so why bother. Get a grip !! One minor newspaper journalist from numerous that are present at St Marys. How do you think the Daily Echo gets the stories they do about Saints ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saint-luco Posted 12 December, 2009 Share Posted 12 December, 2009 does anyone really care if they are banned or not Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ottery st mary Posted 12 December, 2009 Share Posted 12 December, 2009 Let us hope NC bans the Echo from the whole of Southampton...in fact Hampshire. NC walks on water..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minty Posted 12 December, 2009 Share Posted 12 December, 2009 F'ing hell, I seriously cannot believe the amount of posts on this now, and equally I cannot believe how polarised the views are. I don't see NC being 'Pompous'... he obviously has his reasons for his decision, which we're not yet aware of, and I don't see that the Echo are such big villains of the piece, exercising their right to publish information in the public domain. Sometimes I swear it's only Saints fans who would become so polarised over something so trivial. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Third Division South Days Posted 12 December, 2009 Share Posted 12 December, 2009 I'm sure if Mr Murray had not responded to the ban with such a confratational editorial the spat could have been settled quickly and without this public debate. The powers that be at the Echo should reflect that additional sales of the "Pink" tomorrow are caused by the victory today not the comments or printing decisions of the pompous editor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nineteen Canteen Posted 13 December, 2009 Share Posted 13 December, 2009 Only a small amount of text on Sky and the BBC. The Echo showed images of the development against the wishes of the club. Actually, in all the South Today news bulletins in BBC Breakfast news that I saw on the day it broke last week. Not just a small amount of text, report with pictures! Did make you want to ask though if this would have an adverse effect on funds available for new players. The Echo has done nothing wrong and we don't want our local press in agreeing conditions over the release of their reports with any local organisation. Fitzhugh Fella alluded to the potential pitfalls of being a one man owned club and allegedly trying to control the release of information in the local paper would feed that fear somewhat, IMO. I am very, very happy with Mr Liebherr's purchase and 99% with the way the club has been moved forward to date but IMO and based on what I have read, they have got this wrong and I don't see why any fan would support the local paper being banned from the ground. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ericofarabia Posted 13 December, 2009 Share Posted 13 December, 2009 Let us hope NC bans the Echo from the whole of Southampton...in fact Hampshire. NC walks on water..... Cripes didn't realise Nineteen Canteen weilded so much power .... better start getting on his good side Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fitzhugh Fella Posted 13 December, 2009 Share Posted 13 December, 2009 F'ing hell, I seriously cannot believe the amount of posts on this now, and equally I cannot believe how polarised the views are. I don't see NC being 'Pompous'... he obviously has his reasons for his decision, which we're not yet aware of, and I don't see that the Echo are such big villains of the piece, exercising their right to publish information in the public domain. Sometimes I swear it's only Saints fans who would become so polarised over something so trivial. Well you have contributed quite a few yourself Minty How how are old chap? Believe it or not there is a sizeable (elderly) contingent of Sotonians who still rely on the Echo for their information surrounding the Saints. My Dad is one of them. A lot of those people can't get to games themselves. My family grew up with the Echo and, although it is nothing like the paper it was, many senior residents of the City still have an affinity with the paper and it's coverage of SFC. I am no uber fan of the Echo and I AM a big fan of Mr Libherr's ownership but, on this occasion, I think Cortese is very wrong (I accept I only have the Echo's side of things but it seems NC appears unwilling to give his side). Freedom of any press is essential. NC might not like what or when the Echo printed what they did, and indeed they may have broken a pledge, but banning them is not the way forward. It sets a principle that I am uncomfortable with and had Lowe done it I would have been the first to complain. This may seem to be a small issue at present but the principle is pretty fundamental. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saint lard Posted 13 December, 2009 Share Posted 13 December, 2009 Well you have contributed quite a few yourself Minty How how are old chap? Believe it or not there is a sizeable (elderly) contingent of Sotonians who still rely on the Echo for their information surrounding the Saints. My Dad is one of them. A lot of those people can't get to games themselves. My family grew up with the Echo and, although it is nothing like the paper it was, many senior residents of the City still have an affinity with the paper and it's coverage of SFC. I am no uber fan of the Echo and I AM a big fan of Mr Libherr's ownership but, on this occasion, I think Cortese is very wrong (I accept I only have the Echo's side of things but it seems NC appears unwilling to give his side). Freedom of any press is essential. NC might not like what or when the Echo printed what they did, and indeed they may have broken a pledge, but banning them is not the way forward. It sets a principle that I am uncomfortable with and had Lowe done it I would have been the first to complain. This may seem to be a small issue at present but the principle is pretty fundamental. I have only ever had negative dealings with the Echo,so i can only speak from past experience. However, i think until we do get Mr Cortese' side,if we ever do and there may well be good reason he does not wish to comment further but that does not have to be detrimental to the reasons why he stays quiet, ,judgement has to be reserved with regard to his standing on the matter. I do believe the reference,in the aforementioned article, to Lowe was completely inflammatory and unessesary on the Echos' part. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickG Posted 13 December, 2009 Share Posted 13 December, 2009 Don't really care. A petty argument coming out in public. The Editor sounded a pompous **** in his article and sulking like a kid. I find it strange that people come on here and say "I don't care". Why not say nothing Nick? You do come across as the sort of subservient person that will have nothing said against your club....whatever. I have given this a lot of thought today, I am no supporter of the Echo and I don't like Murray one little bit. However I think Cortese to be completely out of order on this issue. To deny the Echo the right to report on Saints (even though their reportage is crap) is undemocratic, and an insult to all those who can't get to matches and rely on the local newspaper. Cortese is being the pompous ass. But NickG you can keep on wiping his arse. I don't care about a petty row between Cortesse and Murry over the release of details of the training ground - particularly when we are not in position to judge. I did read the full article in the echo (did you?) where echo said they wanted a meeting before further dealings with saints and Murry made several references to Lowe, including something like Merry Christmas Lowe. I cannot understand Cortesse's problem about the release of this - it is sounds petty and lacking in logic. The have not denied, nor can they saints reporting rights. I doubt if you did read the article as I think your pompuos arse comment would have been directed elsewhere. Wiping his arse? Grow up, you know nothing of what has happened. Think his is open to criticism from what echo have reported - but if you had read the article they conceded that he requested a meeting. You send a pm apologising for your posting and offering a drink then search my posts to bait for personal arguements. If you want a last word, go ahead - think I will use ignore function as bizarrely I am letting this **** me off! Perhaps enjoy this and stop looking for battles that are not needed? WON Tranmere 3-0 Lambert (2) Harding WON Walsall 3-1 Connolly, Lambert, Hammond WON Wycombe 1-0 Lambert WON Northampton 3-2 Waigo, Lallana, Hammond WON Hartlepool 3-1 Lallana (2) Lambert Drew Norwich 2-2 Lallana Connolly LOST Brighton 3-1 Lambert WON Charlton 2-1 Thomas, Lambert WON Bristol Rover 3-2 Connolly (2) Antonio Drew Orient 2-2 Lambert (2) WON MK 3-1 Lambert, Connolly, Hammond WON Oldham 3-1 Lambert, Connolly, Hammond WON Southend 3-1 Lallana (2) Trottman WON Torquay (pens) 2-2 Wiago (2) WON Gillingham 4-1 Lambert, Lallana (2), Waigo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beatlesaint Posted 13 December, 2009 Share Posted 13 December, 2009 Sorry you have lost me. I have just got back from the match. The only view I have is I think it wrong for the club to "ban" the Echo because it did not "conform" to their way of thinking. NC is acting like a spoilt prima donna. Sorry I realise to criticise Saints on this forum is not acceptable to some. I am totally puzzled why you should be puzzled. Well simply because as someone else has mentioned, you seem to have based your opinion around what the Echo editorial has stated......unless you know more, which you indicate is not the case. Normally your posts are more rounded and take both sides of a situation into account whereas on this occasion you have jumped to the Echo's side and decided NC is being "pompus". I dont even remember you referring to the rosey cheeked one as that too often If Cortese is in the wrong on this, and it seems a matter of opinion and knowing the full story would help, then it will be the first time he has put a foot wrong since coming to the club. Surely, given that, someone as sensible and balanced as yourself would be inclined to cut him a little more slack. Apparently not, hence my puzzlement. Regards 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