Minty Posted 8 February, 2011 Share Posted 8 February, 2011 It is about political one upmanship... The wound is festering and neither side seem to be able to apply the healing balm. What a sad state of affairs Indeed. What purpose did that article serve? Is it going to change anything, or was it simply yet another way for MLT to have a pop at NC? And given that MLT seemingly doesn't know exactly what the reasoning is behind the players' unavailability, it's hardly the strongest of evidence. I've criticised NC in the past but as has been stated in this thread already, the way to do business with him is to discuss it in private and constructively. That's what NC eventually did with the Sun about the photo ban, and it was put right. Fans taking sides won't help either, but on the face of it, the onus appears to be on the organisers to speak to the club to find out more, rather than running to the press. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 8 February, 2011 Share Posted 8 February, 2011 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/southampton/8310643/Alex-Oxlade-Chamberlain-remains-part-of-Southamptons-five-year-plan-despite-interest-from-Liverpool-and-Arsenal.html For all the progress since Liebherr’s takeover in 2009 when Southampton was in adminstration and on its knees, Cortese has been a controversial chairman. There have been spats with both the local and national media and, more significantly, also some of the club’s all-time greats, notably Matthew Le Tissier, Lawrie McMenemy and Francis Benali. It continued this week with reports that the current squad and manager will not be attending a dinner to celebrate 125 years of the club’s history. “Everyone knows me and him don’t see eye to eye,” said Le Tissier. “Most football clubs treat ex-players which served them for many years quite well but that doesn’t seem to be the way under this chairman.” Cortese says that he has a good relationship with many former Saints players and is keen to respond. “There are two sides to every story, and I have more important things on my agenda to deal with,” he says. “I am well aware that there are people, who used to be involved in the club and who behind the scenes are trying to destabilise it. “In reality their actions are completely ineffective and serve only to damage their own reputations. These same people are obviously frustrated as they are not involved in any way with the club and I can understand that. “Things have changed since we took over - I believe for the better - and whether they like it or not, there is nothing they can do about it. I do not believe that attempting to discredit or backstab is the behaviour of intelligent people and it is definitely not going to help them with regard to this club.” It is a stand-off that will sadden most Southampton supporters who, after so much division over the past decade, would simply like to see the past, present and future of their club functioning harmoniously. Yet for all the claim and counter-claim, the basic truth is that football managers - and their chairmen - are all primarily judged by the team’s on-field progress. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 8 February, 2011 Share Posted 8 February, 2011 It is a stand-off that will sadden most Southampton supporters who, after so much division over the past decade, would simply like to see the past, present and future of their club functioning harmoniously. That is the key bit for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfc1971 Posted 8 February, 2011 Share Posted 8 February, 2011 (edited) Cortese has made it plainly clear he wants to disassociate the club from the personalities of the past, some of which have served the club well but can clearly be distracting, some of which have had a destructive effect. Its his club to run, his way, his rules, and he wants to be judged on the RESULTS. The form of this judgment will clearly be attendance figures and hence revenue, alongside promotion. So far it looks good, we are in the top six, with games in hand and have been 2nd and auto promotion spot a few times (something that never happened with Burley or Pardew) I have absolutely no problem with that. STFU and let him get on with it. If he tore down Ted's statue, the time would be right for questioning his attitude towards the club's history. Best post on this thread in my opinion. When NC and co done the due dilligence he had said about the shambolic way SFC was being run with hangers on(I think we know who these are) getting freebies on tickets, meals and drinks in the clubs corperate dep`t and he said it was all going to stop. The club name and logo is a copyright issue the unofficial charity match v the Skates would be an excuse for alot of nobodys to have a pi $$ up on the club. Cortese has done a fantastic job with charities and the local communities he has no issue with genuine ex saints working around the current team Dodd for example and a few of the 76 winning team were at s/wood and invited to SMS for the United game. Le Tiss was unfortunate to get himself hoodwinked by a conman/men and used as a pr exercise to try to gain control of SFC, Is he fit to run a football club the size of saints ? as for Benali just an average but loyal player who knew he was not good enough to go elsewhere, Shearer is NOT a legend he scored a few times and shot off as soon as the money men at Blackburn came calling. All of the above used to be shareholders in SLH do we think if it was still the case we would still be goin to watch AOC ? NO CHANCE !! but would be a nice divendend for the fat cats. We were raped and pillaged for years by certain people around our club and thanks to Cortese it has now stopped and we are on the up. And for a certain ex manager you have made enough money from our club so FOOK OFF Edited 8 February, 2011 by sfc1971 rant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
georgeweahscousin Posted 8 February, 2011 Share Posted 8 February, 2011 I think it speaks volumes that NC didn't take his opportunity with the Telegraph to take a childish swipe at the ex-players. The other side of the story should take note. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 8 February, 2011 Share Posted 8 February, 2011 I think it speaks volumes that NC didn't take his opportunity with the Telegraph to take a childish swipe at the ex-players. The other side of the story should take note. He has made some assumptions though. I highly doubt that the reason MLT is frustrated is because he is 'not involved' with the club. I sincerely wish that they would both put the past behind them and be able to work together for the good of SFC. I'm sure MLT would be broadly supportive of NC if he was welcomed to the club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ecuk268 Posted 8 February, 2011 Share Posted 8 February, 2011 I would think that what the manager and players do in their own time is up to them. Can't see how NC can stop them attending if they wish to. They can be there as private individuals, not representatives of SFC. We don't know the full story as the article only reports one side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
up and away Posted 8 February, 2011 Share Posted 8 February, 2011 The Ex-Saints do a lot of charity work, and have done for a number of years. They should be supported by the club. Do you actually know what is going to charities? If the club were doing it I would expect 100%, along with any time given by contributers. I would expect if the club are unsure of any of this they would be wise to stay well clear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mowgli Posted 8 February, 2011 Share Posted 8 February, 2011 Do you actually know what is going to charities? If the club were doing it I would expect 100%, along with any time given by contributers. I would expect if the club are unsure of any of this they would be wise to stay well clear. Fair point. The charities objecties with the charity commission web site are fairly broad brush but do not include the 'looking after former players who have fallen on hard times' as is published elsewhere (wonder how much they helped Ron Davies out...). Their income was £20k and expenditure £8k. No information on charity commissioner web site - or their own - as to specifically where this money goes. Maybe it is the lack of information that put off Cortese being too closely associated? At the end of the day, I think this dinner was organised by Mike Osman not the charity so the charitable cause is not clear. Same goes for the Mayflower event - no indication on Mayflower web site that a charity benefits (more than happy to be corrected). To be honest this thread is probably missing the point. We know there will be some good jokes about the current regime at both these events. It's how Mike Osman gets his laughs - he's made a career out of it! So would it not be just a tad embarassing for any person currently associated with the club to attend? Where do you laugh? Where do you look embarassed? Is it not a good idea for NC to warn the players off - for their own sakes? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dubai_phil Posted 8 February, 2011 Share Posted 8 February, 2011 Do you actually know what is going to charities? If the club were doing it I would expect 100%, along with any time given by contributers. I would expect if the club are unsure of any of this they would be wise to stay well clear. To be fair, there was an unholy row with lots of very nasty mud slinging some time ago regarding expenses and an event. In the current version of the forum many of the accusations would have been deemed highly libellous, although I have not seen any reports of any legal action actually having been taken However the question was asked earlier in the thread and without taking any sides, there is an easy way to refute and stop any more of these (unpleasant) "people receive expenses for attending" snipes which would be for the accounts of the event to be published. That would at least stop some of the potential petti/nastiness Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 8 February, 2011 Share Posted 8 February, 2011 Despite making us financially sound, sticking to official statements on player departures... Setting up a great official charity and aims to raise a monumental amount of money for it.. Has a plan to return us to the prem, improve a good training ground and talks of upgrading the stadium Some will still side with the daily mail... If the mail said Lallana was leaving, we would dismiss it as bollix.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint_clark Posted 8 February, 2011 Share Posted 8 February, 2011 I'm getting bored of this now tbh. I love Le Tisser, McMenemy etc. but it's clear they're not going to be involved like they were before. Perhaps if they didn't whinge about the big bad foreign chairman every fortnight they'd be as involved as other club legends were on the day of the United game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Topcat Posted 8 February, 2011 Share Posted 8 February, 2011 This incident stems from the Team being banned from attending an outside event for charity. Now why would a Club do that unless Cortese/the Club judged the event to be an embarrassment and one that would damage the Club's image. I fail to grasp what that threat actually amounts to. Are the participants going to wreck the place? Unlikely. Is the charity money raised going to be miss-used? Fairly unlikely. Yet the effect of the ban damages the image of Saints on a national scale. The Club's image is smeared with this talk of factions and disrespect. That is why it has to be viewed as yet another Cortese PR blunder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 8 February, 2011 Share Posted 8 February, 2011 A cynic would suggest that the club's PR company knew the Mail was running their story and so produced this piece as a convenient bit of PR... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint_clark Posted 8 February, 2011 Share Posted 8 February, 2011 Why is the dinner on the 13th of feb anyway? We were formed on the 21st of november. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 8 February, 2011 Share Posted 8 February, 2011 Why is the dinner on the 13th of feb anyway? We were formed on the 21st of november. So they could get in ahead of the club's own event and then complain to the Daily Mail? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
georgeweahscousin Posted 8 February, 2011 Share Posted 8 February, 2011 He has made some assumptions though. I highly doubt that the reason MLT is frustrated is because he is 'not involved' with the club. I sincerely wish that they would both put the past behind them and be able to work together for the good of SFC. I'm sure MLT would be broadly supportive of NC if he was welcomed to the club. But until the side that is being insulting in the public eye stops, they never will. MLT, Benali etc should be talking to the club about grievances, not going to the press. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 8 February, 2011 Share Posted 8 February, 2011 But until the side that is being insulting in the public eye stops, they never will. MLT, Benali etc should be talking to the club about grievances, not going to the press. How do we know they have not tried? We know that Nick tried and was ignored. We also know that Benali is suing Cortese. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint_clark Posted 8 February, 2011 Share Posted 8 February, 2011 So they could get in ahead of the club's own event and then complain to the Daily Mail? A decent theory but the anniversary was last year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnailOB Posted 8 February, 2011 Share Posted 8 February, 2011 Does anyone know what the 'SAINTS BONDS' are. I thought these were purchased in order for funds to go the the ex-players charity etc.. but Le Tissier claims the club has asked for ex-players charities not to use club logo. I was surprised by this as I thought Saints bonds were directly linked with the club ? As for the dinner - couldn't go so didnt look too much into it but the literature i did glance at looked as if it was an official club function - surprised to read that this has nothing to do with the club. Could this be a reason why NC is upset ? (along with LM, MLT, Osman, Benali etc.. being part of the old 'failing' regime - causing problems with with bid by NC & ML by backing non-existent 'new' backers, constantly sniping in the media and 'abusing' their position of being club 'legends' etc...) It does amaze me that they constantly criticise NC at every opportunity and still come back in amazement when their next request for something from the club gets refused ! Like others i wish they would resolve this but these 'legends' are doing more damage to their reputations (IMO) with the fans than NC is at the moment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minty Posted 8 February, 2011 Share Posted 8 February, 2011 The original story is bad enough, but some of this second-guessing is worse IMO. We don't know the facts, we don't know why the decision was made, and so speculating and making judgements on the back of that speculation is pointless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint_clark Posted 8 February, 2011 Share Posted 8 February, 2011 How do we know they have not tried? We know that Nick tried and was ignored. We also know that Benali is suing Cortese. Must have missed that, what for? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 8 February, 2011 Share Posted 8 February, 2011 A decent theory but the anniversary was last year. Damn. Never was much good at conspiracies... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 8 February, 2011 Share Posted 8 February, 2011 Would people prefer cortese or suliman al faheim lime pompey He was fan friendly and wore the shirt too Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yorkie Posted 8 February, 2011 Share Posted 8 February, 2011 I personally don't want any of my players attending such a function when they have an important date with destiny - trying to win promotion! Such events act as a big distraction - like book signings, promtion events for the club (or personal)...the one priority this season is promotion! Imagine if (say) Rickie Lambert (not picking on him cos he's a scouser!) attended the function and through some trip/fall/slip he ended up with a broken leg? OK it happens in everyday life too - but let's just not tempt fate by attending things out of the normal routine and concentrate on winning the league! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rebel Posted 8 February, 2011 Share Posted 8 February, 2011 Who is making money out of this event - that is the question? Osman, Lawrie Mac, etc - or is the money going to charity? Perhaps they should have waited for the club to organize something - or arranged something with the club. I have a feeling that maybe they did - but they disagreed over who was going to be paid exactly what for doing what! Osman amongst others - including Lawrie Mac - has done some good things for Saints - but they've also made money from the club - particularly under the Wilde and Crouch regimes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 8 February, 2011 Share Posted 8 February, 2011 Must have missed that, what for? Well I was told it was because he let him rent his house and then ruined his flooring by ripping it up. The other reason I heard was his jets were not working in his pool so he refused to pay the rent (not sure of the accuracy of that second one TBH.) He is suing him though, it was confirmed by Benali last week on Soccer AM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 8 February, 2011 Share Posted 8 February, 2011 How do we know they have not tried? We know that Nick tried and was ignored. We also know that Benali is suing Cortese. No you don't. The club said the dispute was over return of a deposit and that no legal action had been instigated. Benali didnt say he was suing on Soccer AM, he merely said he didnt want to talk about it as it was a legal matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint_clark Posted 8 February, 2011 Share Posted 8 February, 2011 Well I was told it was because he let him rent his house and then ruined his flooring by ripping it up. The other reason I heard was his jets were not working in his pool so he refused to pay the rent (not sure of the accuracy of that second one TBH.) He is suing him though, it was confirmed by Benali last week on Soccer AM. So basically, you have no idea? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 8 February, 2011 Share Posted 8 February, 2011 Would people prefer cortese or suliman al faheim lime pompey He was fan friendly and wore the shirt too I would prefer if Cortese continued to learn on the job and improve his communication skills (he has admitted himself that he still needs to learn things and improve.) Because of this I will pick him up on things where I believe he needs some improvement. Cortese is supposedly unforgiving and tough on others and thus I am tough on him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 8 February, 2011 Share Posted 8 February, 2011 So basically, you have no idea? He is suing him. I was told (by a relative of Benali) that it was to do with his flooring. I received a PM on here about the pool but absolutely no idea if that is true. He is suing him though, he confirmed it on Soccer AM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint_clark Posted 8 February, 2011 Share Posted 8 February, 2011 I would prefer if Cortese continued to learn on the job and improve his communication skills (he has admitted himself that he still needs to learn things and improve.) Because of this I will pick him up on things where I believe he needs some improvement. Cortese is supposedly unforgiving and tough on others and thus I am tough on him I'm sure he's quaking in his boots He is suing him. I was told (by a relative of Benali) that it was to do with his flooring. I received a PM on here about the pool but absolutely no idea if that is true. He is suing him though, he confirmed it on Soccer AM. I didn't doubt that he is suing him, but I asked why. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dronskisaint Posted 8 February, 2011 Share Posted 8 February, 2011 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/southampton/8310643/Alex-Oxlade-Chamberlain-remains-part-of-Southamptons-five-year-plan-despite-interest-from-Liverpool-and-Arsenal.html For all the progress since Liebherr’s takeover in 2009 when Southampton was in adminstration and on its knees, Cortese has been a controversial chairman. There have been spats with both the local and national media and, more significantly, also some of the club’s all-time greats, notably Matthew Le Tissier, Lawrie McMenemy and Francis Benali. It continued this week with reports that the current squad and manager will not be attending a dinner to celebrate 125 years of the club’s history. “Everyone knows me and him don’t see eye to eye,” said Le Tissier. “Most football clubs treat ex-players which served them for many years quite well but that doesn’t seem to be the way under this chairman.” Cortese says that he has a good relationship with many former Saints players and is keen to respond. “There are two sides to every story, and I have more important things on my agenda to deal with,” he says. “I am well aware that there are people, who used to be involved in the club and who behind the scenes are trying to destabilise it. “In reality their actions are completely ineffective and serve only to damage their own reputations. These same people are obviously frustrated as they are not involved in any way with the club and I can understand that. “Things have changed since we took over - I believe for the better - and whether they like it or not, there is nothing they can do about it. I do not believe that attempting to discredit or backstab is the behaviour of intelligent people and it is definitely not going to help them with regard to this club.” It is a stand-off that will sadden most Southampton supporters who, after so much division over the past decade, would simply like to see the past, present and future of their club functioning harmoniously. Yet for all the claim and counter-claim, the basic truth is that football managers - and their chairmen - are all primarily judged by the team’s on-field progress. This, compared with the Mail article, is reasoned & substantively sourced. Believe me I have no love for the Torygraph but it has gone out & asked the awkward questions & printed the answers...a far cry from the speculative pseudo-sensationalism of the Mail. I also urge Matt, Franny & Lawrie - all heroes of mine - to heed what Cortese has said about damaging their own reputations. Whether you like him or not (I can't dislike someone whose intentions for the club that I've supported for 51 years are so positive...aside from his role in getting ML involved) there is a lot of sense conveyed in this article. I think the DT article desrves it's own thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintjay77 Posted 8 February, 2011 Share Posted 8 February, 2011 This incident stems from the Team being banned from attending an outside event for charity. Now why would a Club do that unless Cortese/the Club judged the event to be an embarrassment and one that would damage the Club's image. I fail to grasp what that threat actually amounts to. Are the participants going to wreck the place? Unlikely. Is the charity money raised going to be miss-used? Fairly unlikely. Yet the effect of the ban damages the image of Saints on a national scale. The Club's image is smeared with this talk of factions and disrespect. That is why it has to be viewed as yet another Cortese PR blunder. Is 100% of the money raised going to charity or are there "Expenses" payments to be paid to those who attend? Will Mike Osman, Big Mac, Le Tiss and Benalli talk and joke about how NC is damaging our club and how unfair it is that they have all been wronged? Is this being arranged via the saints official charity the Saints Foundation? Surly if NC had alloud the club to be assoiciated with this event then it would have caused a bigger PR Blunder if it came out later that the "Star Guests" were no more than expensive employee's of the event, or the club back an event that spend a good portion of the time publicly barrateing the club and its chairman, or why the club is not backing its own charity ahead of an event that is organised privatly elsewhere? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 8 February, 2011 Share Posted 8 February, 2011 I'm sure he's quaking in his boots I didn't doubt that he is suing him, but I asked why. I'm not sure the reason is important. I've told you what I know but cannot say whether it is true or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IamLeGod Posted 8 February, 2011 Share Posted 8 February, 2011 This is all becoming rather boring now. There is clearly someone around the club that is sulking about something or another and clearly has a contact at the daily mail - who also seem to have some problem with us. It's surely no coincidence that these anti-saints stories seem to always come from the daily fail. Much as I love MLT and Lawrie for what they have done for the club this is now just getting a tad embarrassing. MLT needs to accept that he is not the chairman, he has no right to say how the club is run. Personally I am glad about this, in hindsight it is abundantly clear that MLT would not have been up to the task of running the club. I for one am fully behind Cortese. As Alpine said: Cortese, as chairman, can effectively run the club however he wishes. Again, as mentioned previously we are at the right end of the table, playing good football, and resisting interest from top clubs for our brightest prospects. First time in my lifetime I have seen that happen. Long may it continue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shurlock Posted 8 February, 2011 Share Posted 8 February, 2011 When NC and co done the due dilligence he had said about the shambolic way SFC was being run with hangers on(I think we know who these are) getting freebies on tickets, meals and drinks in the clubs corperate dep`t and he said it was all going to stop. The club name and logo is a copyright issue the unofficial charity match v the Skates would be an excuse for alot of nobodys to have a pi $$ up on the club. Cortese has done a fantastic job with charities and the local communities he has no issue with genuine ex saints working around the current team Dodd for example and a few of the 76 winning team were at s/wood and invited to SMS for the United game. Le Tiss was unfortunate to get himself hoodwinked by a conman/men and used as a pr exercise to try to gain control of SFC, Is he fit to run a football club the size of saints ? as for Benali just an average but loyal player who knew he was not good enough to go elsewhere, Shearer is NOT a legend he scored a few times and shot off as soon as the money men at Blackburn came calling. All of the above used to be shareholders in SLH do we think if it was still the case we would still be goin to watch AOC ? NO CHANCE !! but would be a nice divendend for the fat cats. We were raped and pillaged for years by certain people around our club and thanks to Cortese it has now stopped and we are on the up. And for a certain ex manager you have made enough money from our club so FOOK OFF A rant but a v.good one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 8 February, 2011 Share Posted 8 February, 2011 I'm not sure the reason is important. I've told you what I know but cannot say whether it is true or not. As usual Hypo you dont know. You've just stretched quotes beyond their meaning and 'borrowed' from other posts on here. The club said he hasnt sued. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/article-1352310/Charles-Sale-Replays-FA-Cup-revamp.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 8 February, 2011 Share Posted 8 February, 2011 But for Lawrie and Osman, in particular, this is how they make a living. Not sure I'd be comfortable making a living that way really. Is this true? I suspect you may get a bit of grief about that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
up and away Posted 8 February, 2011 Share Posted 8 February, 2011 Originally Posted by hypochondriac Well I was told it was because he let him rent his house and then ruined his flooring by ripping it up. The other reason I heard was his jets were not working in his pool so he refused to pay the rent (not sure of the accuracy of that second one TBH.) He is suing him though, it was confirmed by Benali last week on Soccer AM. So basically, you have no idea? I am pretty sure there is some form of dispute over costs to put the property back to it's original condition. Who's fault is difficult to tell, but I relly doubt Cortese will be the one sued. I would be pretty sure this would all be handled by the club and as there appeared a disagreement between the club and Benali over the rental of office space, this could well have an impact that would impact any final sum? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 8 February, 2011 Share Posted 8 February, 2011 As usual Hypo you dont know. You've just stretched quotes beyond their meaning and 'borrowed' from other posts on here. The club said he hasnt sued. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/article-1352310/Charles-Sale-Replays-FA-Cup-revamp.html So you call the mail a rag and totally dismiss everything it says yet then believe a different article? How selective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 8 February, 2011 Share Posted 8 February, 2011 the more I see Matty's behavior the more I'm glad he did not become chairman. I wonder if the old pals would be more in attendance than fans. Matty please keep to your punditry and leave politics alone as you do seem a tad naive and easily used by so called friends. Matt has been a true legend on the pitch, and I hope long term that is not ruined by foolhardy attacks on the club Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 8 February, 2011 Share Posted 8 February, 2011 So you call the mail a rag and totally dismiss everything it says yet then believe a different article? How selective. More deceit Hypo. I havent commented on the Mail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shurlock Posted 8 February, 2011 Share Posted 8 February, 2011 So you call the mail a rag and totally dismiss everything it says yet then believe a different article? How selective. Why not? The telegraph article is written by an informed and well-motivated saints fan who's no sycophant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 8 February, 2011 Share Posted 8 February, 2011 More deceit Hypo. I havent commented on the Mail. So presumably you quoted the Mail and used it as evidence to support your point of view. By implication you believe what it says and so you must therefore believe the Middle East story? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 8 February, 2011 Share Posted 8 February, 2011 Why not? The telegraph article is written by an informed and well-motivated saints fan who's no sycophant. And so by extension the article which buctootim quoted is b*llocks yes? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wes Tender Posted 8 February, 2011 Share Posted 8 February, 2011 I would prefer if Cortese continued to learn on the job and improve his communication skills (he has admitted himself that he still needs to learn things and improve.) Because of this I will pick him up on things where I believe he needs some improvement. Cortese is supposedly unforgiving and tough on others and thus I am tough on him OK. That is your opinion and you are entitled to it. But it seems to me that you are perfectly happy to be critical of Cortese's supposed lack of communication skills, but allow MLT/Benali and Lawrie carte blanche to say and do as they like, with no obligation towards the reputation of the club, or no forethought of how their reputations might suffer. It rather looks as if they are somehow above criticism in your eyes because of their past contributions. But is it a prerequisite of a football club chairman that they be gifted communicators? I wouldn't have thought that it had that much relevance compared with the ability to ensure that the club was able to be run in a financially astute manner, that attention be given to its investment in the infrastucture encouraging youth development and that the manager was supported when he asked for additional players to gain our promotion. Easy enough for a chairman to delegate the PR responsibility, although he is entitled to lay down the policy structure that he wants. I am sure that Cortese will sit up and take notice whenever you advise him that he needs to improve his communication skills. Not. So Cortese is supposedly tough on others, which means to me that he requires full commitment from his staff, that perhaps he doesn't suffer fools gladly. Maybe he is single-minded in the pursuit of his target for the club (business) that he has the responsibility of running. As far as I can see, those are all positives, but if all he needs to do is improve his communication skills to gain the approval of a few over sensitive fans, the Paparazzi, or ex-players with bruised egos, then I'm happy that he concentrates his energies on other more important matters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 8 February, 2011 Share Posted 8 February, 2011 So presumably you quoted the Mail and used it as evidence to support your point of view. By implication you believe what it says and so you must therefore believe the Middle East story? Basic intro to journalism. Newspapers employ different people to write stories. Some are good and truthful. Some arent. You misrepresented what Benali said on Soccer AM, made up a relative of his and ignored the rebuttal from the club. That would qualify you to work on the Star. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 8 February, 2011 Share Posted 8 February, 2011 Basic intro to journalism. Newspapers employ different people to write stories. Some are good and truthful. Some arent. You misrepresented what Benali said on Soccer AM, made up a relative of his and ignored the rebuttal from the club. That would qualify you to work on the Star. Ah OK then. So the ones with positive stories about saints are the credible journalists and the ones with negative stories are the rubbish ones. Gotcha. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint_clark Posted 8 February, 2011 Share Posted 8 February, 2011 Ah OK then. So the ones with positive stories about saints are the credible journalists and the ones with negative stories are the rubbish ones. Gotcha. More like the ones with actual quotes from the club are the ones i'll trust. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts