More Echo Poo Stirring

[ericofarabia]

http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/sport/saints/view_from_the_chapel/10056594.Together_As_One__That_doesn_t_always_seem_the_case/?ref=twt

 

Why on earth lead with this article when there is at last something to be posiitive about.

 

Tal about (not so hidden) agendas.

[This Charming Man]

I don't see what the problem is?

 

Anyway, let's just bury our heads back in the sand. We won at the weekend, therefore NC can do what he want's until we next lose.

[Greenridge]

It's fish n chip paper, last weeks news. In fact the Echo ran the story themselves. It's something when their online media is behind their printed media.

[This Charming Man]

It's fish n chip paper, last weeks news. In fact the Echo ran the story themselves. It's something when their online media is behind their printed media.

 

The View From The Chapel is a blog.

[Saint Fan CaM]

Old news regurgitated by a poor newspaper shock horror. It would be easy to say it helps them sell copy, but somehow I doubt it.

[The Kraken]

I think the Echo should only be allowed to report on positive news stories. Negative stories such as this one should rightly only receive complete condemnation.

[Saint_clark]

Old news regurgitated by a poor newspaper shock horror. It would be easy to say it helps them sell copy, but somehow I doubt it.

 

Old news? It only came out at the end of last week, didn't it?

The only thing I don't like about these blogs is the speculation that will now be taken as gospel (less than Ramirez earns in a week, "If this is something Southampton FC does regularly").

[Spudders]

I don't see the problem with the article, these are the same questions that some fans have been asking, but we don't get answers. I doubt the Echo will get answers either, but hopefully some of this feedback might eventually get back to the right people/person within the club and they may just take the time to reflect on the situation(s) and question themselves and their actions.

[ericofarabia]

I think the Echo should only be allowed to report on positive news stories. Negative stories such as this one should rightly only receive complete condemnation.

 

I'm not saying it shouldn't be reported - just saying that it already has been, why rehash it when at last there is some feel good factor on the horizon.

 

Only viewing it On Line it came across as The Main Headline Story, but as TCM has pointed out it is a Blog, so not as bad as my first impression led me to believe!!

[The Kraken]

I'm not saying it shouldn't be reported - just saying that it already has been, why rehash it when at last there is some feel good factor on the horizon.

 

Only viewing it On Line it came across as The Main Headline Story, but as TCM has pointed out it is a Blog, so not as bad as my first impression led me to believe!!

 

I think the blog answers that one itself, Eric.

 

"If you couldn’t put food on your table because Saints hadn’t paid their bill, I don’t think any amount of Rickie Lambert goals would gloss over it. Perhaps the club would do well to consider that."

[alpine_saint]

Oh, the delicious irony of some of these posts on this thread.

 

I wonder how many of you were slagging the likes of Appy, the PST and Pompey fans in general for turning a blind eye to all the small creditos being shafted in the on-going process at Krap Nottarf.

[Turkish]

This is a great article, well written by a top journalist is it not?

[Turkish]

I'm not saying it shouldn't be reported - just saying that it already has been, why rehash it when at last there is some feel good factor on the horizon.

Only viewing it On Line it came across as The Main Headline Story, but as TCM has pointed out it is a Blog, so not as bad as my first impression led me to believe!!

 

This is like saying no one should condemn John Terry from racism because hes a good player and it was just before the world cup.

[This Charming Man]

Can we lock this thread, please?

 

Unless it's 100% positive news, I don't want to hear about it.

 

[norwaysaint]

This is definitely a topic worth talking about. Not paying what's owed to local businesses is very bad for the club and the extra details around this one are pretty uncomfortable. there was a story on it last week and this is a comment piece. most of us would like to know why this something like this was allowed to happen. it's not about a disagreement, the ruling's already been made against saints and the club have no excuse for not paying.

 

I don't expect to be told the reason, but I still want to know and as it's not just a rumour and the club aren't commenting, people are going to be free to say all sorts of stuff.

[This Charming Man]

This is definitely a topic worth talking about. Not paying what's owed to local businesses is very bad for the club and the extra details around this one are pretty uncomfortable. there was a story on it last week and this is a comment piece. most of us would like to know why this something like this was allowed to happen. it's not about a disagreement, the ruling's already been made against saints and the club have no excuse for not paying.

 

I don't expect to be told the reason, but I still want to know and as it's not just a rumour and the club aren't commenting, people are going to be free to say all sorts of stuff.

 

We won on Saturday! Get behind the team, FFS!

 

Together As One.

[Hatch]

In effect, they offered no defence – not for the first time this season, you may s******.

 

That bit made me laugh.

[Saint_clark]

If you want to talk about it then talk about it, don't take the thread off track by being sarcastic.

[This Charming Man]

Can whatever mod that is going through deleting my posts please stop. There was nothing offensive in them, if they're not to your personal liking... tough sh1t.

[notnowcato]

Business pays other business late, shocker.

 

This incident doesn't come close to what pompey did to local charites and businesses.

[This Charming Man]

If you want to talk about it then talk about it, don't take the thread off track by being sarcastic.

 

Thought it would've been you. If you're going to be consistent, you probably have around 1,000 sarcastic posts that need deleting. Now run along, you're going to be a busy boy for the rest of the day...

[Spudders]

I wonder how many of you were slagging the likes of Appy, the PST and Pompey fans in general for turning a blind eye to all the small creditos being shafted in the on-going process at Krap Nottarf.

 

This was exactly my thoughts!

[This Charming Man]

Business pays other business late, shocker.

 

This incident doesn't come close to what pompey did to local charites and businesses.

 

It's more than "late"; it was the refusal to pay and no explanation why we wouldn't pay that is the disturbing bit.

[aintforever]

I don't see anything wrong with that article, it's a fair point.

 

As for the Echo's agenda, it's the same as it always has been - to sell newspapers. If the club had a decent relationship with them you wouldn't see articles like this. It's a product of the club's retarded PR policy.

[Spudders]

Business pays other business late, shocker.

 

This incident doesn't come close to what pompey did to local charites and businesses.

 

I don't think anyone is saying it does come close, but would you not agree it's the same type of behaviour?

[Saint_clark]

Thought it would've been you. If you're going to be consistent, you probably have around 1,000 sarcastic posts that need deleting. Now run along, you're going to be a busy boy for the rest of the day...

 

Incredible. You complain about people "burying their heads in the sand", and yet when given an actual opportunity to discuss the topic you'd rather pretend to be one of them, making it even harder for the original topic to be discussed.

[notnowcato]

It's more than "late"; it was the refusal to pay and no explanation why we wouldn't pay that is the disturbing bit.

 

You've heard one side of the story but happy to make a judgement on the club and the running of the club. Go you.

[This Charming Man]

Incredible. You complain about people "burying their heads in the sand", and yet when given an actual opportunity to discuss the topic you'd rather pretend to be one of them, making it even harder for the original topic to be discussed.

 

I have been discussing it. You're the only person posting unrelated nonsense on this thread and it was all going just swimmingly until you started deleting posts.

[Clifford Nelson]

The Daily Echo is a newspaper. Newspapers print news. Live with it!

 

The chances that a newspaper which is banned from the premises will self censure when it comes to less salubrious news are absolutely none. There is also no chance that situation will change since neither the editor nor NC will back down. Get used to it!

[Saint_clark]

I have been discussing it. You're the only person posting unrelated nonsense on this thread and it was all going just swimmingly until you started deleting posts.

 

Fair enough. I've restored the posts to give others the chance to respond to such fantastically made points.

[Turkish]

and another thread gets ruined by people with agendas. FFS Clarky, the power is going to your head.

[This Charming Man]

You've heard one side of the story but happy to make a judgement on the club and the running of the club. Go you.

 

If you read my post properly, I quite clearly state that one of the things I find disturbing is the lack of explanation from the club. The courts certainly felt we were in the wrong though.

[This Charming Man]

Fair enough. I've restored the posts to give others the chance to respond to such fantastically made points.

 

Many thanks. Though if you continue to try and de-rail threads in the future, I shall have to report you.

[Greenridge]

You've heard one side of the story but happy to make a judgement on the club and the running of the club. Go you.

 

It's been discussed at length on a previous thread(s) so I doubt there's more that can be added as no new information has come to light but for a few it gives them the opportunity to bash their keyboard into oblivion once more. Each to their own.

[trousers]

I don't think anyone is saying it does come close, but would you not agree it's the same type of behaviour?

 

Unless we know why SFC refused to pay this firm it's impossible to deduce whether or not its "the same" behaviour as Pompey.

 

If we didn't pay because we've blown all the money on Gaston Ramirez then, yes, its "exactly the same as them lot down the road".

 

If we didn't pay because 'someone' at the club got arsey with the firm doing the work (for whatever reason) then, no, it's not the same as down the road.

 

Without knowing why the club seemingly fell out with the firm I'm not about to judge whether the club were right or wrong in taking the course of action they did. That said, the fact that they ultimately chose not to contend the court order is perhaps revealing. Or, as is sometimes the case in business, the club felt that it had made it's point and that it would ultimately pay the balance having given the company a bloody nose for its trouble.

 

As I say, we'll probably never know why there was a dispute in the first place so I'm not going to jump to conclusions - I'll leave that to the likes of the Daily Echo.

Edited 19 November, 2012 by trousers

[notnowcato]

If you read my post properly, I quite clearly state that one of the things I find disturbing is the lack of explanation from the club. The courts certainly felt we were in the wrong though.

 

No need to re-read your garbage a second time, I got it first time... you're disturbed that the club didn't do something that it doesn't have to do.

[notnowcato]

I don't think anyone is saying it does come close, but would you not agree it's the same type of behaviour?

 

Spud the article by The Echo certainly does draw parallels between the 2.

[Spudders]

Unless we know why SFC refused to pay this firm it's impossible to deduce whether or not its "the same" behaviour as Pompey.

 

If we didn't pay because we've blown all the money on Gaston Ramirez then, yes, its "exactly the same as them lot down the road".

 

If we didn't pay because 'someone' at the club got arsey with the firm doing the work (for whatever reason) then, no, it's not the same as down the road.

 

Without knowing why the club seemingly fell out with the firm I'm not about to judge whether the club were right or wrong in taking the course of action they did. That said, the fact that they ultimately chose not to contend the court order is perhaps revealing. Or, as is sometimes the case in business, the club felt that it had made it's point and that it would ultimately pay the balance having given the company a bloody nose for its trouble.

 

As I say, we'll probably never know why there was a dispute in the first place so I'm not going to jump to conclusions - I'll leave that to the likes of the Daily Echo.

 

 

Agree trousers, but I don't understand why a business that's trying to become self sufficient isn't doing more to enhance and improve its reputation, rather than putting up a wall of silence which will impact the business financially regardless of the truth

[ericofarabia]

Damn ... Bloody Rush of Blood to Head Induced Rage

 

My initial indignation was due to my thinking that this was The Front Page Lead Story, which had already been done last week, but now knowing it was A Blog, and having given it a 2nd reading

I'll happily put my hands up and say that I completely got the wrong end of the stick.

 

I have all along been bitterly disappointed at the way the club have dealt with this, and many other matters and totally agree it should be brought to everyones attention.

 

Guess I was expecting to see Happy Clappy Headlines after the weekend, and being sleep deprived after a nightshift comlpetely misconstrued the article and went off on one!!

 

I am in agreement with most of the points raised in the article and by posters in this thread.

 

Sorry that i put it across the way I did.

 

Together as One ....... We Wish

[trousers]

Agree trousers, but I don't understand why a business that's trying to become self sufficient isn't doing more to enhance and improve its reputation, rather than putting up a wall of silence which will impact the business financially regardless of the truth

 

I would concur that Cortese does seem to tread a fine line between "hard nosed businessman" and "potentially shooting self in foot"

[dubai_phil]

Am I missing something here?

 

Club does not pay for work done.

 

Court adjudicates, club sends nobody

 

Club still doesn't pay.

 

Forget the feel good factor, IMHO that is out of order, at the very LEAST someone from the legal side shouuld have been in court to offer a defence IF there was a dispute.

[Spudders]

Spud the article by The Echo certainly does draw parallels between the 2.

But I don’t think that’s necessarily incorrect is it? There are parallels, or at least there certainly could be. As trousers says, we don’t know all the facts, so it’s difficult to know for sure. But in the absence of any comments on this or other subjects from the club, questions should still be asked by people, we’re paying enough money into the club.

[Greenridge]

Am I missing something here?

 

Club does not pay for work done.

 

Court adjudicates, club sends nobody

 

Club still doesn't pay.

 

Forget the feel good factor, IMHO that is out of order, at the very LEAST someone from the legal side shouuld have been in court to offer a defence IF there was a dispute.

 

Is that the case?

[The9]

http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/sport/saints/view_from_the_chapel/10056594.Together_As_One__That_doesn_t_always_seem_the_case/?ref=twt

 

Why on earth lead with this article when there is at last something to be posiitive about.

 

Tal about (not so hidden) agendas.

 

Seems like a valid point to query why a local business has to go to court to get paid for a completed job when the money is a drop in the ocean compared to our weekly spend. I'm sure it's just Cortese's Way and seems to be similar to the training ground problem, but boy does it make the club look mean-spirited and "above" the community.

 

Hardly surprising the Echo has reported it either, as one of the early recipients of Cortese's Way.

[notnowcato]

But I don’t think that’s necessarily incorrect is it? There are parallels, or at least there certainly could be. As trousers says, we don’t know all the facts, so it’s difficult to know for sure. But in the absence of any comments on this or other subjects from the club, questions should still be asked by people, we’re paying enough money into the club.

 

I get the sentiment but to say we've screwed the local and national economy for over £100million puts this in a different universe for me.

 

I'm not suggesting that this is good practice or behaviour but we don't know the details.

 

Questions can be asked and I'm all for that but this quickly turned into the "bashers" opportunity to have a pop.

Edited 19 November, 2012 by notnowcato

[The9]

This is a great article, well written by a top journalist is it not?

 

He's my actual favourite journalist in the entire world (apart from maybe Jonathan Wilson), actually.

[sfc4prem]

I accept that Cortese has done many things that have had a negative impact on the image of our club to our own fans, but I really can't see what the alternative is? No chairman is perfect. Who would replace Nicola? Would the replacement be able to ensure success on (like Cortese) AND off the pitch?

 

The grass ain't always greener.

 

And to reaffirm what i stated at the beginning - I am not saying Cortese has done no wrong, far from it.

[manji]

Kerins was / is a regular poster on here. Mainly posted pro "lets go Wilde" ******** as I recall. Tosser.

[This Charming Man]

No need to re-read your garbage a second time, I got it first time... you're disturbed that the club didn't do something that it doesn't have to do.

 

Yes. That's what I quite clearly said. There's plenty of things in life that you don't have to do, but people do them because people generally like to do the right thing.

[This Charming Man]

I accept that Cortese has done many things that have had a negative impact on the image of our club to our own fans, but I really can't see what the alternative is? No chairman is perfect. Who would replace Nicola? Would the replacement be able to ensure success on (like Cortese) AND off the pitch?

 

The grass ain't always greener.

 

And to reaffirm what i stated at the beginning - I am not saying Cortese has done no wrong, far from it.

 

I don't think I've seen anyone call for NC head. That would be idiotic after what he has done. Though it's also idiotic that some on here feel he and the club are above criticism because of what they've done.