More Echo Poo Stirring

[The Kraken]

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

 

:lol:

 

Is there anyone you don't hate?!

[notnowcato]

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.

 

Who?

 

Some on here seem very quick, like The Echo, to have a pop when they don't know the full story.

[david in sweden]

typical Echo. Quiet day in the pub - was it ?

 

btw..Do the Echo have any outstanding invoices to pay this month?

[a1ex2001]

I find this sort of thing very worrying, I'm not bothered if the club refuse to pay someone because they've not delivered or delivered rubish but the fact that we didn't send anyone to contest it makes it sound like we were just with holding payment for no reason which leaves only two options 1). We don't have a pot to **** in. 2). We are the sort of scumbags that don't pay our bills promptly. Which ever the case thats not the behavious of the sort of club I thought I supported, sort it out you muppets before we become a laughing stock.

[Turkish]

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

 

He's a top lad actually.

[ericofarabia]

I find this sort of thing very worrying, I'm not bothered if the club refuse to pay someone because they've not delivered or delivered rubish but the fact that we didn't send anyone to contest it makes it sound like we were just with holding payment for no reason which leaves only two options 1). We don't have a pot to **** in. 2). We are the sort of scumbags that don't pay our bills promptly. Which ever the case thats not the behavious of the sort of club I thought I supported, sort it out you muppets before we become a laughing stock.

 

This.

 

You'd think if there was a legit reason for not paying up they would be willing to send somebody along to contest it

 

Very odd and a tad disturbing.

[The9]

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

 

Not my recollection of him on here. I haven't seen him around the site for a few years, probably due to this kind of thing.

 

Actually, I think the JPT Final was around the last time I saw him posting on here regularly - but when you're getting paid to write the sort of stuff people post on here - but with more credibility, better style and inarguably better sources, why would you give it away for free on here ?

[ericb]

He's a top lad actually.

 

Yup and more of a regular attender at games than many on here that slate him. But still don't let facts get in the way of a good old mong board "fact"

[The9]

I find this sort of thing very worrying, I'm not bothered if the club refuse to pay someone because they've not delivered or delivered rubish but the fact that we didn't send anyone to contest it makes it sound like we were just with holding payment for no reason which leaves only two options 1). We don't have a pot to **** in. 2). We are the sort of scumbags that don't pay our bills promptly. Which ever the case thats not the behavious of the sort of club I thought I supported, sort it out you muppets before we become a laughing stock.

 

I don't think not paying your bills leads to becoming a laughing stock, it tends to lead to distrust and criticism. The laughing stock bit doesn't happen until it becomes evident the reason you weren't paying your bills was because your owner doesn't exist or the club chose to spend money on a new club badge or massive toilet-shaped pie-in-the-sky hotel and stadium development instead of paying your tax bill.

[The9]

He's a top lad actually.

 

Bit of a geezer is he ? Taking the Chicken Run etc ?

[Pat from Poole]

:lol:

 

Is there anyone you don't hate?!

 

Manji was / is madly in love with Rupert Lowe, so will be derogatory about anybody who was complimentary about Michael Wilde, usually deeming them as not very perceptive, or some such equally condescending put-down.

[The9]

Manji was / is madly in love with Rupert Lowe, so will be derogatory about anybody who was complimentary about Michael Wilde, usually deeming them as not very perceptive, or some such equally condescending put-down.

 

I'm surprised he posts on here then, I know someone with the same initials as me who was very chummy with Wilde in the early days, he even pitched up at the Solent (Chimpstitute) Student Bar to press the flesh with Wilde back in the day.

 

Why has no-one ever uploaded a pic of themselves in one of those t-shirts for the purposes of the B-anter ? Is it because no-one actually bought one ?

[The Kraken]

Manji was / is madly in love with Rupert Lowe, so will be derogatory about anybody who was complimentary about Michael Wilde, usually deeming them as not very perceptive, or some such equally condescending put-down.

 

I'm fully aware of manji's Lowe-idolotry; in fact I always find it particularly hilarious when he rants on and accuses others of having an intolerable agenda. So lacking in self-awareness, bless him.

[shurlock]

"I’d love to say there definitely aren’t any but I don’t know"

 

[melmacian_saint]

I don't think I have ever seen a city have such a negative attitude to its club's return to the Premier League.

 

Very annoying and you just wonder if the population of Southampton has any pride in its city at all. Certainly not when it comes to Saints...

[ottery st mary]

Poor journalist and a very poor newspaper just shiiiite stirring again...

[Saint_John]

I would ignore the Echo, the same writer in the Pink on 27th Oct when there was lots of discussion about systems e.g. 4-4-2 or Nigel's 4-2-3-1 (4-3-3) wrote the following :-

"As we all know Saints have ditched 4-4-2 after what I consider to be two successful years of using it.

.... but it (442) worked and everyone seemed to know what they were doing. Happy days.

Now the first team has changed over to 4-3-3 .... The fact that the senior side had to change to bring it into line with the youth teams seemed odd...."

 

I think the change to 4-2-3-1 over the last few weeks shows that Dan knows nothing about football or the reasons Saints are doing things.

 

The Echo should be more worried about their circulation figures dropping below 30,000 for the first time ever (29,973).

http://www.holdthefrontpage.co.uk/2012/news/abc-figures-how-the-regional-dailies-performed-5/

[Sour Mash]

Poor journalist and a very poor newspaper just shiiiite stirring again...

Not really, one of the better local papers, particularly considering the size of Southampton. Always has plenty of good football and cricket stuff in it, occasionally there is an article that doesn't paint Saints in a positive light, so what?

[The Kraken]

I would ignore the Echo, the same writer in the Pink on 27th Oct when there was lots of discussion about systems e.g. 4-4-2 or Nigel's 4-2-3-1 (4-3-3) wrote the following :-

 

 

I think the change to 4-2-3-1 over the last few weeks shows that Dan knows nothing about football or the reasons Saints are doing things.

 

The Echo should be more worried about their circulation figures dropping below 30,000 for the first time ever (29,973).

 

More worried than what, exactly? Than writing an opinion piece which a few precious souls are going to get upset about?

 

If you can find a quote from the manager that suggest we play 4231 then fair play; Nigel Adkins has called it 433 all season long, despite the fact it has indeed been more like a 4231 (except when we played 442). First game of the season against Man City we had Ward-Prowse and Schneiderlin playing as the 2, Lallana as the other more advanced central midfielder. If you can point out the glaring difference between that formation and Saturday's, I guess I'd appreciate it. About the only time we've started with a true 4-3-3 was against Man United and Arsenal.

Edited 19 November, 2012 by The Kraken

[CHAPEL END CHARLIE]

The proper function of the press is to report on the club, not to support it like some kind of tame media cheer leader. The article in question would appear to be fair comment - indeed the facts of the matter don't even seem to be in dispute.

 

So why the OP finds it so very objectionable is quite beyond me.

[The Kraken]

The proper function of the press is to report on the club, not to support it like some kind of tame media cheer leader. The article in question would appear to be fair comment - indeed the facts of the matter don't even seem to be in dispute.

 

So why the OP finds it so very objectionable is quite beyond me.

 

You could probably add to that and say that it is the duty of the press to question an organisation when they consider an injustice has occured, and bring them to a higher account.

 

I still find it so surprising that many people still expect the local paper to pander to the football's club every whim despite having been completely ostracised by them and treated with utter contempt.

[stevegrant]

So why the OP finds it so very objectionable is quite beyond me.

To be fair, I think Eric's point was that it was regurgitating news they'd already reported on last week, but he didn't realise it was a post from Dan Kerins' blog rather than a news piece, and held his hands up accordingly.

[captainchris]

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.

 

Completely agree with this post. Being tough but fair is fine but unreasonable is not acceptable and from what I have been told the court agrees, this was totally out of order. Whilst I support the club I do not support bad payers.

[aintforever]

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?

 

He could stop doing things that have a negative impact on the club?

[Wilko]

Seems like a perfectly fair opinion piece to me.

[Dig Dig]

What a great piece of journalism.

 

Certainly feel better informed having read that.

[KelvinsRightGlove]

It's a shockingly awful piece of journalism. Ignoring the story for a moment, it really is.

 

It's all based on ifs, buts and imagined hypotheticals. I would have been chastised for putting out a piece like that when I was doing a bit of writing, at that was at a level much lower than the echo.

 

The story isn't great, and does reflect badly on the club, button again there is a lack of communication from the clubs side, so to pass (fair) judgement eith way is pretty tricky.

 

I swear this Dan Kerins bloke is a skate on a wind-up? I seem to remember reading several other articles slagging the club, and Cortese despite a pretty large gap in his knowledge.

[ottery st mary]

Not really, one of the better local papers, particularly considering the size of Southampton. Always has plenty of good football and cricket stuff in it, occasionally there is an article that doesn't paint Saints in a positive light, so what?

 

I have read the article again and find the journalist, the article and the Echo newspaper very poor standard.

 

As I said...shiiiite stirrrring craaaappp[ as usual.

 

 

 

Just received some phone calls saying the article is as poor as most/all of my posts on this forum:blush:

 

To be honest:rolleyes:

 

It is probably a true statement.

 

I am full of shiiiitee like the Echo journalists.

Edited 19 November, 2012 by ottery st mary

[ericb]

I swear this Dan Kerins bloke is a skate on a wind-up? I seem to remember reading several other articles slagging the club, and Cortese despite a pretty large gap in his knowledge.

 

Yeah definitely a skate, i mean only a skate would have a season ticket, go to away games, drink in well known saints pubs and absolutely love the club. You really are a proper dic.k if you think he is, the lad gives a massive sh.it about the club and is sticking his neck out on many things (with a risk of losing out as a result) so people like us are informed.

 

This place really is depressing reading at times, how you can get so many head in the sand fuc.kwits in one place truly baffles me.

[Chez]

I'm kind of glad the Echo have been banned by Nik Nak from St Marys as it means they are free to report on items such as this without fear of reprisal rather than just brush them under the carpet as so many on here seem to think they should be doing.

[manji]

Manji was / is madly in love with Rupert Lowe, so will be derogatory about anybody who was complimentary about Michael Wilde, usually deeming them as not very perceptive, or some such equally condescending put-down.

Rupert is history to me. I am a card carrying Cortese Cultist. "Salute El Duce" as we say at our meetings.

As for "Mike" Wilde I still despise him and his less perceptive supporters. You should remember the times ,legions of Half Wits believing he was our saviour and then a few of us more intelligent types realising he was a self aggrandising fraud. I got banned twice back then merely for pointing out he was a Liverpool supporter. Dont forget Keith Legg who ran the forum at the time was in the pay of the scouse ****.

[buctootim]

typical Echo. Quiet day in the pub - was it ?

 

btw..Do the Echo have any outstanding invoices to pay this month?

 

No but NewsQuest (their owners) left a £58 million hole in their pension fund and reneged on contractual commitments.

[Turkish]

It's a shockingly awful piece of journalism. Ignoring the story for a moment, it really is.

 

It's all based on ifs, buts and imagined hypotheticals. I would have been chastised for putting out a piece like that when I was doing a bit of writing, at that was at a level much lower than the echo.

 

The story isn't great, and does reflect badly on the club, button again there is a lack of communication from the clubs side, so to pass (fair) judgement eith way is pretty tricky.

 

I swear this Dan Kerins bloke is a skate on a wind-up? I seem to remember reading several other articles slagging the club, and Cortese despite a pretty large gap in his knowledge.

 

 

Sorry, what if, but and hypothetials is it based on? Wasn't It a FACT SFC were given a court order to pay an unpaid bill, that no defence was given as to why not and we didn't even bother to attend court. Anyone in their right mind without a blind cult like loyalty to the club would think that it has been out of order on this occasion and as he says, you can forgive some things like crap beer and ticket tax but not shafting local companies.

 

As for Dan Kerins, I know him personally and I know he is a big saints fan, just one that's not so blind they can't dare to critise th club when it's needed. I just hope he doesn't get 'Illingsworthed' as we know our wonder chairman doesn't like people saying nasty things about his toy.

[DrunkenSaint]

This is really old news, heard this last week and it's already been sorted from what i heard.

[Turkish]

This is really old news, heard this last week and it's already been sorted from what i heard.

 

It's not news, it's a blog FFS.

[CB Fry]

It's a shockingly awful piece of journalism. Ignoring the story for a moment, it really is.

 

It's all based on ifs, buts and imagined hypotheticals. I would have been chastised for putting out a piece like that when I was doing a bit of writing, at that was at a level much lower than the echo.

 

The story isn't great, and does reflect badly on the club, button again there is a lack of communication from the clubs side, so to pass (fair) judgement eith way is pretty tricky.

 

I swear this Dan Kerins bloke is a skate on a wind-up? I seem to remember reading several other articles slagging the club, and Cortese despite a pretty large gap in his knowledge.

 

If you write off a ruling from a judge in court as an "imagined hypothetical" I'd like to see what you'd do if you got a fixed penalty notice.

 

Probably write it off as a being from a "skate on a wind up", eh?

 

This board is not getting any less mongy is it.

[Frank's cousin]

I'm kind of glad the Echo have been banned by Nik Nak from St Marys as it means they are free to report on items such as this without fear of reprisal rather than just brush them under the carpet as so many on here seem to think they should be doing.

 

Not carpet sweepoing Chez, and the Echo is perfectly within its rights to publish what they see fit and comment/provide opinion on these things as all are on here. This case obviously has a negative impact - makes fans feel uncomfortable that the club they support appears to be acting 'oddly' at times, and is not aligned with whatmost wuld consider a more community spirited set of values... BUT... and i guess most knew this was comming, the club does not comment publically on these things and as such we only ever get one side of the story, which results in speculation. I have absolutely no idea what the cubs reasons were for not paying the last installment - especially as the club had paid 85% of the project fee on time, so presume they were satisfied with the work up until that point (so no idea where the suggestion vcomes from they are bad payers). The Court found in favour of the claiment in this case, which also suggests that tehe club knew they would and why they did not turn up offer a defence... but the question remains as to whether the club felt they had justification - I know several folk who have had disputes with contractors that whilst they had the moral right, legally they were screwed etc...

 

We have two possibilties: either cub is run by a bunch of bastards who screw over local businesses without a thought, or there was a disagreement over the works that could not be settled between the two parties - which happens at times. There is no evidence to support either, yet many are very quick to take sides and believe the worst of people - I can only assume it suits them to do so.

 

This is not ignoring the issue, or burying heads in sand, but an acknowledgement that its far too easy to 'assume' the worst when not in full pocession of the details or reasons for certain actions. The Echo's perspective is always welcome - IF they do their homework. They cant be expected to ofefr balance, because the club wont speak to them and offer their side, but its therefore important that these articles are read with that knowledge.

[Wes Tender]

"Salute El Duce" as we say at our meetings.

 

What has Eldon Hoke of the Mentors got to do with us? *Confused*

[The Kraken]

We have two possibilties: either cub is run by a bunch of bastards who screw over local businesses without a thought, or there was a disagreement over the works that could not be settled between the two parties - which happens at times. There is no evidence to support either, yet many are very quick to take sides and believe the worst of people - I can only assume it suits them to do so.

 

This is not ignoring the issue, or burying heads in sand, but an acknowledgement that its far too easy to 'assume' the worst when not in full pocession of the details or reasons for certain actions. The Echo's perspective is always welcome - IF they do their homework. They cant be expected to ofefr balance, because the club wont speak to them and offer their side, but its therefore important that these articles are read with that knowledge.

 

Why are you discounting a separate independent adjudication that was held prior to the court case from any evidence? That adjudication found in favour of the contractor. The club still refused to pay, so it ended it court, where the club then offered no defence of their actions. Now, if you wish to carry on and say there's no evidence either way, then sorry Frank but I'm going to have to disagree; there quite clearly is. There was a separate adjudication, which found in favour of the contractor and against the club. If you still choose to disbelieve in that as evidence, well, that's of course your remit. I'd just perhaps suggest that you shouldn't expect a great amount of people to go along with your viewpoint.

[Chez]

Not carpet sweeping Chez' date=' [/quote']the Echo reported it and Kerins gave an opinion piece about it. They would be remiss not to do both and yet fans are berating them for `**** stirring', obviously preferring the paper only reported on nice things like Saints wins and brushed bad news under the carpet.

 

The Echo may have an agenda after the way Nik Nak has treated them, but in this case they are merely reporting the news and giving opinion. That's what a paper should be doing and quite frankly I am glad they no longer have to toe the line and are in a position to highlight these things.

 

If the club chooses not to make a statement that is their lookout. The club has plenty to say on its website in the way of positive news. I fully appreciate their are two sides to every story, but the fact Saints didn't think theirs was worth telling to the court must raise questions.

[Frank's cousin]

Why are you discounting a separate independent adjudication that was held prior to the court case from any evidence? That adjudication found in favour of the contractor. The club still refused to pay, so it ended it court, where the club then offered no defence of their actions. Now, if you wish to carry on and say there's no evidence either way, then sorry Frank but I'm going to have to disagree; there quite clearly is. There was a separate adjudication, which found in favour of the contractor and against the club. If you still choose to disbelieve in that as evidence, well, that's of course your remit. I'd just perhaps suggest that you shouldn't expect a great amount of people to go along with your viewpoint.

 

You have mis read the post - there is 'no evidence either way' to determine whether the club is an evil bunch of bastards versus a dispute that was not possible to resolve between the two parties so was escalated.... because we do not know what reasons the club had for the initial non payment or their standing their ground following the adjudication - Of course in the eyes of the adjudicator and the court, the club had no grounds for with holding payment, and so they are guilty as charged of failing to make that FINAL payment. BUT I will not start calling the club a bunch of evil bastards if I dont KNOW why they refused to make that payment... it makes no sense to assume this is some sort of 'policy decision' versus a genuine grievence of not being satisfied with the works. I fuly accept that club could wel be in the worng an thus have acted in a shameful way - but its just a slikely that they felt they had strong grounds morally if not legally for witholding the final payment - that is the point - I dont know, none of us do, yet many seem happy to condemn without hearing both sides.

 

.... seems we have already reached the low(e) point... where some fans constant shouting of assumed 'facts', based on nothing more than their opinion, speculation, rumour and gossip, is becoming ingrained in others way of thinking - the classic generation of urban myth that give it a few more months will be considered fact... I am sure we are not the only club that has this level of paranoia within its fanbase.... or this level of desperation to prove the leadership has major flaws.... with Lowe and the PLC there was always an open oor for teh likes of Wilde and Crouch to oust the encumbant... but as pointed out at the time to all those obsessesed that PLC had no place in football.... be careful what you wish for because in private hands there will not be such an option.

 

We have a leadership that is never going to be everyone's cup of tea in terms of approach and style... some can obsess over it if they wish... but my rumour of the day is that the only problems the club has is that its style and approach/communication is not universally loved... which IMHO is not such a big deal.

Edited 20 November, 2012 by Frank's cousin

[The Kraken]

I'm not sure where the evil b*stards thing is coming from then, Frank. Simply that, in this case, the club has acted pretty shabbily. They lost their case at independent adjudication, if they still felt so strongly that they had a case they had every opportunity to turn up in court to defend themselves properly. Just as they have the right and opportunity to issue a statement either through the media or through their website if they feel they've been misrepresented or are "morally if not legally correct".

 

I'm not sure how much further evidence is required to make a decision on this one point; much more for some, I suppose.

[This Charming Man]

Oh great, a 10 page essay from FC. Just what this thread needed.

[stevegrant]

Frank, the "being contrary for the sake of it" look really doesn't suit you.

[Frank's cousin]

Oh great, a 10 page essay from FC. Just what this thread needed.

 

you not able to count pages?

[Frank's cousin]

Frank, the "being contrary for the sake of it" look really doesn't suit you.

 

I am not Steve - I simply dont think its right to make assumptions when we dont know the reasons - its easy to, and its natural to, but it does not make it right.

 

The club may well have dropped a bollock and if I were in pocession of thsoe details, I might well agree and think they were behaving like arseholes - but I dont have al the reasons, and I also believe that when it comes to builders and contractors, the moral rights are not always as clear cut as the legal ones...

 

Sure, mine might be a reaction to the constant drivel on here that seems determined to find fault, without ever explaining the obsession or the root of the issues... seems odd that's all and I am pretty much fed up with the way its so easy for rumour, and gossip to be adopted as fact done the line... we had enough of that in the past

[Frank's cousin]

I'm not sure where the evil b*stards thing is coming from then, Frank. Simply that, in this case, the club has acted pretty shabbily. They lost their case at independent adjudication, if they still felt so strongly that they had a case they had every opportunity to turn up in court to defend themselves properly. Just as they have the right and opportunity to issue a statement either through the media or through their website if they feel they've been misrepresented or are "morally if not legally correct".

 

I'm not sure how much further evidence is required to make a decision on this one point; much more for some, I suppose.

 

..and like many I wish the club would communicate much more and present its case to counter - so that with balance a more 'informed' opinion can be formed, not just on this issue, but all those in which there is often some controversy - would make this a lot easier thats for sure. But I have accepted that the cub seems to have a typical 'swiss' approach which is simply not to comment and be quite secretive abouts its business and operations. Feck all I can do about that, but rather than assume the worst all the time, I tend to assume the best - positivity as NIge would say, makes a big difference to how you perceive the club.

[The Kraken]

..and like many I wish the club would communicate much more and present its case to counter - so that with balance a more 'informed' opinion can be formed' date=' not just on this issue, but all those in which there is often some controversy - would make this a lot easier thats for sure. But I have accepted that the cub seems to have a typical 'swiss' approach which is simply not to comment and be quite secretive abouts its business and operations. Feck all I can do about that, but rather than assume the worst all the time, I tend to assume the best - positivity as NIge would say, makes a big difference to how you perceive the club.[/quote']

 

Fair enough. I'll probably tend to assume that an independent adjudication and subsequent court case came to the correct decision.

[Frank's cousin]

Fair enough. I'll probably tend to assume that an independent adjudication and subsequent court case came to the correct decision.

 

Yep they would have done within the eyes of the law - no one can argue with that. (assuming you feel that adjudicators and teh courts alays come to teh correct decsion... naturally). My point is that its just as easy to assume that Saints withholding the final 15% was because they felt there was something wrong with the end product / failure on timelines etc, even if legally this was not going to hold up (have you never had a dispute with a builder, that you had to pay in the end, but were far from happy about it?) as it is to assume its 'just another example of the club being bad payers' which has been suggested by the same old in numerous threads now...

[The Kraken]

Yep they would have done within the eyes of the law - no one can argue with that. (assuming you feel that adjudicators and teh courts alays come to teh correct decsion... naturally). My point is that its just as easy to assume that Saints withholding the final 15% was because they felt there was something wrong with the end product / failure on timelines etc' date=' even if legally this was not going to hold up (have you never had a dispute with a builder, that you had to pay in the end, but were far from happy about it?) as it is to assume its 'just another example of the club being bad payers' which has been suggested by the same old in numerous threads now...[/quote']

 

Well: if, after adjudication, the club still felt that something was wrong with the end product they had ample chance to do something about it. If they genuinely thought they had a legal (or moral) case, then they had ample opportuity to appear in court and make that case. I can't have any sympathy for an organisation that pushed all the way for its day in court to present its own point of view and then stuck its fingers up at the very last minute to that very opportunity.