Chrons Lee Ryder on NUSC

[Ketsbaia 0]

I'm not be funny PP but put yourself in his shoes.

 

Why would he jeopardise is livelihood to back the NUSC? The flow of information from the club to him earns him his wage. It is in his interest to discredit any perceived threat to the club's management.

 

The only way you are going to change anything at NUFC is to stop attacking those in charge.

 

Local sports journo's get fuck all apart from the occasional insignificant titbit about injuries and possible transfers literally an hour at most before Sky and the BBC get it. Exclusives are no longer exclusives and newspapers no long sell on the back of their sports journo's being in the loop. Ryder may get to sit on the top table with Llambias and laugh at all his jokes but the output of the sports pages will suffer because of it. Just look what happened to Anal, he was a laughing stock and rightly so.

 

If I remember correctly the MEN have decided against pandering to the Manchester clubs because they've realised how little they actually get out of them.

Edited March 4, 2009 by Ketsbaia

[Guest alex]

Just smacks of zero integrity and gives the lie to his cringeworthy patter about how much he loves the club imo.

[Christmas Tree 4858]

All the quotes from Lee Ryders report...

 

“We want to be solid competitors at the top. That’s the way we’re going. We aim to be knocking on the door again.”

 

“We’re sorry about the lack of communication, we know we’ve made mistakes. We were guarded to begin with but we’d made the decision to keep a low profile and got it wrong.

 

“We didn’t realise the backlash of KK, it was so huge and we were waiting for things to calm down. That didn’t happen. But I am more than happy to communicate with you. This is a passionate club and we don’t want to change that. We aim to use the local Press ( ) and supporters’ panel meetings to keep people informed.”

 

“We have plans for the club and we are taking it forward. When we took over we had repair work to do and holes to fill. That has been huge step. We didn’t think the club had any foundation, there was a poor Academy and we are now building for the future.

 

“We’re not neglecting the club. We felt during the transfer window that we needed to add to the squad and we did. We were lacking spirit and we feel that adding Ryan Taylor and Kevin Nolan has addressed that.

 

“The club has built up a structure for the future. We have a grid that is made up by the manager and it highlights the areas we need to strengthen. We pinpoint a player and then we go out and look at him.”

 

http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/north-east-...72703-23007850/

 

Quotes omitted and only reported thanks to NUSC...

 

“We're still paying for some of them now, we won’t clear the debt for those players as it will take us until 2011”

 

“The club makes £100M a year in revenue of which 76% goes on salaries”

 

“Just print that we paid £250 Million for the club”

 

“Xisco was Kevin, don’t believe everything you read in the press, Gonzales was a...well, I won’t go into that because we’ve still got legal issues there”

 

“If you bring Dennis Wise into this room what are you going to get? I just mean he’s not very popular”

 

“Pick your top five players this season and you’ll see that they were Dennis’ players. All those players are Dennis’, they’ve been picked...sorry, Dennis has brought them in...with the knowledge of the manager”

 

“We never wanted to lose Shay, we made that clear from January, whatever the price they offered. They came in with £3M and we politely told them to go away. Somehow Shay got it into his head that he wanted to move on because he wanted to win trophies. City then came in with a £5M bid that we rejected but then ...when a player decides they want to go it’s very, very difficult. We offered Shay a new contract that would take him to the age of 39 but that wasn’t good enough. Maybe we could have matched the contract with City, which we just couldn’t afford”.

 

“Once they came in with a £5M bid we then looked at their team. We tried for their right back, Michael Johnson, Elano on loan to get the deal that suited NUFC. Unfortunately it was difficult. We got £5.9M plus add-ons, not paid until 1st of July. We asked Man city for £15M thinking they would just go away but they got away cheaply, was it good business on our part? Not really ‘cos we never wanted to lose the player cheaply”

 

“Our commercial side is important, we’ll be out there from March trying to bring in better sources of revenue. Our revenue on retail is down because the economy is suffering, our revenue on food and beverage, we’re quite happy with that. We’d like to expand our brand and we’ve taken on commercial directors”

 

“Do we need to spend £200k a year on PR? We did have a PR agency, they’ve just been fired”.

 

“Let’s make a comparison with the rest of the league, everywhere is down other than the big boys”.

 

“If we are short 3,500 seats that is reflected everywhere in the North East. People are struggling to pay for tickets

 

“it would cost more than £12 (per person) in administration to [return the vat on season tickets]”

 

“All they (those who signed for 3 years) were doing was guaranteeing a frozen price”.

 

“If I could tell you the number of top class manager’s banging on my door right now...Top, top”.

 

There's an incredibly clear delineation there between the propaganda and factual/stupid stuff.

Good stuff as per HF. You should raise that on his blog comments section.

 

I disagree because all this is achieving is re-visiting old news if you like. The story here is much more to do with how that one bloody email has shot NUSC in the foot. Those are the issues that need addressing (And PP said today that they are).

 

Sure the NUSC committee can come on here and have smoke blown up their arse, but unless they can agree internally to "play the game", they are fucked, pure and simple.

Edited March 4, 2009 by Christmas Tree

[LeazesMag 0]

What kind of newspaper quotes and links as a source an online free to join public forums, i should be a fcking journo thats easy work.

 

by any chance our those two lads from the chronicle/journal the same people who put out that piss poor Q&A session the other week, if so i wonder what is the darker shade of brown, their tongues or nose...

 

 

"The NUSC group needs to stick together because with the team in grave danger of going down, fans are going to need a proper voice because even if the team stays up, there are tough days ahead."

no fucking shit, and you had a cup of tea a scone and a friendly chat with one of the people who basically helped that to happen.

 

because it has the highest percentage of tits that still back Ashley

Funny how he has a pop at NUSC because many of the 50,000 match going fans haven't signed up as members. How fucking many of that 50k are members of Newcastle Online like?

 

At a rough estimate, how many of that 50,000 actually post on ANY toon message board ?

 

Not many, a few hundred at the most.

[Guest alex]

I disagree because all this is achieving is re-visiting old news if you like. The story here is much more to do with how that one bloody email has shot NUSC in the foot. Those are the issues that need addressing (And PP said today that they are).

 

Sure the NUSC committee can come on here and have smoke blown up their arse, but unless they can agree internally to "play the game", they are fucked, pure and simple.

How is pointing out what Lee Ryder chose to omit from the meeting in his article for the paper (nowt to do with his blog) revisiting old ground, exactly? You're the one doing that, by continually having a pop at NUSC when that isn't the real issue, imo. Regarding HF's point, at least.

[Christmas Tree 4858]

I disagree because all this is achieving is re-visiting old news if you like. The story here is much more to do with how that one bloody email has shot NUSC in the foot. Those are the issues that need addressing (And PP said today that they are).

 

Sure the NUSC committee can come on here and have smoke blown up their arse, but unless they can agree internally to "play the game", they are fucked, pure and simple.

How is pointing out what Lee Ryder chose to omit from the meeting in his article for the paper (nowt to do with his blog) revisiting old ground, exactly? You're the one doing that, by continually having a pop at NUSC when that isn't the real issue, imo. Regarding HF's point, at least.

 

Because their different issues.

 

The attack on NUSC this week and the negative repercussions it is having amongst its own members and the wider fan base, are all self inflicted this time.

[Happy Face 29]

All the quotes from Lee Ryders report...

 

“We want to be solid competitors at the top. That’s the way we’re going. We aim to be knocking on the door again.”

 

“We’re sorry about the lack of communication, we know we’ve made mistakes. We were guarded to begin with but we’d made the decision to keep a low profile and got it wrong.

 

“We didn’t realise the backlash of KK, it was so huge and we were waiting for things to calm down. That didn’t happen. But I am more than happy to communicate with you. This is a passionate club and we don’t want to change that. We aim to use the local Press ( ) and supporters’ panel meetings to keep people informed.”

 

“We have plans for the club and we are taking it forward. When we took over we had repair work to do and holes to fill. That has been huge step. We didn’t think the club had any foundation, there was a poor Academy and we are now building for the future.

 

“We’re not neglecting the club. We felt during the transfer window that we needed to add to the squad and we did. We were lacking spirit and we feel that adding Ryan Taylor and Kevin Nolan has addressed that.

 

“The club has built up a structure for the future. We have a grid that is made up by the manager and it highlights the areas we need to strengthen. We pinpoint a player and then we go out and look at him.”

 

http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/north-east-...72703-23007850/

 

Quotes omitted and only reported thanks to NUSC...

 

“We're still paying for some of them now, we won’t clear the debt for those players as it will take us until 2011”

 

“The club makes £100M a year in revenue of which 76% goes on salaries”

 

“Just print that we paid £250 Million for the club”

 

“Xisco was Kevin, don’t believe everything you read in the press, Gonzales was a...well, I won’t go into that because we’ve still got legal issues there”

 

“If you bring Dennis Wise into this room what are you going to get? I just mean he’s not very popular”

 

“Pick your top five players this season and you’ll see that they were Dennis’ players. All those players are Dennis’, they’ve been picked...sorry, Dennis has brought them in...with the knowledge of the manager”

 

“We never wanted to lose Shay, we made that clear from January, whatever the price they offered. They came in with £3M and we politely told them to go away. Somehow Shay got it into his head that he wanted to move on because he wanted to win trophies. City then came in with a £5M bid that we rejected but then ...when a player decides they want to go it’s very, very difficult. We offered Shay a new contract that would take him to the age of 39 but that wasn’t good enough. Maybe we could have matched the contract with City, which we just couldn’t afford”.

 

“Once they came in with a £5M bid we then looked at their team. We tried for their right back, Michael Johnson, Elano on loan to get the deal that suited NUFC. Unfortunately it was difficult. We got £5.9M plus add-ons, not paid until 1st of July. We asked Man city for £15M thinking they would just go away but they got away cheaply, was it good business on our part? Not really ‘cos we never wanted to lose the player cheaply”

 

“Our commercial side is important, we’ll be out there from March trying to bring in better sources of revenue. Our revenue on retail is down because the economy is suffering, our revenue on food and beverage, we’re quite happy with that. We’d like to expand our brand and we’ve taken on commercial directors”

 

“Do we need to spend £200k a year on PR? We did have a PR agency, they’ve just been fired”.

 

“Let’s make a comparison with the rest of the league, everywhere is down other than the big boys”.

 

“If we are short 3,500 seats that is reflected everywhere in the North East. People are struggling to pay for tickets

 

“it would cost more than £12 (per person) in administration to [return the vat on season tickets]”

 

“All they (those who signed for 3 years) were doing was guaranteeing a frozen price”.

 

“If I could tell you the number of top class manager’s banging on my door right now...Top, top”.

 

There's an incredibly clear delineation there between the propaganda and factual/stupid stuff.

Good stuff as per HF. You should raise that on his blog comments section.

 

I disagree because all this is achieving is re-visiting old news if you like. The story here is much more to do with how that one bloody email has shot NUSC in the foot. Those are the issues that need addressing (And PP said today that they are).

 

Sure the NUSC committee can come on here and have smoke blown up their arse, but unless they can agree internally to "play the game", they are fucked, pure and simple.

 

 

That doesn't quite jive with the Llambias quote in the Ryder propaganda piece about transparency between the club and fans.

[Guest alex]

I disagree because all this is achieving is re-visiting old news if you like. The story here is much more to do with how that one bloody email has shot NUSC in the foot. Those are the issues that need addressing (And PP said today that they are).

 

Sure the NUSC committee can come on here and have smoke blown up their arse, but unless they can agree internally to "play the game", they are fucked, pure and simple.

How is pointing out what Lee Ryder chose to omit from the meeting in his article for the paper (nowt to do with his blog) revisiting old ground, exactly? You're the one doing that, by continually having a pop at NUSC when that isn't the real issue, imo. Regarding HF's point, at least.

 

Because their different issues.

 

The attack on NUSC this week and the negative repercussions it is having amongst its own members and the wider fan base, are all self inflicted this time.

A different aspect of this was being discussed. That happens in a thread. You didn't really answer my question like imo.

[Ketsbaia 0]

I disagree because all this is achieving is re-visiting old news if you like. The story here is much more to do with how that one bloody email has shot NUSC in the foot. Those are the issues that need addressing (And PP said today that they are).

 

Sure the NUSC committee can come on here and have smoke blown up their arse, but unless they can agree internally to "play the game", they are fucked, pure and simple.

How is pointing out what Lee Ryder chose to omit from the meeting in his article for the paper (nowt to do with his blog) revisiting old ground, exactly? You're the one doing that, by continually having a pop at NUSC when that isn't the real issue, imo. Regarding HF's point, at least.

 

Because their different issues.

 

The attack on NUSC this week and the negative repercussions it is having amongst its own members and the wider fan base, are all self inflicted this time.

 

They're not different issues, they're directly related. He's having a whinge at NUSC because he feels hard done by but the quotes tell another story.

[Christmas Tree 4858]

All the quotes from Lee Ryders report...

 

“We want to be solid competitors at the top. That’s the way we’re going. We aim to be knocking on the door again.”

 

“We’re sorry about the lack of communication, we know we’ve made mistakes. We were guarded to begin with but we’d made the decision to keep a low profile and got it wrong.

 

“We didn’t realise the backlash of KK, it was so huge and we were waiting for things to calm down. That didn’t happen. But I am more than happy to communicate with you. This is a passionate club and we don’t want to change that. We aim to use the local Press ( ) and supporters’ panel meetings to keep people informed.”

 

“We have plans for the club and we are taking it forward. When we took over we had repair work to do and holes to fill. That has been huge step. We didn’t think the club had any foundation, there was a poor Academy and we are now building for the future.

 

“We’re not neglecting the club. We felt during the transfer window that we needed to add to the squad and we did. We were lacking spirit and we feel that adding Ryan Taylor and Kevin Nolan has addressed that.

 

“The club has built up a structure for the future. We have a grid that is made up by the manager and it highlights the areas we need to strengthen. We pinpoint a player and then we go out and look at him.”

 

http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/north-east-...72703-23007850/

 

Quotes omitted and only reported thanks to NUSC...

 

“We're still paying for some of them now, we won’t clear the debt for those players as it will take us until 2011”

 

“The club makes £100M a year in revenue of which 76% goes on salaries”

 

“Just print that we paid £250 Million for the club”

 

“Xisco was Kevin, don’t believe everything you read in the press, Gonzales was a...well, I won’t go into that because we’ve still got legal issues there”

 

“If you bring Dennis Wise into this room what are you going to get? I just mean he’s not very popular”

 

“Pick your top five players this season and you’ll see that they were Dennis’ players. All those players are Dennis’, they’ve been picked...sorry, Dennis has brought them in...with the knowledge of the manager”

 

“We never wanted to lose Shay, we made that clear from January, whatever the price they offered. They came in with £3M and we politely told them to go away. Somehow Shay got it into his head that he wanted to move on because he wanted to win trophies. City then came in with a £5M bid that we rejected but then ...when a player decides they want to go it’s very, very difficult. We offered Shay a new contract that would take him to the age of 39 but that wasn’t good enough. Maybe we could have matched the contract with City, which we just couldn’t afford”.

 

“Once they came in with a £5M bid we then looked at their team. We tried for their right back, Michael Johnson, Elano on loan to get the deal that suited NUFC. Unfortunately it was difficult. We got £5.9M plus add-ons, not paid until 1st of July. We asked Man city for £15M thinking they would just go away but they got away cheaply, was it good business on our part? Not really ‘cos we never wanted to lose the player cheaply”

 

“Our commercial side is important, we’ll be out there from March trying to bring in better sources of revenue. Our revenue on retail is down because the economy is suffering, our revenue on food and beverage, we’re quite happy with that. We’d like to expand our brand and we’ve taken on commercial directors”

 

“Do we need to spend £200k a year on PR? We did have a PR agency, they’ve just been fired”.

 

“Let’s make a comparison with the rest of the league, everywhere is down other than the big boys”.

 

“If we are short 3,500 seats that is reflected everywhere in the North East. People are struggling to pay for tickets

 

“it would cost more than £12 (per person) in administration to [return the vat on season tickets]”

 

“All they (those who signed for 3 years) were doing was guaranteeing a frozen price”.

 

“If I could tell you the number of top class manager’s banging on my door right now...Top, top”.

 

There's an incredibly clear delineation there between the propaganda and factual/stupid stuff.

Good stuff as per HF. You should raise that on his blog comments section.

 

I disagree because all this is achieving is re-visiting old news if you like. The story here is much more to do with how that one bloody email has shot NUSC in the foot. Those are the issues that need addressing (And PP said today that they are).

 

Sure the NUSC committee can come on here and have smoke blown up their arse, but unless they can agree internally to "play the game", they are fucked, pure and simple.

 

 

That doesn't quite jive with the Llambias quote in the Ryder propaganda piece about transparency between the club and fans.

 

Dont really know what you are on about there like. Definately two issues here.

 

1. How bad the club is being run and possibility of journalists going easy for titbits.

 

2. NUSC leadership and how it seems to be alienating so many.

 

I have heard you address number 1 many times. What about number 2.

[Christmas Tree 4858]

I disagree because all this is achieving is re-visiting old news if you like. The story here is much more to do with how that one bloody email has shot NUSC in the foot. Those are the issues that need addressing (And PP said today that they are).

 

Sure the NUSC committee can come on here and have smoke blown up their arse, but unless they can agree internally to "play the game", they are fucked, pure and simple.

How is pointing out what Lee Ryder chose to omit from the meeting in his article for the paper (nowt to do with his blog) revisiting old ground, exactly? You're the one doing that, by continually having a pop at NUSC when that isn't the real issue, imo. Regarding HF's point, at least.

 

Because their different issues.

 

The attack on NUSC this week and the negative repercussions it is having amongst its own members and the wider fan base, are all self inflicted this time.

A different aspect of this was being discussed. That happens in a thread. You didn't really answer my question like imo.

 

Did you ask one

[Guest alex]

I disagree because all this is achieving is re-visiting old news if you like. The story here is much more to do with how that one bloody email has shot NUSC in the foot. Those are the issues that need addressing (And PP said today that they are).

 

Sure the NUSC committee can come on here and have smoke blown up their arse, but unless they can agree internally to "play the game", they are fucked, pure and simple.

How is pointing out what Lee Ryder chose to omit from the meeting in his article for the paper (nowt to do with his blog) revisiting old ground, exactly? You're the one doing that, by continually having a pop at NUSC when that isn't the real issue, imo. Regarding HF's point, at least.

 

Because their different issues.

 

The attack on NUSC this week and the negative repercussions it is having amongst its own members and the wider fan base, are all self inflicted this time.

A different aspect of this was being discussed. That happens in a thread. You didn't really answer my question like imo.

 

Did you ask one

You're really not clever enough for this wumming lark, are you? You even answered it, just not in a very satisfactory manner.

[Christmas Tree 4858]

See this also happens on forums.

 

People get to pally with each other and can not bring themselves to debate real issues for fear of falling out.

[Christmas Tree 4858]

I disagree because all this is achieving is re-visiting old news if you like. The story here is much more to do with how that one bloody email has shot NUSC in the foot. Those are the issues that need addressing (And PP said today that they are).

 

Sure the NUSC committee can come on here and have smoke blown up their arse, but unless they can agree internally to "play the game", they are fucked, pure and simple.

How is pointing out what Lee Ryder chose to omit from the meeting in his article for the paper (nowt to do with his blog) revisiting old ground, exactly? You're the one doing that, by continually having a pop at NUSC when that isn't the real issue, imo. Regarding HF's point, at least.

 

Because their different issues.

 

The attack on NUSC this week and the negative repercussions it is having amongst its own members and the wider fan base, are all self inflicted this time.

A different aspect of this was being discussed. That happens in a thread. You didn't really answer my question like imo.

 

Did you ask one

You're really not clever enough for this wumming lark, are you? You even answered it, just not in a very satisfactory manner.

 

So what was it????

[peasepud 59]

I dont see the email as shooting us in the foot at all, in fact quite the opposite. The email went to members and members only, they decided to post it for public consumption which they are more than entitled to do.

 

What the email and Ryders piece has done is shown that

a- we are giving our members the information

and b- people shouldnt believe a word they read in the Ronnie, as far as anyone would have been concerned from their reports that meeting was a nice happy handshake kind of thing where only good things were said by DL. We reported the facts of the meeting as they happened not some glossed up version.

 

The wording probably could have been better yes but frankly who gives a fuck? M Teasdale could have held his nerve better and got less worked up yes but at the same time Derek Llambias treat these 4 members of the panel as lepers from the moment he realised who they were. This was apparent in the fact that he was nice as pie to one lass for over an hour then got a nudge from Esland when she asked a further question and told who she was. Venom can be the only word to describe the way he treat her from that second onwards.

 

I have no problems with this at all, if anything I think the person with holes in their feet and credibility is Ryder. Journalist? my arse, he was even made to admit by Llambias that he misrepresented the Aston Villa quote yet Ryder had clearly stated to the world that what was being printed from the DL interview was word for word.

[Guest alex]

I disagree because all this is achieving is re-visiting old news if you like. The story here is much more to do with how that one bloody email has shot NUSC in the foot. Those are the issues that need addressing (And PP said today that they are).

 

Sure the NUSC committee can come on here and have smoke blown up their arse, but unless they can agree internally to "play the game", they are fucked, pure and simple.

How is pointing out what Lee Ryder chose to omit from the meeting in his article for the paper (nowt to do with his blog) revisiting old ground, exactly? You're the one doing that, by continually having a pop at NUSC when that isn't the real issue, imo. Regarding HF's point, at least.

 

Because their different issues.

 

The attack on NUSC this week and the negative repercussions it is having amongst its own members and the wider fan base, are all self inflicted this time.

A different aspect of this was being discussed. That happens in a thread. You didn't really answer my question like imo.

 

Did you ask one

You're really not clever enough for this wumming lark, are you? You even answered it, just not in a very satisfactory manner.

 

So what was it????

Fuck me

[Christmas Tree 4858]

I dont see the email as shooting us in the foot at all, in fact quite the opposite. The email went to members and members only, they decided to post it for public consumption which they are more than entitled to do.

 

What the email and Ryders piece has done is shown that

a- we are giving our members the information

and b- people shouldnt believe a word they read in the Ronnie, as far as anyone would have been concerned from their reports that meeting was a nice happy handshake kind of thing where only good things were said by DL. We reported the facts of the meeting as they happened not some glossed up version.

 

The wording probably could have been better yes but frankly who gives a fuck? M Teasdale could have held his nerve better and got less worked up yes but at the same time Derek Llambias treat these 4 members of the panel as lepers from the moment he realised who they were. This was apparent in the fact that he was nice as pie to one lass for over an hour then got a nudge from Esland when she asked a further question and told who she was. Venom can be the only word to describe the way he treat her from that second onwards.

 

I have no problems with this at all, if anything I think the person with holes in their feet and credibility is Ryder. Journalist? my arse, he was even made to admit by Llambias that he misrepresented the Aston Villa quote yet Ryder had clearly stated to the world that what was being printed from the DL interview was word for word.

 

Madness pp madness

[peasepud 59]

See this also happens on forums.

 

People get to pally with each other and can not bring themselves to debate real issues for fear of falling out.

 

ahhhhh the old "too cliquey to agree with me" response.

[Christmas Tree 4858]

I disagree because all this is achieving is re-visiting old news if you like. The story here is much more to do with how that one bloody email has shot NUSC in the foot. Those are the issues that need addressing (And PP said today that they are).

 

Sure the NUSC committee can come on here and have smoke blown up their arse, but unless they can agree internally to "play the game", they are fucked, pure and simple.

How is pointing out what Lee Ryder chose to omit from the meeting in his article for the paper (nowt to do with his blog) revisiting old ground, exactly? You're the one doing that, by continually having a pop at NUSC when that isn't the real issue, imo. Regarding HF's point, at least.

 

Because their different issues.

 

The attack on NUSC this week and the negative repercussions it is having amongst its own members and the wider fan base, are all self inflicted this time.

A different aspect of this was being discussed. That happens in a thread. You didn't really answer my question like imo.

 

Did you ask one

You're really not clever enough for this wumming lark, are you? You even answered it, just not in a very satisfactory manner.

 

So what was it????

Fuck me

 

Oh I see, the question I already answered before you asked me to answer it again. Nice one Alex.... Type slower mate.

[Guest alex]

I dont see the email as shooting us in the foot at all, in fact quite the opposite. The email went to members and members only, they decided to post it for public consumption which they are more than entitled to do.

 

What the email and Ryders piece has done is shown that

a- we are giving our members the information

and b- people shouldnt believe a word they read in the Ronnie, as far as anyone would have been concerned from their reports that meeting was a nice happy handshake kind of thing where only good things were said by DL. We reported the facts of the meeting as they happened not some glossed up version.

 

The wording probably could have been better yes but frankly who gives a fuck? M Teasdale could have held his nerve better and got less worked up yes but at the same time Derek Llambias treat these 4 members of the panel as lepers from the moment he realised who they were. This was apparent in the fact that he was nice as pie to one lass for over an hour then got a nudge from Esland when she asked a further question and told who she was. Venom can be the only word to describe the way he treat her from that second onwards.

 

I have no problems with this at all, if anything I think the person with holes in their feet and credibility is Ryder. Journalist? my arse, he was even made to admit by Llambias that he misrepresented the Aston Villa quote yet Ryder had clearly stated to the world that what was being printed from the DL interview was word for word.

The problem is - who will more people believe? People already seem to have softened their view towards the regime. It's not so much a criticism of the content per se, rather that it was predictable he might hit back and he has a bigger readership. I know not many people will read his poxy blog but a lot of people still get the Chronicle and turn straight to the back page. I can understand your feelings because, as I've mentioned above he obviously has no integrity regarding his 'profession' and even less concern for the real good of the club he supposedly loves.

Edited March 4, 2009 by alex

[snakehips 0]

I dont see the email as shooting us in the foot at all, in fact quite the opposite. The email went to members and members only, they decided to post it for public consumption which they are more than entitled to do.

 

What the email and Ryders piece has done is shown that

a- we are giving our members the information

and b- people shouldnt believe a word they read in the Ronnie, as far as anyone would have been concerned from their reports that meeting was a nice happy handshake kind of thing where only good things were said by DL. We reported the facts of the meeting as they happened not some glossed up version.

 

The wording probably could have been better yes but frankly who gives a fuck? M Teasdale could have held his nerve better and got less worked up yes but at the same time Derek Llambias treat these 4 members of the panel as lepers from the moment he realised who they were. This was apparent in the fact that he was nice as pie to one lass for over an hour then got a nudge from Esland when she asked a further question and told who she was. Venom can be the only word to describe the way he treat her from that second onwards.

 

I have no problems with this at all, if anything I think the person with holes in their feet and credibility is Ryder. Journalist? my arse, he was even made to admit by Llambias that he misrepresented the Aston Villa quote yet Ryder had clearly stated to the world that what was being printed from the DL interview was word for word.

 

So you have laydee members??? Why on earth didn't you say???!!!

[Guest alex]

Oh I see, the question I already answered before you asked me to answer it again. Nice one Alex.... Type slower mate.

Pure jibberish man.

[U_V 0]

Just smacks of zero integrity and gives the lie to his cringeworthy patter about how much he loves the club imo.

 

Devil's advocate - He was also indirectly accused of being a puppet of the club. Whether true or not, tell me you wouldn't be upset and respond in kind to an accusation that you lacked any professional integrity sent to over a thousand people and copied on every NUFC forum. The fact that he responded in a similarly petulant way to the email gives me hope that he's more upset by a false accusation than annoyed he's been found out.

 

Of course we have to be realistic in how far the local press are going to push the club in their criticism, but saying they are the club's lapdogs based on this blogpiece is OTT. If he'd come out with a hatchet job on this meeting, he certainly wouldn't have been invited along to future ones, however he now has quotes from the horses mouth which he can hold Llambias to or use in the future if the club subsequently go against or contradict anything said at these meetings. Whether he chooses to do this is another matter of course.

 

NUSC are coming at it from a different angle, and as the voice of the customer can afford to be a bit more up front in their criticism, but they still have to learn how to play the game.

[Guest alex]

I was specifically on about the discrepancy between what NUSC said occurred in the meeting and what he focussed on in his piece for the newspaper about it instead (as HF pointed out). The blog's a different matter.

Edited March 4, 2009 by alex

[U_V 0]

I dont see the email as shooting us in the foot at all, in fact quite the opposite.

we learn from our mistakes that much is true.

Or maybe not. I can understand how the NUSC committee might not have realised how the email would be taken, even if I personally think it was naive, but if you don't now see the negative way in which that email has been perceived even from supporters of NUSC and see that it has done more harm than good, then there's not much hope I'm afraid.