Maybe start redressing that balance by not getting panties bunched about an irrelevant mouthpiece not getting treated like an untouchable deity.
-
Maybe we wont ever redress that balance if we let clubs think it's okay for them to get their panties bunched and throw around their tantrum toys rather than being accountable to the wider viewing public.
-
I think there's a discussion to be had, but it seems to have largely devolved into "I like him" v "I don't like him"
-
I didn't see the plot twist of Tricky supporting the MSM.
-
I'm probably always going to fall on the side of freedom of speech and legitimate comment to provide scrutiny. Now of course that comes with a level of responsibility and is not freedom from consequences. I think a lot more powerful here would be the attitude "who cares what Gary Neville (or any other outside observer) thinks".
Not looking like a massive bully/baby. It's not a look I want for a
communityinstitution that I care about. -
Microsoft Messenger?
-
Now that would be a news story.
-
No one is in any way impacting Gary Neville's freedom of speech or his right to say whatever he wants to whoever he wants about whoever he wants. We just don't have to host him while he's doing it.
I believe that is a position with which you have previously not just expressed sympathy, but also action.
-
Sort of. We are also dictating to our broadcast partner how they can cover the game.
If I charged you to post your opinions, you would reasonably be more annoyed if I let you have your opinions, but not on the platform here. Still, someone less able to express your argument could come and post on your behalf.
-
Which is exactly what Ferguson did at United for 10 years, where was Neville fighting for freedom of the press then.
What’s good for the goose…
-
Not good though. I promise you that I never endorsed that behaviour. Quite the opposite. If you didn't, you've just done a hypocrisy.
It's not a players job to scrutinise a clubs behaviour. It is a professional commentators'. Its worrying that one would have to point out that distinction. Vlad is winning. Critical thought is dying. False equivalence rules the day.
-
See this is where we disagree, you seem to think that Neville is a professional commentator, he’s about 999 on my list of “media pundits” who I would trust for an impartial view on the state of the game, still that’s about 1000 places above Don Goodman whose commentary I had the misfortune to stumble across on a EFL game the other day…
-
What's what you think got to do with anything? He is literally employed for pecuniary gain as a broadcaster to give his opinion.
It's the very definition of "professional commentator". I can't help you if you don't understand words.
-
I refer you to my comments on the other thread. I have a full understanding of words thank you. You may want to ask yourself the same.
-
Well. I do think that Neville is a professional commentator. Because by definition he is.
You are arguing that no principle of legitimate comment should exist, or be immune from persecution, if you cheer the particular example.
-
Blimey. Why use one thread when two threads will do?
