Harty SOCKS it to the NSC LICKERS (& Hyypia) in the Herald this week

[Spun Cuppa]

Job done

 

[chimneys]

I thought you had set up a shell company which actually owned NSC to protect yourself from this sort of thing. There used to be a note right at the bottom of the home page - something like "so and so ltd trading as NSC" (I've forgotten the actual details), but it disappeared after one of the upgrades.

You naïve (and not to mention ungrateful) fool!!

 

[rusty redeyes]

Speaking of which, I hear the Amex suit who performed the opening did a bit of history rewriting. Anyone got any details?

Well this is the mesasage I received early Sat in relation to the opening ceremony -
"I hear at the Training Ground opening Ceremony on Friday that speeches were based around Tony Bloom's vision with the American Express sponsorship deal with both the club and community scheme. Hang on a minute - I thought the deal was done by Dick Knight and Peter Godfrey between 2008 and 2009. Or is the club trying to airbrush Dick out of the past?"

Credit where credit is due perhaps?

 

[rippleman]

Just a thought but maybe this kind of situation could be avoided if Bozza didn't post anything from Barber here?

eg

Paul Barber took time to read the Albion losing one million a month? thread and responded to me with some points on various aspects raised. I'm posting them in a separate thread so they get the attention they deserve.

Why is Barber responding to a thread on NSC through Bozza? If Barber has anything he wants to say to the fans then he could make an account and post just like the rest of us. Not hard is it?

That would certainly avoid the spurious accusations being levelled at Bozza and the mods.

 

[Black Rod]

Just a thought but maybe this kind of situation could be avoided if Bozza didn't post anything from Barber here?

eg

Paul Barber took time to read the Albion losing one million a month? thread and responded to me with some points on various aspects raised. I'm posting them in a separate thread so they get the attention they deserve.

Why is Barber responding to a thread on NSC through Bozza? If Barber has anything he wants to say to the fans then he could make an account and post just like the rest of us. Not hard is it?

That would certainly avoid the spurious accusations being levelled at Bozza and the mods.

Very much this. Unless of course there is a certain element of "look at me, Paul Barber speaks to me, I'm important and know lots of what is going on at the club" behind it which I doubt is the reason

 

[hans kraay fan club]

Just a thought but maybe this kind of situation could be avoided if Bozza didn't post anything from Barber here?

eg

Paul Barber took time to read the Albion losing one million a month? thread and responded to me with some points on various aspects raised. I'm posting them in a separate thread so they get the attention they deserve.

Why is Barber responding to a thread on NSC through Bozza? If Barber has anything he wants to say to the fans then he could make an account and post just like the rest of us. Not hard is it?

That would certainly avoid the spurious accusations being levelled at Bozza and the mods.

Very much this. Unless of course there is a certain element of "look at me, Paul Barber speaks to me, I'm important and know lots of what is going on at the club" behind it which I doubt is the reason

Very much NOT this. Barber posting on here would be a TERRIBLE idea. Truly a dreadful idea. No possible good could come from the binfests that would ensue every time we didn't win 5-0. Look how Palace's board embarass themselves on the BBS.

If he wished to answer questions via the Ask The Club forum, I could see that working - but even then he'd be better doing it through insider.

As it is he addresses a range of posts via Bozza. this seems way, way more sensible than getting drawn into slanging matches he can't possibly win, and wasting hours in here like the rest of us.

 

[The Fifth Column]

I may be slightly more conservative than some but for that I make no apology - it's my name that sits behind NSC. If you are happy to gamble with your own finances and the home of your children etc then go and set up your own site and allow all manner of potentially libellous content to be written. It's very easy to be reckless if you don't believe there is any risk to yourself.

Goodness me Bozza, this argument of yours regarding your entire lifes finances being at risk because of something someone might post on NSC is getting rather tiresome! You make it sound like there are hundreds of poor website/internet forum owners getting regularly sued or shut down and bankrupted due to the actions of its users. There are hundreds if thousands of websites like NSC with millions of posts being made on them daily yet I dont recall seeing regular reports of people such as yourself being dragged through the courts and being made penniless and homeless and unable to provide for their children! Im not saying it doesnt happen but it isnt nearly as much of a risk as you make it out to be. I know its your site and you take the burden of all the risk but I think your house and finances are safe barring the most serious and sustained abuse which would have to continue unchecked for weeks if not months for NSC to pose any risk to you.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

Goodness me Bozza, this argument of yours regarding your entire lifes finances being at risk because of something someone might post on NSC is getting rather tiresome! You make it sound like there are hundreds of poor website/internet forum owners getting regularly sued or shut down and bankrupted due to the actions of its users. There are hundreds if thousands of websites like NSC with millions of posts being made on them daily yet I dont recall seeing regular reports of people such as yourself being dragged through the courts and being made penniless and homeless and unable to provide for their children! Im not saying it doesnt happen but it isnt nearly as much of a risk as you make it out to be. I know its your site and you take the burden of all the risk but I think your house and finances are safe barring the most serious and sustained abuse which would have to continue unchecked for weeks if not months for NSC to pose any risk to you.

The risks might be tiny, or very real (I've no idea) - but regardless of how small they are, they are Bozza's risks. Who the hell are you, or any of us, to tell him what risks he should be prepared to take?

And its not just financial risks - its the ballache of dealing with lawyer's letters, legal threats, threats of violence , and general unnecessary bullshit, that would all be avoided if everyone took responsibility for their own actions.

 

[flying high]

I think that John Campbell took Harty to court over an article in Gulls Eyes but it doesnt seem to have cost him much. This forum is self moderated by the 'holier than thou' brigade so not much liklehood of that happening to Bozza. Harty article this week should be interesting. Before anybody else suggests it I am not BG.

 

[The Fifth Column]

The risks might be tiny, or very real (I've no idea) - but regardless of how small they are, they are Bozza's risks. Who the hell are you, or any of us, to tell him what risks he should be prepared to take?

And its not just financial risks - its the ballache of dealing with lawyer's letters, legal threats, threats of violence , and general unnecessary bullshit, that would all be avoided if everyone took responsibility for their own actions.

Im not telling him what risks to take at all I'm just saying that in my opinion his oft used argument that his entire livelihood is at risk due to what someone might post on here is somewhat melodramatic and unrealistic. Hey its his site, if something is posted that he doesnt like just delete it and ban the poster, I don't see the need for some huge debate about it.

 

[Lincoln Imp]

Well this is the mesasage I received early Sat in relation to the opening ceremony -
"I hear at the Training Ground opening Ceremony on Friday that speeches were based around Tony Bloom's vision with the American Express sponsorship deal with both the club and community scheme. Hang on a minute - I thought the deal was done by Dick Knight and Peter Godfrey between 2008 and 2009. Or is the club trying to airbrush Dick out of the past?"

Credit where credit is due perhaps?

By 2008 the club had appointed an agent - Bonhams I think - to find potential naming rights sponsors. They didn't get on very well and, independently of their efforts, Dick Knight got the chance to present a pitch to Peter Godfrey of American Express. It was very much a freelance effort on DK's part. He was concerned about security and very few people knew about it at the time. He was aware that Amex didn't really do sports sponsorship and his submission was heavily, perhaps almost exclusively, based on the Albion's community activities. Accompanied by Martin Perry, he met Peter Godfrey in London in the summer of 2008.

Against all the odds, the presentation was successful.

However, the financial crisis was starting to bite and, although AMEX itself was rock solid, the banking sector in America was under severe pressure and federal support was in the air. People in the industry were being made redundant. Amex took the view that announcing a large sponsorship deal with an English third tier soccer team that few people there had even heard of wouldn't be good PR.

They decided to put the deal on hold and it was kept on the shelf until 2010. By this time Tony Bloom was chairman and one imagines that he was involved in finalising the details. He certainly led the announcement of the sponsorship at the Amex site.

It is doubtful that there would have been a stadium for Amex to sponsor in 2010 if it hadn't been for Tony Bloom. However, there wouldn't have been an Amex deal if it hadn't been for Dick Knight. In spite of this, the Amex speaker at the opening of the training ground apparently (I wasn't there) said, in so many words, that "Tony came to us in 2010 with a concept based on the Albion's great work in the community. What a salesman!".

DK, who made the original contact, prepared the pitch and sold the concept to Amex, was airbrushed from the narrative. If anyone from the club was involved in briefing the Amex brass on what to say then, well... I leave it to others to comment.

 

[Garage_Doors]

I think that John Campbell took Harty to court over an article in Gulls Eyes but it doesnt seem to have cost him much. This forum is self moderated by the 'holier than thou' brigade so not much liklehood of that happening to Bozza. Harty article this week should be interesting. Before anybody else suggests it I am not BG.

Ye protest too much.

 

[The Large One]

I think that John Campbell took Harty to court over an article in Gulls Eyes but it doesnt seem to have cost him much. This forum is self moderated by the 'holier than thou' brigade so not much liklehood of that happening to Bozza. Harty article this week should be interesting.

Dudley Sizen, Ray Bloom and John Campbell did take Gull's Eye to court over what was then - in court, at least - an unfounded allegation.

The sum GE put out that it cost them was £6,000. The Gull's Eye people didn't have £6,000 (about the equivalent of about £10,000 now) at the time, and it had a bigger effect than merely the financial cost on Harty, so to spuriously dismiss it as 'it doesn't seem to have cost him much' is an utterly absurd fabrication.

Before anybody else suggests it I am not BG.

I'm satisfied you're not BG; even he would struggle to match that shite you've posted.

 

[Lord Bracknell]

Goodness me Bozza, this argument of yours regarding your entire lifes finances being at risk because of something someone might post on NSC is getting rather tiresome! You make it sound like there are hundreds of poor website/internet forum owners getting regularly sued or shut down and bankrupted due to the actions of its users. There are hundreds if thousands of websites like NSC with millions of posts being made on them daily yet I dont recall seeing regular reports of people such as yourself being dragged through the courts and being made penniless and homeless and unable to provide for their children! Im not saying it doesnt happen but it isnt nearly as much of a risk as you make it out to be. I know its your site and you take the burden of all the risk but I think your house and finances are safe barring the most serious and sustained abuse which would have to continue unchecked for weeks if not months for NSC to pose any risk to you.

I could tell you a tale of an NSC moderator being threatened with legal action (criminal, not civil) for failing to remove a post that upset someone in authority. The case was under police investigation for months, with the Crown Prosecution Service being pressed by the Chief Executive of a local authority to get the matter before the courts. The potential punishment wasn't a fine, btw. It was imprisonment.

 

[The Fifth Column]

I could tell you a tale of an NSC moderator being threatened with legal action (criminal, not civil) for failing to remove a post that upset someone in authority. The case was under police investigation for months, with the Crown Prosecution Service being pressed by the Chief Executive of a local authority to get the matter before the courts. The potential punishment wasn't a fine, btw. It was imprisonment.

So was the moderator ever arrested and interviewed? I ask this because if it was a criminal case what was the offence being investigated? If the moderator was being accused of a criminal matter they would require to be interviewed under caution, usually following arrest or occasionally by voluntarily attending the police station. I presume you mention the potential punishment for effect since they are only a guideline for the most serious examples of any given offence, they are rarely enforced to their maximum limit and since the courts are routinely not imprisoning even prolific thieves, sex offenders and other such criminals I wouldnt be remotely concerned about the potential for imprisonment.

If the moderator was never officially interviewed under caution i would suggest the tale you refer to was just a threat of legal action and just that with the person/plaintiff pushing for action trying to influence certain decisions. Also being a chief executive of a local authority would give you no greater sway with the CPS than you or I have, the CPS make decisions on the weight of evidence not what job you have.

 

[GT49er]

Very much NOT this. Barber posting on here would be a TERRIBLE idea. Truly a dreadful idea. No possible good could come from the binfests that would ensue every time we didn't win 5-0. Look how Palace's board embarass themselves on the BBS.

If he wished to answer questions via the Ask The Club forum, I could see that working - but even then he'd be better doing it through insider.

As it is he addresses a range of posts via Bozza. this seems way, way more sensible than getting drawn into slanging matches he can't possibly win, and wasting hours in here like the rest of us.

I can see both sides here - Barber 'posting' through Bozza does make it look as if Bozza is acting as a mouthpiece of the club - but I can also see the negative potential of PB getting involved in a slugfest with one or two I could name (but won't!) on here.

Perhaps it could be done along the lines of, 'in response to this question, PB issued the following statement" or something like that.

 

[El Presidente]

Also being a chief executive of a local authority would give you no greater sway with the CPS than you or I have, the CPS make decisions on the weight of evidence not what job you have.

Didn't a former chief executive of a football club not a million miles away from The Amex, who also had a position in relation to the local police, leverage his status to have an Albion fan jailed for threatening behaviour, which seemed far in excess of the tariff for such a misdemeanor?

 

[The Fifth Column]

I can see both sides here - Barber 'posting' through Bozza does make it look as if Bozza is acting as a mouthpiece of the club - but I can also see the negative potential of PB getting involved in a slugfest with one or two I could name (but won't!) on here.

Perhaps it could be done along the lines of, 'in response to this question, PB issued the following statement" or something like that.

God yes, can you imagine if Paul Barber posted on here in response to us lot? You only have to look at Palaces train wreck BBS and the posts where their board members start spouting off to see what a bad idea that is.

 

[The Fifth Column]

Didn't a former chief executive of a football club not a million miles away from The Amex, who also had a position in relation to the local police, leverage his status to have an Albion fan jailed for threatening behaviour, which seemed far in excess of the tariff for such a misdemeanor?

I have no doubts such things do happen on occasion, however as someone that works in that system I have faith that the vast majority of cases are treated on their merits and based on the evidence alone without being influenced by corrupt individuals.

 

[daveyboy1973]

Very much this. Unless of course there is a certain element of "look at me, Paul Barber speaks to me, I'm important and know lots of what is going on at the club" behind it which I doubt is the reason

Oh dear wait for the mafia