BBC 5live article about the Albion, just started

[Not Andy Naylor]

Most of this thread is complete nonsense I'm afraid. The BBC are hardly still talking about it. They are talking about it here because it's a Championship preview. It's hardly been mentioned on any of their national output since Gus' appeal. They have picked a few interesting clubs to talk about - Brighton is clearly an obvious choice considering what has gone on. As part of that preview it's completely valid to talk about what on earth has gone on at the club in the summer break, because, quite frankly - it's ludicrous and hasn't been seen in football before. Every single publication will reference and talk about what's gone on as part of a preview.

Whoever said it's lazy journalism is burying their head in the sand a bit. It's nothing of the sort. All this stuff happened 6 weeks ago, nothing has come out... any journo worth their salt will be trying to get the first scoop as to what happened, whether that's in a written interview (see Sam Wallace + other phone interviews with gus), TV (Gus getting sacked on air) or radio (Andrea last night). Therefore it's journalism. Lazy journalism would be to ignore what has gone on. Let's face it, as fans we want to know what has gone on. If and when it does, it will be a massive talking point.

The club would have been very stupid to put anyone up for interview if they thought that these questions would not have been asked. It's probably why they put up Andrea, who has a highly sentient thought process and can understand and deflect these questions.

I agree the majority of the short interview was focused on what has gone on. But then the segment with Sean Derry spoke about players who didn't want to be at QPR. I bet they didn't want that either.

As for suggesting anything, there was nothing directly said that can be bought up as libel - especially as Steve Claridge gave an insight as to why the board may have taken this route, alongside the very clear repeated statements of we don't actually know. And they don't. None of them. Neither do we. That's why they were trying to find out.

As a lazy journalist myself, I agree 100 percent with this. "Lazy journalism" is an over-used accusation, and is in itself lazy and often unthinking. "Lazy" would be accepting at face value everything put out by the club without applying the first rule of journalism, which is to ask yourself: 'Why is this ******* lying to me?'

 

[Rookie]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b037j8yz

From 24 minutes in

Don't say much though

 

[B.W.]

Totally agree with this. Why knock the presenters for asking questions to which WE all want to know the answers? And if we want to know, so will other listeners.

Because:

A) they obviously were NOT going to get an answer; and;
B) they were supposed to be previewing the new season.

Other than that, brilliant by the BBC!

Oh, and I really don't want Gus' rep to fall further than it has. I want to hear about our club, and prospects for new season.

 

[Icy Gull]

I have listened to Steve Claridge quite a few times on Radio 5 Live when we have been playing and I think it's fair to say he has been a fan of the way we play in the last couple of years, loads of compliments. I like him!

 

[Hyperion]

It was a firetrap that interview. The 5 Live presenters were obviously hell bent on talking about one thing and one thing only. So, why get Orlandi for an interview then? They want to try and find answers to the Poyet sacking but on that basis they may as well interviewed the dustman. Why the **** would they think they would get anything of substance out of Andreas? So, yes it's lazy journalism.

 

[Seagull over Canaryland]

It was a firetrap that interview. The 5 Live presenters were obviously hell bent on talking about one thing and one thing only. So, why get Orlandi for an interview then? They want to try and find answers to the Poyet sacking but on that basis they may as well interviewed the dustman. Why the **** would they think they would get anything of substance out of Andreas? So, yes it's lazy journalism.

There are plenty of highly respected sports journalists around and clearly there is a story we would all be curious to know more about - but the Club has made its position clear that it is a confidential matter which not only protects its own position but also respects Gus's position too. Particularly as there was potential for an ongoing legal process.

So rather than the BBC asking a player who would hardly be in the know about the details of Gus's sacking (and of course Orlandi is too intelligent to fall for that) it would be a bit more interesting if they ask the same questions of Gus. I look forward to that happening. It seems to me that he has just as many questions to answer as the Club and his claim on live TV (while good for the BBC) that he did not know he had been sacked is merely secondary to the main issues i.e. what were breaches of contract that were deemed gross misconduct, even after internal appeal? If Gus then chooses to say 'no comment' - or speak openly about the matter that's up to him.

It will be very interesting to see how Gus is handled as a BBC pundit on MoTD. Plus it will be interesting to hear him comment on Palace games.....

 

[Brightonfan1983]

Actually Claridge quite often sticks up for the Albion, I don't see where this reputation for being anti-Albion comes from. He was certainly supporting the club when we sacked Gus and he often made complimentary comments regarding our style on the FLS.

And he ran his sodding socks off for us against WH a few years ago. I have total respect for him.

 

[luge]

There are plenty of highly respected sports journalists around and clearly there is a story we would all be curious to know more about - but the Club has made its position clear that it is a confidential matter which not only protects its own position but also respects Gus's position too. Particularly as there was potential for an ongoing legal process.

So rather than the BBC asking a player who would hardly be in the know about the details of Gus's sacking (and of course Orlandi is too intelligent to fall for that) it would be a bit more interesting if they ask the same questions of Gus. I look forward to that happening. It seems to me that he has just as many questions to answer as the Club and his claim on live TV (while good for the BBC) that he did not know he had been sacked is merely secondary to the main issues i.e. what were breaches of contract that were deemed gross misconduct, even after internal appeal? If Gus then chooses to say 'no comment' - or speak openly about the matter that's up to him.

It will be very interesting to see how Gus is handled as a BBC pundit on MoTD. Plus it will be interesting to hear him comment on Palace games.....

Well they did ask Gus. When he got sacked. Live on TV. He couldn't say anything then. Orlandi didn't say anything last night (incidentally, he pretty much insinuated that he did know but couldn't speak for legal reasons). They haven't asked Gus again because he has not featured on a show. He did, however give press interviews a couple of weeks back.

Therefore the BBC, and any other journos who are asking those ITK about this situation, are doing what is expected of them. Asking the questions of the people who know about the situation, regardless of the club's position.

I'm confident that Gus may well be asked again on MOTD. The BBC have done this before - see Harry Redknapp and the England manager job in 2012 + various others.

I fail to see why people get up in arms about journalists asking questions to people involved in any situation. It's one of the major reasons why we have an open, free democracy (although a sports story isn't exactly the kernel of that, obviously. But the principles remain the same).

For the record I believe that the Club's current stance is correct. It's a legal matter and that process should also be respected for all parties. But they cannot (and neither should any die hard fans) expect to not allow any questioning of that stance, nor should they assume that people aren't going to try and find out about it.

 

[Berty23]

Poyet is now a bbc pundit. Either

A) they ask him why he was sacked and he answers and they know
B) they ask he does not answer which is what everyone may have agreed

Either way no need to ask players.

 

[Hyperion]

So, even though the club made it perfectly clear that they, or anyone else from the club would be commenting on the Poyet thing, and it also being bloody obvious that nobody can for legal reasons, the BBC felt it was still ok to ask it then? That being on top of Andreas probably being asked for an chat on air for completely different reasons

 

[Icy Gull]

So, even though the club made it perfectly clear that they, or anyone else from the club would be commenting on the Poyet thing, and it also being bloody obvious that nobody can for legal reasons, the BBC felt it was still ok to ask it then? That being on top of Andreas probably being asked for an chat on air for completely different reasons

Did I imagine that I saw somewhere that Orlandi had some sort of legal training in Spain? If so he was definitely the right Albion player to be on there!

 

[Sweeney Todd]

Orlandi said that he doubted that anyone connected with the Albion planted the excrement, because Albion people are well-educated.

Make of that what you will.

 

[luge]

So, even though the club made it perfectly clear that they, or anyone else from the club would be commenting on the Poyet thing, and it also being bloody obvious that nobody can for legal reasons, the BBC felt it was still ok to ask it then? That being on top of Andreas probably being asked for an chat on air for completely different reasons

Lots of organisations say they won't comment for various reasons. If no-one ever asked them questions then hardly anything would ever get found out. The BBC have hardly broken any rules or contravened anything.

There is little to no chance that Paul Camillin would have not realised that these questions would have been asked. Andrea dealt with them all adequately - he looked good, the club looked good, message was delivered. Whats the problem?

Those who shut up shop and don't offer anyone up, or never answer relevant questions look stupid. It's why Bloom had a video interview on the website (albeit it was a BHAFC job, but at least difficult questions were asked). The club will look so much better allowing questions to be asked - even if the line remains the same.

 

[Seagull over Canaryland]

So in the light of tonight's revelations by Tony Bloom at the fans forum I refer the learned gentleman back to my post #46 - i.e. why weren't journalists asking the questions of Gus himself, rather than a cheap shot at a third party (Orlandi)? Why weren't they seeking Gus out? Hardly a shining example of investigative journalism.

The Club has had a huge amount of flak over the last 3 months but as suggested earlier I think Gus has plenty of questions to answer himself and I hope the BBC will put those to him soon. I imagine the Club will be very interested to hear what he has to say.

As suggested on another thread I could not understand why Gus was less than animated on the touchline during the 2nd leg of the play-offs. Why was he not trying to inspire the players for that crucial last 20 minutes? Tonights information suggests his mind was elsewhere. As a fan I would like Mr Poyet to look 26000 Albion fans in the face and give us some honest answers. The journalist who pins him down for that will get my vote.

 

[luge]

So in the light of tonight's revelations by Tony Bloom at the fans forum I refer the learned gentleman back to my post #46 - i.e. why weren't journalists asking the questions of Gus himself, rather than a cheap shot at a third party (Orlandi)? Why weren't they seeking Gus out? Hardly a shining example of investigative journalism.

Probably because he clearly won't put himself up for interview about Brighton as a main topic! Looks like he's happy to do TV punditry. Interestingly I notice no-one is complaining that ITV didn't quiz him. I suspect that journo's have asked him, but he's given nothing up

The Club has had a huge amount of flak over the last 3 months but as suggested earlier I think Gus has plenty of questions to answer himself and I hope the BBC will put those to him soon. I imagine the Club will be very interested to hear what he has to say.

As would we all. Let's wait and see. I wouldn't read too much into him being a MOTD pundit BTW. He'll be appearing on everything, including Sky.

As suggested on another thread I could not understand why Gus was less than animated on the touchline during the 2nd leg of the play-offs. Why was he not trying to inspire the players for that crucial last 20 minutes? Tonights information suggests his mind was elsewhere. As a fan I would like Mr Poyet to look 26000 Albion fans in the face and give us some honest answers. The journalist who pins him down for that will get my vote.

We can all agree on this.

If I come across all anti - club...I'm not. I just fail to see how anyone can expect journalists not to do their jobs, and claim that because people ask questions - they are automatically biased against the club. There was nothing uber critical about last night's broadcast, just four men musing about what could have gone on.

I am aware that this last statement can be repeated for every single club around the country.

It will all come out in the wash, as they say.

 

[drew]

As a lazy journalist myself, I agree 100 percent with this. "Lazy journalism" is an over-used accusation, and is in itself lazy and often unthinking. "Lazy" would be accepting at face value everything put out by the club without applying the first rule of journalism, which is to ask yourself: 'Why is this ******* lying to me?'

Equally, why would a journalist believe everything a sacked manager would tell them!!!!