shade Posted 23 February 2015 Share Posted 23 February 2015 Nigel Pearson: "I don't comment on speculation or deals that aren't finalised" Ian Stringer: "Any truth in the rumour about....." every. single. week. That's idiotic and disrespectful. Someone is granting you an interview, has told you before they won't discuss something, and you say "I've got to ask". No you don't, moron. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davieG Posted 23 February 2015 Share Posted 23 February 2015 So 11 pages on and 400 replies has anyone changed their opinion on this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wurmer Posted 23 February 2015 Share Posted 23 February 2015 So 11 pages on and 400 replies has anyone changed their opinion on this? Nah, him and Pearson are both cocks when it comes to media interviews. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Doctor Posted 23 February 2015 Share Posted 23 February 2015 Stringer may not be professional but I don t get why Pearson is excused. Someone in his position should be smart enough to deal with a two bit journalist. Instead he chooses to ignore him which in my opinion is to the detriment of the fans. It's not to the detriment of the fans though - Pearson talks to MOTD and the BBC, to Sky, to papers - just not to Stringer. Fans can see what he has to say, the only one it's to the detriment of is Stringer. Now, answer me this honestly - if you were manager of a company and you had an external company looking for your business, but the rep they sent was crude and grossly unprofessional, would you work with them or would you take your business elsewhere? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freeman's Wharfer Posted 2 March 2015 Share Posted 2 March 2015 Just got round to listening to the anniversary 'Boot Room' programme that BBC Radio Leicester did and, I have to say, I think that (silly 'banterous' quips about the former pros aside) this is something that Stringer does fairly well. Well worth a listen. However. Yet again, Stringer let himself down. Nice interview with O'Neill about the good old days and then he pops in a question "would you ever consider returning to manage The Foxes?". O'Neill was quite taken aback by the question having been invited on to talk about former glories and describes the question as 'brutal' but manages to swerve it and in a later response back Pearson. I noticed on the BBC Sport pages there was an article along the lines of 'Pearson Backed By O'Neill' and you just know that had O'Neill not dodged the question it would have been Stringer's little scoop/exclusive 'O'Neill Wants Leicester Return'. I don't know if he thinks about the consequences of his questions (he had enough time to prepare them before the show so should have done) but imagine the extra pressure that would put on Pearson's job if O'Neill hadn't refused to answer his question. On here it'd be all "O'Neill wants to come back let's get rid" and it just changes the whole dynamic of things amongst the audience. It was just a nice little look back at a great time for the club but yet again (through maliciousness or stupidity I can't be sure) Stringer tries to undermine Pearson with a question completely unrelated to the subject at hand. If he even registered with O'Neill, there might be another manager unwilling to answer his 'brutal' questions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
red5 Posted 2 March 2015 Share Posted 2 March 2015 Just got round to listening to the anniversary 'Boot Room' programme that BBC Radio Leicester did and, I have to say, I think that (silly 'banterous' quips about the former pros aside) this is something that Stringer does fairly well. Well worth a listen. However. Yet again, Stringer let himself down. Nice interview with O'Neill about the good old days and then he pops in a question "would you ever consider returning to manage The Foxes?". O'Neill was quite taken aback by the question having been invited on to talk about former glories and describes the question as 'brutal' but manages to swerve it and in a later response back Pearson. I noticed on the BBC Sport pages there was an article along the lines of 'Pearson Backed By O'Neill' and you just know that had O'Neill not dodged the question it would have been Stringer's little scoop/exclusive 'O'Neill Wants Leicester Return'. I don't know if he thinks about the consequences of his questions (he had enough time to prepare them before the show so should have done) but imagine the extra pressure that would put on Pearson's job if O'Neill hadn't refused to answer his question. On here it'd be all "O'Neill wants to come back let's get rid" and it just changes the whole dynamic of things amongst the audience. It was just a nice little look back at a great time for the club but yet again (through maliciousness or stupidity I can't be sure) Stringer tries to undermine Pearson with a question completely unrelated to the subject at hand. If he even registered with O'Neill, there might be another manager unwilling to answer his 'brutal' questions. O'Neill backed Pearson because of what happened when Pearson was sacked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoboFox Posted 3 March 2015 Share Posted 3 March 2015 However. Yet again, Stringer let himself down. Nice interview with O'Neill about the good old days and then he pops in a question "would you ever consider returning to manage The Foxes?". O'Neill was quite taken aback by the question having been invited on to talk about former glories and describes the question as 'brutal' but manages to swerve it and in a later response back Pearson. I have to say, on the whole I really enjoyed the show but that moment was cringeworthy. Stringer knew he wouldn't get a straight answer out of O'Neill, yet asked anyway. You can imagine Martin hanging up the line after the chat and thinking to himself "I gave up my own time for the interview, and he throws something like that at me?" It's those sort of questions that break down relationships between people associated with our football club and Radio Leicester. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philce Posted 3 March 2015 Share Posted 3 March 2015 However. Yet again, Stringer let himself down. Nice interview with O'Neill about the good old days and then he pops in a question "would you ever consider returning to manage The Foxes?". O'Neill was quite taken aback by the question having been invited on to talk about former glories and describes the question as 'brutal' but manages to swerve it and in a later response back Pearson. It was cringe worthy when he asked that question, and I'd fully understand if O'Neill slammed the phone down. If O'Neill wanted to come back he'd have done it already, we're lead to believe that he had the chance. I know its the question that most fans, maybe jokingly, would like to ask him, but I suppose its the timing of it that makes Stringer more of a cock for actually asking it, I'm sure I heard Elliott in the background wincing when he asked it. Sometimes journalists do have to be blunt and ask the obvious questions, but I feel in situations like this some discretion needs to be used. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
veezeeblue Posted 4 March 2015 Share Posted 4 March 2015 This twat is why I dont give interviews to RL anymore Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freeman's Wharfer Posted 4 March 2015 Share Posted 4 March 2015 Ian Stringer @StringerSport 17m17 minutes ago At last somebody said it - http://dailym.ai/1EhIj3w - well done @neilashton_ #TwitterTrollsOUT Neil Ashton just wrote a piece about the abuse he's received through Twitter when writing about match reports or opinion pieces and Mr Stringer has just Tweeted the above! The arrogance of the man is astounding. I think Ashton taking abuse for giving his opinion as a sports writer is rather different to Stringer taking abuse for the way he's conducted himself this season. Of course, I'm sure anyone who has criticised Stringer this season is a '#TwitterTroll' in his mind... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueharmie Posted 4 March 2015 Share Posted 4 March 2015 Apprentice reject. Life reject. Reject broadcaster. ****. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoneDog Posted 4 March 2015 Share Posted 4 March 2015 What's that cheesy music they have on? It's some electronic sound with a guitar being twanged. Sounds like it's out of some 80's movie but I can't think what it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eddy Kellys Heroes Posted 5 March 2015 Share Posted 5 March 2015 Someone at the BBC must be bumming Stringer? I used to like him but he's turned into a total ****wit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MC Prussian Posted 5 March 2015 Share Posted 5 March 2015 Who else thinks that the deployment of the current regular intro during the phone-in is essentially just a decoy in order to reduce the talking time on air? First of all, the news eat away about five minutes of the hour at his disposal, but since this season (I think), the intro reduces it by another roughly five minutes. A large portion of that intro is spent with no talking at all, just a rehash of Stringer's matchday commentary. I find that approach rather strange. I thought you'd want to maximize your time on air in order to provide a healthy ground for discussion - but here's Stringer loving Stringer with that intro and further taking away options for fans to connect to the program directly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arkie Bennett Posted 5 March 2015 Share Posted 5 March 2015 Who else thinks that the deployment of the current regular intro during the phone-in is essentially just a decoy in order to reduce the talking time on air? First of all, the news eat away about five minutes of the hour at his disposal, but since this season (I think), the intro reduces it by another roughly five minutes. A large portion of that intro is spent with no talking at all, just a rehash of Stringer's matchday commentary. I find that approach rather strange. I thought you'd want to maximize your time on air in order to provide a healthy ground for discussion - but here's Stringer loving Stringer with that intro and further taking away options for fans to connect to the program directly. The bits where he witters on about crisp packets floating across the pitch and peoples' hats? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davieG Posted 5 March 2015 Share Posted 5 March 2015 Who else thinks that the deployment of the current regular intro during the phone-in is essentially just a decoy in order to reduce the talking time on air? First of all, the news eat away about five minutes of the hour at his disposal, but since this season (I think), the intro reduces it by another roughly five minutes. A large portion of that intro is spent with no talking at all, just a rehash of Stringer's matchday commentary. I find that approach rather strange. I thought you'd want to maximize your time on air in order to provide a healthy ground for discussion - but here's Stringer loving Stringer with that intro and further taking away options for fans to connect to the program directly. As I've said in another post a lot of it is down to RL policy. Their morning show used to be a free for all phone in where anyone could strike up a conversation on any subject now they have set subjects that you can only talk about, generally ones they believe will give them the biggest audience. Whether that's working I don't know but it led to a lot of complaints when it changed. I'm guessing a similar approach is happening to the phone in and that's why stringer comes up with these outrageous generally negative requests Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cc_star Posted 5 March 2015 Share Posted 5 March 2015 I can't believe that under threat of imprisonment I'm forced, by the State, to contribute an amount to this guy's salary And with the wagon circled by RL, he's completely unaccountable for his woeful, unprofessional commentary and his personal agenda-driven other shows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burbage Fox Posted 5 March 2015 Share Posted 5 March 2015 Who else thinks that the deployment of the current regular intro during the phone-in is essentially just a decoy in order to reduce the talking time on air? First of all, the news eat away about five minutes of the hour at his disposal, but since this season (I think), the intro reduces it by another roughly five minutes. A large portion of that intro is spent with no talking at all, just a rehash of Stringer's matchday commentary. I find that approach rather strange. I thought you'd want to maximize your time on air in order to provide a healthy ground for discussion - but here's Stringer loving Stringer with that intro and further taking away options for fans to connect to the program directly. Surely the format and timings of the program is down to the producer not the presenter? The 2nd point could be that in general we all have our opinion on the manager, you could argue that NP is a nightmare to interview and its not in RL interest to always blow smoke up NP arse. I don't really hear the commentary as I attend the games so it makes me wonder if people that slag off stringer don't actually see the games and understand the frustration we have all felt watching a title winning team slump so badly week in week out. In my opinion NP just does not like anyone questioning him in a way he does not like.. NP would fall out with himself in a room on his own and that's no reflection on stringer.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UpTheLeagueFox Posted 5 March 2015 Share Posted 5 March 2015 In my opinion NP just does not like anyone questioning him in a way he does not like. It can't be denied he's not hugely media friendly (yet the likes of Taylor and Holloway were/are) but he doesn't have a problem with the majority of professional journalists going about their business in the right way. In my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MattP Posted 5 March 2015 Share Posted 5 March 2015 I can't believe that under threat of imprisonment I'm forced, by the State, to contribute an amount to this guy's salary And with the wagon circled by RL, he's completely unaccountable for his woeful, unprofessional commentary and his personal agenda-driven other shows. This, this and this. Until the BBC is forced to play by the same rules as the rest we'll have to tolerate morons like this as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pleatout Posted 5 March 2015 Share Posted 5 March 2015 I can't believe that under threat of imprisonment I'm forced, by the State, to contribute an amount to this guy's salary Erm, you're not. You don't have to pay the license fee to listen to the radio. Just dont watch live TV and you don't have to pay anything. Anyway, having got that off my chest I'll move into slag Stringer mode. The Man City game was available on polish satellite TV to anyone with a valid legal subscription but without an english commentary. I was able to avail myself of this sat feed and used some jiggery pokery to sync RL with the tv pictures. Just a note Mr Stringer - I could see what you could see. You "painted" a picture that was so far removed from fact that it was unbelievable. You commentry amounted to "jeez, we're rubbish and they are fantastic" when the evidence before your eyes was clearly to the contrary. You said "city players cant get a touch of the ball" as we were attacking on more than one occasion. It would serve you well to remember some of us are watching AND listening. You seem to delight in defeat, revel in misfortune and gloat when things go wrong. You are no more a fan of LCFC than I am of Florist. I don't want you to overlook poor performances but tell it how it is and not to some personal agenda. Or maybe it's just that you're not very good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoneDog Posted 5 March 2015 Share Posted 5 March 2015 I can't believe that under threat of imprisonment I'm forced, by the State, to contribute an amount to this guy's salary. Right on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swiss_tony Posted 5 March 2015 Share Posted 5 March 2015 i don't like stringer, but then i never liked nev foulger either. i mean it's local radio, what are you expecting woodward and bernstein??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoneDog Posted 5 March 2015 Share Posted 5 March 2015 Erm, you're not. You don't have to pay the license fee to listen to the radio. Just dont watch live TV and you don't have to pay anything. What if I only want to watch Ice Road Truckers and never turn on the BBC on my tv? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pleatout Posted 5 March 2015 Share Posted 5 March 2015 What if I only want to watch Ice Road Truckers and never turn on the BBC on my tv? If you watch it on "catch up" you don't need a license. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.