Why no Pearson interview on radio Leicester

[Vlad the Fox]

Is this dave from Coalville the same dave thats been plaguing 606 in recent weeks repeating the same things every time?

[yorkie1999]

I don't like the way he brings the "fans opinions" into the questioning. "We've had fans saying this and that, what do you say to them?" Firstly, it's not particularly relevant what the fans think, and if it is he should balance it, saying the fans praised a decision if it went well. It always seems to be included in a negative aspect of the game. Also, ask your own questions, ask what YOU saw at the game, not Dave from Coalville.

good point, Pearson must think Leicester is the moaning capital of the world. Which it probably is, but we don't like to admit it...

[ealingfox]

Just sack Stringer ffs. Media types who could do the job to the standard he does it are ten a penny.

They'd have genuine City fans (Stringer is not one) queueing round the block for auditions/interviews to do the job, and most of them would do it for a lot less than Stringer.

This whole debacle is more or less entirely his fault. They would not be missing or losing out on ANYTHING by just cutting the twat loose. Get rid.

[Bayfox]

Pearson ought to go to the Dyche school of media handling. It's something Sean Dyche handles well. He's able to use the media to manage expectations and garner support. Pearson may well be a good leader but he lacks charisma. On the other hand Ian Stringer isn't very good at the interviews, it should be done by one of our ex players imo. I would actually tune in to listen to the post match interview if it was any good.

really?

pearson maybe as monotone as alan smith (the leeds version)

but **** me if he becomes many many pound notes. then shoot me now.

[Collymore]

Maybe RL should hire a female to do the interviews. NP always seemed to get on with Natile Jackson, maybe he'd respond better?

I actually think IS has potential as a commentator. He's got a good radio voice and if he could just bite the bullet and retrain to learn how to describe the action a bit better I think he'd be an asset. Just keep him away from everything else.

[inckley fox]

The trick with interviewing most managers - and Pearson is a case in point - is to stay "in the middle" ie don't get too carried away with questions regardless of result. I was bursting with joy after the ManU game but had to reign it in and be professional. The tone of the questions is, as you say, always something to bear in mind as a reporter.

 

 

 

Correct. There are ways and means of getting the right response from an interviewee. Pearson is very much not a fan of reporters putting their own opinions into questions. A reporter's job is to ask questions - who, what, why, where, when etc - not make statements.

 

 

Again, correct. Some football reporters think they're auditioning for Newsnight or Panorama. They're not. Football is very different to political interviews. The trick is to be polite and respectful (and, crucially, learning from previous interviews with the person) while posing the right questions. If you come across as being amateurish, Pearson will sniff it out straight away and won't stand for it. I know the phrase "I'm just doing my job" often gets bandied about but a key thing is to do the job properly. And if the relationship is difficult, take a step back and find a way to make it better.

 

To be frank, I think manager interviews are extremely poor in general, not only those conducted by Stringer. If there is an art to it, then I've never rarely it in practice. You talk about the 'right response' and 'the trick' to it, but the sort of bland, lazy questioning you tend to see from most interviewers, little of which shows any degree of research, preparation or insight, rarely seems to elicit anything of merit from the manager. That's not to say that your technique isn't the exception to the rule, not at all, and I'm sure there are people who acquire 'the trick', as you put it. But I am curious as to why a football manager should be treated with greater reverence than politicians, writers, civil servants, singers, police chiefs or the general public when people ask for their opinions, or for them to justify their decisions. I remember, for example, some incredibly offensive and disrespectful questions being asked to musicians, and with the exception of Dylan or Lou Reed there's rarely anyone who takes them to task. Are football managers treated more kindly simply because a lot of them lack the articulacy to put their views across properly and have to hide behind impatience and bad temper in order not to look like half-wits? Or is it a culture of arrogance started by the likes of Clough, who were simply better, more witty in being arrogant than a lot of today's managers?

[Foxes_Trust]

I really don't understand where you get the idea from that you can email them and tell them to "sort it out" and you think you will get a desired result.

Fōøtbâłł trusts play a part in certain football clubs, and may play a part in ours one day. But I am ptetty sure that you engaging with them in that manner will be creating a divide between the two parties and will be a reason why you are quite far apart from the club.

In my opinion, you need senior members in your group that can engage. You appear a very wooden organisation and is a reason why there is a lack of closeness.

 

Using e-mail as the initial method of communication was chosen carefully on this occasion, as we wanted to ensure the message was consistent to both parties involved and we wanted to clearly demonstrate that the Trust was not "taking sides" with either party's stance, just wanted them to work together on a resolution.

[UpTheLeagueFox]

To be frank, I think manager interviews are extremely poor in general, not only those conducted by Stringer. If there is an art to it, then I've never rarely it in practice. You talk about the 'right response' and 'the trick' to it, but the sort of bland, lazy questioning you tend to see from most interviewers, little of which shows any degree of research, preparation or insight, rarely seems to elicit anything of merit from the manager. That's not to say that your technique isn't the exception to the rule, not at all, and I'm sure there are people who acquire 'the trick', as you put it. But I am curious as to why a football manager should be treated with greater reverence than politicians, writers, civil servants, singers, police chiefs or the general public when people ask for their opinions, or for them to justify their decisions. I remember, for example, some incredibly offensive and disrespectful questions being asked to musicians, and with the exception of Dylan or Lou Reed there's rarely anyone who takes them to task. Are football managers treated more kindly simply because a lot of them lack the articulacy to put their views across properly and have to hide behind impatience and bad temper in order not to look like half-wits? Or is it a culture of arrogance started by the likes of Clough, who were simply better, more witty in being arrogant than a lot of today's managers?

 

Politicians simply have to appear again and again on radio and TV. Football people don't.

 

A football manager of course should not be treated with greater reverence than politicians etc But when you're working at local or regional level (more so than national), you tend to deal with a lot of the same football people on a regular basis so it helps to have a positive working relationship. That doesn't mean you "go easy" on them but if you have developed an understanding over time and there's a scintilla of respect, when the tough stuff needs addressing, you have got some goodwill in the bank. That's where RL have gone wrong.

 

Actually asking simple questions is often the best way to get good answers. Interviewees such as Pearson can sniff out agenda-driven bollocks from smart-arse reporters straight away.

 

Not every battle with a football club is worth fighting. You have to pick your battles. Sometimes you need favours from a club - a certain interview, some background information about a possible transfer etc - and if you've not been too much of an arse, then you're more likely to get helped. Sometimes the club asks for a favour from you and you store that up for future use.

 

There's a definite trade off to be made between journalists and clubs. Both know it, both do it - it's how the industry generally operates. I found out about Kramaric last summer but was asked to keep the name quiet and in return was given some other bits and pieces of good information. I weighed up the pros and cons and felt it was an acceptable trade off to keep good relations.

 

If you constantly awkwardly prod someone with a stick without any self awareness of what you're doing then don't be surprised if the beast bites back. 

[ozleicester]

Pair of self important self absorbed tossers. Acting like children.

 

Both of them should be embarrassed...

 

IS - "oh im a hard hitting jounro, im just asking the question...blah blah"

NP - "ooh he said things i dont like, im not gonna talk to him any more"

 

[RizLCFC]

I wonder which female Journo Nigel is having a little dig at here when he first walks in

[ozleicester]

I wonder which female Journo Nigel is having a little dig at here when he first walks in

 

That first two minutes about transfers is handled very differently than when Stringer asks the same questions.

[HitchinFox]

That first two minutes about transfers is handled very differently than when Stringer asks the same questions.

 

Agreed. Partly because the journalist in this clip is a real journalist and has the experience and intuition to be humble (accepting that Nige has no obligation to speak about transfer) while still trying to get something out by using a bit of humour.

Stringer, armed with the man-management and social skills of a house brick, does no favours to himself by coming across as a person of entitlement and insisting Nige must speak to him about everything and anything that he decides – just because he's the current BBC RL. man.

 

[shade]

ian stringer "it's because we care, contrary to popular belief", we don't care whether you care, we just think you're an amateur, sensationalist hack on the wind up.