The Doctor Posted 14 December 2014 Posted 14 December 2014 I don't necessarily think it's an issue of the right questions or the wrong questions. I think the problem is how they're asked and Ian Stringer failing to know the person he is interviewing. Ian Stringer has better access to Nigel Pearson than ANY other journalist in the country. He can interview him midweek, before the match, after the match, get him on the football forum. In theory they should have an excellent working relationship (even if it's not an excellent personal one) but they don't. And for that you have to look at Ian Stringer. I can tell you now just from listening to interviews over the last three years (never mind conducting them) what Nigel Pearson will and won't generally speak about. Won't speak about: transfer speculation, his job security, comments that other managers have made about the club Will speak about: player injuries, why he made certain changes, what he feels the team did/did not do well Stick within these parameters and you'll get a decent interview from Pearson, as much as he's not that keen on the media side of things as it is. Stick within those parameters, get to know him and handle yourself professionally you'll gain his respect and get even more than you could have hoped for (see Henry Winter). Instead, Ian Stringer constantly asks the questions that you just know Pearson won't answer. The amount of times you hear: "Ian, you know I don't speak about..." or "My response to that is as it always is...". It must get very tiring trying to work with someone who always presses you to do things that they should know you're not going to do. It's like asking the person in the office who doesn't drink tea if they want tea three times a day! And therein, I think, lies the reason Pearson and Stringer don't get on. It's not a case of him not wanting to answer difficult questions. I think it's a case of him not wanting to answer the same question, not respecting the person asking the questions because of their inability to work with him conducively and not appreciating their sensationalist, headline-hunting style in general. It's almost an issue of trust as well. Remember last time Stringer was banned because he leaked team news early? You can bet that Pearson will have told other journalists things off the record and they will have respected that and not put it in their articles. Can he trust Ian Stringer with something "off the record"? No chance. It's a complete break down in working relationship that has been coming for some time. Very well put - the interviews that the likes of Winter get out of him show it's not Nige that's the problem here - he'll open up and give a lot of insight if the right questions are asked. Stringer has spurned those chances in favour of asking whether his job is at risk every week. I think we all want to hear what Nigel thinks of how we performed and what he thinks might improve the performances, but instead we get questions about whether he's going to be talking with the owners (the implications obvious).
Larry_LCFC Posted 14 December 2014 Posted 14 December 2014 It isn't a contradiction. From reading this forum I can see that most people are with Nigel and against Stringer.This forum isn't exactly representative though is it when people who rely on the radio and don't have internet access can't post here. I don't doubt that stringer has brought this entirely on himself but some sort of mutual agreement needs to be made between the club and RL, even if that means getting Elliott or someone to do the interviews. Plus it's not just Pearson, its all the player interviews that have ceased as well.
Harry - LCFC Posted 14 December 2014 Posted 14 December 2014 This forum isn't exactly representative though is it when people who rely on the radio and don't have internet access can't post here. I don't doubt that stringer has brought this entirely on himself but some sort of mutual agreement needs to be made between the club and RL, even if that means getting Elliott or someone to do the interviews. Plus it's not just Pearson, its all the player interviews that have ceased as well. Can't be many of them. And anyway, why would not having access to the internet make you more or less likely to hold a certain view on the manager? I don't see any reason why this forum shouldn't be representative.
Larry_LCFC Posted 14 December 2014 Posted 14 December 2014 Can't be many of them. And anyway, why would not having access to the internet make you more or less likely to hold a certain view on the manager? I don't see any reason why this forum shouldn't be representative.Is it not obvious? If you don't have access to the internet and media sites etc, you need to seek other sources I.e. Radio Leicester for information. They are therefore going to be slightly more peeved than you that post match content has been lost. They can't just log onto here. Older generations in particular aren't necessarily up with technology.
C.J Posted 14 December 2014 Posted 14 December 2014 Because Stringer is a tit with all the Journalistic qualities of an ape. A five year old could do a better interview than him just asking the same embarrassing questions each week. Listening to him and NP is like a car crash. I bet Nige wonders what idiot they've sent to interview him this week, because Jason Bourne and Mike Mcarthy are very similar. I can't blame him for not wanting to waste his breath. You only have to listen to his interview to sky after the Villa game last Sunday, that was calm and measured. That's the response you get when you're asked well thought out and considered questions. And whilst I'm having a pop at Stringer, he doesn't engage his brain whilst commentating either. Saying "is that the end of Nigel Pearson" after the second Southampton goal. What a stupid thing to say. #400thpost
skmanuk Posted 14 December 2014 Posted 14 December 2014 I don't necessarily think it's an issue of the right questions or the wrong questions. I think the problem is how they're asked and Ian Stringer failing to know the person he is interviewing. Ian Stringer has better access to Nigel Pearson than ANY other journalist in the country. He can interview him midweek, before the match, after the match, get him on the football forum. In theory they should have an excellent working relationship (even if it's not an excellent personal one) but they don't. And for that you have to look at Ian Stringer. I can tell you now just from listening to interviews over the last three years (never mind conducting them) what Nigel Pearson will and won't generally speak about. Won't speak about: transfer speculation, his job security, comments that other managers have made about the club Will speak about: player injuries, why he made certain changes, what he feels the team did/did not do well Stick within these parameters and you'll get a decent interview from Pearson, as much as he's not that keen on the media side of things as it is. Stick within those parameters, get to know him and handle yourself professionally you'll gain his respect and get even more than you could have hoped for (see Henry Winter). Instead, Ian Stringer constantly asks the questions that you just know Pearson won't answer. The amount of times you hear: "Ian, you know I don't speak about..." or "My response to that is as it always is...". It must get very tiring trying to work with someone who always presses you to do things that they should know you're not going to do. It's like asking the person in the office who doesn't drink tea if they want tea three times a day! And therein, I think, lies the reason Pearson and Stringer don't get on. It's not a case of him not wanting to answer difficult questions. I think it's a case of him not wanting to answer the same question, not respecting the person asking the questions because of their inability to work with him conducively and not appreciating their sensationalist, headline-hunting style in general. It's almost an issue of trust as well. Remember last time Stringer was banned because he leaked team news early? You can bet that Pearson will have told other journalists things off the record and they will have respected that and not put it in their articles. Can he trust Ian Stringer with something "off the record"? No chance. It's a complete break down in working relationship that has been coming for some time. It's a journalists job to ask the difficult questions. Pearson is just arrogant if he thinks that he should only have to a answer questions he likes. Ferguson tried the same trick, difference is he had the record to get away with it, Pearsons starting to look like a deer in headlights. He may be grateful of a few friends in the media soon......
skmanuk Posted 14 December 2014 Posted 14 December 2014 Vote with your feet Pearson gives candid interviews all over, tune in to anyone to hear/watch/read him. RL will soon get the message and get a proper commentator/journalist in rather than that useless gimp, fanzone reject whose wages I'm forced to contribute to under threat of imprisonment whether I get any value out of it or not Candid?.. To paraphrase from another time, "Never in the field of PL Manager interviews has so little been said in so many words in a boring monotone" Pearson wouldn't know passion if it sat on him!
davieG Posted 14 December 2014 Posted 14 December 2014 It's a journalists job to ask the difficult questions. Pearson is just arrogant if he thinks that he should only have to a answer questions he likes. Ferguson tried the same trick, difference is he had the record to get away with it, Pearsons starting to look like a deer in headlights. He may be grateful of a few friends in the media soon...... Well there's journalists and then there's Stringer who is hardly a decent commentator never mind a journalist. Journalists are trained to ask questions in such a way as to elicit a useful informative response something that we've seen real journalists manage to do with Pearson.
skmanuk Posted 14 December 2014 Posted 14 December 2014 Well there's journalists and then there's Stringer who is hardly a decent commentator never mind a journalist. Journalists are trained to answer questions in such a way as to elicit a useful informative response something that we've seen real journalists manage to do with Pearson. Do you mean ask?
Freeman's Wharfer Posted 14 December 2014 Posted 14 December 2014 It's a journalists job to ask the difficult questions. Pearson is just arrogant if he thinks that he should only have to a answer questions he likes. Ferguson tried the same trick, difference is he had the record to get away with it, Pearsons starting to look like a deer in headlights. He may be grateful of a few friends in the media soon...... I think you're struggling to differentiate between the different strands of journalism. Stringer is a BROADCAST JOURNALIST not an INVESTIGATIVE JOURNALIST. Were he an INVESTIGATIVE JOURNALIST then, yes, it would be his job to ask difficult questions to uncover scandal and wrongdoing. As a BROADCAST JOURNALIST it is his job to present a programme in a manner that is appropriate for his audience. As we're not all sat here with pitchforks demanding answers from Pearson about what the chairman has said to him, he's not doing his job properly and has now cost his audience one of the things that held most value in his programme for them. People who say it's his job to ask difficult questions have been taken in by the man's own "it's my job to ask" line that he now frequently hides behind. After a long time this finally came to a head when Pearson had to remind him what his job was: "No it's not your job Ian".
The Doctor Posted 14 December 2014 Posted 14 December 2014 It's a journalists job to ask the difficult questions. Pearson is just arrogant if he thinks that he should only have to a answer questions he likes. Ferguson tried the same trick, difference is he had the record to get away with it, Pearsons starting to look like a deer in headlights. He may be grateful of a few friends in the media soon...... He has friends in the media, and will give good interviews to journalists who ask the difficult questions. What he won't do is talk about whether he's going to be sacked and transfer targets (not least because the fees will get hiked as a result). What he doesn't do is engage with the local radio gimp who is more bothered about getting people to look at him than he is about fostering good relationships with the manager. It's a journalists job to get the details, but to do so you can't act like a twunt and get yourself cold-shouldered and told to go sit in the corner until you're ready to act like a human being.
ozleicester Posted 15 December 2014 Posted 15 December 2014 Oh for goodness grow the fvck up both of you! Stringer, do the research and ask sensible intelligent questions, dont stir stuff up for the sake of it, if you have listeners asking you the question you have the right to ask Pearson, but you dont have the right to start a vendetta. Pearson, Answer the questions, give a little more than a yes/no through gritted teeth, feel free to say, no comment, but dont get uppity about it, just be mature, For goodness sake, the pair of you grow up, treat each other with respect and act like adults, not kids in a playground.
davieG Posted 15 December 2014 Posted 15 December 2014 for those getting Stringer withdrawal symptoms.
pazzerfox Posted 29 December 2014 Posted 29 December 2014 Does anybody know if Pearson refuses to talk to radio Leicester now? I notice his recent interviews have been with the BBC but not with BBC Radio Leicester.
UpTheLeagueFox Posted 29 December 2014 Posted 29 December 2014 Does anybody know if Pearson refuses to talk to radio Leicester now? I notice his recent interviews have been with the BBC but not with BBC Radio Leicester. The players don't like Ian and the 'gesture' post Liverpool led to them collectively deciding not to speak to Radio Leicester at all, out of support for the manager. (Their decision, not Pearson's.) Pearson got fed up with Ian, which had been a long time coming, and decided he wouldn't tolerate him any more. He will still speak to RL, just not Ian. However, RL have decided not to take up the offer and are using MOTD or 5Live interviews with Pearson instead.
sylofox Posted 29 December 2014 Posted 29 December 2014 The players don't like Ian and the 'gesture' post Liverpool led to them collectively deciding not to speak to Radio Leicester at all, out of support for the manager. (Their decision, not Pearson's.) Pearson got fed up with Ian, which had been a long time coming, and decided he wouldn't tolerate him any more. He will still speak to RL, just not Ian. However, RL have decided not to take up the offer and are using MOTD or 5Live interviews with Pearson instead. Why will it save them having to pay off Stringer if they had to sack him. Not going to be good they will never get an exclusive while Stringer is on board. If anyone in industry fooked up like Stringer has he would be gone. RL is no longer supplying what people pay for his big head should roll.
The Horse's Mouth Posted 29 December 2014 Posted 29 December 2014 They were probably thinking he'd have been sacked by now so thought they'd risk it.
Bettsj2 Posted 29 December 2014 Posted 29 December 2014 The players don't like Ian and the 'gesture' post Liverpool led to them collectively deciding not to speak to Radio Leicester at all, out of support for the manager. (Their decision, not Pearson's.) Pearson got fed up with Ian, which had been a long time coming, and decided he wouldn't tolerate him any more. He will still speak to RL, just not Ian. However, RL have decided not to take up the offer and are using MOTD or 5Live interviews with Pearson instead. What was the 'gesture' post Liverpool?
smudger63 Posted 29 December 2014 Posted 29 December 2014 Why will it save them having to pay off Stringer if they had to sack him. Not going to be good they will never get an exclusive while Stringer is on board. If anyone in industry fooked up like Stringer has he would be gone. RL is no longer supplying what people pay for his big head should roll. In what way has he fvcked up? By asking the manager questions he don`t like? He has a right to ask difficult questions, and would actually not be doing his job properly if he didn`t ask them. I will grant you that he could maybe ask the questions in better way, but there are some questions, that no matter how you ask them, that the manager is not going to like, especially our manager!. In fact i would think that if Radio Leicester were to sack Ian Stringer for the fall out, he could take the radio station to court and win a case of unfair dismissal, if he wanted too. Pearson is just a mardy git, who is fine when things are going well, but gets the hump when criticised if things are not going so well. I heard interviews with Pearson on radio Humberside when he was at Hull, he was just the same, fine after a win, but the slightest hint of criticism after a defeat and he was a right mardy arse. Ian Stringer undoubtedly has an ego, as does Pearson, but to solely blame Stringer for the fall out when he is just purely doing his job is misguided in my opinion.
separator Posted 29 December 2014 Posted 29 December 2014 I listened to the RL commentary on the Hull game and Stringer seemed to apologise for making comments about the game, I remember he asked Elliott if Leicester are playing too much long ball, and followed it up straight away with 'i'm not having a dig at them by the way'. Maybe he's been reading these forums too much.
smudger63 Posted 29 December 2014 Posted 29 December 2014 The players don't like Ian and the 'gesture' post Liverpool led to them collectively deciding not to speak to Radio Leicester at all, out of support for the manager. (Their decision, not Pearson's.) Pearson got fed up with Ian, which had been a long time coming, and decided he wouldn't tolerate him any more. He will still speak to RL, just not Ian. However, RL have decided not to take up the offer and are using MOTD or 5Live interviews with Pearson instead. The "gesture" that no one will say anything about. Sometimes players and people see and read into things what they want to. Like the Chelsea players who alleged that Mark Clattenburg had racially abused them! That poor guy was hung out to dry, on the word of what some Chelsea Footballers thought they heard. Nothing to do with them having the arse with him of course!
MPH Posted 29 December 2014 Posted 29 December 2014 Candid?.. To paraphrase from another time, "Never in the field of PL Manager interviews has so little been said in so many words in a boring monotone" Pearson wouldn't know passion if it sat on him! So he didnt really care about that fan berating him and kindly told him to go home and think long and hard about what he had said? Think you are mistaking someone who is aware that anything he says can be twisted for being passionless
MPH Posted 29 December 2014 Posted 29 December 2014 The players don't like Ian and the 'gesture' post Liverpool led to them collectively deciding not to speak to Radio Leicester at all, out of support for the manager. (Their decision, not Pearson's.) Pearson got fed up with Ian, which had been a long time coming, and decided he wouldn't tolerate him any more. He will still speak to RL, just not Ian. However, RL have decided not to take up the offer and are using MOTD or 5Live interviews with Pearson instead. Whilst not picking sides on this exactly, BBC radio Leicester will do well to remember that their wages come from the taxpayers pocket and they don't need to be denying us an interview just because they themselves want to pick sides. If i wanted to see the same interview over and over again i would read 20 websites or buy 10 newspapers.
UpTheLeagueFox Posted 29 December 2014 Posted 29 December 2014 In what way has he fvcked up? By asking the manager questions he don`t like? He has a right to ask difficult questions, and would actually not be doing his job properly if he didn`t ask them. I will grant you that he could maybe ask the questions in better way, but there are some questions, that no matter how you ask them, that the manager is not going to like, especially our manager!. Doing the job properly is building up an effective working relationship with managers/players/club that when the difficult questions need asking, they're not considered to be part of an agenda. The "gesture" that no one will say anything about. The cut throat gesture.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.