CosbehFox Posted 9 February 2015 Posted 9 February 2015 Sometimes I find myself thinking Collymore goes against the grain to attract Attention/Fans but when you listen to him he really does speak a lot of sense regarding many clubs He does his research really well into clubs fanbase and their moods. Does far more reading and researching than most do in the game.
HankMarvin Posted 9 February 2015 Posted 9 February 2015 Collymore is one of the few in the media happy to go against the grain and upset all the chummy lot within the media. Yes to have the backing of someone that has borderline personality disorder and beats up women and not to mention is partial to a spot of dogging is just what we need to validate the actions of Nigel
CosbehFox Posted 9 February 2015 Posted 9 February 2015 Yes to have the backing of someone that has borderline personality disorder and beats up women and not to mention is partial to a spot of dogging is just what we need to validate the actions of Nigel I was talking about his role as a journalist. No more no less. No need to point the conversation in a different direction.
veezeeblue Posted 9 February 2015 Posted 9 February 2015 yep this ones teetering too but some valid discussion - will give radio 5 a try
HankMarvin Posted 9 February 2015 Posted 9 February 2015 I was talking about his role as a journalist. No more no less. No need to point the conversation in a different direction. So was I, as personally i wouldn't value someone's opinion that beats up women or has borderline personality disorder talking about the managers actions that have been widely condemned, Not really a huge surprise that someone with mental health issues condones that type of behaviour
Grewks Posted 9 February 2015 Posted 9 February 2015 So was I, as personally i wouldn't value someone's opinion that beats up women or has borderline personality disorder talking about the managers actions that have been widely condemned, Not really a huge surprise that someone with mental health issues condones that type of behaviour What type of behaviour? All Pearson has done is have his own opinion. He hasn't beaten up any women......FFS!
HankMarvin Posted 9 February 2015 Posted 9 February 2015 Erm strangle a player, try reading the posts again it may help you comprehend what was written
Grewks Posted 10 February 2015 Posted 10 February 2015 Erm strangle a player, try reading the posts again it may help you comprehend what was written Sorry mate...But I think a lot of people with fail to comprehend why a person with 'Mental health issues' condones the act of strangling. Very bizarre. But also on another note. He didn't strangle him...he was having a joke on the floor pretending to, they were both smiling. Yes it got a bit heated after, but that was only when nige didn't let go of his shirt.
TrentFox Posted 10 February 2015 Posted 10 February 2015 So if someone has BPD, or mental health issues, their opinions are not as valid as someone who doesn't?
HankMarvin Posted 10 February 2015 Posted 10 February 2015 Sorry mate...But I think a lot of people with fail to comprehend why a person with 'Mental health issues' condones the act of strangling. Very bizarre. But also on another note. He didn't strangle him...he was having a joke on the floor pretending to, they were both smiling. Yes it got a bit heated after, but that was only when nige didn't let go of his shirt. Collymore sticking up for Pearson with the host Sam Matterface slating him. I think it's generally a 50/50 split on big Nige. Collymore backs pearson's actions, he (collymore has a history of BPD) and has publicly attacked a woman "The argument turned violent and the 27-year-old allegedly dragged her to the floor and aimed kicks at her head". I'm merely pointing out that having collymore in your corner on this subject, is the equivalent of a pyromaniac giving a speech to children on fire safety
HankMarvin Posted 10 February 2015 Posted 10 February 2015 Sorry mate...But I think a lot of people with fail to comprehend why a person with 'Mental health issues' condones the act of strangling. Very bizarre. But also on another note. He didn't strangle him...he was having a joke on the floor pretending to, they were both smiling. Yes it got a bit heated after, but that was only when nige didn't let go of his shirt. Thats your interpretation, when James McArthur is quoted as saying Nigel Pearson SCARED me when he grabbed my throat does that not maybe show that show a different side to the story
Guest Posted 10 February 2015 Posted 10 February 2015 Thats your interpretation, when James McArthur is quoted as saying Nigel Pearson SCARED me when he grabbed my throat does that not maybe show that show a different side to the story What about when James McArthur said there's nothing in it and it WILL get blown up out of proportion. Ignored that bit did you?
5waller5 Posted 10 February 2015 Posted 10 February 2015 Patricia Murphy doesn't give the first stuff about Leicester City. Nigel was spot on to give him short shrift. Whatever happened is none of his decking business. If I were Nigel, I would have said I don't need a morality lesson from someone who works for an organisation that rapes the best part of £150 from the pockets of the poor. Now I am confused!!! Who??? How????
Sharpe's Fox Posted 10 February 2015 Posted 10 February 2015 Now I am confused!!! Who??? How???? Not sure if trolling but i'll bite. He's referring to the TV license.
5waller5 Posted 10 February 2015 Posted 10 February 2015 Not sure if trolling but i'll bite. He's referring to the TV license. Oh FFS ... Wish I hadn't asked!!!! How ridiculous. Thanks for the explanation!
HankMarvin Posted 10 February 2015 Posted 10 February 2015 What about when James McArthur said there's nothing in it and it WILL get blown up out of proportion. Ignored that bit did you No - why would a grown man come out and say he was scared, hey may have diffused the situation by following up with that, but if someone jokingly puts their hands round your neck that you have previously met would you be scared??? More so if you was a premier league footballer would you want to admit that to the press???
Eddy Kellys Heroes Posted 10 February 2015 Posted 10 February 2015 Fook the BBC, Zionist controlled main stream media in its lowest form! Ah that's better :-)
HankMarvin Posted 10 February 2015 Posted 10 February 2015 So if someone has BPD, or mental health issues, their opinions are not as valid as someone who doesn't? Correct, for example if it was a court of law and said witness has a history of BPD, mental health issues or violence. the report from the House of Commons, Justice Committee- Ninth Report, The Crown Prosecution Service: Gatekeeper of the Criminal Justice System (2009), CPS may be reluctant to recognise that people with mental health problems can be credible witnesses at all.'
5waller5 Posted 10 February 2015 Posted 10 February 2015 Correct, for example if it was a court of law and said witness has a history of BPD, mental health issues or violence. the report from the House of Commons, Justice Committee- Ninth Report, The Crown Prosecution Service: Gatekeeper of the Criminal Justice System (2009), CPS may be reluctant to recognise that people with mental health problems can be credible witnesses at all.' It's not often you get a reply of that quality!!!! Nice research!!!!
Guest Posted 10 February 2015 Posted 10 February 2015 No - why would a grown man come out and say he was scared, hey may have diffused the situation by following up with that, but if someone jokingly puts their hands round your neck that you have previously met would you be scared??? More so if you was a premier league footballer would you want to admit that to the press??? So you're saying he probably wouldn't have said that to the press? If someone I'd met out their hands around my neck I'd probably assume it was a joke, if someone I hadn't met did it it may be worrying.
HankMarvin Posted 10 February 2015 Posted 10 February 2015 Id say its a bit strange for a grown man ( especially a footballer) to say he was scared to the press, If your then going to write the whole thing off as a joke. My personal interpretation is that Nigel maybe initially thought it was intentional due to what happened in the summer "Rosler said he felt McArthur had been "used" and "left in limbo". The German told BBC Radio 5 live: "He had already said goodbye to everybody at the club." Pearson said: "My reminder to everyone is that my policy is not to discuss other clubs' players. "A player potentially stays at the club he's at if a deal cannot be done. Initially a bit of a tight grip, MacArthur tying to laugh it off as the accident it was, if you jokingly throttle someone it doesn't normally last that long and you don't pin them to the ground. Thats just my opinion
HankMarvin Posted 10 February 2015 Posted 10 February 2015 So you're saying he probably wouldn't have said that to the press? If someone I'd met out their hands around my neck I'd probably assume it was a joke, if someone I hadn't met did it it may be worrying. Thats what i mean they had met seems odd he would be scared to be jokingly throttled with Pardew standing right there
TrentFox Posted 10 February 2015 Posted 10 February 2015 Correct, for example if it was a court of law and said witness has a history of BPD, mental health issues or violence. the report from the House of Commons, Justice Committee- Ninth Report, The Crown Prosecution Service: Gatekeeper of the Criminal Justice System (2009), CPS may be reluctant to recognise that people with mental health problems can be credible witnesses at all.' You can have a rep point for a smart answer, but you were talking about a radio programme that is conversational - not a court of law.
Jacnah Posted 10 February 2015 Posted 10 February 2015 Murphy actually said "I don't take kindly to taking lectures about what is news and not news especially from Nigel Pearson" He then went to say Pearson should if nipped it in the bud today when he had a chance too but refusing too only added fuel to the fire and now thinks this issue will linger until its finally resolved Personally i think that's journo bullshit: Just because they haven't got the story they want doesn't make Pearson's refusal to comment wrong; even if most of his other responses leave something to desired in the media handling department. Fire feeds on oxygen and if you starve it of that fuel it will eventually die out. If Pearson or anybody else gave a blow by blow account of what happened, then it gives the opportunity for every journo to pick it over word by word, before seeking confirmation from anybody else who may have been involved. God help us if there is any discrepancy between Pearson's version and anybody else's. He was right not to comment specifically, but he could have been more polished in some of his responses, which did come across very badly.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.