So, this leak...

[alastair]

You really do talk some tedious bollocks Alistair. United aren't there to give The Mirror news stories. The guy was publishing confidential information that wouldn't have been revealed as early as he was revealing it. It's not on United to give people stories if they don't want to. He says it's his job to uncover stories, well nobody at United is stopping him from uncovering stories, they're just not letting him have direct access to the club. He can uncover stories if he wants, he can just do it somewhere else. What did he expect when he broadcast stuff before it should have been revealed? A fanfare when he rocked up to Carrington with his notebook? United are well within their rights to try and stop a journalist giving their opposition a head start by releasing their lineups early. The press have this notion that clubs owe them stories or that every question they ask should be answered because they've asked it. What gives them this entitlement? United can tell who they want what they want, and if they don't want some cnut keen to breach their confidentiality sitting in on an official press conference then they're right to not allow him access.

I'd rather you cut out the abuse that lines your every post.

United do not exist to deliberately give controversial stories away, of course not.

United do everything in their power, however, to ensure that any journalist that has something negative to say is nowhere near the club. So if it's early leakage of a team, or an article criticising a player, or releasing the news that a player has been injured, United ban the journalist and don't let him return.

You will say that they are well within their rights to do that. If so, why do United even bother having press conferences? They should just have a few words printed on the website from Moyes for the sake of the supporters. Nothing else but the official line. No press near the ground. No press at the game - they can write their match reports from the television. Nothing is released except what United want to be heard.

This is the question that has to be asked: if the clubs don't need the press, then why engage with them at all? Why do the clubs agree to PL rules that state they must see and speak to them?

There is a reason for which the press are invited to events, across all walks of life. It's to maintain integrity. It's in order to ensure that things that happen within our society are constantly questioned and debated. It's a positive thing, and pretty much everyone accepts it. Ian Duncan Smith goes to a Select Committee which he isn't obliged to attend by law because he's aware that he ought to be questioned on policy. It applies in so many fields - not necessarily to a press, but to peers within the profession.

That's not to say the press are perfect - they're not. They need taming, sometimes. The answer however, in my view, for United is not to ban journalists for reporting correct information, but to ensure that it is harder for them to gain the information if they don't want it published. Prying and investigation is positive for the sport.

 

[The Neviller]

I'd rather you cut out the abuse that lines your every post.

United do not exist to deliberately give controversial stories away, of course not.

United do everything in their power, however, to ensure that any journalist that has something negative to say is nowhere near the club. So if it's early leakage of a team, or an article criticising a player, or releasing the news that a player has been injured, United ban the journalist and don't let him return.

You will say that they are well within their rights to do that. If so, why do United even bother having press conferences? They should just have a few words printed on the website from Moyes for the sake of the supporters. Nothing else but the official line. No press near the ground. No press at the game - they can write their match reports from the television. Nothing is released except what United want to be heard.

This is the question that has to be asked: if the clubs don't need the press, then why engage with them at all? Why do the clubs agree to PL rules that state they must see and speak to them?

There is a reason for which the press are invited to events, across all walks of life. It's to maintain integrity. It's in order to ensure that things that happen within our society are constantly questioned and debated. It's a positive thing, and pretty much everyone accepts it. Ian Duncan Smith goes to a Select Committee which he isn't obliged to attend by law because he's aware that he ought to be questioned on policy. It applies in so many fields - not necessarily to a press, but to peers within the profession.

That's not to say the press are perfect - they're not. They need taming, sometimes. The answer however, in my view, for United is not to ban journalists for reporting correct information, but to ensure that it is harder for them to gain the information if they don't want it published. Prying and investigation is positive for the sport.

I was right with my first post, tedious bollocks.

 

[alastair]

I was right with my first post, tedious bollocks.

Thanks for the debate.

Clearly when you have no answer, you come up with abuse to replace it.

 

[The Neviller]

Thanks for the debate.

Clearly when you have no answer, you come up with abuse to replace it.

I've given an answer. Your postings on this earlier were tedious bollocks. This is the third time I've now pointed this out to you. I wonder how your viewpoint would switch if this was the Arsenal teamsheet being leaked every week. Manchester United can't stop any journalist writing any story, or revealing information given to them by a mole that they shouldn't really be party to. What they can do, however, is stop giving them access to the club if they're so intent on willfully harming it by giving opposition teams help with their build up to games by letting them know what team they're facing earlier than they should. That's what they have done, and they're right to do so.

 

[Fergus' son]

Stop 'abusing' poor Alistair, TN.

 

[alastair]

I've given an answer. Your postings on this earlier were tedious bollocks. This is the third time I've now pointed this out to you. I wonder how your viewpoint would switch if this was the Arsenal teamsheet being leaked every week. Manchester United can't stop any journalist writing any story, or revealing information given to them by a mole that they shouldn't really be party to. What they can do, however, is stop giving them access to the club if they're so intent on willfully harming it by giving opposition teams help with their build up to games by letting them know what team they're facing earlier than they should. That's what they have done, and they're right to do so.

See, I'm not as one eyed as some here. Wenger has received some criticism in his time at Arsenal and most of it has been justified, at least to some extent. And in credit to him, he's never banned a journalist for it, even when it's been an unfair hatchet job. Arsenal's team was also being leaked every weekend by someone with connections on Twitter. He was politely informed of what the effect might be, and the guy stopped out of courtesy. There would be no stronger critic than me if Arsenal started banning people left, right and centre for investigating goings-on at the club.

You never addressed my point about why United should actually invite the press to anything. Probably because you haven't got an answer.

 

[The Neviller]

Stop 'abusing' poor Alistair, TN.

The old accusation of talking tedious bollocks, one of the worst abuses of human rights to befall the Arsenal fan in recent years. He's a brave wee laddie for putting up with it for so long.

 

[alastair]

The old accusation of talking tedious bollocks, one of the worst abuses of human rights to befall tye Arsenal fan in recent years. He's a brave wee laddie for putting up with it for so long.

It merely frustrates me when you don't have an argument so you just say it's tedious bollocks to cover it up.

 

[Zen86]

I wish I lived in the land of rainbows and sunshine like alastair.

 

[Fergus' son]

He is a brave wee laddie, a brave wee laddie indeed.

 

[alastair]

I wish I lived in the land of rainbows and sunshine like alastair.

You know what's rainbows and sunshine?

Blindly following a club and automatically agreeing with every action they take even if it is at the cost of all else. It's scary. The ignorance is bliss approach.

 

[Steven Seagull]

I'd rather you cut out the abuse that lines your every post.

United do not exist to deliberately give controversial stories away, of course not.

United do everything in their power, however, to ensure that any journalist that has something negative to say is nowhere near the club. So if it's early leakage of a team, or an article criticising a player, or releasing the news that a player has been injured, United ban the journalist and don't let him return.

You will say that they are well within their rights to do that. If so, why do United even bother having press conferences? They should just have a few words printed on the website from Moyes for the sake of the supporters. Nothing else but the official line. No press near the ground. No press at the game - they can write their match reports from the television. Nothing is released except what United want to be heard.

This is the question that has to be asked: if the clubs don't need the press, then why engage with them at all? Why do the clubs agree to PL rules that state they must see and speak to them?

There is a reason for which the press are invited to events, across all walks of life. It's to maintain integrity. It's in order to ensure that things that happen within our society are constantly questioned and debated. It's a positive thing, and pretty much everyone accepts it. Ian Duncan Smith goes to a Select Committee which he isn't obliged to attend by law because he's aware that he ought to be questioned on policy. It applies in so many fields - not necessarily to a press, but to peers within the profession.

That's not to say the press are perfect - they're not. They need taming, sometimes. The answer however, in my view, for United is not to ban journalists for reporting correct information, but to ensure that it is harder for them to gain the information if they don't want it published. Prying and investigation is positive for the sport.

Bit over the top but I agree with the majority of this post. It's a matter of principles really rather than this isolated incident.

 

[Ryan's Beard]

United do everything in their power, however, to ensure that any journalist that has something negative to say is nowhere near the club. So if it's early leakage of a team, or an article criticising a player, or releasing the news that a player has been injured, United ban the journalist and don't let him return.

You will say that they are well within their rights to do that.

Nailed it. Of course United are well within their rights to do that. So they did it.

A brief summary, complete with some handy pointers as to how you should feel about it.

1)Someone leaks our line up (NAUGHTY)
2)Some puts that in the public eye (THEIR JOB)
3)We ban them to stem the outflow of confidential information (WELL WITHIN OUR RIGHTS)

 

[alastair]

Bit over the top but I agree with the majority of this post. It's a matter of principles really rather than this isolated incident.

Of course. This incident is basically irrelevant to all intents and purposes, but it's indicative of a wider issue.

 

[alastair]

Nailed it. Of course United are well within their rights to do that. So they did it.

A brief summary, complete with some handy pointers as to how you should feel about it.

1)Someone leaks our line up (NAUGHTY)
2)Some puts that in the public eye (THEIR JOB)
3)We ban them to stem the outflow of confidential information (WELL WITHIN OUR RIGHTS)

So what are you gaining from them being there at all?

Just ban all of them. Get them out of the club. Nothing's getting out if there's no press allowed anywhere near the site.

 

[Zen86]

You know what's rainbows and sunshine?

Blindly following a club and automatically agreeing with every action they take even if it is at the cost of all else. It's scary. The ignorance is bliss approach.

Yep, you're right, exposing our tactics prior to the match is completely in the public interest and we're well out of order for banning one of the people responsible - I'm sure you would feel the same way if it were Arsenal

 

[Ryan's Beard]

So what are you gaining from them being there at all?

Just ban all of them. Get them out of the club. Nothing's getting out if there's no press allowed anywhere near the site.

You're being far too polar to the point of making this not worth talking about.

We banned this journo because he publicised leaked lineups. That is secret information, it getting out is detrimental to the club and further more paints a picture of a fractured institution (clearly someone at Old Trafford isn't behaving). This is completely different to "bad press". It's entirely different to them turning up and asking awkward questions and reporting made up hyperbole and lies. All of that would be fine.

If you can't see how this incident is a special case I can't be arsed explaining it to you.

 

[alastair]

Yep, you're right, exposing our tactics prior to the match is completely in the public interest and we're well out of order for banning one of the people responsible - I'm sure you would feel the same way if it were Arsenal

Jesus.

Putting words into my mouth and then topping it off with claiming I'm a hypocrite because I would have a different view if it was my own team.

Arsenal generally don't go in for press obstruction, and I'm glad we don't. What you're trying to do is justify your opinion by claiming that I'd feel differently if it was my own team. I wouldn't. It's no justification for your view. You're just a blind loyalist.

 

[alastair]

You're being far too polar to the point of making this not worth talking about.

We banned this journo because he publicised leaked lineups. That is secret information, it getting out is detrimental to the club and further more paints a picture of a fractured institution (clearly someone at Old Trafford isn't behaving). This is completely different to "bad press". It's entirely different to them turning up and asking awkward questions and reporting made up hyperbole and lies. All of that would be fine.

If you can't see how this incident is a special case I can't be arsed explaining it to you.

Strange, because I'm actually of the view that if certain members of the press make up proven lies about the club, they should be punished by a ban. You don't?

This journalist is getting a leak from the club. He's not getting it while he's sitting in the press conference, is he? So the ban is fundamentally pointless, done to deflect from the real issue of someone leaking the team sheet.

 

[LR7]

You know what's rainbows and sunshine?

Blindly following a club and automatically agreeing with every action they take even if it is at the cost of all else. It's scary. The ignorance is bliss approach.

It's got nothing to do with blindly supporting the club. If it a were City or Liverpool manager, they too with the best interests of the club at heart, would be well within their rights to ban the joumo, and I'd agree with them for doing so. Good on Moyes. In this instance McDonnell can continue leaking the team news early if he wishes, as you say it's his job, he just now knows there are repercussions, and rightly so.

 

[Bestie07]

Strange, because I'm actually of the view that if certain members of the press make up proven lies about the club, they should be punished by a ban. You don't?

This journalist is getting a leak from the club. He's not getting it while he's sitting in the press conference, is he? So the ban is fundamentally pointless, done to deflect from the real issue of someone leaking the team sheet.

And that somebody didn't just wake up one day and decide that he would start leaking lineups only to this particular journo. This guy probably pulled in some favors with his source to get the lineups early. And in doing so he is harming the club.

 

[NotoriousISSY]

Did he himself say something about regulations stating lineups shouldn't be released any more than an hour before kick-off, despite admitting he did so? I haven't read it again since it was published and genuinely can't be bothered. But if interpreted it right and that is what he said, he can't complain?

 

[Ryan's Beard]

Strange, because I'm actually of the view that if certain members of the press make up proven lies about the club, they should be punished by a ban. You don't?

This journalist is getting a leak from the club. He's not getting it while he's sitting in the press conference, is he? So the ban is fundamentally pointless, done to deflect from the real issue of someone leaking the team sheet.

feck me! It's Sherlock Holmes!

Of course that is the reason he has been banned. He's releasing illegitimately acquired information that should not be available to anyone Moyes doesn't want it to be available to. That's an affront to Manchester United and so for that he has been banned. I.e. He's pissed us off by helping someone compromise us so now he's lost his presser privileges.

I don't understand why there's such a ball ache about this. The leak's a cnut, this guy's been a cnut, and we've been a cnut to him. Seems fair all 'round.

 

[alastair]

It's got nothing to do with blindly supporting the club. If it a were City or Liverpool manager, they too with the best interests of the club at heart, would be well within their rights to ban the joumo, and I'd agree with them for doing so. Good on Moyes. In this instance McDonnell can continue leaking the team news early if he wishes, as you say it's his job, he just now knows there are repercussions, and rightly so.

I fully accept there are people who don't share my view who aren't just blind followers, but that is the case for some.

I hope he does continue to leak them, because this would highlight how irrelevant United's punishment is, and how it was done to deflect from the main issue. I always think it comes back to bite United in general because so many journalists have such a bad experience of dealing with them that positive reviews are becoming rarer and rarer. Whether United or its fans care about that is another question.

 

[alastair]

And that somebody didn't just wake up one day and decide that he would start leaking lineups only to this particular journo. This guy probably pulled in some favors with his source to get the lineups early. And in doing so he is harming the club.

Interesting, because I reckon that's exactly what happened. Disaffected player, wants to get one over the management, rings up a journalist who he might get on with.

 

[alastair]

feck me! It's Sherlock Holmes!

Of course that is the reason he has been banned. He's releasing illegitimately acquired information that should not be available to anyone Moyes doesn't want it to be available to. That's an affront to Manchester United and so for that he has been banned. I.e. He's pissed us off by helping someone compromise us so now he's lost his presser privileges.

I don't understand why there's such a ball ache about this. The leak's a cnut, this guy's been a cnut, and we've been a cnut to him. Seems fair all 'round.

Surely basically everything is illegitimately acquired?

The leak is your problem, not the journalist. United should probably thank the guy for highlighting to them that there's someone within your squad who's looking to sabotage you.

 

[The Neviller]

See, I'm not as one eyed as some here. Wenger has received some criticism in his time at Arsenal and most of it has been justified, at least to some extent. And in credit to him, he's never banned a journalist for it, even when it's been an unfair hatchet job. Arsenal's team was also being leaked every weekend by someone with connections on Twitter. He was politely informed of what the effect might be, and the guy stopped out of courtesy. There would be no stronger critic than me if Arsenal started banning people left, right and centre for investigating goings-on at the club.

You never addressed my point about why United should actually invite the press to anything. Probably because you haven't got an answer.

Probably because it's a daft point. You're making out that United have committed some heinous act of mass censorship, when all they've done is tell some bell end who was revealing stuff he shouldn't have knowledge of to piss off. This isn't United banning someone writing a negative opinion piece, it's about leaking sensitive information that has a set time of release, so that both clubs have the same window to make necessary changes to their lineups and tactics. Nobody should know the information he was releasing until it's officially released, so it was putting United at a disadvantage. As such they've told a guy who was involved in willfully hampering United that he isn't having access to them anymore.

Boo fecking hoo.

As usual with you though, where United are concerned you blow it all out of proportion with your hyperbole. United, the big, nasty, imperial force hampering the poor set upon journalist just out to bring the news to the people out of public concern.

United are happy to have journalists at their press conferences, that's why they do them. Had this guy not been willfully fecking Uniteds preparations for games by giving their opponents a heads up on the team they'd be facing then he'd still have access to the club. He was hampering them though, because he valued a few extra hits on his Twitter feed more, and probably liked proving he had an inside source, so now United don't feel obligated to give him anything more. Bastards they are.

 

[Ryan's Beard]

Surely basically everything is illegitimately acquired?

The leak is your problem, not the journalist. United should probably thank the guy for highlighting to them that there's someone within your squad who's looking to sabotage you.

Not at all. Firstly I want to make it clear that I don't oppose genuine investigative journalism to uncover things that the public need to know about (our line ups aren't one of those things, by the way).

He didn't get this information through interviews or even hiding in a fecking plant pot in the dressing room. He got this information because someone who works at the club is leaking it to him. This information is sensitive information and it's very clear to everyone that it is not information that is supposed to be made public like this. Obviously the leak is the main problem but this man is the one responsible for actually putting it out there (the leak can't very well do that himself, can he?). We know for a fact he has a part in this, so we've banned him from Old Trafford because he's part of a group of people who are causing us a problem. Like I've said already (in one of the 68 threads on this) once we find and get rid of the leak we can lift the ban on this journo. If the leak starts to contact and use another journo, we can ban them too. Anyone involved with this has no place at Old Trafford, why is that tricky to understand?

 

[The Neviller]

It merely frustrates me when you don't have an argument so you just say it's tedious bollocks to cover it up.

No, I said it was tedious bollocks because it was tedious bollocks. This is now the fourth time I've had to tell you this.

It's getting tedious.

 

[The Neviller]

You know what's rainbows and sunshine?

Blindly following a club and automatically agreeing with every action they take even if it is at the cost of all else. It's scary. The ignorance is bliss approach.

The cost of all else? Yeah, you're not exaggerating and blowing this out of all proportion at all.

 

[LR7]

I fully accept there are people who don't share my view who aren't just blind followers, but that is the case for some.

I hope he does continue to leak them, because this would highlight how irrelevant United's punishment is, and how it was done to deflect from the main issue. I always think it comes back to bite United in general because so many journalists have such a bad experience of dealing with them that positive reviews are becoming rarer and rarer. Whether United or its fans care about that is another question.

Well he didn't today when he has done for the last few weeks. And no, we didn't really care that some journos felt aggrieved by Fergie and I don't suppose we will if it goes the same way with Moyes. Their false sense of entitlement is ridiculous. I wasn't too keen on Moyes' appointment at first but things like this (as small as it is) help win me over with him. It's about having the Clubs best interest at heart.

 

[Ryan's Beard]

To be fair to Nev, it is tedious.

 

[The Neviller]

Strange, because I'm actually of the view that if certain members of the press make up proven lies about the club, they should be punished by a ban. You don't?

This journalist is getting a leak from the club. He's not getting it while he's sitting in the press conference, is he? So the ban is fundamentally pointless, done to deflect from the real issue of someone leaking the team sheet.

He's not getting it sitting in the press conference, no. But now he knows United aren't just going to sit there and let him act the fecko and tell the world our tactical information before they're supposed to hear about it, so if he wants access to United again he can wind his neck in and stop releasing confidential information that he shouldn't know about.

 

[Fergus' son]

Not at all. Firstly I want to make it clear that I don't oppose genuine investigative journalism to uncover things that the public need to know about (our line ups aren't one of those things, by the way).

He didn't get this information through interviews or even hiding in a fecking plant pot in the dressing room. He got this information because someone who works at the club is leaking it to him. This information is sensitive information and it's very clear to everyone that it is not information that is supposed to be made public like this. Obviously the leak is the main problem but this man is the one responsible for actually putting it out there (the leak can't very well do that himself, can he?). We know for a fact he has a part in this, so we've banned him from Old Trafford because he's part of a group of people who are causing us a problem. Like I've said already (in one of the 68 threads on this) once we find and get rid of the leak we can lift the ban on this journo. If the leak starts to contact and use another journo, we can ban them too. Anyone involved with this has no place at Old Trafford, why is that tricky to understand?

When it comes to utd, he finds the simplest things hard to understand.

 

[alastair]

I just find it quite worrying how no-one can see the principle behind the argument. Some people just don't like questions being asked. I won't bother making the simple point. It's tedious for the under-educated.

 

[Ryan's Beard]

I just find it quite worrying how no-one can see the principle behind the argument. Some people just don't like questions being asked. I won't bother making the simple point. It's tedious for the under-educated.

I can see the principle but it's ill applied to this situation given the actual reality of what's going on.

Blindly following principle rather than pragmatically and logically assessing each incident on its own merit is stupid.

You're being stupid, by the way.

 

[alastair]

I can see the principle but it's ill applied to this situation given the actual reality of what's going on.

Of course it's not a serious situation but it's just bizarre how so many are so averse to any level of questioning. They're more than happy for United to ban anyone they want as long as it creates a minuscule advantage for the club. I wonder if they apply the same logic to other elements of life.

 

[Ryan's Beard]

Of course it's not a serious situation but it's just bizarre how so many are so averse to any level of questioning. They're more than happy for United to ban anyone they want as long as it creates a minuscule advantage for the club. I wonder if they apply the same logic to other elements of life.

Well if you're wondering that I'm afraid you're being a colossal dildo. Look at this, particular situation. Banning the journo is a completely reasonably and justifiable course of action to take. Of course people are happy for them to take a reasonable and justifiable course of action. It's not "banning anyone" you toadstool. It's this particular man.

 

[alastair]

Well if you're wondering that I'm afraid you're being a colossal dildo. Look at this, particular situation. Banning the journo is a completely reasonably and justifiable course of action to take. Of course people are happy for them to take a reasonable and justifiable course of action. It's not "banning anyone" you toadstool. It's this particular man.

Many posters here were fully behind Ferguson's decision to ban journalists for any criticism. This bloke is hardly an isolated case in recent history.

 

[Ryan's Beard]

Many posters here were fully behind Ferguson's decision to ban journalists for any criticism. This bloke is hardly an isolated case in recent history.

Except it is an isolated case because this case is leaked information being released and it's a new manager. We all know SAF could be a right arse when he wanted to. That isn't relevant at all to this situation, I don't care who backed what in the past.